Montana: Outlaw guns and we'll secede

[midtennchip]

Folks, before anyone gets too upset about Heller, there are a few clarifications that need to be made.

1. The SCOTUS (at least as a body) does not listen to arguments made outside of court, so the Montana officials (nor anyone else that wants to tell the Justices how they feel) will not have any bearing on the outcome. Obviously, some of the Justices allow their own political/social/etc views cloud their legal reasoning, I personally do NOT want the SCOTUS as a body to make decisions based on what people WANT the outcome to be. The people have the ability to voice that through their elected officials, not the SCOTUS.

2. Having spent a great deal of time reading law review articles and court opinions on this issue, I seriously doubt the SCOTUS will actually hold that the 2nd Amendment is a "collective" right. If we (i.e, gun owners) were to be on the short end of Heller, it will likely be a much more technical issue (i.e., one of the "technicalities" people gripe about when criminals "get away with it.").

3. Even if the SCOTUS upholds the ban, that DOES NOT mean that guns will automatically be illegal throughout the country. There is no current law outlawing gun ownership, except in those very few cities that have passed such laws. For gun ownership (or certain types of guns) to be outlawed, more laws must be passed. I'll leave it to you to wonder if a federal, state (TN), or local ban would be passed after the Heller decision that would affect you.

Most of the members here probably know all of this already, but a few of the posts made it seem that this decision is more important than it really is. Regardless of how the SCOTUS decides this, the case WILL NOT be the end of this issue. This post is already too long, but an explanation of why the decision will not solve the issue would be WAY too long to post here.

[Guest canynracer]

see but sometimes the "what ifs" are fun to talk about...I agree, I dont think they will come...

but.......WHAT IF!!!

LMAO

[threeshot]

Ummmmm WHAT??????!!!!

I am with FADT (Fathers Against Drunk Typing) and I think you have a problem...LOL...

I have fixed my post using cut-and-paste from Word 2003 into the Post Reply box. I have no idea what happen and I did not notice the issue after posting.

Edited February 22, 2008 by threeshot

[Guest 2HOW]

I say all the gun owners get together and take over Mexico. great beachs, and weather,

[Mike.357]

Montana is not going anywhere, Heller is not going to change much irregardless of how it is decided.

Mars had it right.

[Guest canynracer]

I have fixed my post using cut-and-paste from Word 2003 into the Post Reply box. I have no idea what happen and I did not notice the issue after posting.

HAHAAH no biggie!! it was funny though...

[Im Neero]

I think Thomas Jefferson would want us to do that.

I think Jefferson might have a little stronger of a reaction in mind than boycotting Wal-Mart.

[deerslayer]

What's the other name? Baghdad on the Mississippi?

I think it's "Mogadishu on the Mississippi."

[towerclimber37]

If they rule against us, we will ignore them.

:up: +25

[Guest GMCS(SW)]

I agree that no matter what the SCOTUS decides, this is far from over. I don't see a lot of change if they decide on "individual" or "collective" rights. It will come down to the states deciding for themselves. The states should be controlling most things that the federal gov does now anyway. Big brother needs to be staying out of my neck of the woods. He has certain responsibilities (ie national defence) but most decisions should come from the state level.

[analog_kidd]

"I'm moving to Montana Soon,

Gonna be a Dental Floss Tycoon"

Show your age and tell me the author

[Marswolf]

"I'm moving to Montana Soon,

Gonna be a Dental Floss Tycoon"

Show your age and tell me the author

Kidd, you aren't old or weird enough to know Zappa.

[Guest jackdog]

I vote for ignore them completely

[Marswolf]

I think it's "Mogadishu on the Mississippi."

That sounds correct.

I've never watched Black Hawk Down, although I did copy the disc - err - I mean I can check a copy out of the library.

[DaveTN]

IF they rule against us...what's keeping the states from telling them to pound sand and allowing guns.

Nothing. No matter how they rule nothing will be outlawed.

The Supreme Court has refused to answer the “individual right†question for many years and has left it up to the state courts and the Federal District courts. The right to “keep arms†is not the problem; the right to “bear†arms is.

<O:p</O:p

Personally I don’t think they are going to answer that question in this case. But if they do we are not going to like the outcome. They will either rule that it is a collective right of the state or that it is an individual right but that the state may control the carry and use. (Just like the Tennessee state Constitution reads.)

<O:p</O:p

If they were to rule it is an individual right to keep and bear arms and that everyone can strap on a firearm and go about their business (never happen); it would become a states rights issues and some states would continue to arrest people for doing so. That is why we won’t get a ruling in our favor. You can’t take away a states right to enact legislation that they perceive as protecting its citizens. (Whether we agree that is the case or not).

<O:p</O:p

On this issue States Rights will without a doubt trump individuals rights.

I have to admit...I HATE winter..but Montana DOES look inviting

It is my understanding that you still need a permit to carry concealed in a city or town in Montana. But I'm not sure of that.

[Fallguy]

It is my understanding that you still need a permit to carry concealed in a city or town in Montana. But I'm not sure of that.

You can Open Carry in most places in Montana without a permit. http://opencarry.org

[DaveTN]

You can Open Carry in most places in Montana without a permit. http://opencarry.org

Sure, but who wants to open carry?

[Im Neero]

People in Montana.

[Fallguy]

People in Montana.