March 16, 2010 by Statesman Sentinel
By Bob Unruh – 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.
South Dakota’s law specifically notes “any firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in South Dakota and that remains within the borders of South Dakota is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of Congress to regulate interstate commerce.”
The provisions are nearly a mirror of the original law
penned in Montana as well as those adopted in subsequent decisions by Tennessee, Utah and Wyoming.
Gary Marbut of the Montana Shooting Sports Association spearheaded the Montana law and now describes himself as a sort of “godfather” to the national campaign.
He told WND the issue is not only about guns but about states’ rights and the constant overreaching by federal agencies and Washington to impose their requirements on in-state activities…He said he’s pleased South Dakota has become No. 5, and noted Alaska, Idaho and Oklahoma all have legislation that is approaching the stage of being presented to a governor to be made into law.
The Firearms Freedom Act website also reveals that other states either with pending legislation or pending plans include Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, Washington and West Virginia. Marbut said Washington appears to be reacting the same way it did when states legalized marijuana or rejected the REAL ID national plan: by ignoring it.
“Ultimately we hope there will be lawsuits in other federal circuits, because there are two things that predispose the U.S. Supreme Court to take a case: the national scope of the issue and differing appellate decisions,” he told WND.
Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center said Washington likely is not anxious for a confrontation.
“I think they’re going to let it ride, hoping some judge throws out the case,” he said today.
“When they really start paying attention is when people actually start following the [state] firearms laws,” he said.
WND reported earlier when Wyoming joined the states with self-declared exemptions from federal gun regulation.
But when Democratic Gov. Dave Freudenthal signed his state’s bill into law, it included penalties for any agent of the U.S. who “enforces or attempts to enforce” federal gun rules on a “personal firearm” in Wyoming including up to two years in prison and up to $2,000 in fines.
The bellwether likely is to be a lawsuit pending over the Montana law, which was the first to go into effect.
As WND reported, the action was filed by the Second Amendment Foundation and the Montana Shooting Sports Association in U.S. District Court in Missoula, Mont., to validate the principles and terms of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, which took effect Oct. 3, 2009.
http://statesmansentinel.com/?p=803
Click to view image: 'progun'
By: Eva_Destruction
In: News
Tags: second amendment, gun control, pro-gun
Marked as: approved
Views: 9518 | Comments: 88 | Votes: 1 | Favorites: 2 | Shared: 1 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 1
Advertisement below
|
|
| Liveleak on Facebook | |
|
LIKE Liveleak.com |
-
N.R.A. TELLS THE U.N. TO GO POUND SAND RE: AMERICAN GUN REGULATION!
-
Govenor Jan Brewer of Arizona Has Signed Constitutional Concealed Carry Bill
-
Sotomayor's confirmation will likely shrink property rights and Second Amendment rights
-
Alex Jones - Obama Administration Caught Running False Flag Against Second Amendment!
-
Sunstein Attacks (Gun Rights) Second Amendment (Slowly all our rights are being eradicated, while the sheeple watch American Idol)
-
The worldwide conspiracy against U.S. self defense and gun ownership.
-
Restoration of the Second Amendment - Parts 1 & 2
-
Womans 911 Call as She Kills Intruder
-
Freedom's Insurance Policy The Second Amendment
-
"Empty Holsters" Second Amendment rights on college campus




hell yeah.
Posted Mar-20-2010 Bywonderwhen (63.76) wonderwhen View Channel Send Message
(9)
This is just a red state's way of telling all the bicoastal, libcunt, control-freak, suck-the-dicks-of-criminals-and-terrorists, totalitarian, faggot pieces of shit to go fuck themselves.
Posted Mar-20-2010 ByAvgDude2 (451.72) AvgDude2 Send Message
(7)
if california law makers are the last to pick up on this trend, im going to kick each lawmaker in they're cunt.
Posted Mar-20-2010 ByDarkPsyOps (187.26) 
DarkPsyOps View Channel Send Message
(5)
their cunt, possessive.
Posted Mar-20-2010 Bydusty_bottomz (68.70) dusty_bottomz View Channel Send Message
(0)
dey coochie.
Posted Mar-20-2010 Bycastanza128 (621.42) 
castanza128 View Channel Send Message
(0)
Good for you South Dakota! Hope north Dakota follows suit!!!!!
Posted Mar-20-2010 ByFugMan (232.82) FugMan View Channel Send Message
(5)
Good news no doubt. It will be interesting to see what the state will do if by some chance the feds do try to go after a gun maker in the state.
Posted Mar-20-2010 Byhlabrake (678.24) hlabrake View Channel Send Message
(4)
But of course gun chasers want the law abiding citizens' guns taken so they can take advantage of people
Posted Mar-20-2010 BySauerCandies (80.62) SauerCandies Send Message
(1)
MOLON LABE MOTHER FUCKERS
Posted Mar-20-2010 ByLuckyshame_420 (10.86) Luckyshame_420 View Channel Send Message
(0)
*rolls his head around drunkenly and mimes tipping a bottle back*
Posted Mar-20-2010 ByST0N3PONY (5077.52) 
ST0N3PONY View Channel Send Message
(0)
are you going to delete my comments again?
leave them on there, see what happens.
Posted Mar-20-2010 Bydusty_bottomz (68.70) dusty_bottomz View Channel Send Message
(-1)
and i'm really sorry about bringing back the memories of your daddy beating you and your mother up. although, i am exempt from any medical bills that occur from said incident.
Posted Mar-20-2010 Bydusty_bottomz (68.70) dusty_bottomz View Channel Send Message
(-1)
Yes, when you're in my comment section drunkenly blabbering out your retardation I will delete them. Simply to save space. Say something that isn't drunken trolling gibberish and I'll leave it.
And... This is not my thread drunkard, how could I delete them?
*rolls his head around drunkenly and mimes tipping a bottle back*
Posted Mar-20-2010 ByST0N3PONY (5077.52) 
ST0N3PONY View Channel Send Message
(0)
i'm sorry for your mothers black eye, i told him to stop. but, you know sometimes they deserve it.
you have my shoulder to cry on stony, any time.
Posted Mar-20-2010 Bydusty_bottomz (68.70) dusty_bottomz View Channel Send Message
(-1)
Thanks drunk degenerate low-life.
Posted Mar-20-2010 ByST0N3PONY (5077.52) 
ST0N3PONY View Channel Send Message
(0)
My understanding is that the second amendment is intended to prevent the overtake of the nation by political tyranny, rather than to first fight criminals, is this correct?
Posted Mar-20-2010 ByAriomaniac (232.80) Ariomaniac View Channel Send Message
(0)
It's all about protection of self and family, whether it is our goverment, a foreign goverment or someone who does not obey the laws of the land, we are allowed the right to bear arms in defence of wrong doing by others no matter who they might think they are.
Posted Mar-20-2010 Bykillingforgod (706.40) killingforgod View Channel Send Message
(0)
Might have to move out to one of those states so I can get a machine gun
Posted Mar-20-2010 Byhcruz773 (98.24) hcruz773 Send Message
(0)
If South Dakota could speak as a state, it would be saying to Washington the following:
"Kiss my a.ss and suck my d.ick, treat me like a god damn king when I be up on my sh.it"
Posted Mar-20-2010 Bytroggiesanonymous (52.70) 
troggiesanonymous Send Message
(0)
Let it ride.
Posted Mar-20-2010 Byjjjjjay (909.06) jjjjjay View Channel Send Message
(0)
protecting*
my night off...
Posted Mar-20-2010 Bydusty_bottomz (68.70) dusty_bottomz View Channel Send Message
(-1)