MONTANA STANDS TALL!!

[Hazcat]

Second Amendment an individual right

The U.S. Supreme Court will soon decide D.C. v. Heller, the first case in more than 60 years in which the court will confront the meaning of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Although Heller is about the constitutionality of the D.C. handgun ban, the court's decision will have an impact far beyond the District ("Promises breached," Op-Ed, Thursday).

The court must decide in Heller whether the Second Amendment secures a right for individuals to keep and bear arms or merely grants states the power to arm their militias, the National Guard. This latter view is called the "collective rights" theory.

A collective rights decision by the court would violate the contract by which Montana entered into statehood, called the Compact With the United States and archived at Article I of the Montana Constitution. When Montana and the United States entered into this bilateral contract in 1889, the U.S. approved the right to bear arms in the Montana Constitution, guaranteeing the right of "any person" to bear arms, clearly an individual right.

There was no assertion in 1889 that the Second Amendment was susceptible to a collective rights interpretation, and the parties to the contract understood the Second Amendment to be consistent with the declared Montana constitutional right of "any person" to bear arms.

As a bedrock principle of law, a contract must be honored so as to give effect to the intent of the contracting parties. A collective rights decision by the court in Heller would invoke an era of unilaterally revisable contracts by violating the statehood contract between the United States and Montana, and many other states.

Numerous Montana lawmakers have concurred in a resolution raising this contract-violation issue. It's posted at progunleaders.org. The United States would do well to keep its contractual promise to the states that the Second Amendment secures an individual right now as it did upon execution of the statehood contract.


BRAD JOHNSON

Montana secretary of state

Helena, Mont.

More at link http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080219/EDITORIAL/646772049&template=nextpage

Now THAT is the kinda man I would be proud to have representing me!

[Lucas]

I was born and rasied in Montana, I love it here!!!  I will be perfectly honest when I say that I wasn't always a "good guy".  One of the things I love most about this state is that it is an extreme rarity that someone breaks into a house when they are home.  I atribute this to the fact that it is common knowlege that just about everyone here can and does own a firearm.  The only ones here afraid for their life are the bad guys.  Anyone I know would gladly risk their lives for a perfect stanger in need of help.  THIS IS THE WAY IT SHOULD BE!!!  Granted we are not the most populated state,  here our neighbors are our friends.  We look out for one another.  About two months ago around 3am 2 young males were trying to break into my mustang.  While I was sleeping like a log, my neighbor heard the noise,  came outside holding a single shot  12ga and they ran like hell.  There most likely wont be any arrests,  however I doubt they will be coming back this way anytime soon!  I guess what I am getting at is when it comes down to it there is no better feeling than knowing that the people around are willing and able to keep this place safe for all of us.

[DDMac]

I had the privelige of serving, long ago, with some sailors and Marines from Montana. They expected nothing without effort and were in high gear when Battle Stations sounded.

In the populous eastern US, where I now live (NC), it is clear to me that the citizens clamoring for free gubment cheese by far outnumber those willing to work for theirs. It doesn't seem to matter if the candidate has a pitchfork, horns and a pointy red tail, whichever one promises the most, for the least effort, will win.  Just Dammit!!

ps Looks like you've got it figured out now, Lucas.
  Mac.

[Bidah]

Yeah, you just gotta love this state.

There is more on it at http://www.progunleaders.org

-Bidah

[clayflingythingy]

That's all well and good, but 8 men and 1 woman will ultimately decide what the constitution says on this issue. And I am nervous as hell.

[Sponsor]

[Lucas]

Get what you can get while you can get it and let them try to take it!!!

[jnevis]

I was amazed to read about this.  I wonder if any other states are willing (or even looking at thier compact/constitutions) to make the same statement.  Montana's only problem is that they don't have the infrastructure or economy to legitimately void thier compact and leave the Union.  Now states like Florida, Texas, or Arizona on the other hand....

[Hazcat]

Florida?  With wish washy dem lite Crist?  NEVER happen!

[ericire12]

A collective rights decision by the court would violate the contract by which Montana entered into statehood, called the Compact With the United States and archived at Article I of the Montana Constitution. When Montana and the United States entered into this bilateral contract in 1889, the U.S. approved the right to bear arms in the Montana Constitution, guaranteeing the right of "any person" to bear arms, clearly an individual right.

So, why did this not come up in the Supreme Court hearings....... sounds like pretty rock solid precedent to me.

[Solus]

You know, I've been thinking that if the Supreme Court rules in our favor this month, both on an Individual Right and Strict Interpretation, this will be the most meaningful and monumental 4th of July in my life....

I've been wondering where to have the party, and it now seems that Montna might be the place....and I'd buy those lawmakers a round of beer....

But, does anyone in Montana know how to make really good BBQ or Chili???