ATF to Montana: 'You will respect our authoritah!'

ATF to Montana: 'You will respect our authoritah!'

www.examiner.com

On Friday, we saw the letter ATF sent to FFL dealers in Tennessee telling them the Bureau was overriding the state's Firearms Freedom Act, and would continue to impose federal requirements in disregard of state law.

They've done the same thing to Montanans.

(visit the link for the full news article)

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives have sent a friendly letter to gun dealers in Tennessee and Montana to 'remind' them of their 'obligation' to obey federal laws, despite recently passed legislation to reaffirm those states' Tenth Amendment rights.

These people (the ATF, DEA, and TPTB in general) are power-hungry totalitarians and will stop at nothing to ensure that their organization continues to exist and wield authority. They simply can't stand the notion that the Constitution protects our right to keep and bear arms without their interference.


TA




www.examiner.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

What the heck is the point of having states and state rights if the Federal Government overrides every damn thing?

Montana should tell the ATF to go F off. What's happening to state sovereignty is indicative of what's happening to individual sovereignty in our country. Eventually it will be worthless with our freedoms and rights being whittled away.

reply to post by Zosynspiracy

Not to mention national sovereignty. I think the feds denying states their rights is a pretty good indication that they're getting ready to hand over our nation to a global ruling body. Can't have a NWO with states governing themselves.


TA

reply to post by TheAssociate


How about the state reassure the dealers that state law (in their eyes) trumps federal and THEN stand up for the little guy by arresting and prosecuting any federal officers that try to infringe upon state rights. Alas, the federal government will rule that roost.

reply to post by Aggie Man

Good plan, Aggie Man. I doubt it would fly, but it certainly would annoy the hell out of the feds to see a case like that taken to the Supreme Court.


TA

The ATFE needs to be disbanded anyway. A simple Google search can turn up several instances where they used excessive force when none was needed, and never compensated for wrongful acts caused by swat style tactics on the wrong address with out even announcing they were the ATF. One just really needs to look at Ruby Ridge and Waco to see how they are.

reply to post by TheAssociate


Everyday we slip a little bit closer toward civil war...for the exact same reasons we fought the first one. The federal government is in dire need of a major ass kicking!



[edit on 20-7-2009 by LiquidMirage]

reply to post by seeker83

Couldn't agree more. Acting like a cross between Russian mobsters and Green Berets is not an acceptable way to deal with people. They've definitely gotten out of hand and need to, at least, be put under better control or, better yet, disbanded entirely.


TA

Well you folks should all know by now that Federal rights trump state rights. A whole war was fought over that nasty little bit of ugliness in the 1800s and the states lost and the Fed won. States rights are secondary to Fed Authority and the constitution? Well that was ignored over a century ago... its been nothing but an out dated piece of paper for a long while...

SIGH!

Maybe Montana and Tennessee WILL stand up for state rights again.

Maybe the states and the fed will have another war to figure out who is right.

I'd say its the piece of paper...then again I have no political authority what so ever..... I'm just the citizen they expect to fight their wars... At this point the only way I'd fight would be side by side with you against the fat over weight politicians that believe we are here to serve them and not the vice versa.

This is about extortion.

You see, if the States begin to defy Federal authority the issue of State's Rights to self-govern becomes salient. The Fed has DEBT to hold over the states, as well as ZERO hesitation to cut the state off from funds it desperately needs to survive the debt load it already has - it's stake in the 'bailout'.

The States are going to need a set of brass ones to push this fight, and frankly, as the Governors are all meeting (the one's that bother to show up) at this moment, I doubt you'll see a lot of patriotic speeches. Most of those people are loyal only to their 'party' (if you want to call it that) and therefore are not likely to represent the States with any kind of Constitutional vigor.

Good luck everybody.

You know, you can lump all of "conspiracy" under one heading and that's dominance. Centuries ago the low lifes pulled a con and got away with it. The more they pulled cons and the more they got away with it, the more contempt that had for humanity and the more they realized (I'm sure to their own surprise) they could get away with, more and more and more.

Most of these issues are bluff, some muscle and the willingness of the states to allow them to have any authority within their borders. States should kick federal law enforcement out of their territory. It is simply unconstitutional and illegitimate. State should certainly be ready to intercede on the behalf of their residence against any strong arm or fake legal tactics of the feds. The Federal Government simply isn't a superior power to that of the state and the individual. At best, the Federal Powers of security are faced outward and are advisory inward towards the states. They are not strong arms and should have no authority to kidnap residence of a state including business owners.

They do have the power of money vs. Debt.

That is why the HR1207, the resolution to audit the fed, is such a big deal.

It is the end all, be all.

Still though,

The county sherriff in Tenn, Montana or anywhere, OVER-RIDES Fed law.

That is what we have going for us, and that's about it..

reply to post by Maxmars

Very true. All we can really do is "hope" obama inadvertently brings about some "change" he wasn't counting on, in the form of states' politicians stand up for state sovereignty and individual liberty.


TA

According to the ATF, Federal law and regulation supercede State law.
The ATF has jurisdiction over the inter-state commerce of firearms. They do not have jurisdiction under federal law to dictate to the states what they can do within the state boundaries. A firearm manufactured within the State and sold to a resident of the state DOES NOT fall under inter-state commerce laws!!
The ATF is trying to throw weight around that they do not legally have!!
I suppose we'll see these cases in front of the SCOTUS.

reply to post by Aggie Man


+1!

The states being called like that by the feds should just make a declaration to the state gun shops saying that the FEDs have no business in state law and that if federal agents try to raid a gun shop in the state, they will be arrested by the national guard and escorted out of the state.

This non-sense have to stop. The 10th amendment is there for a reason. Screw the feds.

But of course if you do that, prepare for ``economic sanctions`` since the ``stimulus`` money will be withdrawn from the state, maybe even federal tax returns.

If the feds do that, I would encourage the governor to encourage the people of the state to not pay any federal income tax until the economic sanctions are lifted.

[edit on 20-7-2009 by Vitchilo]

This stuff pisses me off. I am a legal gun owner and have served this country as a marine. I can have weapons if I want. No one is taking my guns... EVER.

I know this article wasnt exactly about that but yall know what I mean, I'm sure.

Peace!

reply to post by daddyroo45

A firearm manufactured within the State and sold to a resident of the state DOES NOT fall under inter-state commerce laws!! The ATF is trying to throw weight around that they do not legally have!!

Exactly. The ATF felt threatened by the new legislation in those states and, like the school-yard bullies they are, decided they had to put on a display of authority in the form of threats.



reply to post by Vitchilo

Screw the feds.

and


TA

reply to post by LiquidMirage


Civil war? If a civil war broke out all the sheeple would be fed a line of BS that Montana is simply a bunch of backwoods, gun toting rednecks looking to start trouble. The word "militia" has a bad enough connotation. Can you imagine if the word "secession" became mainstream? The media would have a field day.

the other nasty thing about a civil war is we'd be ducking for cover from UAV's and Predator drones instead of staring down the barrel of a gun or cannon. Things are way different nowadays. If a civil war were ever to break out it would need to be done clandestinely and covertly. Just watch that movie V for Vandetta. There will come a day when freedom lovers will be called terrorists. Terrorism will come to America but it will be home grown if the government doesn't change its policy.

[edit on 20-7-2009 by Zosynspiracy]

reply to post by jeasahtheseer

but yall know what I mean, I'm sure.

Unfortunately, we know all too well what you mean, jeasahtheseer. And I think this case is just one more step toward that. Any attempt to abridge the Second Amendment is a step toward abolishing it.


TA