Federal judge tosses out Montana's firearms freedom act lawsuit

[Anti Federalist]

Heh heh heh...like this was a surprise.

OK folks, what are you prepared to do next?

Rubber: meet road, road, rubber.



Judges Tosses Challenge by Gun-Rights Advocates

1 October

By ANNIE YOUDERIAN

http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/10/01/30741.htm

BOZEMAN, Mont. (CN) - A federal judge on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit brought by gun-rights advocates seeking a declaration that Montana law allows them to make and sell guns without abiding by federal regulations.

U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy in Missoula adopted a federal magistrate's recommendation to toss the lawsuit for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, because the commerce clause grants Congress the power to regulate firearms.

The Montana Shooting Sports Association, the Second Amendment Foundation and resident Gary Marbut had asked Molloy to declare that they could legally make and sell firearms under the 2009 Montana Firearms Freedom Act without complying with federal laws, including licensing and registration requirements.

The state law declares that 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 (sic) to regulate interstate commerce."

But the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives held a different view. It warned Marbut in response to his request for clarification that a violation of the federal Gun Control Act or the National Firearms Act "could lead to ... potential criminal prosecution."

To the extent that the state law conflicts with federal gun laws and regulations, federal law trumps the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, the ATF explained.

Marbut and other gun-rights advocates argued that this answer violates the 10th Amendment, which limits the federal government's authority to the powers specifically outlined in the Constitution.

Molloy's dismissal sides with the Department of Justice, which argued that the Constitution's commerce clause grants Congress the ability to regulate guns -- even those that never leave Montana.

 

[pcosmar]

Hang the judge.
Get a new judge.
Show the new judge the old judge.
Refile suit.

 

[phill4paul]

This is exactly what will happen to every other lawsuit nullification supporters put forth.
So people better start deciding NOW what their next move will be because the federal government WILL NOT let go of its power.
Another harshly written editorial or something more resounding?

 

[Matt Collins]

Hang the judge.

Advocating violence isn't a good thing.

 

[Dr.3D]

Yep, interstate commerce is now intrastate commerce. That judge needs an education, and not one afforded him by the liberalized educational institutions.

Edit: Of course, it was not in his jurisdiction to make a decision anyway. He would be biased in favor of the federal government.

 

[Matt Collins]

 

[pcosmar]

Advocating violence isn't a good thing.

True enough.

Perhaps some one should explain that to the men that stood at Lexington.

 

[phill4paul]

Advocating violence isn't a good thing.

Then let's get rid of the ATF. The government is an advocate of violence if individuals do not bow to them or recognize that they are subjects to be ruled over. WACO?

 

[Matt Collins]

The question is now as to the resolve of both the MT Governor and their legislature. How far are they willing to take this?


Are they willing to arrest any federal official who breaks their law? Or are they going to roll over and say "good fight but we lost this one"?

Will they make the stand, draw the line just to give them a taste, or will they capitulate like cowards?


It ultimately does come down to force.

 

[fedup100]

This is exactly what will happen to every other lawsuit nullification supporters put forth.
So people better start deciding NOW what their next move will be because the federal government WILL NOT let go of its power.
Another harshly written editorial or something more resounding?

The thugs that own you and your country are laughing at you.

 

[fedup100]

Advocating violence isn't a good thing.

Your right, the founders would have suggested that you bend over a little farther in order to take that last 8 inches.

 

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

It ultimately does come down to force.

Are you willing to use force in order to defend anything? If no, please go home in peace and wear the chains of servitude. If yes, please articulate what you are personally willing to defend against...

 

[pcosmar]

For those that are interested (2nd amendment issues) you might look at this,
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=261890
Though a different state, it does show the state of things.
Especially the rest of the story.
http://www.cityofmadison.com/news/view.cfm?news_id=2231

 

[phill4paul]

For those that are interested (2nd amendment issues) you might look at this,
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=261890
Though a different state, it does show the state of things.
Especially the rest of the story.
http://www.cityofmadison.com/news/view.cfm?news_id=2231

Exactly this. The second amendment secures all others. Without it then the rest can be re-interpreted to whatever the desires of TPTB.

Unless the state of Montana calls on its citizens to arm themselves and deputizes every citizen that is willing to walk into a federal building and seize it then this was nothing more than than a show.

I'm sure this was anticipated.

I'm sure the next phase would be the supreme court. That may take a few more years.

When it gets there the outcome will be the same.

Times running out Montana. They will call your bluff.

If you make a stand then I'm in the truck and on my way. If not then it is just more useless banter.

 

[erowe1]

I think the best step is for Montana residents to demand clarification not from federal courts but from their state legislature. The clarification should be another law reaffirming the first one and explicitly empowering state law enforcement to arrest any ATF or other feds who interfere with gun manufacturers, sellers, and owners in Montana who are acting in accordance with state law. Montana residents need to demand this vocally and repeatedly from their representatives, and those legislators who voted for the first law should feel obligated to vote for this one as well. This can be another example proving what Federalist #78 says, which is that the court has neither force nor will, only judgment.

 

[phill4paul]

I think the best step is for Montana residents to demand clarification not from federal courts but from their state legislature. The clarification should be another law reaffirming the first one and explicitly empowering state law enforcement to arrest any ATF or other feds who interfere with gun manufacturers, sellers, and owners in Montana who are acting in accordance with state law. Montana residents need to demand this vocally and repeatedly from their representatives, and those legislators who voted for the first law should feel obligated to vote for this one as well. This can be another example proving what Federalist #78 says, which is that the court has neither force nor will, only judgment.

I agree.

 

[fedup100]

Exactly this. The second amendment secures all others. Without it then the rest can be re-interpreted to whatever the desires of TPTB.

Unless the state of Montana calls on its citizens to arm themselves and deputizes every citizen that is willing to walk into a federal building and seize it then this was nothing more than than a show.

I'm sure this was anticipated.

I'm sure the next phase would be the supreme court. That may take a few more years.

When it gets there the outcome will be the same.

Times running out Montana. They will call your bluff.

If you make a stand then I'm in the truck and on my way. If not then it is just more useless banter.

Fuck the supreme court, the patient will be dead by then. Deputize and if you'll do it, I'm on my way!

 

[madengr]

It's going to take some civil disobedience such as manufacturing supressors.

 

[james1906]

Advocating violence isn't a good thing.

 

[Matt Collins]

It's going to take some civil disobedience such as manufacturing supressors.

What good does that do?

The courts will simply defer to the previous court's ruling and that's where it'll end. Nothing will be accomplished by that unless it's done en masse which I don't believe will happen.

I'm sure the next phase would be the supreme court. That may take a few more years.

When it gets there the outcome will be the same.

Times running out Montana. They will call your bluff.

Exactly. Going to the USSC would be a waste too. Dealing with the federal government's judiciary is a complete waste of time.

Unless the state government has the resolve to take this to the next level by arresting federal agents violating the MT law, then nothing else will come of it and it'll simply be another failed footnote in history.