Author Topic: Montana's new sovereignty law (Read 2853 times)

vies359 · « **on:** May 07, 2009, 10:50:41 PM »

Today, on the Glen Beck show, they talked about a new Montana law the gives the rights back to the stated via the 10th ammendment. One thing that this does is makes all firearms and ammo manufactured in Wyoming and sold in Wyoming out of the reach of all federal gun laws. Many other states are also doing the same. Nebraska should consider this.

Rich B · « **Reply #1 on:** May 08, 2009, 01:38:17 PM »

MT's law, while a good start, still doesn't apply to NFA items which would be the ultimate middle finger to the fed .gov.

Sadly, Nebraska will probably the last state to follow suit since we're just about last for everything else (concealed carry, safe haven, etc.).

JimP · « **Reply #2 on:** May 09, 2009, 10:54:24 PM »

Where does it say it does not apply to NFA? It says firearms manufactured in and that stay in MT, no?

FarmerRick · « **Reply #3 on:** May 10, 2009, 08:05:38 AM »

Quote from: JimP on May 09, 2009, 10:54:24 PM

Where does it say it does not apply to NFA? It says firearms manufactured in and that stay in MT, no?

It applies to some NFA items, but not others.

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0246.htm

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 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.

huskergun · « **Reply #4 on:** May 10, 2009, 08:06:04 PM »

It's a hell of a start though. We should start pushing Nebraska in that direction don't ya think.
I think this law did give the middle finger to the Feds even though the NFA part of it is minimal. At least they did something productive.

Rich B · « **Reply #5 on:** May 14, 2009, 08:35:05 AM »

The first test case of someone with a suppressor, SBR, or SBS that doesn't have a tax stamp will determine how good the law really is.

I wouldn't count on the MT National Guard to back someone up when the ATF comes rolling in, or the AG to defend them when the feds put them on trial.

huskergun · « **Reply #6 on:** May 14, 2009, 07:19:24 PM »

By law they might not have a choice. We will see.
More states need to become involved in this type of law.
This is a very productive first step in regaining states rights. It needs to spread and evolve so we the people can get our country back someday.

Josh1776 · « **Reply #7 on:** May 14, 2009, 10:29:54 PM »

Quote from: huskergun on May 14, 2009, 07:19:24 PM

...More states need to become involved in this type of law...

Firearms Freedom Act Introduced in South Carolina

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/05/12/firearms-freedom-act-introduced-in-south-carolina/

huskergun · « **Reply #8 on:** May 15, 2009, 09:38:10 PM »

How about Nebraska?

Ya right. That won't happen here for a while I fear.

Josh1776 · « **Reply #9 on:** May 16, 2009, 12:12:44 AM »

Nebraska always seems to be tail end charlie. Not sure why.

bkoenig · « **Reply #10 on:** May 16, 2009, 09:39:52 AM »

Quote

Nebraska always seems to be tail end charlie. Not sure why.

I think it's because of the conservative nature of most people who live here. Not conservative politically (although most are) but conservative as in "don't rock the boat".

With that said we seem to be on a roll the last few years with regard to gun issues, so why not push it next session?

Josh1776 · « **Reply #11 on:** May 17, 2009, 12:58:57 AM »

Quote from: bkoenig on May 16, 2009, 09:39:52 AM

...most people who live here...Not conservative politically (although most are) but conservative as in "don't rock the boat".

I've been trying to figure out Nebraska's political culture, but could not put my finger on it until your comment. Thanks.

Unfortunatley the populations centers (Omaha & Lincoln) are socialist. [Deleted lead-in to my stupid comment].

I'm all for pushing 2nd and 10th Ammendment legislation next session!...lets push while we have the momentum.

bullit · « **Reply #12 on:** May 17, 2009, 10:00:51 AM »

"I've been wondering if federal government farm aid has something to do with the political leanings of the state as well."

Ya' think

?? As an independant business owner (i.e. no bail out opportunities for me) don't get me started. While on vacation last week, I stopped at the local convienance store a couple of miles from my rural home. Looked like a new pick-up dealership in the parking lot what with all the local "poor" farmers shootin' the bull at 0830.

Also, look at the 2006 election in the 3rd district. Look at who ran against Johanns in 2008. Here comes a ship in the night (Kleeb) and gets the large number of votes he did. As has been mentioned on this site and others, read "Liberty and Tyranny" by Mark Levine. Entitlement mindset. If this offends any of you....GOOD!!! It needs to be said. Folks we are in trouble.......

lefty · « **Reply #13 on:** May 17, 2009, 01:07:58 PM »

Ever wonder how big those "Wellfare Payments" are the farmers get?
Check out this website. It will blow you away.

I never got paid for not working!

http://farm.ewg.org/farm/index.php

lefty · « **Reply #14 on:** May 17, 2009, 01:25:15 PM »

http://farm.ewg.org/farm/dp_analysis.php This site is a lot faster.
Sorry about that.

Josh1776 · « **Reply #15 on:** May 17, 2009, 02:54:36 PM »

I apoligize for my stupid comments, which I've deleted.

FarmerRick · « **Reply #16 on:** May 17, 2009, 08:51:55 PM »

Yup, I'm on that list. I earned a whole $5.31 per acre last year for my 80 acres.
It's a payment program intended to promote preserving natural habitat and conservation-type farming techniques such as buffer zones by creeks and planting native grasses in waterways. Do you like to hunt in Nebraska? Pheasants? Deer? Ducks? Turkey? Ever heard of "habitat"? Sure, the people that own thousands and thousands of acres get a nice check from the .gov, but most farmers that I know sure aren't driving new trucks.

You should see that new truck that my $430 "welfare payment" bought me.

What is your noble occupation, Lefty? Josh?

Just curious. No offense.

With that said, let's try to get this thread back on topic please, we can discuss this in another thread without hijacking this one.

lefty · « **Reply #17 on:** May 17, 2009, 09:02:14 PM »

I worked for a natural gas utility for 38 years. Been threatened to have my home blown up for removing a meter for non pay and had to call the sheriff a few times to go with me to get a non pay meter. Yep, the customer is always correct. (In their mind)

One farmers I know in here Kearney county got $884,654 in the last 10 years
and yes it is a new work truck (fancy one) every year.

I was raised on a farm, pumped 25 old cows with my folks and 2 brothers for many years. Dad never did have a new pickup. Of course, we only farmed 360 acres out in Frontier county. Wouldn't trade my hill stomping with the .22 for anything.

Josh1776 · « **Reply #18 on:** May 18, 2009, 08:32:30 PM »

Good points FarmerRick!...I apologize for my stupid comments!...I know nothing about farming and I was speaking out of my butt...not sure that I was thinking...I was not thinking. I'm a former Marine who spent some time in the sandbox and now I'm an engineer in the manufacturing sector.

FarmerRick · « **Reply #19 on:** May 18, 2009, 09:44:53 PM »

Didn't mean to call anyone out.
No problem Josh(and Lefty), I get pissed off about the govt. handing out our money too. It's just that my family has been in farming in one way or another in Nebraska since the late 1880's, and there will be quite a few having a hard time this year due to the rising costs of fertilizer, fuel, seed, etc. We're all just one hail storm from going under(crop insurance only pays 60% of actual crop value). Believe me, I wish that there wasn't any payments going to farmers from the govt., and the corporate farms that are getting hundreds of thousands are no doubt abusing the system. But until the govt. gets their sticky fingers out of ALL of our business(again, 10th amendment), I'll continue to take my very small share and do what I can with it.
In my case, I use the money to re-seed water ways, for weed killer, and other maintenance items around the farm while trying to improve the wildlife habitat and keep erosion to a minimum. I would do most these things anyway, but it is nice to have a little monetary help to do a better job. That pheasant that hatches on my farm may provide a meal for someone else come fall. Some big corporate farms may use their check for similar purposes, though I doubt many do.

The problem is: where do we draw the line? Who gets to decide where that line is drawn?

This is a very similar situation to some public assistance such as WIC and other programs, the govt. feels it needs to take care of the things that people and communities should be doing themselves. Quite a few of the people are appreciative of the help they get and end up paying most of what they get back into the system with tax dollars, but many more abuse these programs to the point of it being criminal. Certain parts of Omaha and many other large cities are full of these people, literally sucking the teat of the govt.(and our tax dollars) without trying to better themselves.

Back to Montana-
I wish them all the luck in the world, but it WILL be a court battle and will most likely end up in the Supreme Court. I just hope the ratio is the same as now, by the time it gets that far.