Thread: Napolitano on Beck: Montana 2nd Amendment and States Rights

Napolitano on Beck: Montana 2nd Amendment and States Rights Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mV_Mlmam ... re=related

Judge Napolitano Joins Glenn and discuss Montana states rights legislation.

Utah's Carl Wimmer and Texas Leo Berman announce similar legislation in their states.


Napolitano on Beck: Montana 2nd Amendment and States Rights Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHwPHvkr ... re=related

Montana Gun Sovereignty Law Unconstitutional - Supreme Court will Overturn it - Tyranny Wins

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUi_Bq9E ... re=related

Federal Tyranny will only be stopped by constitutional amendments. We the People must act now or forever hold our peace. It is up to us, and if we do nothing, then we will only have ourselves to blame; we deserve what we get.

I would say that for this law to even have a chance of being upheld by the Supreme Court, then at minimum the State of Montana would have to track these guns. And to do that they would have to register them, and then keep the Feds informed about the whereabouts of these guns, which would be no different than a federal gun registration. Is this what we want?

Like the guy in the video said, we need to have some Constitutional amendments that will put the federal government back in its place, the place that it used to be in before the progressives from both parties took over. I believe that this is the only chance that we have of taking the power away from the feds, and giving it back to the States, and to the people, where it came from in the first place.
jbranstetter04


Made in Montana: New Montana Law Makes Certain Guns and Ammo Exempt From Federal Regulation

In a time when the Federal government is busily seeking ways to limit the freedom of the American people, the state of Montana has created a new law, dubbed the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, which exempts from Federal regulation all firearms, firearm accessories (including silencers), and ammunition manufactured within its borders, so long as it is properly marked "Made in Montana" and it does not cross state lines.
Certain exceptions apply, one of which seems to delete shotguns from coverage under this new legislation. Although probably aimed at fully-automatic guns (a.k.a. machine guns), the wording "a firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of the trigger or other firing device" could easily define a shotgun using shotshells (rather than slugs), which discharges many projectiles with each pull of the trigger.
This Montana bill became law on "income tax day," April 15, 2009. It seems ironic that this move towards freedom from Federal oppression became official on a date that so many freedom-minded Americans loathe. At this time, similar legislation is in the works in other states, including Texas and Alaska.
Montana residents may wish to consult this list of Montana Firearms Manufacturers and Gunsmiths.
The Federal government has long regulated firearms via authority granted to it in the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, on the premise that any gun or related device is automatically subject to Federal regulation because it may be involved in interstate commerce. These new laws would negate that, by protecting guns and related goods which do not cross state lines.
By making exempt from such regulation any eligible gun or related device manufactured within its borders and which stays within those borders, these states are in essence denying the Federal government an apparently fictional authority which it has long asserted. More importantly, the states are creating law-based protection against the very-real threat of a Federal gun registration/confiscation scheme.
I purposely used "registration" and "confiscation" in combination above, because the former historically leads to the latter, with the inevitable result being government by those in government, not by the people.
Many predict that this new movement will lead to an epic legal battle over the Tenth Amendment ("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"). If so, an Obama-weighted Supreme Court may end up deciding the issue.
These laws rely on the exempted goods never crossing state lines, which seems pretty tough to control, especially if we wish to remain free from such things as inspection (read: vehicle search) stations where highways cross state lines, which I don't doubt the Fed would wish to implement, Fourth Amendment to the Constitution notwithstanding.