Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Democratic Montana Gov. Sticking it to Feds

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    87

    Post imported post

    This is fantastic. Way to go. Montana attempting to manufacture and distribute weapons with no federal registration.

    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.p...p;pageId=97265

  2. #2
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    And so it begins.

    The silencers get straight to the NFA issue. NFA tax stamp is an interstate commerce tax.

    Go Montana.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    263

    Post imported post

    I love this. Did anyone else get a sudden urge to move to Montana?

  4. #4
    Regular Member Statesman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    thorvaldr wrote:
    I love this. Did anyone else get a sudden urge to move to Montana?
    I'd wait until it's settled under a SCOTUS ruling before I moved. States are going to have to start refusing federal dollars in addition to this, and that's going to be difficult I'd say, unless the people in that state back it up with their demands.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Gloucester, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    629

    Post imported post

    A free state, looking out for the interest of the people, can it be true? The American spirit of freedom and liberty is alive and well in Montana!

  6. #6
    Regular Member Statesman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    New Hampshire also: http://www.freestateproject.org

    But keep in mind, if you move there, Obama's DHS will probably classify you as a terrorist or extremist. Just make sure to keep your Turban head towel in the trunk when you cross state lines.


  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Laveen, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    432

    Post imported post

    This is good, but what was the SCOTUS case where the rancher that grew his own feed for his own cattle, but was forced to pay interstate tax on it because the feednormally 'could have been' shipped interstate? Seems like that shoots down this kind of thinking.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    West Jordan, UT, ,
    Posts
    98

    Post imported post

    Notso wrote:
    This is good, but what was the SCOTUS case where the rancher that grew his own feed for his own cattle, but was forced to pay interstate tax on it because the feednormally 'could have been' shipped interstate? Seems like that shoots down this kind of thinking.
    Seems to me that I remember my history prof teaching us about Andrew Jackson telling SCOTUS to get bent & doing as he pleased anyway. If they start giving out more rulings like that one, it may be about time "We the People" start doing the same.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    236

    Post imported post

    There are a small group of states dedicated to protecting their citizens' rights. New Hampshire, Montana, and Wyoming - any more?



    Http://Www.FreeStateWyoming.Com

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    This is AWESOME!

    SCOTUS is notorious for giving the feds too much power under the commerce clause. A line needs to be drawn somewhere. In the gun in a gun free zone case (can't remember the name of it) the courts decided that the commerce clause at least didn't go that far.

    I hope more states follow Montana's lead and tell the Feds to go blank themselves.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Oregon, USA
    Posts
    281

    Post imported post

    GJD wrote:
    There are a small group of states dedicated to protecting their citizens' rights. New Hampshire, Montana, and Wyoming - any more?
    Idaho and Alaska come immediately to mind.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Flintlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska, USA
    Posts
    1,224

    Post imported post

    American Rattlesnake wrote:
    GJD wrote:
    There are a small group of states dedicated to protecting their citizens' rights. New Hampshire, Montana, and Wyoming - any more?
    Idaho and Alaska come immediately to mind.
    As does South Dakota, Utah, and Texas.
    Peace through superior firepower

    Luke 11:21
    "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    West Jordan, UT, ,
    Posts
    98

    Post imported post

    Flintlock wrote:
    American Rattlesnake wrote:
    GJD wrote:
    There are a small group of states dedicated to protecting their citizens' rights. New Hampshire, Montana, and Wyoming - any more?
    Idaho and Alaska come immediately to mind.
    As does South Dakota, Utah, and Texas.
    Almost sounds like the Rocky Mountain Republic.

  14. #14
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    Glenn Beck is talking about this on his radio show right now.

    TFred


  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    Statesman wrote:
    thorvaldr wrote:
    I love this. Did anyone else get a sudden urge to move to Montana?
    I'd wait until it's settled under a SCOTUS ruling before I moved. States are going to have to start refusing federal dollars in addition to this, and that's going to be difficult I'd say, unless the people in that state back it up with their demands.
    I still got the urge.

    In fact, I'm finishing my Associate's Degree soon.
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Statesman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    Brass Magnet wrote:
    This is AWESOME!

    SCOTUS is notorious for giving the feds too much power under the commerce clause. A line needs to be drawn somewhere. In the gun in a gun free zone case (can't remember the name of it) the courts decided that the commerce clause at least didn't go that far.

    I hope more states follow Montana's lead and tell the Feds to go blank themselves.
    Glenn Beck said today, that he understood that most of the judges (SCOTUS) are just waiting for a good case to reverse these asinine commerce clause decisions. They've apparently been waiting for a "good" case to come along, and recent state resolutions on local firearm commerce may be the ones they are looking for.

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    Statesman wrote:

    Glenn Beck said today, that he understood that most of the judges (SCOTUS) are just waiting for a good case to reverse these asinine commerce clause decisions. They've apparently been waiting for a "good" case to come along, and recent state resolutions on local firearm commerce may be the ones they are looking for.
    I hope that's true. I just find it hard to put my trust in the court where both the liberal and conservative justices fail to interpret the law based on the constitution and instead interpret it with agendas. The Heller decision was correct in the end, but they came about it for the wrong reasons.See if you can pick out the idiocy in this statement. In the dissent, Justice Breyer said: "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."(DUH! this is where youneed them most!)In fact, the whole dissent basicallyconfirmed that they want to legislate from the bench. Even the majority worried about the "implications" of their decision, which is not theirs to worry about. There are grounds to impeach almost every justice on that court. All you need to do is read a couple of decisions.

    Also dissapointing was that in drawing a parrallel to the English bill of rights; “That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defense suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law.” they conluded that"shall not be infringed" meant common sense laws. WTF? The reason our founders put in "shall not be infringed" was because their arms were taken from them whilst they were "protected" by english law. They didn't want it to be up to a law to take them away ever again.

    I guess this is where some of my lack of faith comes in.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  18. #18
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    Here's a link to the Glenn Beck transcript from today. He claims to be ADHD, and he does tend to ramble a bit... Of course, he's filling 3 hours of air time each day...

    http://www.glennbeck.com/content/art...cle/198/25060/

    TFred


  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    466

    Post imported post

    MuellerBadener wrote:
    Flintlock wrote:
    American Rattlesnake wrote:
    GJD wrote:
    There are a small group of states dedicated to protecting their citizens' rights. New Hampshire, Montana, and Wyoming - any more?
    Idaho and Alaska come immediately to mind.
    As does South Dakota, Utah, and Texas.
    Almost sounds like the Rocky Mountain Republic.
    Unfortunately I don't have high hopes of that list including Colorado anytime soon

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    West Jordan, UT, ,
    Posts
    98

    Post imported post

    RockyMtnScotsman wrote:
    MuellerBadener wrote:
    Flintlock wrote:
    American Rattlesnake wrote:
    GJD wrote:
    There are a small group of states dedicated to protecting their citizens' rights. New Hampshire, Montana, and Wyoming - any more?
    Idaho and Alaska come immediately to mind.
    As does South Dakota, Utah, and Texas.
    Almost sounds like the Rocky Mountain Republic.
    Unfortunately I don't have high hopes of that list including Colorado anytime soon
    Then we'll just have to annex them! Manitoba too!

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    466

    Post imported post

    MuellerBadener wrote:
    RockyMtnScotsman wrote:
    MuellerBadener wrote:
    Flintlock wrote:
    American Rattlesnake wrote:
    GJD wrote:
    There are a small group of states dedicated to protecting their citizens' rights. New Hampshire, Montana, and Wyoming - any more?
    Idaho and Alaska come immediately to mind.
    As does South Dakota, Utah, and Texas.
    Almost sounds like the Rocky Mountain Republic.
    Unfortunately I don't have high hopes of that list including Colorado anytime soon
    Then we'll just have to annex them! Manitoba too!
    I'd rather have Alberta over Manitoba. From spending a fair amt of time there on business, most of them would be OK with that too.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •