It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Montana Governor Signs New Gun Law

page: 10
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in


posted on May, 9 2009 @ 09:21 PM

The Bill of Rights prohibits Congress from making any law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise therof, forbids infringement of "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms...",

Furthermore, the Supreme Court ruled in Heller:

The current legal meaning of the Second Amendment was addressed in District of Columbia v. Heller. In Heller, the Supreme Court determined that the Second Amendment protects an individual right, with the majority opinion stating that: The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.[7]

The only LEGAL way for that to change, would be repealing the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution.

End of Discussion.

posted on May, 9 2009 @ 11:12 PM

Originally posted by Jadette
if you think you and your ten pals with your glocks are going to take on the remaining superpower in the world - good luck with that. It's really childish to imagine that gun ownership is a legitimate thread [threat] to nuclear armed nation with a full standing army and navy.

But we're not talking about me and ten pals... We're talking about over 80 million American gun owners, who are in possession of over 280 million firearms, as well as billions of rounds of ammunition.

If even 1% of American gun owners decided to take the law into their own hands, essentially challenging the federal government to come and get it, then we'd see about 800,000 Ruby Ridge incidents all across the country.

That's if only 1% of American gun owners chose to rebel... Eight Hundred Thousand civilian standoffs with BATF and other law enforcement agencies. And you seriously think the gubbmint would win?

As the gubbmint learned the hard way, they can't mount a siege of even ONE American civilian and his family without serious repercussions for years afterwards. The gubbmint still wishes they'd never initiated the siege at Ruby Ridge. That incident did more to ignite anti-government sentiment than anything else up until that time. You can't buy that kind of negative publicity, and you can't buy your way out of it, either.

Now, judging from your repeated allusions to the U.S. military getting involved in a federal war against the American people, it sounds as though you think our combined military are ready and willing to KILL MILLIONS of American citizens on our own soil, and that the gubbmint would seriously consider such action to disarm American citizens.

I put it to you, If this government even entertains such notions behind closed doors, then the People should ALREADY be rising up and staging an armed revolution. If the gubbmint EVER considers going to war against the People, then America is already dead, and it's every man for himself.

In case I haven't made it clear yet, I have no respect for our increasingly socialist central government, and my first allegiance is to the U.S. Constitution. Revolution is our heritage, and I know exactly what the Founders intended when they penned our founding documents — Their intent was (and is) that the People should always be able to rein-in the government, even if that means by force of arms.

But let me also make it clear that I don't give a damn about advanced weapons systems. By God, if it came down to it, I'd fight our goddamned government and its military with slingshots and wooden clubs. The one thing that frightens our government more than anything else is the thought of facing an adversary who is unimpressed by our sophisticated military technology, and who would just as readily fight barehanded.

As it happens, the American people don't have to fight barehanded — we have 280 Million guns. All that is required of us as American citizens is the guts to use them.

— Doc Velocity

[edit on 5/10/2009 by Doc Velocity]

posted on May, 10 2009 @ 12:14 AM

Originally posted by severdsoul
The last study i read (been a while in a local paper, there are 3 guns for every living person here. Old, young, what ever age. Which is probably is about the same as your study read porportion wise.

Quite right, I should have stipulated 10 guns for every household in Montana — I guess I didn't make that clear enough. If there are enough firearms in Montana to supply every living soul in the state with 3 guns, and the average Montanan household is 3 to 4 people, then it comes out to around 10 guns on average per household. Of course, without digging out the actual stats, this is all just approximating from memory.

Still, the police of Montana are well aware of the numbers, and they're too smart to commit suicide by attempting to enforce federal anti-gun legislation in that state. I do admire Montana for many reasons, but most of all for the guts that Montana legislators and law enforcement officials exhibit in facing down the federal gubbmint.

— Doc Velocity

posted on May, 10 2009 @ 12:40 AM
These acts of defiance against Federal intrusions into States rights by the perversion of the commerce clause and the current ground swell of across the political spectrum Tea Party political protest is the nightmare the Statist (Progressives) have feared and cannot allow; we witness the match of the Second American Revolution.

posted on May, 11 2009 @ 06:41 AM
As a Montana Resident this makes me so proud of my state.

The only thing about it that disappointed me is they took out the concealed carry clause that would have made it so anyone could carry concealed without and permits or red tape.

Oh and we can also have silencers that are made in Montana.

Now i can practice on my land without pissing the neighbors off.

As far as the fed cutting us off.
That is fine.
Just as long as they know we will cut them off as well.
We will not pay any federal taxes.
They don't really give us all that much money anyways and with what we save by not sending them any money we can fund all our programs just fine.
If they really wanna push it we are just fine with succession.

As a final thought, this isn't so much about guns as its about Montanans standing up for there rights. Montanans are pretty much united on this issue so i would advise the PTB to not push us on this. This bill passed our house by a vote of 287-2.

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 01:15 AM
yeah I saw this on the Glenn Beck show and the guy in Utah is making the original bill even better. This is more than just gun laws and such its about reclaiming our rights as individual states the forced budget and all the taxes were the last straw I think but this should hopefully be a very good thing.

top topics
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in