• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Montana to Feds: We Don't Want Your Gun Control (Montana Gun Law Mega Thread)

Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
1,200
Likes
34
Location
Harrison, Maine
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Thursday, October 1, 2009

HELENA, Mont. -- If Montana has its way in a lawsuit filed Thursday, there will be far less federal gun control in the state.

The state's libertarian streak _ which has spawned efforts to buck the federal Real ID Act and sparked widespread contempt for the Patriot Act _ is now triggering a fight over whether Montana should have sovereignty over made-in-Montana guns and equipment.

If gun advocates win, the state could decide which rules, if any, would control the manufacturer, sale and purchase of guns and paraphernalia.

READ MORE
 
Makes too much sense to me. Feds will go down kicking and screaming. It is unfortunate that Mass. cannot have something similar to this.

Can somebody take these guns to another state for competition?
 
The courts will probably doubt hold that in so much as the manufacturers use raw materials and equipment from many states in the manufacturing process, federal gun control is simply "regulating interstate commerce".
 
If the manufacturers can show complete vertical integration within the state (from raw ore to final product) this should be an interesting case under an interstate commerce argument. If raw materials are imported into the state, it is a different ball game. Recycled and reclaimed materials would also be an interesting question of origin. All in all, cool long shot for the possibility of new machine guns on market.
 
"I will live in Montana. And I will marry a round American woman and raise rabbits, and she will cook them for me"

That was a great line.[grin]

I love Montana. I will live there again someday, & maybe even marry a round American man to cook homemade rabbits for. [smile]
 
Last edited:
If the manufacturers can show complete vertical integration within the state (from raw ore to final product) this should be an interesting case under an interstate commerce argument. If raw materials are imported into the state, it is a different ball game. Recycled and reclaimed materials would also be an interesting question of origin. All in all, cool long shot for the possibility of new machine guns on market.

You shouldn't have to go that far.

Unfortunately SCOTUS doesn't have a lot of US v Lopez grade decisions (eg, where the feds get punched in the face for violating interstate commerce provisions) and that's how this crap got out of control.

BTW, Montana excludes MG's from it's "made in montana" thing, so machine guns are out of the question. So they were brave, but not
that brave.

-Mike
 
BTW, Montana excludes MG's from it's "made in montana" thing, so machine guns are out of the question. So they were brave, but not that brave.
Indeed - it's basically a paper-work statement...

Which, IMHO is the right place to start because it increases participation. The best "civil disobedience" is the kind that breaks few if any laws so that participation is maximized...
 
Indeed - it's basically a paper-work statement...

Which, IMHO is the right place to start because it increases participation. The best "civil disobedience" is the kind that breaks few if any laws so that participation is maximized...

Made in Montana suppressors would not fall under the NFA with this act.
 
We should do this in NH, we've at least got Ruger and Sig...

Neither of which will really care. Both of them make substantial amounts of coin from interstate commerce, so their activities won't be exempt from federal regulation. (Unless SCOTUS makes a landmark decision that severely curtails the level of regulation the feds can impose on the states. )

-Mike
 
If the manufacturers can show complete vertical integration within the state (from raw ore to final product) this should be an interesting case under an interstate commerce argument. If raw materials are imported into the state, it is a different ball game. Recycled and reclaimed materials would also be an interesting question of origin. All in all, cool long shot for the possibility of new machine guns on market.

Even if every single part was made in Montana, using only materials from Montana and native-born Montana workers, there'd still be a problem under existing Supreme Court decisions. Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942) essentially held that the commerce clause covered anything and everything conceivable. The very fact that something was done in one state meant that there was less demand to have it done in another state, thus affecting interstate commerce. It's every bit as obscene as Dred Scott v. Sanford, U.S. v. Cruikshank or Plessy v. Ferguson, but it's still binding precedent until overturned.

Back when I was an undergrad, I used to joke that, since laws applied to people and people were free to move from one state to another, anything they did was covered by interstate commerce. Then I encountered Wickard v. Filburn and discovered to my horror that I was right. U.S. v. Lopez seems to have been a lapse in judgment on the part of the Court. lower courts have systematically treated it as such ever since, and SCOTUS has done absolutely nothing to dissuade them from that interpretation.

Ken
 
Last edited:
We should do this in NH, we've at least got Ruger and Sig...

Based on LSRs, three bills will be filed to bring this forward in NH.

I have seen drafts of two, and neither of those would exclude any firearms by type.

However, none of these bills in any state - including Montana - are crafted to affect federally licensed manufacturers/SOTs. New, legal "in state only" guns would have to be produced by companies that do not yet exist.
 
Makes too much sense to me. Feds will go down kicking and screaming. It is unfortunate that Mass. cannot have something similar to this.

If MA had anything like this it would go 180 degrees in the opposite direction. You'd be lucky to get a bbgun in this state! Unless you were a criminal and didn't care because you were ALREADY breaking the law.

*sigh* I'm having a bad week. [crying]
 
Back
Top Bottom