Green Room

Governor Brian Schweitzer (D), signs revolutionary new gun law in Montana

posted at 7:19 am on May 6, 2009 by

From the AP:
The state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law.  The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal, confiscation of privately owned firearms.

Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obama’s face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face.

If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. Since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA, the very document that empowers the USA.

Silencers made in Montana and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered. As a note silencers were first used before the 007 movies as a device to enable one to hunt without disturbing neighbors and scaring game. They were also useful as devices to control noise when practicing so as to not disturb the neighbors. Silencers work best with a bolt-action rifle. There is a long barrel and the chamber is closed tight so as to direct all the gases though the silencer at the tip of the barrel. Semi-auto pistols and revolvers do not really muffle the sound very well except on the silver screen. The revolvers bleed gas out with the sound all over the place. The semi-auto pistols bleed the gases out when the slide recoils back. Silencers are maybe nice for snipers picking off enemy soldiers even though they reduce velocity but not very practical for hit men shooting pistols in crowded places. Silencers were useful tools for gun enthusiasts and hunters. There would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. So in a short period of time there would be millions and millions of unregistered untraceable guns in Montana. Way to go Montana !

Let us see what Obama does. If he hits Montana hard they could probably vote to secede from the USA. The governor of Texas has already been refusing Federal money because he does not want to agree to the conditions that go with it and he has been saying secession is a right they have as sort of a threat. Things are no longer the same with the USA. Do not be deceived by Obama acting as if all is the same, it is not.
Governor Schweitzer is very popular with Montanans, and this is an example of how he has built his popularity. It’s a breath of fresh air to see a politician run on a platform of promises, and back up those promises with action. Governor Schweitzer promised to protect the 2nd amendment rights of the citizens. With the signing of this bill, he has lived up to the billing. I don’t care about the (D) or and (R) in front of the name, say what you mean and mean what you say. Good for you Brian Schweitzer!

Text of the New Law
HOUSE BILL NO. 246
INTRODUCED BY J. BONIEK, BENNETT, BUTCHER, CURTISS, RANDALL, WARBURTON.


AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:

Section 1. Short title.. [Sections 1 through 6] may be cited as the “Montana
Firearms Freedom Act”.
Section 2. Legislative declarations of authority. The legislature declares
that the authority for [sections 1 through 6] is the following:
(1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the
states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government
elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of
Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was
admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of
contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of
the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted
by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the
people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of
Montana certain rights, as they were understood at the time that Montana was
admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of
contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of
the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted
by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the
9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if
not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted
state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an
intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.
(4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the
people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the
time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the
right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and
the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was
agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to
Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of
individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional
protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was
approved by congress and the people of Montana, and the right exists, as it
was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was
agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
Section 3. Definitions. As used in [sections 1 through 6], the following
definitions apply:
(1) “Borders of Montana” means the boundaries of Montana described in
Article I, section 1, of the 1889 Montana constitution.
(2) “Firearms accessories” means items that are used in conjunction with or
mounted upon a firearm but are not essential to the basic function of a
firearm, including but not limited to telescopic or laser sights, magazines,
flash or sound suppressors, folding or aftermarket stocks and grips,
speedloaders, ammunition carriers, and lights for target illumination.
(3) “Generic and insignificant parts” includes but is not limited to
springs, screws, nuts, and pins.
(4) “Manufactured” means that a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition
has been created from basic materials for functional usefulness, including
but not limited to forging, casting, machining, or other processes for
working materials.
Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or
ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and
that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or
federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress
to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that
those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies
to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in
Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the
inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and
insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product
applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and
their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm
accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the
firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is
declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel
and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and
are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms
accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were
actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of
congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include
authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in
Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into
Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as
being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation
under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in
conjunction with a firearm in Montana..
Section 5. Exceptions. [Section 4] does not apply to:
(1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one person;
(2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than 1 1/2 inches and that
uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;
(3) ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of
chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or
(4) a firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of
the trigger or other firing device.
Section 6. Marketing of firearms. A firearm manufactured or sold in Montana
under [sections 1 through 6] must have the words “Made in Montana” clearly
stamped on a central metallic part, such as the receiver or frame.
Section 7. Codification instruction. [Sections 1 through 6] are intended to
be codified as an integral part of Title 30, and the provisions of Title 30
apply to [sections 1 through 6].
Section 8. Applicability. [This act] applies to firearms, firearms
accessories, and ammunition that are manufactured, as defined in [section
3], and retained in Montana after October 1, 2009
Sources: KVPI Channel 6 (Montana) – Associated Press
For more on this story, go here

Recently in the Green Room:

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

Comment pages: 1 2

I’m proud of you, as you come to places like hotair.com to get your news!!!

Good for you Jewel!

Keemo on May 6, 2009 at 9:52 AM

Is somebody paying you to be a snarky @$$wipe, or do you just to it for $h!ts and giggles?

Dark-Star on May 6, 2009 at 3:05 PM

Yoop on May 6, 2009 at 12:06 PM

Lived in Upper Michigan for 7 months, loved it. Real people up there.

I just may move to Montana, on this reason alone.

Conservative Voice on May 6, 2009 at 3:10 PM

Nice to see some American men still have a pair. Need to start looking at Montana real estate, now.

Alden Pyle on May 6, 2009 at 3:12 PM

The text is lifted directly from here. It’s a law firm website. They specialize in asset protection and offshore tax shelters for corporations and individuals.

That said, go Montana! We need more states to challenge the commerce clause in other ways too. In particular, land use and environmental protection regs. Let locals protect their own environment. Their the one’s who live there.

The Apologist on May 6, 2009 at 3:17 PM

I don’t think this will pass in Texas just yet, but at least someone is talking about it here.

Asher on May 6, 2009 at 2:42 PM

I bet it would (will).

Vashta.Nerada on May 6, 2009 at 3:18 PM

Awesome! Can’t wait for AZ to pass this law. I can finally own a machinegun! Sweet!

Tim Burton on May 6, 2009 at 3:19 PM

It’s nice to know that I was born where testicular fortitude still reigns verses the treasonous antics of that vile Stalin-imitating douche bag Barry Soetero.

babylonandon on May 6, 2009 at 3:20 PM

Obama should be looking in the rearview mirror at Schweitzer in 2012.

Who wouldn’t vote for him?

This is a precursor of things to come and no one can stop it.

This reflects the Federalist form of government that the founders of our country envisioned and that will soon experience a resurgence in popularity.

Obama, Pelosi and Reid, and their strong-armed bureaucrats (who run banks, automobile manufacturers, etc), had better tread very carefully with respect to this matter, because it will resonate strongly with many millions of people.

The 55+ million people who didn’t vote for Obama, and many of the 62+ million who did, would vote for this guy in 2012 over Obama and whatever oaf the Republicans select in a New York minute.

All of which is for the better, because our country needs a viable third party.

molonlabe28 on May 6, 2009 at 3:29 PM

To quote a song by Frank Zappa “I might be moving to Montana soon” and it won’t be “to raise a crop of dental floss”.

GO MONTANA

darwin-t on May 6, 2009 at 3:31 PM

They threatened to secede just before Heller was decided. They really believe in gun rights, as they should.

Also, please take some tips from the others Keemo on formatting your posts.

Free Constitution on May 6, 2009 at 3:40 PM

Montana & Texas to manufacture its own guns and tell the feds to shove it concerning registration since they will be marked “made in Montana” “made in Texas” for in state use only ?? STATE SOVERIGNTY !! what if EVERY state did this? up urs feds!!?

This was on sodahead blogs three days ago.

try again later on May 6, 2009 at 3:44 PM

What are the chances of New York following suit?

New York won’t follow…but this New Yorker is looking hard at MT as my next home.

Jed1899 on May 6, 2009 at 3:55 PM

The text of the “AP” story is obviously bogus – the style is wrong, much less the content. However, the underlying bill is real and it was signed into law on April 15. Take that, D.C.!

This is a link to a Montana state page showing the legislative history – and showing it was signed into law on Tax Day.

BananaSlug on May 6, 2009 at 3:56 PM

How that living in Montana working out fer ya there Tom Brokaw, you liberal prick.

try again later on May 6, 2009 at 4:05 PM

Original Source. It’s not the AP, they’re a little more discreet with their support.

Keemo, fair use is your friend.

Free Constitution on May 6, 2009 at 4:05 PM

Oops, not original source, but one of many copy and paste jobs.

Free Constitution on May 6, 2009 at 4:09 PM

Are the women good looking in Montana on average? I could marry one then move there.

keep the change on May 6, 2009 at 4:23 PM

Perhaps someone should delete this post and have it rewritten by someone who knows what they are doing. This is not an AP article, and the information within is completely unsourced.

Either write responsibly or not at all…

Tomblvd on May 6, 2009 at 4:40 PM

OH man…it’s on!

vsunited on May 6, 2009 at 4:40 PM

I may move to Monatana

CaCa on May 6, 2009 at 4:41 PM

BTW, thanks to the posters immediately above who took the time to get the actual facts.

Tomblvd on May 6, 2009 at 4:42 PM

I want to say, if this is true, this is the most incredible slap in the face to the Liberals and the Federal government I have ever seen.

Remember Ladies and Gents, 93 died at Waco over not paying the $200 transfer tax to own weapons covered under the Gun Control act of 1934. The BATF is going to pass a bloody brick if this is real. Even if this is law for 3 days, you are going to have every gun guy in Montana firing up their lathe to turn out silencers and full auto triggers, short barreled rifles, stocked pistols (Yes, putting a stock on a pistol is against Federal law). Just all kinds of interesting stuff.

99% of the innovations of the past 100 years have come down to a handful of inventors, Garand, Maxim, Browning, Luger, Bouchart, Colt, Armalite and a few others. All of these men working in their little shops developed these designs and the U.S. government got this development for FREE. After 1934, the inventions stopped because of the Federal Laws. What have we developed since then? The AR which is a worthy but flawed design, and the MAC, which was driven out of business. Now we buy our guns from “other countries”. Think about it, in WWII every weapon for the GI was American made and developed by an American. The M1 Garand, the Browning .45 Auto, the Browning .30 Machine gun, the Browning .50 caliber Heavy machine gun. All those are gone except the .50, replaced by weapons that either are old American designs (AR-15) or completely foreign designs (Beretta 9mm pistol, MAG-58 machine gun). Gun guys have been talking about new designs, innovations, new experiments, etc but no one could build them because it would get you 10 years (I’m not kidding), First Amendment be damned. Years of pent up inventions just waiting to explode!

Example:

How about a silenced downward ejecting bullpup 308 based on the reliable M1A action but with a straight, overhead short piston that loads mags from either side (For lefty or right hander) and is reliable with 240gr subsonic but can reach out to 800 yards with 168gr Match ammo?

God Bless Montana!

GunRunner on May 6, 2009 at 5:07 PM

Now THAT is a REAL Tea Party!

ronsfi on May 6, 2009 at 5:14 PM

Always wanted to be a dental floss tycoon.

ronsfi on May 6, 2009 at 5:14 PM

Too bad this has no chance of holding up to court challenge, thanks to the modern interpretation of the “interstate commerce” clause.

The Supreme Court effectively repealed the 10th Amendment all on their own by re-defining “interstate commerce” as “almost anything the federal government wants to regulate”.

Hollowpoint on May 6, 2009 at 5:22 PM

(1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one person;
(2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than 1 1/2 inches and that
uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;
(3) ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of
chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or

By my reading of this, a version of the M-388 Davy Crockett would be legal, so long as black power is used to propel the warhead, if it is made in Montana.

hicsuget on May 6, 2009 at 5:30 PM

By my reading of this, a version of the M-388 Davy Crockett would be legal, so long as black power is used to propel the warhead, if it is made in Montana.

hicsuget on May 6, 2009 at 5:30 PM

Techically no, since the warhead requires the use of chemical energy to create the explosions to drive the fissionable material into critical mass.

wv619 on May 6, 2009 at 5:37 PM

http://waronyou.com/forums/index.php?topic=8586.0

For those who were asking…

Montana Governor Sign
Stunning New Gun Law
KVPI Channel 6 (Montana)
Associated Press – April 15, 2009 5:24 PM ET

The actual AP link has been removed.

Keemo on May 6, 2009 at 6:03 PM

Governor Schweitzer signed this into law 5/4/2009. We Montanans have been sitting on pins & needles waiting to see if the Governor would sign this bill, or would he cave to the Liberal wing of his party. We have been partying here in Montana since we got the good news Monday night.

I’m always willing and able to report the bad news that Democrats bring us on a regular basis; I am also willing and able to report when a Democrat politician stands up to his own party and does the right thing for the people he/she represents. This is one of those cases.

Keemo on May 6, 2009 at 6:25 PM

Damn. That’s hardcore.

What are the chances of New York following suit?

(Okay. You can stop laughing now. …Sigh.)

Daddy-O on May 6, 2009 at 2:15 PM

Same thought occured to me but like yourself reality kicked in.

heshtesh on May 6, 2009 at 8:40 PM

http://vociferation.net/holyh/?p=963

This is beyond simply drawing a line in the sand, this looks far more like a gauntlet being thrown down by a state that recognizes and is able to decipher the signs of what is coming.

If the federal government attempts to take action against the state of Montana will a vote of secession be their next move?

Don’t think that this is some crazy Montana thing, several states are taking a similar approach to slapping back the over reaching hand of the federal government.

You’d think news of this would be all over the internet, but I am having a very hard time at the moment finding anything beyond blog entries.

Good job Montana!

Good job Governor!

I now miss home more than ever.

Nicely stated! Like your blog as well…

Keemo on May 7, 2009 at 8:32 AM

Comment pages: 1 2