Montana firearms freedom act (road, federal, free)

[Klapton]

Originally Posted by da jammer

Sadly the NRA has little enthusiasm for the FFA...

Sadly the NRA has little enthusiasm for the uninfringed right to keep and bear arms.

[Reziac]

Can't argue with that.. sometimes you gotta wonder what on earth the NRA is thinking!! A right compromised is a right LOST.

[mica]

* The NRA stay somewhat narrowly focused. It wasn't until about 1-2 years ago that they got involved with conceal carry.
* This is more a 10th Amendment issue than a 2nd.
*The NRA will not enter a battle that they are not pretty sure they can win...
There was 1 person that put A LOT of effort into the NPS rule change, starting about 5 or so years ago. The NRA's position was along the lines of 'yeah, good luck with that'. They didn't get on board until the end. Same with Heller, the NRA was very much against it.

Look closely at the NRA's candidate endorsements. Some can have a great pro gun voting record but if it looks like he/she is going to lose the election the NRA will not endorse them.

They do good things but I don't think they are what a lot of people wish they were.

[cumminszhere]

I am a gun owner and a strong believer in the second amendment. I had given my contact info while navigating the NRA website. First mistake. I had planned on eventually paying for a lifetime membership. But I have been consistently hounded for contributions by their telemarketers. So much so that I wont give them a nickel now. And then I see they wont support the FFA lawsuit. I understand the suits intention is to re-establish Federal limits of the commerce clause using guns as the fulcrum. Sad to see.

[Reziac]

Yes, I've noticed that about the NRA -- they only back fights they are sure they can win. Of course that keeps their track record pretty much perfect, which looks good on paper and probably works better for marketing purposes. People like to put their money on a winner.

As to the FFA -- if the states can enforce it against the federal gov't, that does indeed make a wonderful precedent for "get out of our hair" and "none of your damned business" for all sorts of other stuff that the Constitution doesn't allow in the first place, but have been usurped by D.C. And it may be that states are going to have to band together and say "We don't care what you in D.C. and the courts have to say; this is what the Constitution says, and if D.C. doesn't follow the Constitution, then you have broken the contract under which we entered the union." I doubt one state can manage this, but a dozen together... that's another matter.

People forget, the Constitution's primary function is to RESTRICT the Federal government's powers. It is not there to hand out powers to Congress or to federal agencies.

[okieplumber]

The Feds: have bulldogged the states long enough this a chance to get some of our powers back

[Gman2007]

An update:

Montana to feds: Hands off our rights

[Reziac]

Excellent... a couple interesting points it brings up:

It cited a 1939 Supreme Court ruling that states "are as independent of the general government as that government is of the states."

and

The federal supremacy clause, therefore, has no impact "because only laws made in pursuance of the Constitution constitute the supreme law of the land."

"To the extent that Congress has usurped states Ninth and Tenth Amendment powers with the federal courts' blessing, the issue should be revisited in a case just such as this – where a state legislature has passed a specific limited exercise of its reserved powers to protect and strengthen the rights of citizens," it said.

Note that last -- this essentially states that where even the Supreme Court rules against the Constitution, we should not unthinkingly accept the decision when it blatantly tramples the rights of Citizens or the individual States. Indeed, it is our duty to question decisions which do so.

[HowardRoarke]

Not sure if anyone else has covered it, but this also covers the manufacture of gun parts/entire guns. Basically, the Feds can't force Montana shops to register with the ATF to get permission to make guns/parts (or something to that extent). Correct me if I'm wrong.

A shop out that way has inquired of my services , in fact I'm seriously considering taking them up on their offer. Several companies in that state are now making aftermarket parts, w/o Fed oversight.

[Pashta]

Well... the cities around here (Flathead valley) are debating over allowing marijuana shops and/or zoning for them. How is this pertinent to the gun thread? WELL, it's because they are saying "We don't want to zone for it because it's still illegal FEDERALLY." and are now trying to make laws saying that no public land can be used for anything illegal by the city, state OR FEDERAL.

This will affect the gun issue too.