More on Montana and Heller
Over at Free Constitution, they’re saying Montana has threatened secession.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
February 26th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
I spent some time yesterday searching and reading on this. Couldn’t find anything supporting the assertion that there’s a compact in place guaranteeing a particular 2A interpretation. Maybe there’s some historical precedent for it, but I didn’t find it in their argument.
Not that I’m arguing against a right to secede. And I appreciate the strong 2A stance taken by the folks up there. But this one looks like a misfire.
February 26th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Seems to me that if the Feds default on the statehood contract, then Montana doesn’t have to secede…
As the article states: “it would be the Union that has left Montana”.
February 26th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
That letter is awesome. That would be awesome if Montana really went down that road. While they probably wouldn’t, it still is awesome that someone in a prominent position within the Montana government would use such strong language.
February 26th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
It amazes me that people would actually take that seriously.
Montana would lose millions, if not billions, in federal dollars. Yes, they would be in control of their natural resources but considering that many of their residents moved there enjoy the relatively unspoiled condition of the surroundings I doubt they’ll be very willing to put up with increased mining and logging.
This is just intended for internal political consumption.
February 26th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
I think they would return to “Territory” status.