Montana to Washington on guns: Come and take them
posted at 12:26 pm on April 17, 2009 by MadisonConservative
regular view
Montana is continually impressing me as a state with chutzpah, on a level to even rival the home of the 18%ers. Marginalized in the last decade as a haven for “militiamen”, it cannot be argued that it has a tendency to afford more rights to its citizens than many states. Their most recent initiative is a bold move, and one with even more meat on it than Rick Perry’s assertions:
Gov. Brian Schweitzer has signed into law a bill that aims to exempt Montana-made guns from federal regulation, adding firepower to a battery of legislative efforts to assert states’ rights across the nation.
“It’s a gun bill, but it’s another way of demonstrating the sovereignty of the state of Montana,” Democrat Schweitzer said.
Since the law applies only to those guns that are made and kept in Montana, its impact is limited. The state is home to just a handful of specialty gun makers, known for recreating rifles used to settle the West, and most of their customers are out-of-state.
But supporters of the new law hope it triggers a court case testing the legal basis for federal rules governing gun sales.
Yeah, you read that right. Brian Schweitzer, the governor who signed it, is a Democrat. The same Democratic governor who proposed the refinement of Montana’s vast coal reserves into fuel to help curb our dependence on foreign oil. It certainly helps that the guy has a Master’s degree in Soil Science, something I’m pretty sure Harry Reid lacks.
For the moment, this statement is just as much a mere symbol as the resolution reiterating the 10th amendment, as the article implies. However, suppose a major ammunition or firearms company decides it would be a great business decision to relocate to Billings, or Helena? Chances are costs would be cut down, and there are plenty of blue-collar workers available in that area. Rich mining deposits of coal, lead, copper, and zinc, along with ample timber make raw materials locally available at low prices. If you could get an outfit that would have the same quality and market as, say, Springfield, Colt, Winchester or Remington, suddenly the value of this legislation become more and more striking. The impact would not only be a boon for the firearms industry, but the ATF would be apoplectic.
In a sense, this sort of declaration of sovereignty may shake things up even more than talk of secession. Texas might consider taking a cue from their northern compatriot.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Greenroom Feed
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Awesome. I’m forwarding it to Rick Perry.
bitsy on April 17, 2009 at 2:22 PM
Right Wing Extremist!!!!
Thumbs up Montana!
allrsn on April 17, 2009 at 2:37 PM
So Harry Reid lacks a Soil Science degree. He lacks plenty of other stuff too! A pulse, maybe?
hawksruleva on April 17, 2009 at 3:04 PM
Thanks Madison for giving my adopted home state some kudos. Appreciate that very much!
Keep up the good work you have been doing my friend…
Keemo on April 17, 2009 at 4:49 PM
That’s the kind of Democrat you could vote for. I understand that Montana is being inundated with fleeing Californians. To many of those can’t be good, the should keep an eye on it.
Cindy Munford on April 17, 2009 at 10:12 PM
Hopefully rick perry will start buying F-16’s directly from Lockheed FT WORTH and rebuild TANG…
phreshone on April 17, 2009 at 10:19 PM
Fan-FREAKIN’-tastic!
q2600 on April 17, 2009 at 10:38 PM
States should start opting out of other kinds of federal regulations, too.
Firearms with no background checks, no speed limits, no taxes on microbrewery output, use DDT to kill insects, use cyclamates for sweetening, etc. — as long as it is made and used within the state.
Also, go for the purse strings. Have all withholding for federal income taxes be submitted to the State instead of the US Treasury, and transfer the money from the state to the feds — but only give the feds the percentage of the budget that the federal government spends on constitutionally authorized programs (military, customs and border enforcement…)
Right_of_Attila on April 17, 2009 at 10:58 PM
Good for Montana, good for the country.
Backbones have a tendency to scare the hell out of the politicians. Especially angry armed ones.
Limerick on April 17, 2009 at 11:18 PM
This idea – fly, it will not.
There are so many Commerce Clause cases that have long established that there is pretty much no such thing as intra-state commerce not subject to some Federal jurisdiction that this is doomed to immediate failure.
HOWEVER
A Democrat Governor publicly saying to a Democrat administration in Washington
“Hey, punks, yer not the complete boss of us…”
High, indeed, that will fly, and attention WILL be paid
eeyore on April 18, 2009 at 1:42 AM
This is the beginning of the “blow back”.
Democratic politicians now realize that their success is hitched to Obama’s but …
Some are smart enough to realize that Obama’s policies will not only eventually be proven wrong – they’ll be proven catastrophic for the nation.
Very interesting – the Republicans are eating themselves over lack of success. The Democrats now are eating themselves over an abundance of it.
HondaV65 on May 6, 2009 at 4:09 PM
First … I applaud this move I am an avid sportsman and I like to shoot at the range often – usually 100 year old rifles but I have some new “Russian” stuff too. And I’m also a BIG ADVOCATE of States Rights – and this move by Montana is almost orgasmic to me!
BUT …
The way the Fed’s keep the States in line is through Federal FUNDING. Ever asked yourself how every state in the union has a “drinking age” of 21? Drinking age used to vary by state – it isn’t something regulated by the Federal Government I don’t think.
I believe Bill Clinton caused all states to raise the drinking age by holding Federal Highway dollars hostage. Basically telling the states “You don’t play – I don’t pay”. I’m usually well sourced on the stuff I write but I’m doing this from memory right now – so I could be wrong.
In any case – there will be Federal repercussions here for Montana – and they will be of the $$ kind. Question is – can Montanan’s stand firm when the money goes dry.
I hope they can.
HondaV65 on May 6, 2009 at 4:16 PM