No Guns for Negroes

I found this rather informative and felt I should repost for others to see

"No Guns for Negroes"

JPFO's movie, "No Guns for Negroes" -exposes the racist history of American gun control laws. Every person who supports gun control laws must be shown this film or gun ownership will cease to exist in America.

Don't become a former gun owner because you chose not to show "No Guns for Negroes "to every one you know.
http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/movieplay-ngn-swf.htm

Death by Gun Control

The chart doesn't post right here on the blogger so attached is a PDF file so you can get a better idea of timelines.

Addition - For easier chart printing, download the Genocide Chart PDF file, which has just a text synopsis of this page included. When the gun prohibitionists quote a statistic about how many people are killed by firearms misuse, the discussion sometimes bogs down into whose crime stats to believe and how to count crimes vs. the defensive firearm uses. Death by Gun Control works on a level that nobody can dispute: documented world history. In the 20th Century:

• Governments murdered four times as many civilians as were killed in all the international and domestic wars combined.
• Governments murdered millions more people than were killed by common criminals.

How could governments kill so many people? The governments had the power - and the people, the victims, were unable to resist. The victims were unarmed. Truth They Cannot Refute Death by Gun Control delivers the essential - and gut wrenching -- truth that the anti-self defense "gun control" advocates never try to refute. They simply cannot refute the facts or the formula. Here's the Formula: Hatred + Government + Disarmed Civilians = Genocide What makes the argument so powerful? Two factors. First, it makes common sense: unarmed defenseless people have no hope against armed aggressors. Second, it states the historical truth: evil governments did wipe out 170,000,000 innocent non-military lives in the 20th Century alone. Using the facts in Death by Gun Control, you can take down the enemies of the Bill of Rights. The rights-destroyers have no answers to these facts. They have no excuses for their killer ideas. JPFO's work has already borne fruit. John R. Bolton, an under-Secretary of State for the United States, this year urged the United Nations to recognize how an "oppressed non-state group defending itself from a genocidal government" will need ready access to firearms. Mr. Bolton might have been the first U.S. official in modern history to have argued to the UN that private citizens might need to be armed against their own killer governments.

Paul Harvey, the world-renowned and much admired radio commentator, last year reportedly broadcast the JPFO-produced facts linking "gun control" to the genocide of millions of unarmed civilians. Country by country, Mr. Harvey counted the murdered victims of civilian disarmament policies.

http://www.jpfo.net/filegen-a-m/deathgc.htm#chart

Montana gun law targets states’ rights clash

Montana is trying to trigger a battle over gun control – and perhaps make a larger point about what many folks in this ruggedly independent state regard as a meddlesome federal government.

In a bill passed by the Legislature earlier this month, the state is asserting that guns manufactured in Montana and sold in Montana to people who intend to keep their weapons in Montana are exempt from federal gun registration, background check and dealer-licensing rules because no state lines are crossed.

That notion is all but certain to be tested in court.

The immediate effect of the law could be limited, since Montana is home to just a few specialty gun makers, known for high-end hunting rifles and replicas of Old West weapons, and because their out-of-state sales would automatically trigger federal control.

Still, much bigger prey lies in Montana’s sights: a legal showdown over how far the federal government’s regulatory authority extends.

“It’s a gun bill, but it’s another way of demonstrating the sovereignty of the state of Montana,” said Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer, who signed the bill.

Carrie DiPirro, a spokeswoman for the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, had no comment on the legislation. But the federal government has argued that it has authority under the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution to regulate guns because they can so easily be transported across state lines.

Guns and states’ rights both play well in Montana, the birthplace of the right-wing Freemen militia and a participant in the Sagebrush Rebellion of the 1970s and ’80s, during which Western states clashed with Washington over grazing and mineral extraction on federal land.

Montana’s leading gun rights organization, more hard-core than the National Rifle Association, boasts it has moved 50 bills through the Legislature over the past 25 years. And lawmakers in the Big Sky State have rebelled against federal control of everything from wetland protection to the national Real ID system.

Under the new law, guns intended only for Montana would be stamped “Made in Montana.” The drafters of the law hope to set off a legal battle with a simple Montana-made youth-model single-shot, bolt-action .22 rifle. They plan to find a “squeaky clean” Montanan who wants to send a note to the ATF threatening to build and sell about 20 such rifles without federal dealership licensing.

If the ATF tells them it’s illegal, they will sue and take the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, if they can.

Similar measures have also been introduced in Texas and Alaska.

“I think states have got to stand up or else most of their rights are going to be buffaloed by the administration and by Congress,” said Texas state Rep. Leo Berman.

Critics say exempting guns from federal laws anywhere would undermine efforts to stem gun violence everywhere.

“Guns cross state lines and they do so constantly, and this is a Sagebrush Rebellion-type effort to light some sort of fire and get something going that’s pleasing to the gun nuts and that has very little actual sense,” said Peter Hamm, communications director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

In a 2005 case, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the enforcement of federal laws against marijuana in California, even if the drug is for medical purposes and is grown and used within the state. The court found that since marijuana produced in California is indistinguishable from pot grown outside the state, the federal government must have the authority to regulate both to enforce national drug laws.

Randy Barnett, the lawyer and constitutional scholar who represented the plaintiff in the California case, said that Montana could argue that its “Made in Montana”-stamped guns are unique and sufficiently segregated as to lie outside federal regulation.

Supporters of the measure say the main purpose is not extending gun freedoms, but curbing what they regard as an oppressive interpretation of the interstate commerce clause and federal overreach into such things as livestock management and education.

“Firearms are inextricably linked to the history and culture of Montana, and I’d like to support that,” said Montana state Rep. Joel Boniek, the bill’s sponsor. “But I want to point out that the issue here is not about firearms. It’s about state rights.”

Source: SF Gate

Beck speaks to UT and TX

Glenn speaks with leaders in Utah and Texas about their plans to implement laws similar to those passed recently in Montana, namely, the refusal to allow federal regulation of guns, ammo, etc

Gov Brian Schweitzer on the new MT gun law

I will be one of the first to admit Schweitzer isn't top of my list of favorite people in the world, BUT when Bozeman had the gas explosion he was here didn't go to a renaming ceremony he was scheduled to be at, he went to where there was a tragedy. And now he did what is right not maybe his political counterparts said he should do...he did was was right for the people of Montana. For this I say thank you Brian for not letting your own political agenda get in the way just because you are democrat, but looked out for our state, please continue to do so.

“It’s a gun bill, but it’s another way of demonstrating the sovereignty of the state of Montana,” Democrat Schweitzer said.

House Bill 246, the Montana-made gun bill, cleared the Legislature easily before reaching the governor’s desk.

Its supporters next plan to find a “squeaky clean” Montanan who wants to send a note to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives threatening to build and sell about 20 rifles without federal dealership licensing. If the ATF says it’s illegal, the gun bill’s backers plan to file a lawsuit in federal court with the goal of launching a legal showdown that lands in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Montana Shooting Sports Association, which drafted the bill, has said it will raise the money to pay for any legal costs.

“It doesn’t cost us any money and I like guns,” Schweitzer said after signing the bill.

“I like big guns, I like little guns, I like pistols, I like rifles, and I would like to buy a gun that’s made in Montana,” Schweitzer said.

Rest of the mid April article in the Helena paper

Montana Firearms Freedom Act

WOOHOO WTG MONTANA!!!!

Ok now that I said that. and noticing there isn't a lot of national news on our new fabulous law yes I am blogging on it so there is more in the google search! Yes I am pleased with the new Montana law it is needed to protect our states citizens from the Federal Government's BS anti gun laws trying to be passed. I hear Texas is in the process of passing similar law to our new gun law here in MT. I am pleased to hear this since TX is my birth state and a pending state in which we could end up in for medical attn for our daughter. Too bad they don't have permn license plate options like we have here in MT.

Now I am sure there are many upset over our new law, but guess what....MT does not want people like you here in our state! If you want the Fed running your life go back to CA,NY,MA or DC. MT wants people that take responsibility for their own lives and defense! If you want to be sheep, go ahead. We aren't the only state with this law others are now pending...Montana just happened to have the balls to go first! Now if the rest of the state legislatures will stand up and be counted, maybe the nuts in Washington will begin to get the message and be backed down..Obama is forcing a revolution as much as he is pushing this recession into full swing. This law re-affirms the 2nd, 9th and 10th amendments.

The state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. I mean REVOLUTIONARY.

The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana . The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal - confiscation of privately owned firearms. I am guessing this is one of those challenges Obama is not liking;0)

Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch.

Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obama's face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face. Gotta love it...win win in Montana's court.

Important Points - If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. Since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA , the very document that empowers the USA .

Silencers made in Montana and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered. Now this was added in there more as a political issue I am sure as the law even mentions the screws and such to hold the gun together. I laughed at first, but then realized they were trying to cover all gray areas the best they could. Silencers were useful tools for gun enthusiasts and hunters.

There would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. So in a short period of time there would be millions and millions of unregistered untraceable guns in Montana . Way to go Montana! I am sure just like the no speed limit we use to have regulations will be put into affect at some point for guidelines so to speak.

Let us see what Obama does. If he hits Montana hard they will probably vote to secede from the USA. The governor of Texas has already been refusing Federal money because he does not want to agree to the conditions that go with it and he has been saying secession is a right they have as sort of a threat. Things are no longer the same with the USA. Do not be deceived by Obama acting as if all is the same, it is not.


Text of the New Law

HOUSE BILL NO. 246

INTRODUCED BY J. BONIEK, BENNETT, BUTCHER, CURTISS, RANDALL, WARBURTON

AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:

Section 1. Short title. [Sections 1 through 6] may be cited as the "Montana Firearms Freedom Act".

Section 2. Legislative declarations of authority. The legislature declares that the authority for [sections 1 through 6] is the following:
(1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889..
(2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of Montana certain rights, as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the 9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.
(4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.(5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was approved by congress and the people of Montana, and the right exists, as it was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

Section 3. Definitions. As used in [sections 1 through 6], the following definitions apply:
(1) "Borders of Montana" means the boundaries of Montana described in Article I, section 1, of the 1889 Montana constitution.
(2) "Firearms accessories" means items that are used in conjunction with or mounted upon a firearm but are not essential to the basic function of a firearm, including but not limited to telescopic or laser sights, magazines, flash or sound suppressors, folding or aftermarket stocks and grips, speedloaders, ammunition carriers, and lights for target illumination.
(3) "Generic and insignificant parts" includes but is not limited to springs, screws, nuts, and pins.
(4) "Manufactured" means that a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition has been created from basic materials for functional usefulness, including but not limited to forging, casting, machining, or other processes for working materials.

Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.

Section 5. Exceptions. [Section 4] does not apply to:
(1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one person;
(2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than 1 1/2 inches and that uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;
(3) ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or
(4) a firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of the trigger or other firing device.

Section 6. Marketing of firearms. A firearm manufactured or sold in Montana under [sections 1 through 6] must have the words "Made in Montana" clearly stamped on a central metallic part, such as the receiver or frame.

Section 7. Codification instruction. [Sections 1 through 6] are intended to be codified as an integral part of Title 30, and the provisions of Title 30 apply to [sections 1 through 6].

Section 8. Applicability. [This act] applies to firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition that are manufactured, as defined in [section 3], and retained in Montana after October 1, 2009.

Ernest Hancock's website

Offered by John C.

URGENT Congress is going to vote

Congress is moving closer to a showdown over the largest expansion of government in modern U.S. history -- a bill which would require virtually every single American to buy government-approved health insurance, whether they wanted it or not. And, in the process, that bill would feed all of your most confidential medical data into an enormous database, which could be used to take away your guns.

This is a bit complicated. But here's where we are:

Once a year, the 1974 Budget Act allows Congress to pass a bill -- solely for the purpose of balancing the budget -- and that bill cannot be filibustered in the Senate. Hence, it can be passed with only fifty Democrat votes (plus the vice president), without any Republican support.

Now, that supposed "budget-balancing bill" is called the "reconciliation bill" -- and it can only be created if the annual budget resolution mandates it.
http://gunowners.org/a042709.htm

Obama Positioning For Backdoor Gun Control

Obama Positioning For Backdoor Gun Control
By Chuck Baldwin
April 24, 2009


This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090424.html


On his recent trip to Central America, President Barack Obama did more than
cozy up to Marxist dictators; he also signed onto an international treaty
that could, in effect, be used as backdoor gun control. It appears that
Obama wants to use international treaties to do what congressional
legislation is not able to do: further restrict the right of the American
people to keep and bear arms.

Obama is using the oft-disproved contention that "90% of the guns recovered
in Mexico come from the United States" as the stated basis of his support
for the international treaty he is promoting. The treaty is formally known
as the Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and
Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives and Other Related Materials
(CIFTA) treaty. The Bill Clinton administration signed the treaty back in
1997, but the U.S. Senate has never ratified the treaty. Obama intends to
change that.

To date, 33 nations in the western hemisphere have signed the treaty. The
U.S. is one of four nations that have yet to ratify it. According to one
senior Obama administration official, passing the treaty is a "high
priority" for the President.

If ratified, the treaty would require the United States to adopt "strict
licensing requirements, mark firearms when they are made and imported to
make them easier to trace, and establish a process for sharing information
between national law enforcement agencies investigating [gun] smuggling."

Senator John Kerry, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee promises to
"work for its [the CIFTA treaty's] approval by the Senate."

Should the Senate ratify CIFTA, Americans who reload ammunition would be
required to get a license from the government, and factory guns and
ammunition would be priced almost out of existence due to governmental
requirements to "mark" each one manufactured. Even the simple act of adding
an after-market piece of equipment to a firearm, such as a scope or bipod,
or reassembling a gun after cleaning it could fall into the category of
"illicit manufacturing" of firearms and require government license and
oversight.

In addition, CIFTA would authorize the U.S. federal government (and open the
door to international entities) to supervise and regulate virtually the
entire American firearms industry. Making matters worse is the fact that, as
a treaty, this Act does not have to be passed by both houses of Congress,
nor is it subject to judicial oversight. All Obama needs to do in order to
enact this unconstitutional and egregious form of gun control is convince a
Democratic-controlled Senate to pass it.

Obviously, the United Nations, from its very inception, has been one of the
world's most ardent gun control proponents. As anyone who has ever driven by
the U.N. building in New York City knows, a huge statue of an American-made
revolver with its barrel twisted in the shape of a pretzel greets every
visitor. The CIFTA treaty is one of the U.N.'s pet projects in order to
achieve this long-held ambition.

Of course, Obama is a longtime liberal radical when it comes to the Second
Amendment. As a senator, he voted against the Second Amendment at every
opportunity. He has never seen a piece of gun control legislation that he
did not support. And as I have said before in this column, gun control is
high on the list of priorities for the newly elected President Barack Obama.

For Obama to intimate that 90% of the firearms used by Mexican drug cartels
come from the United States reveals either a truly dishonest and deceptive
mind or a totally misinformed and na�ve one. Many studies have thoroughly
debunked the 90% myth, including one by William La Jeunesse and Maxim Lott
in a recent Fox News report. According to these researchers, the real number
is closer to 17%.

According to La Jeunesse and Lott, Mexican drug cartels, which control
billions of dollars, obtain the overwhelming majority of their guns from the
Black Market, Russian crime syndicates, South America, China, Guatemala, and
even from the Mexican army.

In fact, Mexico is a virtual arms bazaar: AK-47s from China; fragmentation
grenades from South Korea; shoulder-fired rocket launchers from Spain,
Israel and former Soviet bloc dealers; assault weapons from China; and
explosives from Korea--just to name a few sources.

In addition, according to Mexican Congressman Robert Badillo, more than
150,000 Mexican soldiers have deserted in just the last six years. The vast
majority of them took their weapons with them, including the standard issue
M-16 assault rifle made in Belgium.

And please do not forget that corruption within the Mexican government is
rampant. Many news sources have covered stories of how drug cartels bribe
Mexican officials. An article in the New York Times last year reported, "One
of Mexico's most notorious drug cartels made huge cash payments to officials
in the Mexican attorney general's office in exchange for confidential
information on anti-drug operations . . . the cartel might have had an
informant inside the American embassy."

The Mexican drug cartels control a multi-billion dollar enterprise that has
more than enough resources to obtain planeloads of weapons from all over the
world. For Obama to assert that 90% of the Mexican drug cartels' firearms
come from the United States is a bald-faced lie! Again, either Obama is
stupid and na�ve or he is deliberately lying to the American people in order
to "sell" the CIFTA treaty to the U.S. Senate. I think we all know that Mr.
Obama is anything but stupid and na�ve.

Read more about the CIFTA treaty at

http://gunowners.org/a042109.htm

In addition to the CIFTA treaty, liberal Chicago Democrat Congressman Bobby
Rush has introduced H.R. 45 in the House of Representatives. This bill is
anything but subtle. It is an in-your-face gun control bill that would make
"Mr. Gun Control," the late Senator Howard Metzenbaum, shout Hallelujah.

H.R. 45 would require a federal license for all handguns and semiautomatics,
including the ones you already possess. It would require handgun and
semi-auto owners to be thumbprinted at a police station and sign a
certificate that the gun will not be kept in a place where it could be used
for the defense of the gun owner's family.

Read more about H.R. 45 at

http://gunowners.org/hr45ana.htm

In all likelihood, H.R. 45 is probably a long shot at passing both houses of
Congress, albeit gun owners should never take any proposed gun control bill
for granted. The CIFTA treaty, however, is much more dangerous due to its
subtlety and subterfuge, the less cumbersome process of passage, and the
fact that it makes U.S. gun owners subject to international gun control
laws.

All in all, freedom in America is on the Obama White House chopping block.
And this much is certain: if the American people do not retain the right to
keep and bear arms, every other freedom we hold dear will quickly disappear
as well. Moreover, if we do retain the right to keep and bear arms, it will
only be because enough of us--and our state and federal legislators--resist
the tyrannical gun control machinations of Barack Obama. And that means
defeating the CIFTA treaty and H.R. 45.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

(c) Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.

To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/subscribe.php

To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/unsubscribe.php

Chuck Baldwin's commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck's web site address is included.

Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida. When responding, please include your
name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will
be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.

Please visit Chuck's web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com

Have Gun May Travel??

I came across this article from a Florida paper that came thru an RV forum I frequent and wow the stir this has caused!! Seems many believe in gun rights and a couple that not so much. I had a link about each states gun rights that I can not find at this time so will post it as soon as I do. I have refrained from commenting on the forum on the topic as I believe as I do and nothing anyone says or does will change my mind and I am sure for the most part vice versa.

Here's the article:

The inherent novelty of a recreational vehicle is the convenience of bringing your home with you wherever you go. RV enthusiasts can travel on their own schedule and take a break from noisy neighbors and lawn maintenance.

But, like any hobby, there are hazards. A broken-down RV on a dark rural road can make an easy target for unsavory characters.

Some argue that traveling with a gun is the best protection for these situations. But that can be a potentially criminal undertaking when traveling from state to state, as many RV owners do.

For example, consider a trip across the state line from Kentucky to Ohio. It's perfectly legal to have a gun in the glove box in Kentucky - whether it's locked or not. Cross over the border, however, and it's a misdemeanor.

In Maryland, it's illegal to transport a gun unless the driver is headed to target practice. South Carolina and Florida do not consider a loaded gun in the glove box a concealed weapon.

Typically, laws are generally the same from state to state, "but not with gun control," said Scott Kappas, an attorney and author of the Traveler's Guide to the Firearms Laws of the Fifty States.

Kappas was inspired to write his book after his father, "an avid RVer," asked for some advice about traveling from state to state with his firearm. After a list was compiled, it made sense to publish it in book form, Kappas said.

"It's something that comes up quite a bit," he said. When crossing state lines, drivers can go from "law abiding citizen to felon."

The book is updated on an annual basis as gun laws change across the states.

Another tricky legal question in regard to RVs is search warrants. The general consensus is a search warrant is required to search a home, but not a vehicle.

But what if your home is a vehicle?

Most states consider an RV a vehicle when the four wheels are rolling or it can be readily moved. When it's parked and hooked up to utilities, it becomes a home. The exception is Texas and Washington, which consider an RV a residence regardless of its status.

"The courts have interpreted it that way," Kappas said.

http://www2.hernandotoday.com/content/2009/apr/17/ha-have-gun-may-travel/news/

Gun Control

Ok I have to blog this because you know I have kids and since birth what you may not know is they are use to seeing guns laying around.  When babies and much younger never was it loaded and even now it really isn't loaded if out, but more of a reminder it is in the house.  Even if we didn't have guns in our home our kids would have beent taught about them in the event the encountered them elsewhere.  

We had reason for this...what do kids go after??...things they are told they can't have or is forbidden up out of reach.  After having 3 kids the one thing I learned was never under estimate them if something is high they will figure a way to get to it...especially my middle child.  Instead of hiding guns from them how about teaching them.  OMG what a concept!  A parent has to be responsible? WHAT is this world coming to?  

If we are not going to take the time to teach them how to properly use these tools as that is what a gun is...a tool.  Then yes they will be harmed. They could get hurt with a knife or an axe.  A gun is just a tool...if you don't teach a child how to use it you and others will be harmed.  We chose to teach our children how to use these tools.  They have rules set by us as their PARENTS and consequences were laid in place if they went against our rules.  If you can't teach your child responsibility how are you going to teach them anything.  This is the most basic rule out there.  I don't care if it is a fork, manners, respect, axe, gun, knife etc teach responsibility you can't teach that by taking away....sorry just doesn't work that way.  Life is full of dangerous and hazerdous situations. What are you going to do keep your child in a bubble? I would love to protect them...and the only way to do this is to spend time and teach them- not lock them away from everything.  

simple example that most should be able to understand: I could walk out in the street not knowing that I should look first and get hurt...but because I was taught to look I know to do this so that I don't get hurt.  

I homeschool and CHOOSE to spend time and teach them.  All these laws and regulations is telling me that only the government can teach and take care of them is bullshit!  I don't need or want the government controlling my every aspect of life.  

What do you think that our forefathers and pioneers did with their guns? they didn't have gun locks and they would have looked at you like you were crazy. It all comes down to education by parents. That is what is wrong with kids today. Parents don't live up to their responsibilities as parents.  Teach the children about guns what they are to be used for give them respect for them as weapons not toys. kids in the old days knew how to use them by the time they were nine and younger.. look it up there are historical references to children helping to defend their homes against indian attack.  It comes down to parenting, parenting, OH and parenting. 

Unlike Hilary maybe it took a village to raise her kid, maybe she didn't have time I don't know don't care...but I don't need her help or the rest of a community to help raise mine.  I will listen to advice out there ...use what sounds good toss the rest.

I am an AMERICAN......without our 2nd ammendment right we have no first.  My husband and I have chosen to live in MT because of their agreement with the United States.  Aside from all its' beauty to the naked eye Montana has decided to live responsibly.  this state has enough resources to whether the storm lord god Obama.  I will NOT become a socialist just because he deems it is the right thing.  Maybe it is for him.  Obviously Yugo Shavez has a place for him in his country...fine go there.  As for the rest of his crew go with him this was nation was built on independent issues for a cause this can happen again.  Remember in the revolutionary war freedom was won by the blood of the common man not elitist self righteous $%@**$& so go ahead and put HR45 into play.  I have no problem fighting this to the end.

Maybe before you start debating 'gun ownership in homes', you need to address a MUCH GREATER Problem: the neglect, malnutrition, and abuses of children from alcohol AND drugs, prescription and illegal, in homes!  

Just because some parents are irresponsible don't punish me. 

They are after our guns again...Imagine that!

Ok seriously Montana we need HB246!!!  THIS bill would relieve us from the BS of federal laws.  Lets make this pass.  

HB246

Montana lawmakers fired another shot in battles for states’ rights as they supported letting some Montana gun owners and dealers skip reporting their transactions to the federal government.

Under House Bill 246, firearms made in Montana and used in Montana would be exempt from federal regulation. The same would be true for firearm accessories and ammunition made and sold in the state.

“What we need here is for Montana to be able to handle Montana’s business and affairs,’’ Republican Rep. Joel Boniek told fellow lawmakers Saturday. The wilderness guide from Livingston defeated Republican incumbent Bruce Malcolm in last spring’s election.

Boniek’s measure aims to circumvent federal authority over interstate commerce, which is the legal basis for most gun regulation in the United States. The bill potentially could release Montanans from both federal gun registration requirements and dealership licensing rules. Since the state has no background-check laws on its own books, the legislation also could free gun purchasers from that requirement.

“Firearms are inextricably linked to the history and culture of Montana, and I’d like to support that,’’ Boniek said. “But I want to point out that the issue here is not about firearms. It’s about state rights.’’

The House voted 64-36 for the bill on Saturday. If it clears a final vote, the measure will go to the Senate.

House Republicans were joined by 14 Democrats in passing the measure.

NOW FOR the LATEST WITH FEDERAL BS

"Only tyrants fear an armed populace."

Please send this to everybody on your list... this is Obama gun control by secrecy.

Very Important for you to be aware of a new bill HR 45 introduced into the House.

This is the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sale Act of 2009.

We just learned yesterday about this on the Peter Boyles radio program.

Even gun shop owners didn't know about this because it is flying under the radar.

To find out about this - go to any government website and type in HR 45 or Google HR 45 Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sales Act of 2009. You will get all the information.

Basically this would make it illegal to own a firearm - any rifle with a clip or ANY pistol unless:

It is registered

You are fingerprinted

You supply a current Driver's License

You supply your Social Security #

You will submit to a physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing

Each update - change or ownership through private or public sale must be reported and costs $25 - Failure to do so you automatically lose the right to own a firearm and are subject up to a year in jail.

There is a child provision clause on page 16 section 305 stating a child-access provision. Gun must be locked and inaccessible to any child under 18.

They would have the right to come and inspect that you are storing your gun safely away from accessibility to children and fine is punishable for up to 5 yrs. in prison.

If you think this is a joke - go to the website and take your pick of many options to read this. It is long and lengthy. But, more and more people are becoming aware of this. Pass the word along. Any hunters in your family - pass this along.

Peter Boyles is on this and having guests. Listen to him on KHOW 630 a.m. in the morning. He suggests the best way to fight this is to tell all your friends about it and "spring into action". Also he suggests we all join a pro-gun group like the Colorado Rifle Association, hunting associations, gun clubs and especially the NRA.

This is just a "termite" approach to complete confiscation of guns and disarming of our society to the point we have no defense - chip away a little here and there until the goal is accomplished before anyone realizes it. (Did Obama promise transparency? It seems his motives are more and more transparent while his methods are hidden in back rooms.)

This is one to act on whether you own a gun or not.

If you take my gun, only the criminal will have one to use against me. HR 45 only makes me/us less safe. After working with convicts for 26 years I know this bill, if passed, would make them happy and in less danger from their victims.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.45:

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/show

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-45

Please.. copy and send this out to EVERYONE in the USA

Ammunition Accountability Legislation

It has already begun......

Remember how Obama said that he wasn't going to take your guns? Well, it seems that his allies in the anti-gun world have no problem with taking your ammo!

 

The bill that is being pushed in 18 states (including Illinois and Indiana ) requires all ammunition to be encoded by the manufacture a data base of all ammunition sales. So they will know how much you buy and what calibers. Nobody can sell any ammunition after June 30, 2009 unless the ammunition is coded.

 

Any privately held uncoded ammunition must be destroyed by July 1, 2011. (Including hand loaded ammo.) They will also charge a .05 cent tax on every round so every box of ammo you buy will go up at least $2.50 or more!

 

If they can deprive you of ammo they do not need to take your gun!

 

This legislation is currently pending in 18 states: Alabama, Arizona, California, Connecticut , Hawaii , Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey , New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Washington

 

Send to your friends in these states AND fight to dissolve this BILL!!

 

To find more about the anti-gun group that is sponsoring this legislation and the specific legislation for each state, go to: http://ammunitionaccountability.org/Legislation.htm