Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-08-2009, 05:08 PM
 
9,763 posts, read 10,527,281 times
Reputation: 2052

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reziac View Post
Because like a lot of other Federal infringements on states' rights, it uses coercion against the states' other interests for enforcement, and restricts intrastate commerce (which the feds have no Constitutional right to do).

It's a mistake to think of the Bill of Rights as unrelated clauses; they all support one another. Much as the 2nd Amendment supports the 1st Amendment, by giving you a means to defend your freedom of speech, the 10th Amendment supports the 2nd Amendment by saying "if our citizens want to sell each other guns, it is none of your damned Federal business."
But the feds aren't doing anything. All these 2nd Amendment challenges were initiated over state/local law. The only involvement of the federal government has been the courts. I don't see any infringement of states' rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-08-2009, 07:25 PM
 
Location: The Woods
18,358 posts, read 26,495,840 times
Reputation: 11351
Quote:
Originally Posted by trlhiker View Post
I think they should leave then take away all the federal funding Montana gets as well as the military and you will see taxes go sky high to pay for things the federal government pays for. i doubt that anyone in montana who wants this has really looked at the big picture.
Unnecessary once the state has control of all the land and resources the feds have locked up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2009, 08:58 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,066,605 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
Unnecessary once the state has control of all the land and resources the feds have locked up.
It doesn't belong to Montana and never has.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2009, 09:00 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,066,605 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
Your opinion is basically meaningless.

Some 20 + states have taken similar actions.
No state has ever seceded. Loud talking idiots does not equal legal precedent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2009, 09:03 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,066,605 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
The 10th Amendment makes no distinction between the original states and other states.
Only while Montana remains a state. If it ceases to be a state it reverts to a territory. It's OWNED.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2009, 10:54 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,100 posts, read 39,261,360 times
Reputation: 4937
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
No state has ever seceded.
Yet
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2009, 11:13 PM
 
19,226 posts, read 15,321,408 times
Reputation: 2337
Projected date of Proclamation of Secession and Declaration of Independence is set for March 21, 2010.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2009, 11:14 PM
 
Location: Washington
844 posts, read 1,280,576 times
Reputation: 333
Montana could not afford to maintain its roads on its own, let alone run itself. Well, run it self at anything near its current levels of subsistence. Its a state that takes in more than it gives out (sorry, Its a beautiful state and I love visiting, but facts are facts)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2009, 06:33 AM
 
Location: The Woods
18,358 posts, read 26,495,840 times
Reputation: 11351
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
Only while Montana remains a state. If it ceases to be a state it reverts to a territory. It's OWNED.
Nope, statehood forever changed its status. It will never be a territory again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2009, 06:34 AM
 
Location: The Woods
18,358 posts, read 26,495,840 times
Reputation: 11351
Quote:
Originally Posted by tindo80 View Post
Montana could not afford to maintain its roads on its own, let alone run itself. Well, run it self at anything near its current levels of subsistence. Its a state that takes in more than it gives out (sorry, Its a beautiful state and I love visiting, but facts are facts)
Once again...its held back by so much of its resources being locked up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:31 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top