Archive

Archive for the ‘Hunting – Fishing – Competitive Shooting’ Category

Montana Moves to Guarantee the Availability of Ammunition

January 23, 2015 Leave a comment

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE MONTANA SHOOTING SPORTS ASSOCIATION AND ABOUT THE 15 PRO GUN BILLS WE HAVE LINED UP FOR THIS 2015 LEGISLATIVE SESSION: http://www.mtssa.org/?page_id=172

There is a serious threat to our right to bear arms because of narrow, monolithic and federally-controlled manufacture of essential ammunition components, smokeless powder (propellant), primers and cartridge brass. For example, there are only two manufacturers of smokeless powder in the U.S., one plant owned by defense contractor General Dynamics and another owned by defense contractor Alliant Systems (ATK). All other smokeless powder used in the U.S. is imported, and subject to immediate and arbitrary import restrictions. And, General Dynamics and Alliant Systems are subject to a standard condition of military contracts that 100% of their production may be commandeered for military use at any time.

Without ammunition, our firearms and our right to bear ammunition are worth nothing.

We propose certain incentives to encourage small-scale production of ammunition components in Montana. That model includes offering liability protection to future producers, providing that such producers qualify for existing state assistance with financing, and will include a 20-year tax amnesty from start of business, which would give up zero current tax income to the state but would provide jobs for Montana.

Montana Moves to Guarantee the Availability of Ammunition

It’s downright strange.  And more than slightly suspicious.

One of our spokesmen will be on talk-radio in some distant part of the country, and the first caller will ask a familiar question: “Why has all of the ammunition flown off the shelves?”

There are a variety of answers to this question, but many of them revolve around the same three words.  And those words are: Barack Hussein Obama.

Under Obama, for some reason, agencies like FEMA and the IRS have suddenly found it necessary to make large ammunition purchases.

In addition, Obama has banned the import of Russian made 7N6 6.45×39 ammunition using questionable legal justification, and this may be just the beginning.

Private gun owners have made atypically large purchases because of a fear of what Obama and his disciples might do next.  And the paucity of ammunition on the shelves in many places has created a self-perpetuating cycle.

Perhaps for this reason, Montana state Senator Matt Rosendale has introduced Senate Bill 122 — a bill which would use Montana’s considerable resources to encourage the manufacture and sale of ammunition in Montana: CONTINUE READING GOA ARTICLE: http://www.gunowners.org/state01222015a.htm

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE MONTANA SHOOTING SPORTS ASSOCIATION AND ABOUT THE 15 PRO GUN BILLS WE HAVE LINED UP FOR THIS 2015 LEGISLATIVE SESSION: http://www.mtssa.org/?page_id=172

2015 Montana Shooting Sports Association Legislation – Montana RKBA

December 12, 2014 Leave a comment

2015 Pro Gun, RKBA Legislation – Montana Shooting Sports Association  (MSSA)

Montana’s once-every-two-years legislative session will begin on Monday, January 5th 2015. When the session convenes, things will happen quickly because the session only lasts 90 working days. You need to be prepared to keep up and weigh in.

Here is a list of the Bills presented by MSSA that are slated to debate during this session. Please familiarize yourselves with these Bills and share the information with your Friends and Family members. Once the Legislature convenes, we are going to need your help to get these passed into law in Montana. Please be prepared!

If you reside in the State of Montana, PLEASE ask your Legislators to support these bills! And if you reside in other States, please work to get similar legislation enacted in your State.

If you’re interested in participating in, and/or keeping track of the progress of MSSA RKBA legislation in Montana this legislative session, the following options are available to you:

1) You may “Like” and “Follow” the MSSA facebook page, which will be updated regularly during the legislative session beginning 01/05/2015. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Monta…3426517?ref=hl

2) You may contact MSSA and ask to be added to our legislative update email distribution list: mssa@mtssa.org

3) For questions and concerns regarding this, or any, legislation the MSSA is currently working on, you may contact the MSSA Legislative Coordinator at elisa@mtssa.org or on the MSSA Legislative Coordinator facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/MSSALegCoord

http://www.mtssa.org

MONTANA SHOOTING SPORTS ASSOCIATION
2015 LEGISLATIVE ISSUES
1. Smokeless powder and primer production. There is a serious threat to our right to bear arms because of narrow, monolithic and federally-controlled manufacture of essential ammunition components, smokeless powder (propellant), primers and cartridge brass. For example, there are only two manufacturers of smokeless powder in the U.S., one plant owned by defense contractor General Dynamics and another owned by defense contractor Alliant Systems (ATK). All other smokeless powder used in the U.S. is imported, and subject to immediate and arbitrary import restrictions. And, General Dynamics and Alliant Systems are subject to a standard condition of military contracts that 100% of their production may be commandeered for military use at any time. Without ammunition, our firearms and our right to bear ammunition are worth nothing. We propose certain incentives to encourage small-scale production of ammunition components in Montana. That model includes offering liability protection to future producers, providing that such producers qualify for existing state assistance with financing, and will include a 20-year tax amnesty from start of business, which would give up zero current tax income to the state but would provide jobs for Montana.
http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2013/billhtml/HB0468.htm
2. Prohibit enforcement of new federal gun laws by Montana public employees. Every week there is talk of a new federal gun control bill, to limit magazine capacity, to outlaw semi-auto rifles, to ban common bullets, to limit the number of firearms a person may own, and many more. The principle has already been established by the U.S. Supreme Court (Printz v. US) that the federal government may not commandeer state and local government employees to implement federal programs. We propose that Montana public employees be prohibited from enforcing, or assisting to enforce, any federal gun laws that are not already in effect.
http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2013/billhtml/HB0302.htm
3. Allow safe travel to work and employee property right inside private vehicles. Employees have a property right to what they choose to carry in their vehicles, whether Bibles, newspapers, or firearms. Employees also have a constitutional right to be equipped to provide for their own personal protection when traveling to and from work. However, many private employers have made it a termination offense for an employee to have a firearm locked in the employee’s vehicle if that vehicle is parked in a company parking lot. Such employers assume no responsibility for employee safety during travel to and from work. We propose that employers be prohibited from firing employees only because that employee has a firearm locked in a privately owned vehicle in a company parking lot. This bill would require that any such firearms also be out of sight from outside the vehicle.
http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2013/billhtml/HB0571.htm
4. “Prohibited Places.” There is a badly-conceived statute at 45-8-328 to regulate “prohibited places.” This law allows anyone to carry a firearm openly in the listed places but prohibits those who have taken training, had a background check, obtained a concealed weapon permit from their sheriff from exercising their CWP in these “prohibited places.” We propose that this archaic and bad law be repealed. There is a backup, alternative solution at:
http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2013/billhtml/HB0358.htm
5. University system gun bans. The people of Montana have reserved from government interference the right to keep or bear arms in the Montana Constitution. The Montana university system is a government entity. The Montana Constitution gives the Board of Regents broad authority to manage the affairs of the U. system, but it gives the Board NO authority whatsoever to suspend, amend or abolish the Constitution and the rights the people have reserved to themselves from government interference. We propose a bill that withdraws all authority from the Board of Regents to restrict firearms on U. system campuses, and then gives back to the U. system narrowly-tailored authority to adopt certain restrictions that are sensible and also defensible under recent federal (Heller and McDonald) and state (Colorado, Oregon and Utah) court cases.
http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2013/billhtml/HB0240.htm
6. Sheriffs First – Law Enforcement Cooperation. Many Montanans, both citizens and people in public office, are concerned about the lack of accountability of federal officers conducting law enforcement operations in Montana. In Montana, we know the county sheriff and he is elected and accountable locally. We believe the sheriff is the chief law enforcement officer in the county, and ought to have the tools to implement that status. MSSA will offer a bill to require federal officers to obtain the written permission of the local sheriff before conducting an arrest, search, or seizure in the sheriff’s county. There are exceptions for federal reservations, Border Patrol, Immigration and Naturalization Service, close pursuit, when a federal officer witnesses a crime that requires an immediate response, if the sheriff or his personnel are under investigation, and other necessary exceptions. This bill was passed by the Legislature in 1995, but was vetoed by the Governor.
http://www.SheriffsFirst.net
7. Sound suppressors illegal for poaching only. Firearm suppressors do not “silence” firearms, but suppress somewhat the noise of the muzzle blast. They do nothing to attenuate the loud crack of the sonic boom as a bullet breaks the sound barrier all along its flight path. Currently, firearm suppressors are illegal for hunting. FWP argues this is necessary for them to be able to catch criminals who poach. We propose a bill to make use of suppressors illegal for poaching only, but not for general hunting. Some argue that use of suppressors for hunting is not “fair chase,” because the hunted animal would not hear the muzzle blast from a hunter’s rifle. This argument ignores physics – that a rifle bullet arrives before the sound of the muzzle blast because the bullet flies faster than the speed of sound. It ignores that a missed shot will startle the game animal with the nearby sonic boom before any sound of muzzle blast arrives. Finally, it ignores the common acceptance of “fair chase” hunting with absolutely silent arrows during archery season.
http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2013/billhtml/HB0205.htm
8. Harmonizing concealed weapon permit (CWP) requirements. Since 1991, a CWP has not been required for a law-abiding person to carry a concealed weapon in 99.4% of Montana – outside the limits of cities or towns. With over two decades of experience that not requiring CWPs for nearly all of Montana has not created any problems, we propose a bill to harmonize the law so a permit will no longer be required for a law abiding person to carry a concealed weapon in the remaining small 6/10ths of 1% of Montana, inside cities and towns. We intend to leave the permitting process in place, so citizens who desire them may still obtain CWPs for travel to other states that recognize Montana CWPs, and for firearm purchases at gun stores under the federal Brady Law. This change would exclude criminals from applicability – it would still be illegal for criminals to carry concealed weapons.
http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2013/billhtml/HB0304.htm
9. Clarify authority of school boards for firearms violations. An underreported tragedy in Montana is the number of students who have been disciplined, many expelled, for forgetting that their hunting rifle was locked in their vehicle, usually from a weekend hunt. When such a condition occurs in a school parking lot, ill-informed administrators usually tell reviewing school boards (incorrectly) that the board has no choice but to expel offending students because of mandatory federal law. However, unknown to these poorly-informed administrators, federal law on the subject specifically excludes from consideration any firearm locked in a vehicle in a school parking lot. About 450 Montana high school students have been expelled, and had their academic aspirations ruined for life, over this issue. We propose a bill to clarify for uninformed administrators and misinformed school boards that firearms locked in a student vehicle does not mandate expulsion, but that school boards have full discretion to apply discipline as needed and appropriate to the ingredients of the incident. This bill would NOT deprive school boards of tools to deal with genuine safety problems, but would clarify that firearms locked in vehicles do not MANDATE student expulsion.
http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2011/billhtml/HB0558.htm
10. Bankruptcy and Arms. Allow up to $5,000 of firearms, archery equipment and ammunition that a person has owned for a year or more to be exempt from claims under bankruptcy.
11. Home Guard. Expand upon existing laws establishing the Montana Home Guard to specify organization, mission, duties, responsibilities and control.
http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2011/billhtml/HB0278.htm
12. Shooting range funding. Montana began using some hunter license money to make matching grants to develop local shooting ranges in 1989. The program to build safe and suitable places for Montana people to shoot was put into state law in 1999, as the Shooting Range Development Program (SRDP). The funds for this program are approved each legislative session in the appropriations process for the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks budget. There are no general tax revenues used for this program, only the money hunters pay for licenses. The 2007 Legislature appropriated $1,000,000 for the SRDP. $600,000 was appropriated in 2009, and about $650,000 in 2011 and 2013. We ask that $1,000,000 be appropriated to the SRDP in the 2014 legislative session, regardless of any FWP opposition to that level of funding.

To The Brady Campaign….. “REALLY?!?”

March 28, 2014 2 comments

We’ve seen NOTHING but lies from those cretins over at the brady campaign to destroy our Bill of Rights, but THIS, my Friends, takes the cake!  These idiots have been so deeply and thoroughly brainwashed by the lies being vomited down their throats each and every day.  Each and every one of them have become nothing more than  brain-dead sociopath pathological liars.

 

I am ONE HUNDRED PERCENT certain that their “plans would change”….. I just wish one of them would try testing this idiotic theory at my house…… but I’d settle for them trying this out at ANY gun owner’s house.

 

Brady campaign idiocy

Gunmaker packs up after Colo. control bill signed


TWG:  These companies would be VERY welcomed here in Montana.  Besides being a gun-friendly State, we have our “Montana Firearms Freedom Act”, which protects these companies from overreaching federal tentacles. 

 

MontanaFlagGuns

 

By Valerie Richardson

The Washington Times

Thursday, March 21, 2013

No sooner had Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper signed three gun-control bills into law Wednesday than the economic backlash began.

Officials at gun equipment manufacturer Magpul Industries confirmed that the company would make good on its vow to leave Colorado if the governor signed the bill to limit ammunition-magazine capacity. The Erie-based manufacturer confirmed on its Facebook page that it will start its transition “almost immediately.

“We will likely become a multi-state operation as a result of this move, and not all locations have been selected,” said the company in a statement, adding that it expects to begin manufacturing its PMAG-brand magazines within 30 days of the bill-signing.

Magpul may be the first firearms-related business to relocate as a result of state gun-control laws, but it probably won’t be the last. Companies in Connecticut, Maryland and New York are considering moves to more gun-friendly pastures as their state legislatures act on restrictive firearms measures similar to those pushed through by state Democrats here.

Founded in 1999, Magpul stands as a relative newcomer to the firearms business, but even companies with hundreds of years of history in their states may look to relocate as a result of political shifts.

In New York, where Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed laws banning so-called assault weapons and limiting magazine capacity to seven rounds, venerable gun manufacturer Remington Arms is being wooed by officials in at least a half-dozen other states.

“We are carefully evaluating our options,” Teddy Novin, marketing director for Remington parent company Freedom Group, Inc., told the Utica Observer-Dispatch in January.

 

Gun owners to hit Colorado in pocket book


TWG:  BOYCOTT those idiots in EACH AND EVERY State that’s infringing on our unalienable rights.  Come to Montana, where the hunting and fishing is abundant, and law abiding gun owners are not treated like mass-murdering criminals!

MontanaFlagGuns

The pressure is building on Colorado in the wake of its new laws that infringe on the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Gun owners across the country now say that they will hit the state in the pocket book, punishing Colorado economically for essentially kicking gun owners in the teeth.

Magpul, a magazine manufacturing company located in Colorado, has already announced it will be leaving the state, taking hundreds of jobs with it, and creating a hole in Colorado’s economy to the tune of $85 million this year alone.

But this action is far from the worst of what Colorado faces as a consequence of its new law that bans magazines and guns that carry over 15 rounds, eight rounds if it is a shotgun, and mandates background checks on private, citizen-to-citizen gun sales and transfers. Gun owners plan to avoid the state as a regular destination for hunting, fishing, and other recreational use of firearms — one of the major sources of revenue for the state government.

Outraged by what they view as a direct attack on their rights as citizens, the gun owners who regularly visit Colorado wish to send a clear message to the state legislature — you can’t expect us to continue allowing Colorado to benefit from the revenue generated by our sporting activity if the state is going to treat gun owners as criminals….

CONTINUE READING: http://www.examiner.com/article/gun-owners-to-hit-colorado-pocket-book?CID=examiner_alerts_article

Montana Gun Control Nullification Bill Going to the Governor’s Desk


MontanaFlagGuns

TWG: THANK YOU, GARY MARBUT! 

Posted by

HELENA, Mont. (March 20, 2013) – The Montana House today concurred with the State Senate on a a bill prohibiting state compliance with any federal attempt to enforce a ban semiautomatic firearms or high capacity magazines  in Montana.  The vote was 62-35.

The House previously approved HB302 by a vote of 56-42.  And last week the Senate approved with with an amendment, 28-21.  The House had the option of approving the amended version of the bill or sending the original back to the Senate.  Inside sources indicated that the Senate was prepared to vote down the original bill which would have included a provision dictating to the county attorneys of the state how to handle violations of the act.

If signed by Governor Bullock, HB302 will prohibit “a peace officer, state employee, or employee of any political subdivision is prohibited from enforcing, assisting in the enforcement of, or otherwise cooperating in the enforcement of a federal ban on semiautomatic weapons or large magazines and is also prohibited from participating in any federal enforcement action implementing a federal ban on semiautomatic weapons or large magazines.”

The law also prohibits expenditure of public funds for the purpose of enforcing a federal gun ban. Any state agent working with the feds would be guilty of official misconduct.  Any use of public funds to assist the federal government would be considered “public theft.”

An employee of the state or any political subdivision may not expend public funds or allocate public resources for the enforcement of a federal ban on semiautomatic weapons or large magazines. Any expenditure of public funds or public resources, including paying the salaries of personnel, to enforce or participate in the enforcement of a federal ban on semiautomatic weapons or large magazines is an unauthorized use of public resources and is considered theft as provided in 45-6-301.

The so-called ‘war on drugs’ illustrates federal dependency on the support of  state agencies in enforcing its laws. Federal agencies almost always act in cooperation with state and local law enforcement. In many situations, federal agents have absolutely no way to carry out enforcement without massive state and local support.  If a large number of states simply refuse to cooperate with federal gun bans, it will effectively nullify the law.  Without state compliance and assistance, many unconstitutional federal acts are little more than a house of cards. Refusing compliance on a state or local level is a big deal – and it sets the stage for others to do the same.

Earlier this week, Judge Andrew Napolitano supported this position when on Fox News he said that state noncompliance with federal gun control would make it “nearly impossible” to enforce.

“We saw the power of non-compliance in the 1850s, ” Tenth Amendment Center communications director Mike Maharrey said. “Northern states passed personal liberty laws and flat out refused to cooperate with federal agents trying to return accused runaway slaves south. They denied use of their jails and facilities and in some cases criminalized state cooperation – just like the Montana bill. It was so effective, South Carolina and Mississippi listed northern nullification of the Fugitive Slave Act as a cause for secession.”

More than two dozen states have introduced legislation to nullify federal gun “laws.” – and Montana is leading the way as the first state where both houses have approved such a bill.

ACTION ITEMS for Montana

1.  Call Governor Steve Bullock.    A phone call will have far more effect than an email.  Let him know that you want him to SIGN HB302 when it reaches his desk.  Strongly, but very politely, make sure he knows that you want him to do the right thing – principle not party – and make sure that Montana will not be a part of unconstitutional federal bans.

406-444-3111

link to contact form here: http://governor.mt.gov/contact.aspx

2.  Encourage your local community to take action as well.  Present the even broader 2nd Amendment Preservation Act to your city county, your town council, or your county commissioners.  Various local governments around the country are already passing similar resolutions and ordinances.  Local legislative action present a great way to strengthen a statewide campaign against violations of the 2nd Amendment

Model legislation here:
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2ndamendmentpreservation

LEGISLATION and TRACKING

If you would like to see model legislation to introduce in your state or local community to nullify federal firearm laws, please see The Tenth Amendment Center’s Model Legislation: The 2nd Amendment Preservation Act.

Track the status of 2nd Amendment preservation legislation in states around the country HERE.

 

SOURCE: http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/03/montana-gun-control-nullification-bill-going-to-the-governors-desk/

Colt Shuts Plant, Workers Talk To Conn. Lawmakers


TWG:  I can’t believe obama’s State-run media minions over at yahoo posted this article.

Colt will, HOPEFULLY, join the “Firearms Equality Movement”

They, and their fellow Firearms and Firearms Accessory Manufacturers, are eagerly  invited to join us here in Montana where the business climate is far more welcoming to them than any other State in the Union.

Colt shuts down Conn. gun plant so workers can go to Conn. Capitol to oppose gun bills

By Susan Haigh, Associated Press | Associated Press

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — The president of one of the nation’s oldest gun manufacturers closed down his Connecticut factory Thursday morning and bused 400 of his workers to the state Capitol so they could personally urge lawmakers not to pass gun control legislation that they say could risk their livelihoods.

Dennis Veilleux, president of the Hartford-based Colt’s Manufacturing Co., said even though he has spoken with legislators and Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s staff about his trepidations several times, he believes they don’t truly understand the financial ramifications of the legislation being proposed in the wake of the deadly Dec. 14 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown.

State officials have listened to the concerns he and other Connecticut gun company officials have voiced, “but I would say it’s more pacifying us,” Veilleux said. That’s why he decided to rent 10 buses and bring over his first shift workers, plus some second- and third-shift ones, and some suppliers.

“These are the faces of the jobs at Colt,” Veilleux said in an interview with The Associated Press while riding on a bus back to the factory. “Each of these people represents other people in the state. They represent the community and, in a lot of cases, they’re the breadwinners of their families. And more and more, manufacturing jobs are hard to come by.”

Colt has been operating in Connecticut for the past 175 years.

The Colt workers packed the Legislative Office Building, many holding signs that read “Save Our Jobs,” as legislative leaders continued to meet behind closed doors, trying to craft a bipartisan response to the school massacre. They’re scheduled to meet again on Friday.

Meanwhile, members of the General Assembly’s Public Safety and Security Committee heard testimony on numerous gun control bills, including a new gun offender registry, an expanded assault weapons ban, ammunition restrictions and a ban on bulk purchases of handguns.

Ron Pinciaro, executive director of Connecticut Against Gun Violence, defended the breadth of legislation.

“We feel that because of the enormity of the situation that happened on Dec. 14, that if we just put some Band-Aids on things, it’s really not going to be enough,” Pinciaro said. Twenty first-graders and six educators were killed at Sandy Hook. The shooter had also killed his mother before eventually committing suicide.

Eric Koenigs, a manufacturing engineer at Colt for the past nine years, has worked in the industry for 18 years. Even though Veilleux has not threatened to move Colt out of Connecticut, Koenigs said he is extremely concerned about the fate of his job if, for example, the state’s current assault weapons ban is expanded.

“I never thought it would happen here,” said Koenigs.

Connecticut is known as the “Arsenal of the Nation,” a reputation first gained in the American Revolution. In the early 19th century, inventors Eli Whitney and Simeon North began making firearms in Connecticut with interchangeable parts, which is often recognized as the beginning of modern mass production.

Democratic members of a legislative subcommittee charged with reviewing gun laws recently recommended exempting Connecticut gun manufacturers from a proposed law expanding the definition of an assault weapon. Even though the weapons could not be purchased in the state, they could still be manufactured here.

Veilleux contends his company would still suffer, even though it currently doesn’t sell many rifles in Connecticut.

“If we ban this product in the state where we make it, our customers will take their business to another brand,” he said. “When we start to get erosion of our customers, we lose our market share.”

There are numerous postings on Colt’s Facebook page from gun advocates urging the company to move out of Connecticut, which they claim does not respect the constitutional right to bear arms. There also are postings from people urging Colt not to supply law enforcement with guns in New York, a state that recently enacted strong gun control initiatives.

Veilleux said gun customers are well-connected and know what is happening in different states in terms of gun control efforts.

“Our customers don’t want to support the state of New York. So our customers aren’t going to want to support the state of Connecticut,” he said. “And our association is so strong with the state of Connecticut, that it’s inevitable that it’s going to begin to erode.”

%d bloggers like this: