• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Montana Made Guns, No Fed. Check in MT

Ben H

Well-known member
Montana residents, I want to know how this bill is doing, I heard it passed the legislature and is waiting for the Gov.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it would make it so any gun manufactured and sold in MT would not require a federal background check. This is less of an issue on guns and more of one on State's sovereignty.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
A bill that recently passed both chambers of the Montana Legislature could make it easier to buy guns in Montana, but it could also put Montana in the middle of a state's rights battle.
Jim Mickelson has been selling guns at Shipton's Big R for years. If you want to buy a gun in Montana, you must fill out the front and back of a sheet, then Jim will call the FBI to make sure you're allowed to buy a firearm. If the FBI says it's okay, you can walk out of the store with your gun that day.

"It takes longer fill out the form that it does to get approval," Mickelson said.

Though the process doesn't take long now, House Bill 246 would make it even easier to buy a gun in Montana by eliminating the federal background check for guns made and kept in the state.
"The general perception is that the government will move to more control and so the citizenry of Montana is saying, 'we're voting for less control,'" he said.

The text of the bill also sets Montana up for a major state's rights battle, saying that commerce within the state is allowed to be controlled by the state alone as granted by the 9th and 10th amendments.

If the governor signs the bill, Mickelson said it's likely more gun manufacturers will want to come to Montana,
http://www.kulr8.com/news/local/42560492.html

for a full copy of the bill go to:
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0246.htm


:D Now if Gov BS will just sign it-- the people have spoken!!
 

Texan

Well-known member
I read somewhere (maybe here?) that Montana is also trying to make it so that 12-year old kids can walk down the streets with Uzis.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Texan said:
I read somewhere (maybe here?) that Montana is also trying to make it so that 12-year old kids can walk down the streets with Uzis.


naw, OT single handedly defeated that part -- hahaha

that was a different bill, HB228, it will probably pass too now that the teeth are kicked out of it.
MT had some good bills in front of it this year, unlike OT, most of us treasure FREEDOM!!!!
 

Ben H

Well-known member
One thing that could come in to play here is lets look at the so called "assault rifles". The only part you need to get through a FFL is the reciever with the serial no. Everything else is considered an accesory. You can buy an 80% finished reciever for an AR without a check. It needs machining to finish it, then it needs to be parkerized. Because it's not finished it has no serial no, and it doesn't need to be purchased through an FFL. The stipulation is that you need to finish it and can't sell it. The way I see it, these could be purchased and finished in Montana, then buy in the other components to assemble. The same thing can be done with stamped G3 recievers, you need to bend the stamped part to finish the reciever.
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
Montana has proven itself to be anti-business. I can't imagine our legislature doing anything that would bring industry to the state.
:lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mainly this is a bill to test States Rights- something I've always been a strong supporter of....
But if it gets vetoed- it will be because of the expected high cost to the taxpayers of the state of the court cases to defend it...Because you know it will be immediately challenged....And so far I've seen no one from private industry or outside government step forward to volunteer to put up that money....
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Mainly this is a bill to test States Rights- something I've always been a strong supporter of....
But if it gets vetoed- it will be because of the expected high cost to the taxpayers of the state of the court cases to defend it...Because you know it will be immediately challenged....And so far I've seen no one from private industry or outside government step forward to volunteer to put up that money....


BSOT, if it gets vetoed it's because Gov BS is not wanting to rock the boat towards getting something from obama in the future.
You say you are a "strong supporter" - have you written or called Gov BS on this yet?? Are you starting a legal defense fund?? How much have you contributed?? Are you a member of the NRA??
This has nothing to do with the "high cost to taxpayers", heck look at the tax money that would come into the state with the new industry.
The bad part of this bill would be all the people moving here!!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lonecowboy said:
Oldtimer said:
Mainly this is a bill to test States Rights- something I've always been a strong supporter of....
But if it gets vetoed- it will be because of the expected high cost to the taxpayers of the state of the court cases to defend it...Because you know it will be immediately challenged....And so far I've seen no one from private industry or outside government step forward to volunteer to put up that money....


BSOT, if it gets vetoed it's because Gov BS is not wanting to rock the boat towards getting something from obama in the future.
You say you are a "strong supporter" - have you written or called Gov BS on this yet?? Are you starting a legal defense fund?? How much have you contributed?? Are you a member of the NRA??
This has nothing to do with the "high cost to taxpayers", heck look at the tax money that would come into the state with the new industry.
The bad part of this bill would be all the people moving here!!

I'd rather test states rights on some cattle issues-- like the State passed M-COOL (which the state wouldn't take USDA on because of the high cost) and the Mandatory ID the USDA/Bush has been trying to push down folks throats for years...

The bad part of this bill would be all the people moving here
And there in lies the comedy of many eastern Montanans-- they scream that that we need jobs--then when you try to bring in jobs/business they scream about that (like the Prison that we could have had but after all the local protests about all their wives and daughters going to be raped and pillaged went to Shelby- that loves it) ....And God forbid if you get some high paying jobs in- because then they all cry, whine, and scream (especially the farmer/ranchers) because the can't find any cheap semi-slave labor anymore....
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Lonecowboy said:
Oldtimer said:
Mainly this is a bill to test States Rights- something I've always been a strong supporter of....
But if it gets vetoed- it will be because of the expected high cost to the taxpayers of the state of the court cases to defend it...Because you know it will be immediately challenged....And so far I've seen no one from private industry or outside government step forward to volunteer to put up that money....


BSOT, if it gets vetoed it's because Gov BS is not wanting to rock the boat towards getting something from obama in the future.
You say you are a "strong supporter" - have you written or called Gov BS on this yet?? Are you starting a legal defense fund?? How much have you contributed?? Are you a member of the NRA??
This has nothing to do with the "high cost to taxpayers", heck look at the tax money that would come into the state with the new industry.
The bad part of this bill would be all the people moving here!!

I'd rather test states rights on some cattle issues-- like the State passed M-COOL (which the state wouldn't take USDA on because of the high cost) and the Mandatory ID the USDA/Bush has been trying to push down folks throats for years...

The bad part of this bill would be all the people moving here
And there in lies the comedy of many eastern Montanans-- they scream that that we need jobs--then when you try to bring in jobs/business they scream about that (like the Prison that we could have had but after all the local protests about all their wives and daughters going to be raped and pillaged went to Shelby- that loves it) ....And God forbid if you get some high paying jobs in- because then they all cry, whine, and scream (especially the farmer/ranchers) because the can't find any cheap semi-slave labor anymore....


amazing OT,
you take a 2009 MT gun law and turn it into a bush/bash
avoid all the personal responsibility questions, then do a hit and run on all your neighbors--- simply amazing!!!!
The NRA would be glad to bring in lawyers to fight to win this one!!!
Just like they did Heller in DC.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
GOOD NEWS! Governor Schweitzer signed HB 246, MSSA’s Montana-made guns bill, today. HB 246 declares that any guns and ammunition made and retained in Montana are not subject to ANY federal regulation under the authority of Congress to regulate commerce “among the states.”

HB 246 will become effective on October 1, 2009. MSSA is beginning now to plan our legal strategy for vetting the legal principles involved. Soon after October 1st, MSSA will determine if it is necessary to file a lawsuit in federal court to prove the principles established in HB 246. If we do need to file this lawsuit (probably will), MSSA will need to do some serious fundraising to defray the expenses involved.

http://montanahuntingtoday.com/blog/index.php/2009/04/15/flash-good-news-gov-signs-hb-246/
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Lonecowboy said:
GOOD NEWS! Governor Schweitzer signed HB 246, MSSA’s Montana-made guns bill, today. HB 246 declares that any guns and ammunition made and retained in Montana are not subject to ANY federal regulation under the authority of Congress to regulate commerce “among the states.”

HB 246 will become effective on October 1, 2009. MSSA is beginning now to plan our legal strategy for vetting the legal principles involved. Soon after October 1st, MSSA will determine if it is necessary to file a lawsuit in federal court to prove the principles established in HB 246. If we do need to file this lawsuit (probably will), MSSA will need to do some serious fundraising to defray the expenses involved.

http://montanahuntingtoday.com/blog/index.php/2009/04/15/flash-good-news-gov-signs-hb-246/

Wonder what the odds are this will stand? I hope it does, but curious how much you can avoid the feds?
 
Top