Montana challenges fed with new gun law - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier Great Lakes 4x4 Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 8th, 2009, 12:02 PM   #1
3-foot
Senior Member
 
3-foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-21-06
Location: Springfield Township, Mi
Posts: 1,121
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default Montana challenges fed with new gun law

This is going to get interesting......



http://www.atv.info/article.cfm?id=842


HOUSE BILL NO. 246

INTRODUCED BY J. BONIEK, BENNETT, BUTCHER, CURTISS, RANDALL, WARBURTON

AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:

Section 1. Short title. [Sections 1 through 6] may be cited as the "Montana Firearms Freedom Act".

Section 2. Legislative declarations of authority. The legislature declares that the authority for [sections 1 through 6] is the following:

(1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

(2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of Montana certain rights, as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

(3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the 9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.

(4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

(5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was approved by congress and the people of Montana, and the right exists, as it was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

Section 3. Definitions. As used in [sections 1 through 6], the following definitions apply:

(1) "Borders of Montana" means the boundaries of Montana described in Article I, section 1, of the 1889 Montana constitution.

(2) "Firearms accessories" means items that are used in conjunction with or mounted upon a firearm but are not essential to the basic function of a firearm, including but not limited to telescopic or laser sights, magazines, flash or sound suppressors, folding or aftermarket stocks and grips, speedloaders, ammunition carriers, and lights for target illumination.

(3) "Generic and insignificant parts" includes but is not limited to springs, screws, nuts, and pins.

(4) "Manufactured" means that a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition has been created from basic materials for functional usefulness, including but not limited to forging, casting, machining, or other processes for working materials.

Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.

Section 5. Exceptions. [Section 4] does not apply to:

(1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one person;

(2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than 1 1/2 inches and that uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;

(3) ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or

(4) a firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of the trigger or other firing device.

Section 6. Marketing of firearms. A firearm manufactured or sold in Montana under [sections 1 through 6] must have the words "Made in Montana" clearly stamped on a central metallic part, such as the receiver or frame.

Section 7. Codification instruction. [Sections 1 through 6] are intended to be codified as an integral part of Title 30, and the provisions of Title 30 apply to [sections 1 through 6].

Section 8. Applicability. [This act] applies to firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition that are manufactured, as defined in [section 3], and retained in Montana after October 1, 2009.
3-foot is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old May 8th, 2009, 12:04 PM   #2
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

god i love montana.
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 8th, 2009, 01:11 PM   #3
Hombre
I carry a shank
 
Hombre's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-15-06
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,548
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steveo View Post
god i love montana.
You don't have the right guns for Montana. Better stay here in Michigan. At least here, the hood rats are impressed with your "arsenal".
Hombre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 8th, 2009, 09:58 PM   #4
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hombre View Post
You don't have the right guns for Montana. Better stay here in Michigan. At least here, the hood rats are impressed with your "arsenal".
It keeps getting bigger. I seem to remeber you drooling over at least one of my pieces.
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2009, 07:22 AM   #5
Tie Dyed
O.G.
 
Tie Dyed's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: Howell
Posts: 4,191
iTrader: (28)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to Tie Dyed
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hombre View Post
You don't have the right guns for Montana. Better stay here in Michigan. At least here, the hood rats are impressed with your "arsenal".
But it is Montana. Do they really have "hood rats"??
__________________
2000 XJ with a 3 inch body lift
Tie Dyed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2009, 02:02 PM   #6
Stan
I got a gold chain
 
Stan's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: Shelby Twp.
Posts: 15,732
iTrader: (8)
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Default

Texas is also doing the same thing. Maybe Iowa too, not sure.

I don't think most people realize what a big issue this is, if passed there will be pretty big changes with states rights.
Stan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2009, 04:33 PM   #7
Hombre
I carry a shank
 
Hombre's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-15-06
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,548
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan View Post
Texas is also doing the same thing. Maybe Iowa too, not sure.

I don't think most people realize what a big issue this is, if passed there will be pretty big changes with states rights.
Maybe we'll have another "war between the states!"
Hombre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2009, 05:20 PM   #8
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan View Post
Texas is also doing the same thing. Maybe Iowa too, not sure.

I don't think most people realize what a big issue this is, if passed there will be pretty big changes with states rights.
x2 with the last 3 generations having been under a huge federal government we have lost sight of the intent of our founding fathers. The federal government has way too much power, and we let that happen.
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2009, 07:13 PM   #9
Mr Toes - R.I.P.
November 7, 1958 - July 22, 2011
 
Mr Toes - R.I.P.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-29-07
Location: Belleville Mi
Posts: 4,727
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hombre View Post
Maybe we'll have another "war between the states!"

OH yeah right.... You ever listen to the younger generation and how complacent they are...
Mr Toes - R.I.P. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2009, 04:32 PM   #10
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Toes View Post
OH yeah right.... You ever listen to the younger generation and how complacent they are...
yes, and I doubt you are in any way in touch with the "younger" generation.
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2009, 04:40 PM   #11
Mr Toes - R.I.P.
November 7, 1958 - July 22, 2011
 
Mr Toes - R.I.P.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-29-07
Location: Belleville Mi
Posts: 4,727
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steveo View Post
yes, and I doubt you are in any way in touch with the "younger" generation.
Except for that union sell out Steveo.....
Mr Toes - R.I.P. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2009, 04:41 PM   #12
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Toes View Post
Except for that union sell out Steveo.....
Who?
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2009, 04:44 PM   #13
Mr Toes - R.I.P.
November 7, 1958 - July 22, 2011
 
Mr Toes - R.I.P.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-29-07
Location: Belleville Mi
Posts: 4,727
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steveo View Post
Who?

I do consider you an exception to the complacent younger generation....

I think you may have born about 30 years to late...
Mr Toes - R.I.P. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2009, 04:51 PM   #14
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Toes View Post
I do consider you an exception to the complacent younger generation....

I think you may have born about 300 years to late...
me too.
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2009, 07:13 PM   #15
upchuck
Senior Member
 
upchuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10-16-07
Location: grand rapids, Michigan
Posts: 1,100
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Is the 30 years key here? Are the younger generation guilty of complacency of "states rights" that has been a veiled attempt at pushing back the clock on segregation?
upchuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2009, 07:28 PM   #16
shawn
Resident HVAC/R Jambi
 
shawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Milford/Commerce
Posts: 10,106
iTrader: (24)
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Send a message via Yahoo to shawn
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hombre View Post
Maybe we'll have another "war between the states!"
This is the problem. Although we may have the right to have our weapons, our fore-fathers never could know the advanced weaponry and technology the military could have. We could never have a war like the civil or revolutionary wars. Back then, everybody had the same weaponry, but today there is no way a civil war could ever make an impact. Any attempt would be humiliating and devastating to the uprising of such a political movement.
shawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2009, 08:25 PM   #17
Hombre
I carry a shank
 
Hombre's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-15-06
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,548
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn View Post
This is the problem. Although we may have the right to have our weapons, our fore-fathers never could know the advanced weaponry and technology the military could have. We could never have a war like the civil or revolutionary wars. Back then, everybody had the same weaponry, but today there is no way a civil war could ever make an impact. Any attempt would be humiliating and devastating to the uprising of such a political movement.
I'd bet that entire military units and their equipment would choose sides just like in 1861. Remember, when the federal government decides to use force against a mans home state, people get pissed. Think about it........who do you have more loyalty to? Michigan (or whatever state you are from) or the federal government?

In both the Revolutionary war and the American Civil War, there were many, many humiliating defeats. You can lose battles but still win a war.
Hombre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2009, 08:40 PM   #18
Mr Toes - R.I.P.
November 7, 1958 - July 22, 2011
 
Mr Toes - R.I.P.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-29-07
Location: Belleville Mi
Posts: 4,727
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steveo View Post
me too.
No way on the 300 years, you fall into at least gattlin gun times....
Mr Toes - R.I.P. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2009, 08:44 PM   #19
Mr Toes - R.I.P.
November 7, 1958 - July 22, 2011
 
Mr Toes - R.I.P.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-29-07
Location: Belleville Mi
Posts: 4,727
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by upchuck View Post
Is the 30 years key here? Are the younger generation guilty of complacency of "states rights" that has been a veiled attempt at pushing back the clock on segregation?
Where the heck did this come from??????

1979, what segregation you talking about, the United "insert racial slur here" College Fund, the all black schools that still exsist, Miss Black America, The Latino Music Awards.
Mr Toes - R.I.P. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2009, 09:26 PM   #20
smasheromalley
Senior Member
 
smasheromalley's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-06-05
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,038
iTrader: (15)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by upchuck View Post
Is the 30 years key here? Are the younger generation guilty of complacency of "states rights" that has been a veiled attempt at pushing back the clock on segregation?
R you serious?
smasheromalley is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:39 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.34968 seconds with 80 queries