Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Posted: 1/29/2007 5:00:58 AM EST
Very interesting this Montana HB 420.

This bill declares that any firearms made and retained in Montana are simply not subject to any federal regulation under the power of Congress to "regulate commerce ... among the several states." If it passes, this bill will open the door to unregulated, Montana-only firearms manufacture. It may also set up a nifty test case over the alleged power of Congress to regulate everything under the Sun under the guise of regulating "interstate commerce."

You may read this bill at: data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2007/billhtml/HB0420.htm


2007 Montana Legislature

HOUSE BILL NO. 420

INTRODUCED BY R. KOOPMAN


A BILL FOR AN ACT ENTITLED: "AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA."

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

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

NEW SECTION. 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 guarantee 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 guarantee 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 guarantee 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.

NEW SECTION. 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 creating a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition from basic materials for functional usefulness, including but not limited to forging, casting, machining, or other processes for working materials.

NEW SECTION. Section 4. Prohibition. 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.

NEW SECTION. 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.

NEW SECTION. Section 6. Marking 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.

NEW SECTION. 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].

- END -

Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:02:22 AM EST
*Begins browsing Monster.com*
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:02:23 AM EST
It begins.

GO MONTANA!
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:03:24 AM EST

Originally Posted By qualityhardware:
It begins.

GO MONTANA!



Did you hear that? It sounds like Tanks!
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:03:40 AM EST
Sweet.

Atleast some still have their balls attached.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:03:49 AM EST
it won't matter, the feds alread said that Federal law trumps state law.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:04:05 AM EST
I knew there were more reasons other than the natural beauty in Montana that make me want to move there...
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:04:13 AM EST
The feds will threaten to cut off federal tax dollars for other things. The state will cave.

The term "Do not question my Authoritay" comes to mind.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:04:15 AM EST
So what's the weather like in Montana?
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:06:56 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/29/2007 5:08:25 AM EST by BenDover]
I hear Bozeman is real nice.

ETA: I also recall that you only need a state septic permit for $40, and you only need to send them a pencil sketch.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:06:58 AM EST
good news........but you can color me cynical about it actually amounting to anything.........
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:07:15 AM EST
Yes, its hard to see how the interstate commerce clause applies if they don't leave the state.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:07:31 AM EST
sweet


snowballs chance in hell but ballsy
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:07:41 AM EST

Originally Posted By UH_SALT_RIFLE:
So what's the weather like in Montana?


Cold


I still have relative there. I need to start looking for property.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:09:57 AM EST
If it passed i would move there





But it passing is a cold day in hell......
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:10:01 AM EST
Very interesting development, it will be worth keeping a close watch on to see what happens. However...


Originally Posted By BenDover:


NEW SECTION. 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.

NEW SECTION. Section 6. Marking 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.

NEW SECTION. 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].

- END -



Still can't get more thrusts per squeeze
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:10:25 AM EST

Originally Posted By BenDover:

NEW SECTION. 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.
NEW SECTION. Section 6. Marking 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.

NEW SECTION. 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].

- END -




AAhhhh...

But its a good start
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:10:29 AM EST

Originally Posted By jkstexas2001:
Yes, its hard to see how the interstate commerce clause applies if they don't leave the state.


The feds will dream up some argument as to how it applies.

- The materials used to manufacture those firearms could have come from outside Montana.

- The equipment used to manufacture those firearms could have come from outside Montana.

- The ammunition used in those firearms could have come from outside Montana.

Etc...

- CD
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:12:22 AM EST
Read the whole bill.

It specifically excludes machineguns.


NEW SECTION. 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.


Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:13:45 AM EST
Is there any land left in Montana?
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:14:30 AM EST
I was very excited until I read Exemption 4. Sounds like the law does not cover full auto / select fire. Am I reading that correctly?
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:14:53 AM EST
But it does permit bores to 1 & 1/2 inches.

Holy crap big caliber.

Where's Texas? Oh yeah, licking the boots of the current administration and the National GOP.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:15:31 AM EST

Originally Posted By Kylaer_:
Very interesting development, it will be worth keeping a close watch on to see what happens. However...


Originally Posted By BenDover:


NEW SECTION. 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.

NEW SECTION. Section 6. Marking 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.

NEW SECTION. 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].

- END -



Still can't get more thrusts per squeeze


Ahh crap, there goes your shotguns!

Kudos for having the balls to stand up to the feds. They really don't have authority if it doesn't cross state lines. Too bad they will blackmail this bill to an ugly death.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:16:34 AM EST

Originally Posted By WolfFox:
Is there any land left in Montana?


Why, you'd consider leaving the "gunshine" state?
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:16:42 AM EST

Originally Posted By Hank_Rearden1:
I was very excited until I read Exemption 4. Sounds like the law does not cover full auto / select fire. Am I reading that correctly?


that is how I read it but it appears to cover SBR's and can's.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:16:50 AM EST
Why would they want to exclude select fire and shotguns
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:18:02 AM EST

Originally Posted By grizzlyarms:
it won't matter, the feds alread said that Federal law trumps state law.


Montana just needs to put some teeth behind it. Does Montana have a State Militia (Ohio does)? If federal agents come down, the Governor could order the State Militia to stop them. That's a political NIGHTMARE for the feds, and I guarantee you not a shot would be fired before the thing was resolved, provided Montana was really serious.

Montana just needs to stand their ground. It's their right, as far as I'm concerned. I don't care if the Supreme Court disagrees with me. The founders never intended for this to be regulated as interstate commerce. We all know it.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:21:00 AM EST

Originally Posted By shootemup:

Originally Posted By WolfFox:
Is there any land left in Montana?


Why, you'd consider leaving the "gunshine" state?


I Wouldn't. I will be retiring and traveling with a fifth wheel in a couple of years and would love some land up there to park it on. I love that area of the country.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:21:20 AM EST
I think a good strategy would be find out where the VPOTUS is going to retire, then buy some land near him. He's a big gun / NFA nut. Also, it will be nice to live near our future Revolutionary War II Commander and Chief.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:21:30 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/29/2007 5:25:41 AM EST by vrwc0915]

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By grizzlyarms:
it won't matter, the feds alread said that Federal law trumps state law.


Montana just needs to put some teeth behind it. Does Montana have a State Militia (Ohio does)? If federal agents come down, the Governor could order the State Militia to stop them. That's a political NIGHTMARE for the feds, and I guarantee you not a shot would be fired before the thing was resolved, provided Montana was really serious.

Montana just needs to stand their ground. It's their right, as far as I'm concerned. I don't care if the Supreme Court disagrees with me. The founders never intended for this to be regulated as interstate commerce. We all know it.


Didn't SC or NC have the state patrol block the feds from dumping some radioactive waste a few years back

That would be funny as hell, the MT NG detaining and removing BATFE from the state


Even though this will most likely never pass, it really makes me feel like there is still hope. Just that fact that this bill was introduced is something.

This needs to be posted in Hometown as a fire mission


Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:24:47 AM EST
I love what Montana stands for, but unfortunately, the issue of states rights was settled by the Civil War. It's been all downhill from there.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:28:05 AM EST

Originally Posted By lagadelphia:

Originally Posted By Hank_Rearden1:
I was very excited until I read Exemption 4. Sounds like the law does not cover full auto / select fire. Am I reading that correctly?


that is how I read it but it appears to cover SBR's and can's.


indeed, that just mad emy day
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:28:05 AM EST

Originally Posted By grizzlyarms:
it won't matter, the feds alread said that Federal law trumps state law.
That's funny isn't it? They claim this in spite of the 2nd amendment being violated anywhere guns are banned. I would think the 2nd falls under federal law. Supreme law of the land right? Seems the powers that be like to interpret laws both ways as it suits them...Hog
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:28:16 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:30:02 AM EST
go montana!

I am slightly disapointed that they excluded field artilery






(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;

Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:30:32 AM EST

Originally Posted By vrwc0915:

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By grizzlyarms:
it won't matter, the feds alread said that Federal law trumps state law.


Montana just needs to put some teeth behind it. Does Montana have a State Militia (Ohio does)? If federal agents come down, the Governor could order the State Militia to stop them. That's a political NIGHTMARE for the feds, and I guarantee you not a shot would be fired before the thing was resolved, provided Montana was really serious.

Montana just needs to stand their ground. It's their right, as far as I'm concerned. I don't care if the Supreme Court disagrees with me. The founders never intended for this to be regulated as interstate commerce. We all know it.


Didn't SC or NC have the state patrol block the feds from dumping some radioactive waste a few years back

That would be funny as hell, the MT NG detaining and removing BATFE from the state


Even though this will most likely never pass, it really makes me feel like there is still hope. Just that fact that this bill was introduced is something.

This needs to be posted in Hometown as a fire mission




It was SC.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:30:45 AM EST
Its getting close to the time when patriots will rise...
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:33:04 AM EST

Originally Posted By dpmmn:

Originally Posted By grizzlyarms:
it won't matter, the feds alread said that Federal law trumps state law.


Tell that to California, New York and the other States that have weapons bans


State law can be MORE restrictive than federal law, not less restrictive.

If it is more restrictive, it is not trumping federal law - it is "supplementing" it. If it is less, it is trumping it, because it is replacing federal law and substituting state law instead.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:33:37 AM EST
Additionally, people forget that the NFA was passed explicitly under Congress's taxing authority, NOT the commerce clause.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:33:37 AM EST

Originally Posted By ipschoser1:
I love what Montana stands for, but unfortunately, the issue of states rights was settled by the Civil War. It's been all downhill from there.


I don't know about "settled".

If the bill passes and Montana is serious about the will of their people, and they are SERIOUS about defending the Constitution as written and intended by the founders, they can bring the issue right back up again. Or they can roll over and decide that the federal government is right. Either way.

Laws are only effective to the extent that governments are willing to enforce them.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:34:07 AM EST

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By ipschoser1:
I love what Montana stands for, but unfortunately, the issue of states rights was settled by the Civil War. It's been all downhill from there.


I don't know about "settled".

If the bill passes and Montana is serious about the will of their people, and they are SERIOUS about defending the Constitution as written and intended by the founders, they can bring the issue right back up again. Or they can roll over and decide that the federal government is right. Either way.

Laws are only effective to the extent that governments are willing to enforce them.


They did roll over on the speed limit to the feds
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:35:24 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/29/2007 5:36:06 AM EST by jrkarp]

Originally Posted By grizzlyarms:
it won't matter, the feds alread said that Federal law trumps state law.


The Constitution says that.


Constitution of the United States, Article VI

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:36:26 AM EST

Originally Posted By vrwc0915:

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By ipschoser1:
I love what Montana stands for, but unfortunately, the issue of states rights was settled by the Civil War. It's been all downhill from there.


I don't know about "settled".

If the bill passes and Montana is serious about the will of their people, and they are SERIOUS about defending the Constitution as written and intended by the founders, they can bring the issue right back up again. Or they can roll over and decide that the federal government is right. Either way.

Laws are only effective to the extent that governments are willing to enforce them.


They did roll over on the speed limit to the feds


They weren't willing to go to arms over it, is my broader point.

As a guess, I'm assuming that the feds held highway funding over their heads.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:37:37 AM EST

Originally Posted By CamperDad:

Originally Posted By jkstexas2001:
Yes, its hard to see how the interstate commerce clause applies if they don't leave the state.


The feds will dream up some argument as to how it applies.

- The materials used to manufacture those firearms could have come from outside Montana.

- The equipment used to manufacture those firearms could have come from outside Montana.

- The ammunition used in those firearms could have come from outside Montana.

Etc...

- CD



No.

1) You affect interstate commerce when you don't buy a transferrable MG.
2) MGs are traded in interstate commerce, therefore the feds have jurisdiction over MGs. (See Raich)
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:39:05 AM EST

Originally Posted By jrkarp:

Originally Posted By grizzlyarms:
it won't matter, the feds alread said that Federal law trumps state law.


The Constitution says that.


Constitution of the United States, Article VI

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.


Regarding this Consitution, regulating firearms made and kept by the residents of Montana is NOT a law made "in pursuance thereof" and is therefore invalid.

In my view anyway, and only to the extent that Montana really friggin' means it.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:40:32 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/29/2007 5:41:32 AM EST by jrkarp]

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By jrkarp:

Originally Posted By grizzlyarms:
it won't matter, the feds alread said that Federal law trumps state law.


The Constitution says that.


Constitution of the United States, Article VI

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.


Regarding this Consitution, regulating firearms made and kept by the residents of Montana is NOT a law made "in pursuance thereof" and is therefore invalid.

In my view anyway, and only to the extent that Montana really friggin' means it.


Congress is given wide taxing authority. NFA is a taxing regulation.

Other than that (non NFA firearms and devices), I am with you.

ETA: I'm not saying it's right or that I agree with it - I'm just saying that's how it is.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:42:31 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:44:00 AM EST
god bless them.


I wish them luck.


Hopefully it will start a precedent.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:44:25 AM EST

Originally Posted By jrkarp:

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By jrkarp:

Originally Posted By grizzlyarms:
it won't matter, the feds alread said that Federal law trumps state law.


The Constitution says that.


Constitution of the United States, Article VI

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.


Regarding this Consitution, regulating firearms made and kept by the residents of Montana is NOT a law made "in pursuance thereof" and is therefore invalid.

In my view anyway, and only to the extent that Montana really friggin' means it.


Congress is given wide taxing authority. NFA is a taxing regulation.

Other than that (non NFA firearms and devices), I am with you.

ETA: I'm not saying it's right or that I agree with it - I'm just saying that's how it is.


That is such BS the authors of the NFA clearly and in writing said that the intent of teh NFA was to prevent ownership. Government officials admitted in writing to attempting to subvert the Constitution and (myself included) pussies that value comfort over freedom allow it to stand
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:46:13 AM EST

Originally Posted By jrkarp:

Originally Posted By grizzlyarms:
it won't matter, the feds alread said that Federal law trumps state law.


The Constitution says that.


Constitution of the United States, Article VI

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.


Yeah, but your leaving out a couple of relevant points:


Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.


and


Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Link Posted: 1/29/2007 5:46:57 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/29/2007 5:48:24 AM EST by M4]

Originally Posted By grizzlyarms:
it won't matter, the feds alread said that Federal law trumps state law.


Ask the medical marijuana crowed in CA or the right to die folks in OR.

The Feds crushed/are crushing state passed ballot measures.

The Fed regulates ALL and there's no way around it unless the SCOTUS decideds to rule in favor of states rights....if they even take the case.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Top Top