Montana considers secession over 2nd Amendment ruling

[Anti Federalist]

Several dozen Montana politicians, including Secretary of State Brad Johnson, have adopted an unconventional take on the Second Amendment case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court: They’ve threatened secession. D.C. v. Heller, the first substantive Second Amendment case the Court has heard in nearly 70 years, could definitively settle whether the right to bear arms is an individual right or a collective right.

In a joint resolution, the Montana politicians argue that when Washington approved the state constitution, including a clause granting “any person” the right to bear arms, upon the Treasure State’s entry into the Union in 1889, the federal government recognized that clause as consistent with the Second Amendment. If the Court comes down on the side of a collective right, they argue, it would breach the compact for statehood between Montana and the federal government.

“Some speak of a ‘living constitution,’ the meaning of which may evolve and change over time,” supporters of the resolution explain on their website. “However, the concept of a ‘living contract,’ one to be disregarded or revised at the whim of one party thereto, is unknown.” Therefore, they argue, “A collective rights holding in Heller would not only open the Pandora’s box of unilaterally morphing contracts, it would also poise Montana to claim appropriate and historically entrenched remedies for contract violation.” Said remedies include opting out of its breached compact with the federal government—in other words, seceding from the Union.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/126063.html

Resolution home page

http://www.progunleaders.org./

I think I may have start looking at ranches in Montana.

[Carehn]

maybe my rental agreement could be a living contract. In that case i will raise the rent and tell my tenant that the contract has now reached puberty.

[Carehn]

I think I may have start looking at ranches in Montana.


White Fish! Its the shit.

[RideTheDirt]

Montana FTW

[foofighter20x]

Small problem: Montana wasn't an independent state before it joined the union. It was a U.S. territory.

Only the 13 original states, Vermont, and Texas have any real substance to any claim of reversion to independent status as they were temselves independent.

If Montana's contract is voided, then they wouldn't be independent, but would revert back to territorial status.


Edit: I'm thinking the USSC is going to come down on the side of an individual right anyway, so these threats of secession are rather pointless to me.

[orafi]

is there like a facebook group for this?

[orafi]

Small problem: Montana wasn't an independent state before it joined the union. It was a U.S. territory.

Only the 13 original states, Vermont, and Texas have any real substance to any claim of reversion to independent status as they were temselves independent.

If Montana's contract is voided, then they wouldn't be independent, but would revert back to territorial status.


Edit: I'm thinking the USSC is going to come down on the side of an individual right anyway, so these threats of secession are rather pointless to me.


what does the constitution specifically say about this? wouldn't a state be a state and eligible for sovereignty because of that?

[Andrew-Austin]

Go for it Montana, the US military is all over in the middle east.

[JWZguy]

When is the Supreme Court supposed to make their ruling?

Anyway yeah. I'd move there. If they allow me to "immigrate" afterwards...maybe my huge gun collection will prove I deserve to be a citizen of the new United State of Montana.

[James Madison]

Ugh...I can't stand it when people talk about a 'living, breathing' Constitution. They just use it as an excuse to take our liberties.

[FSP-Rebel]

I welcome Montana to secede and set the precedent for others to follow. But, I do think that one of the original 13 states would have a better shot at it...

[pahs1994]

If Montana were to secede, we can all go there and then we wouldn't have to buy our own island like some have suggested!

[orafi]

If Montana were to secede, we can all go there and then we wouldn't have to buy our own island like some have suggested!

or lay the foundation for sea colonies...

[Acala]

It is my hope that the coming economic calamity so weakens the Federal government and so infuriates the people that several states will be able to secede without a fight. And then some of them will revert to the ideas of liberty as a foundation for their new society.

Hey, I can dream!

[mediahasyou]

A brokered union is the best thing that could happen to the People of America.

The feds don't realize that the states are everything, and they had nothing. Without the states they have no money, no job. Succession directly threatens the feds and makes them take a second look at how they use their power.

[James Madison]

A brokered union is the best thing that could happen to the People of America.

The feds don't realize that the states are everything, and they had nothing. Without the states they have no money, no job. Succession directly threatens the feds and makes them take a second look at how they use their power.

The problem is the feds have the military.

[RideTheDirt]

The problem is the feds have the military.
I don't think they would strike a state, but the feds never cease to amaze and disapoint me :(

[UnReconstructed]

They will strike a state as they have in the past.

[liberteebell]

Go for it Montana, the US military is all over in the middle east.

ROFLOL! :D:D:D

(Actually, jorge booosh just signed some agreement with Canada so their military can come down and help out if necessary. Isn't that just lovely??)

[Matt Collins]

It is my hope that the coming economic calamity so weakens the Federal government and so infuriates the people that several states will be able to secede without a fight. I would rather just see another Constitutional convention. Unfortunately in today's climate I am sure it'll be written much like the UN charter :mad:

[mediahasyou]

The problem is the feds have the military.

The first revolutionary war involved the weak country, America, against the world power, England. With America now the world power, the second revolutionary war will have to be the same.

God bless our souls.

[Matt Collins]

or lay the foundation for sea colonies...
Enter the Principality of SeaLand:
http://www.sealandgov.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealand

[RideTheDirt]

The first revolutionary war involved the weak country, America, against the world power, England. With America now the world power, the second revolutionary war will have to be the same.

God bless our souls.
Britain was fighting more wars than the revolution at the time.

[christagious]

Britain was fighting more wars than the revolution at the time.

and the Feds will probably, by this time, be in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, maybe Pakistan, maybe Venezuela, the list could possibly go on. They do have nukes though, think they'd use them on their own soil?

[Matt Collins]

They do have nukes though, think they'd use them on their own soil?McCain is crazy enough to do it. But it wouldn't be their soil if the state has severed ties from the Union now would it?

[Anti Federalist]

and the Feds will probably, by this time, be in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, maybe Pakistan, maybe Venezuela, the list could possibly go on. They do have nukes though, think they'd use them on their own soil?

And a percieved union of seceding states could very well engage the help of other nations that have a vested interest in seeing the power monoply of the District of Criminals shattered.

This is not a laughable idea to me. In fact, it represents the only real chance at securing our freedom, again.

[Matt Collins]

And a percieved union of seceding states could very well engage the help of other nations that have a vested interest in seeing the power monoply of the District of Criminals shattered.

This is not a laughable idea to me. In fact, it represents the only real chance at securing our freedom, again.Last time I checked Montana is kind of land locked. However trying to blockade their border might be a tad difficult only because it's so large.

In fact just a quick glance at the map, it appears they might have more border than the US / Mexican border or very close to it. And we all know how good the US Gov is about being able to guard it. :rolleyes:

[CoreyBowen999]

Montana has no access to the ocean.. They would be sorrounded by the US and Canada.. dosen't spell good for them if they do suceed

[Matt Collins]

Remember what happened to Key West when it seceded and became the Conch Republic (for a few minutes)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conch_republic

[Agent CSL]

If Montana does secede, which I hope it does, I hope other states go with it. This will be very big.

Plus isn't some Indian tribe trying to make their own nation, and they own a lot of land? They're right by Montana to my knowledge.

[AmericaFyeah92]

I just hope they wouldn't treat this as "seceding" from America, but rather as "liberating" themselves from the federal government while remaining part of the American people. That would encourage more states to join.

I live in the northwest, and i know there are plenty of "super-patriots" up here would take kindly to the idea

[Carehn]

Last time I checked Montana is kind of land locked. However trying to blockade their border might be a tad difficult only because it's so large.
In fact just a quick glance at the map, it appears they might have more border than the US / Mexican border or very close to it. And we all know how good the US Gov is about being able to guard it. :rolleyes:

If states start checking out the people that live there will likely be all about it. The feds would have a much harder time keeping the states in line when their own bureaucrats and foot solders are fighting for the other side.

[Flash]

I hope Montana does leave, then we can move there.

[christagious]

I hope Montana does leave, then we can move there.

yep.

Free State Project 2!!!

[foofighter20x]

what does the constitution specifically say about this? wouldn't a state be a state and eligible for sovereignty because of that?

The issue of what the constitution says is irrelevant as Montana has not based its claim on the constitution, but instead on common law principles over contracts.

My opinion is that if Montana wanted to secede on grounds of breach of contract, then that would simply revert the State to status quo ante: territorial status, and subject to complete federal control.