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

South Dakota 5th State to pass Firearms Freedom Act

Ben H

Well-known member
REBELLION IN AMERICA
5th state exempts guns. Is Washington noticing?
'I think they're going to let it ride, hoping some judge throws out case'
Posted: March 15, 2010
9:11 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

A fifth state – South Dakota – has decided that guns made, sold and used within its borders no longer are subject to the whims of the federal government through its rule-making arm in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and two supporters of the growing groundswell say they hope Washington soon will be taking note.

South Dakota Gov. Mike Rounds has signed into law his state's version of a Firearms Freedom Act that first was launched in Montana. It already is law there, in Tennessee, Utah and Wyoming, which took the unusual step of specifying criminal penalties – including both fines and jail time – for federal agents attempting to enforce a federal law on a "personal firearm" in the Cowboy State.

According to a report in the Dakota Voice, the new South Dakota law addresses the "rights of states which have been carelessly trampled by the federal government for decades."

"As the federal government has radically overstepped is constitutional limitations in the past year or so, an explosion of states have begun re-asserting their rights not only with regard to firearms, but also in shielding themselves against government health care, cap and trade global warming taxes, and more," the report said.

(Story continues below)
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=128035

100315map2.jpg
 

Tam

Well-known member
I hear there are about 30 states that have or are going to pass laws outlawing the Federal Governments attempts at forcing everyone to buy health insurance by threat of jail time and fines. I guess the State guys are getting a bit tired of the Washington guys stepping on citizens Constitutional rights and freedoms and it is about time. I just hope that someday the US can get back to "We The People" and not the "We the Elite of Washington" that they have become.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Tam said:
I hear there are about 30 states that have or are going to pass laws outlawing the Federal Governments attempts at forcing everyone to buy health insurance by threat of jail time and fines. I guess the State guys are getting a bit tired of the Washington guys stepping on citizens Constitutional rights and freedoms and it is about time. I just hope that someday the US can get back to "We The People" and not the "We the Elite of Washington" that they have become.

At least 36 state legislatures are considering legislation that would allow citizens to opt out of a key component of President Obama's health-care "reform" – an "individual mandate" requiring that all Americans have health insurance.
Both the House and Senate health-care bills require Americans to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty. The House bill establishes a fine based on percentage of a person's income, while the Senate version creates a penalty as a flat fee or percentage of income, whichever is higher. Those refusing to get insurance could be found guilty of a misdemeanor crime, punishable by another fine or even jail time.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, formal resolutions or bills have been filed in opposition to the individual mandate in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
As of March 4, Virginia became the first state to enact a new statute section titled, "Health insurance coverage not required." In Arizona, voters will cast ballots on a constitutional amendment in November 2010 that would "preserve the freedom of all residents of the state to provide for their own health care."
The administration is trying to shift from a government by social compact, agreement between elected officials and citizens, to a government where the leaders tell the subjects what to do," Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall, chief sponsor of the measure in his state, told the Globe. "That is not what the American Revolution was about."
Minnesota State Rep. Tom Emmer told the New York Times in September 2009 that lawmakers in his state have proposed a state constitutional amendment to protect citizens from government interference in their private health decisions.

"All I'm trying to do is protect the individual's right to make health-care decisions," Emmer said. "I just don't want the government getting between my decisions with my doctors."

He said an amendment wouldn't prohibit anyone from participating in a federal health program. It would simply prevent them from being forced to enroll.

"[T]ell me where in the U.S. Constitution it says the federal government has the right to provide health care," Emmer said. "This is the essence of the debate."




http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=127404
 

Tam

Well-known member
I see Montana is not on that list I guess their freedom to own a gun is more important to them than their freedom to decide what health care they and their families recieve and at what cost.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Tam said:
I see Montana is not on that list I guess their freedom to own a gun is more important to them than their freedom to decide what health care they and their families recieve and at what cost.

Montana State Legislatures only meet every 2 years, this is an election year, next session starts in January 2011! So there hasn't been a chance for a similiar bill to be introduced.
This is an exciting year in Montana politics- there looks to be a very good chance of having allot of conservatives going to Helena for that session!!
Montana is very much a Freedom loving state, the Montana firearm Freedom act is way more about FREEDOM than firearms.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Lonecowboy said:
Tam said:
I see Montana is not on that list I guess their freedom to own a gun is more important to them than their freedom to decide what health care they and their families recieve and at what cost.

Montana State Legislatures only meet every 2 years, this is an election year, next session starts in January 2011! So there hasn't been a chance for a similiar bill to be introduced.
This is an exciting year in Montana politics- there looks to be a very good chance of having allot of conservatives going to Helena for that session!!
Montana is very much a Freedom loving state, the Montana firearm Freedom act is way more about FREEDOM than firearms.

I would hope so as I would hate to have to visit any family or friends in jail due to Obama care.
 

Ben H

Well-known member
This is not about guns, it's about State’s Rights and using guns as a vehicle to challenge the commerce clause.
 
Top