Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
That is the Tenth Amendment of the US Constitution. I think it has been severely abused by the Federal Government. I personally think that they have crossed the line many times and tried to find technicalities to regulate trade. I am going to provide a link to what Glenn Beck has to say on the subject. Pay attention to the part about the farmer. In this case, the Federal Government had no right to rule on his actions, or to regulate his business.
www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/25060/Now we come to what I really want to talk about.
HB 246 - Exempt Montana-made firearms and ammunition from commerce clause
This bill was signed into law here in Montana. The law states that firearms and ammunition made, purchased, and kept in Montana are exempt from Federal regulation. Based on the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution this power is reserved for the state. Montana is taking advantage of this power and right. Because the products do not cross state lines, it is not considered interstate commerce, and therefore can not be regulated by the Federal government. Most likely this will be challenged at some point. If Montana stands alone, the chances of failure are high. If other states join in, and they are all challenged, then the Supreme Court will have to hear the case. So far Texas, Utah, and Tennessee are following. But I would say that we will need more states than that for this to work. Glenn Beck used a term "Emerging Consensus". The basic idea is that the more states that get on board, the more likely the Supreme Court is to follow if a case makes it to them. Now, I don't agree with this totally, but in this case it won't hurt.
Ok, a rabbit trail for a second. You may be asking why I don't agree with emerging consensus. Well if most of the states are enacting laws that violate the US Constitution, this would still be emerging consensus, but the Supreme Court would have the obligation and sworn duty to rule based on the Constitution regardless of feelings.
Back to the subject. I am proud that Montana would take a lead and take a stand in this area. And I honestly hope that it will be forced and end up at the Supreme Court for a ruling. Once the Court rules on this, every state and every court has to follow precedence. I also believe that Glenn Beck talks about a couple cases regarding this as well when it comes to commerce and state rights.
The downside to this, is that the process will take several years to complete. It will take time for other states to get on board, and enact their own laws. These laws will have to be challenged. Once challenged they will go through the Court of Appeals. Then on to the Supreme Court. At that point, the decision is crucial. I pray that we have the right Judges on the bench at that time.
Most people who know me, know that guns are a huge part of my life. I shoot for fun. I reload for fun. I hunt with them. And if necessary, I will use them for protection of myself and the ones I love. It seems at times that the Federal government would like to take all of that away. I hope that this bill that Montana passed and was signed into law will force the hand of the Federal Government. It does not seem to be enough that people are buying every gun and box of ammo out there. Should that not tell them that we do not trust them, and that we want out Constitutional right to guns protected?
I realize that this is not very detailed. I will try to get some links to the court cases referred to. That will help back it up.
2 comments:
You make some really good points on the 10th amendment, by the way! But also, it is exciting the MT and the other states you listed are doing SOMETHING about gun rights. While a court ruling would be really sweet, you're right: we'd really need the right judges on the bench. Something that I'm afraid Obama's nominations might inhibit. Thanks for posting this info, it's good to know what's going on here.
This is very exciting. I also think more states are looking at doing the same thing than the ones mentioned. As for Obama's nominations, you may be right. They will hurt this cause with their vote. You really would like at least 5 to vote in your favor to make it conclusive. Six would be better. Seven would be the best, but that won't happen. Based on past cases, I believe that there are currently 5 or 6 on the bench that will rule in Montana's favor.
Post a Comment