“Proposed gun law couched states' rights language” MT gives bird to anti-RKBA, will UT follow?

[jody]

Proposed gun law couched states' rights language. (Salt Lake Tribune)

Montana's Legislature recently passed a bill that Gov. Brian Schweitzer signed into law that would exempt guns made in the state and kept within its borders from federal regulations, including registration, background checks and dealer-licensing.
It's an idea that's appealing to some of Utah's conservative legislators, who say President Barack Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress are strongly anti-gun and are trying to overstep their bounds and infringing on states' rights.
"I think preempts somewhat what the federal government is trying to do right now in gun registration," said Rep. Carl Wimmer, R-Herriman. "This is something Utah should look into. We should look into several different avenues to reassert state rights."
Wimmer says he or one of his colleagues may run a similar bill in next year's legislative session, and it's an idea that has traction among many legislators who are fiercely pro-gun rights and pro-states' rights.

Montana and Utah each have two U.S. senators that counter New York and California each with their two anti-RKBA senators.

That’s politics! :rofl:

Montana gun law takes aim at Uncle Sam (Case Grande Valley Newspapers)

In a bill passed by the Legislature earlier this month, the state is asserting that guns manufactured in Montana and sold in Montana to people who intend to keep their weapons in Montana are exempt from federal gun registration, background check and dealer-licensing rules because no state lines are crossed.

* * * * * * * * * * *

Carrie DiPirro, a spokeswoman for the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, had no comment on the legislation. But the federal government has generally argued that it has authority under the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution to regulate guns because they can so easily be transported across state lines.

* * * * * * * * * * *

Montana's leading gun rights organization, more hardcore than the National Rifle Association, boasts it has moved 50 bills through the Legislature over the past 25 years. And lawmakers in the Big Sky State have rebelled against federal control of everything from wetland protection to the national Real ID system.

* * * * * * * * * * *

Supporters of the measure say the main purpose is not extending gun freedoms, but curbing what they regard as an oppressive interpretation of the interstate commerce clause and federal overreach into such things as livestock management and education.

[msongs]

1. yeah let's bring back slavery in all those mostly white states as well - states rights and all nt

[NewMoonTherian]

2. What state would vote to reinstate slavery? n/t

[jmg257]

3. Why would anyone want to do that? A bit racist, no? & talk about infringment of rights!

[jody]

4. Unlikely but MT's new law and others if any state follows could be considered when SCOTUS eventually

rules on whether the 2nd is incorporated in the 14th just as are the 1st and 4th.

[Tim01]

5. Pretty big leap to force race into this topic.

[X_Digger]

6. You know..

.. you're going to break that hobby horse if you keep trotting it out so much.

[east texas lib]

7. I doubt that the slave traders would have been as successful as they were...

Had the Africans been armed with the latest weapons and tactics of that era. A history lesson, yes?
Unarmed people are at the mercy (or lack thereof) of armed people. Arm yourself. Defend yourself.
Class dismissed.

[dairydog91]

8. Play that funky race card, msongs. nt

[HALO141]

15. So according to you...

freedom = slavery


WTF?

[dairydog91]

16. Yes, and "War is Peace" and "Ignorance is Strength"

[X_Digger]

9. I really think that the Interstate Commerce clause

has been stretched beyond all recognition.

For example, see the new Lautenberg - Feinstein legislation aimed at making the sale of a firearm between two individual residents of a state somehow the purview of the federal government. Next they'll be saying that because you transport your groceries home from the farmer's market in a car that's made in another state, that's interstate commerce, too.

[dairydog91]

10. They probably would.

They've already agreed that growing food in a private garden (Edit: Private farm in this particular case) legally qualifies as "interstate commerce". The ruling (Wickard v Filburn) was that since growing food for private consumption will result in you not participating in the agricultural market, the act of growing your own food counts as "interstate commerce".

[X_Digger]

11. *headdesk* n/t

[dairydog91]

13. Gonzales v. Raich is another stinker. nt

[jmg257]

12. What is amazing is that they are allowed to use it AT ALL to infringe on gun rights.

The 2nd amendment CHANGED the constitution - it supersedes all that came before it, including the tyrannical notion that ANY Congressional powers can be used to override it.

[X_Digger]

14. Well, not that surprising..

Some folks don't understand that the second amendment doesn't _grant_ rights, it protects an existing right that predates the constitution. It is not a dictum to the people, it is an admonishment to congress- don't touch!

By that same token, others don't understand that the constitution and amendments don't constitute a full enumeration of all our rights, merely sets out how a government will function and what powers the state and federal authorities have.

[jody]

17. Not really, SCOTUS said "Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth Amendments, codified a

pre-existing right. . . . {t}his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence." (See D.C. v. Heller)

Our Constitution acknowledged pre-existing rights that PA (1776) and VT (1777) recognized as "natural, inherent, inalienable/unalienable" rights and obligated government to protect those rights against infringement by a simple majority of votes whether by voters or voters' representatives at the federal level and once the 2nd is incorporated in the 14th, like the 1st and 4th Amendments, it will apply to state and local governments as well.