All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:06 AM.  

Go Back   Gunco.net > General Firearms Lobby > Firearm Laws and Regulations

Firearm Laws and Regulations Local, state, federal and global laws and regulations forum...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 05-07-2009, 05:39 PM   #1 (permalink)
Gunco Member
 
Fingolfen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 77
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Showdown over “Made in Montana” Law Expected


Montana has passed legislation exempting firearms made and sold in Montana to Montana residents from most Federal Firearms regulations. The key legal reasoning behind the state law is the fact that Federal Firearms law is based on the “interstate commerce” powers of the Federal government. Texas and Alaska introducing similar measures:

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
__________________
Mike

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

"ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ" - King Leonidas I of Sparta

Visit "Smokeless Powder", my firearms and 2nd Amendment blog:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Fingolfen is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Old 05-07-2009, 06:26 PM   #2 (permalink)
Gunco Veteran
 
Markp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Somalia
Posts: 1,689
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fingolfen View Post
Montana has passed legislation exempting firearms made and sold in Montana to Montana residents from most Federal Firearms regulations. The key legal reasoning behind the state law is the fact that Federal Firearms law is based on the “interstate commerce” powers of the Federal government. Texas and Alaska introducing similar measures:

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]


Yep, this is gonna get ugly!!!

I can't wait... I want to see this fight go down!

Mark
Markp is online now   Reply With Quote
 
Old 05-08-2009, 03:04 AM   #3 (permalink)
Gunsmith
 
Fritz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Salem, Oregon
Posts: 1,040
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markp View Post
Yep, this is gonna get ugly!!!

I can't wait... I want to see this fight go down!

Mark
This.
Fritz is online now   Reply With Quote
 
Old 05-08-2009, 07:29 AM   #4 (permalink)
ALCOHOLIC
 
4thIDvet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: astor florida
Posts: 6,247
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Thumbs up Good For Them..

Wonder who the guy is who is going to step too the plate and do the deed.
My FFL has too charge me $5.00 "his cost" to the State of Florida for a background check on purchase.
Think this law was implemented by the Feds.
Vermont members correct me if I am wrong. Pretty sure Vermont told the Feds to kiss off on the charge. Told them they aint gonna charge nobody.
Dont know how that ever worked out.
Good to see the States starting to fight back.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"Man needs but two things to survive alone in the woods. A blow up female doll and his trusty old AK-47" - Thomas Jefferson 1781


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
4thIDvet is online now   Reply With Quote
 
Old 05-08-2009, 08:30 AM   #5 (permalink)
NoWorkCamp4Me
 
railbuggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Cincinnati,OHIO
Posts: 2,503
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elza
First of all the Fed is going to fall on this like the Hammer of God, or try to at any rate. First will be a Supreme Court ruling which is easily ignored. Ignoring the SC seems to be working well for the District of Columbia for the time being. If the legislature and the people of Montana stand fast then the ball is in the court of the Fed.

What will the Fed do at this point? Some sort of blockade to all interstate transportation? It would be rather like crossing a picket line. Some would do it but most wouldn’t chance the wrath of the Fed. I certainly wouldn’t want to stand roadblock duty! Talk about a sitting duck………

Would the Fed actually move on Montana militarily? The British tried it against the Colonials (and for the same reason) and it didn’t work out all that well.

It will basically come down to the people and the legislature. I have never had the pleasure of visiting the Great State of Montana but if the folks on this board are in any way representative of the overall population it could be very interesting!

It could get very interesting, quick. There are several other state legislatures with similar bills, so it would be interesting to see if they all get "knocked" out in one blow or not.

The biggest problem I see for Montana is that the Feds could withhold federal money until/unless the state enforces the ruling. This is the biggest problem with federal income tax, namely that individuals pay the IRS and the Congress deals the money back out to the states, influencing a whole slew of state choices, like 21 alcohol age, and speed limits on highways. Montana may not be able to hold out over a funding showdown.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elza

Would the Fed actually move on Montana militarily?
Quote
Move against who, specifically?
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
My children are in one home now. NRA JPFO MC/NAVY When death looks you in the eye,smile.
railbuggy is online now   Reply With Quote
 
Old 05-08-2009, 10:21 AM   #6 (permalink)
OCD ADD Patriot
 
MaadiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 188
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

“Under the new law, guns intended only for Montana would be stamped "Made in Montana." The drafters of the law hope to set off a legal battle with a simple Montana-made youth-model single-shot, bolt-action .22 rifle. They plan to find a "squeaky clean" Montanan who wants to send a note to the ATF threatening to build and sell about 20 such rifles without federal dealership licensing.

“If the ATF tells them it's illegal, they will sue and take the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, if they can.”

I've been looking for a reason to move back home! I'll do it!
MaadiMan is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Old 05-08-2009, 10:54 AM   #7 (permalink)
ALCOHOLIC
 
4thIDvet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: astor florida
Posts: 6,247
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Post The Downside to This Law.

The one problem, among others, is the first time the weapon leaves the State of Montana, has the owner transported an illegal weapon.
Then another battle will ensue as to transferring.
Ah what the hell. At least there letting the Feds know were sick of there friggen stupid laws.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"Man needs but two things to survive alone in the woods. A blow up female doll and his trusty old AK-47" - Thomas Jefferson 1781


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
4thIDvet is online now   Reply With Quote
 
Old 05-08-2009, 12:29 PM   #8 (permalink)
Gunco Veteran
 
Markp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Somalia
Posts: 1,689
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4thIDvet View Post
The one problem, among others, is the first time the weapon leaves the State of Montana, has the owner transported an illegal weapon.
Then another battle will ensue as to transferring.
Ah what the hell. At least there letting the Feds know were sick of there friggen stupid laws.
There is no reason it should be illegal as long as it remained in the possession of a Montana resident. Still, the federal government has simply gone too far in regulating our lives. They need to be cut down to size.

Mark
Markp is online now   Reply With Quote
 
Old 05-08-2009, 08:52 PM   #9 (permalink)
SniperPig
 
TheCol.U.S.M.C.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: 1984
Posts: 311
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I want to move now!!! I hope AZ will do this
TheCol.U.S.M.C. is online now   Reply With Quote
 
Old 05-08-2009, 11:16 PM   #10 (permalink)
Gunco Veteran
 
nalioth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,100
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by railbuggy View Post
The biggest problem I see for Montana is that the Feds could withhold federal money until/unless the state enforces the ruling. This is the biggest problem with federal income tax, namely that individuals pay the IRS and the Congress deals the money back out to the states, influencing a whole slew of state choices, like 21 alcohol age, and speed limits on highways. Montana may not be able to hold out over a funding showdown.
I don't think the good legislators of Montana are that stupid, to overlook all possible ramifications before running this through. I suspect they took it under consideration and felt that they didn't need Fed money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4thIDvet View Post
The one problem, among others, is the first time the weapon leaves the State of Montana, has the owner transported an illegal weapon.
Then another battle will ensue as to transferring.
Why? So long as it has a manufacturers mark and serial number on it, it can transfer anywhere via an FFL dealer.

If it doesn't, you just won't be able to sell it out of state.


I think the bigger s***storm is coming when Montanans start bending their own receivers and assembling their Krink and AMD-65 kits as they come (iow, w/o 16" barrels) and making their own suppressors.
nalioth is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:06 AM.
Style By: vBSkinworks

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.1.0