You are not signed in (Login or Join Free)   |   Help
Sploofus Trivia
Trivia GamesCommunityLeaderboardsTournaments
You are here:  Home  >>  Chat Forums  >>  The Salty Dog  >>  View Chat Message

View Chat Message

Pages:  1    

Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Thu, 14th May '09 1:18 AM


I heard there was some trouble a-brewing in Montana, and I thought I'd ask y'all what you think. Because this thread will probably be a bit political "possibly", I may not respond to it much however short or long it becomes, but just curious as to what you guys think of this situation. Thanks. (BTW, though the author of this article appears to not be an Obama fan, I usually am, so don't think I'm out there posting his hate mail, I'm just truly interested in the topic both as a former resident of Montana and as a citizen.) This particular article may be from something of a slanted website, but I was too tired to look further. Thoughts? (I know, I asked for it!)

Montana Governor Signs New Gun Law

Executive Summary – The USA state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. I mean REVOLUTIONARY.

The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal – confiscation of privately owned firearms.

Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obamas face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face. Gotta love it.

Important Points – If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. Since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA, the very document that empowers the USA.

Silencers made in Montana and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered. As a note silencers were first used before the 007 movies as a device to enable one to hunt without disturbing neighbors and scaring game. They were also useful as devices to control noise when practicing so as to not disturb the neighbors.

Silencers work best with a bolt-action rifle. There is a long barrel and the chamber is closed tight so as to direct all the gases though the silencer at the tip of the barrel. Semi-auto pistols and revolvers do not really muffle the sound very well except on the silver screen. The revolvers bleed gas out with the sound all over the place. The semi-auto pistols bleed the gases out when the slide recoils back.

Silencers are maybe nice for snipers picking off enemy soldiers even though they reduce velocity but not very practical for hit men shooting pistols in crowded places. Silencers were useful tools for gun enthusiasts and hunters.

There would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. So in a short period of time there would be millions and millions of unregistered untraceable guns in Montana. Way to go Montana.

Discussion – Let us see what Obama does. If he hits Montana hard they will probably vote to secede from the USA. The governor of Texas has already been refusing Federal money because he does not want to agree to the conditions that go with it and he has been saying secession is a right they have as sort of a threat. Things are no longer the same with the USA. Do not be deceived by Obama acting as if all is the same, it is not.

Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Thu, 14th May '09 2:04 AM

Oops, I guess the post doesn't make it "immediately" clear what the new law is! I guess it has something to do with Montana legalizing and manufacturing it's own silencers, and also I thought I read certain kinds of bullets that are illegal elsewhere? Does anyone even know for sure if this is legit?

Collioure  (Level: 113.7 - Posts: 9952)
Thu, 14th May '09 4:56 AM

What do I think?

In general much ado about nothing.

Kaufman  (Level: 268.0 - Posts: 3941)
Thu, 14th May '09 5:45 AM

I agree with the "much ado" bit. The telltale is in the first paragraph of the press release, where it reads, "The gun control laws all have one common goal – confiscation of privately owned firearms." Hardly from an impartial reporter. Maybe a few on the fringe of the gun control movement want that, but I don't think the NRA mainstream really believes that is the goal of most who favor gun control.

So given that the above was a piece of extremist propaganda, odds are it doesn't reflect the reality of the situation.

Just so you know where I'm coming from and my personal biases, I believe in the Second Amendment, but I don't think a few reasnable controls violate the letter or spirit thereof.

Caramel1  (Level: 135.1 - Posts: 21590)
Thu, 14th May '09 7:54 AM

The move has been started in other states also to try to limit the power of the Federal Government because it controls everything under the guise of interstate commerce. From what I have heard the legal folks believe the Montana law will not pass muster at the higher court level. Many are working with other states to get more "teeth" in the law. Jank might know something as there is a similar thing in the works in Texas as believe also in Ohio. Said a long time ago people have had enough when they wake up. In order for the Montana thing to work in would have to have every gun registration stamped as made in Montana and used in Montana or something similar. Hope all of you like diet soda as it is in the works to tax the nondiet stuff as well as snack items. It will be said that it is a move to make people eat healthy and reduce health care costs-has to pay for his dream somehow. The cigarette tax worked to fund child health care because everyone knows those who smoke are truly EVIL people but in my mind a bit of a Catch 22 because if people quit smoking as tthe government sponsored ads and the health folks tell them to do than the kids would have no health care..

Caramel1  (Level: 135.1 - Posts: 21590)
Thu, 14th May '09 8:19 AM

Sure Guns are important to the Montana folks as they are with many folks. The real issue is that states are trying to come up with something to get the Feds out of everything-hope at least one is successful and a trend develops-Linda

Papajensai  (Level: 201.7 - Posts: 1024)
Thu, 14th May '09 9:46 AM

I heard an NPR report about this. The gist was that the Montana law was to the effect that guns (or ammunition or silencers or whatever) which are manufactured in the state and are intended for use within the state are not subject to Federal controls, such as background checks, licensing, etc. The argument is that if the things don't cross state lines, they aren't of Federal interest. The Federal approach is if they can cross state lines, they will do so, and thus are under Federal jurisdiction. That's all I know about it, and I'm not getting into the discussion, except for this attempt at, I hope, clarity.

Suzer22  (Level: 165.6 - Posts: 1982)
Thu, 14th May '09 10:17 AM

That was my first thought - how will they stop people from taking them across state lines - especially people from neighboring states who come into Montana specifically to buy them.

And if it passes, I would be very interested to see what happens to the count of gun related deaths in the state. I can't imagine that it would go down!

Oldcougar  (Level: 228.6 - Posts: 1935)
Thu, 14th May '09 10:18 AM

Pro guns, definitely pro some control of guns. I understand how silencers would be nice when target shooting but out in the bush if you can't hear a gun you might just wander into the line of fire. Of course someone will use them inappropriately. As per many things, a few idiots screw up things for the sane folks.

Diet soda may be worse for your health than regular. They don't promote weight loss according to a few studies I've read. Apparently Tax people haven't read those

Caramel1  (Level: 135.1 - Posts: 21590)
Thu, 14th May '09 10:59 AM

I know, Randy, but watch for the tax on non-diet anyway because it has to sound good- diet anything supposedly reduces obesity which is a cause of the rise in health care costs- The argument is pretty much BS but much of political arguments are just that. Believe the Montana thing goes beyond the gun issue-but it is an issue-attempt to get the Federal Government to release its choke hold on every one and every thing- Chrysler went into bankruptcy and he fired the head guy at GM. Heard a pundit say stopping anything like the bonuses or the initiating salary caps is like putting a rock in a waterfall-water just goes around it. They tried to cap NYC rent rates way back and then people were charged for the keys to the apartment. Interesting and sad that the Chrysler plant in Wisconsin is being closed and a plant opened in Mexico. Watched the beginning of the death of Detroit when the city taxed people and businesses who actually paid taxes out of it to support those who did not . The small business owners-the dealerships- are being let go which employ more actual people if you include the business affected that surround them than the current companies Linda

Garrybl  (Level: 291.9 - Posts: 6773)
Thu, 14th May '09 11:08 AM

Marsha 17

Caramel1  (Level: 135.1 - Posts: 21590)
Thu, 14th May '09 11:24 AM

Sorry, Barry, you are way too intellectual in your insults-fact Detroit is dying or dead- fact Wisconsin plant now opening in Mexico-fact-diet soda does nothing to prevent obsesity- fact rent controls in nYc were not effective, etc. fact-a whole bunch of folks really weary of the "Nanny" Federal government and the gun issue is tring to adress that-fact you really should NOT read my postrs as your BP must increase which is a health issue-Linda

M48ortal  (Level: 262.0 - Posts: 3830)
Thu, 14th May '09 11:28 AM


Did she win? Or do we sing 'Happy Birthday?"

Caramel1  (Level: 135.1 - Posts: 21590)
Thu, 14th May '09 11:32 AM

This is off Topic but don't want to hog the forum with the political "CRAP' to quote someone. Believe Nancy will soon find out it is unwise to accuse the CIA of lying which she just did Linda

Caramel1  (Level: 135.1 - Posts: 21590)
Thu, 14th May '09 12:27 PM

LoL, Barry, just reread Marsha's thread and I'll be smarter if you deal with facts and not just nastiness for nastiness sake. You REALLY do pay attention to me, don't you? When Justin first put the "Do something' feature, I was your first one with the pie. I am so very flattered that someone as smart to the point of really making a constant a-- of themselves so Fixated on me- Smooches Linda

Caramel1  (Level: 135.1 - Posts: 21590)
Thu, 14th May '09 12:41 PM

Marsha 1 through 20

Caramel1  (Level: 135.1 - Posts: 21590)
Thu, 14th May '09 2:16 PM

Pages:  1    

Copyright © 2003-2017 Sploofus Holdings LLC.  All rights reserved.
Legal Notice & Privacy Statement  |  Link to Sploofus