The time has come to throw our support behind the efforts of several Montana Elected Officials in their efforts to get the Supreme Court of the United States to recognize that a decision in D.C. v. Heller that interprets the Second Amendment of the U. S. Constitution as being a “Collective Right” as opposed to an “Individual Right” would violate Montana’s Compact with the United States, the contract by which Montana entered the Union in 1889. (Send a message of support!)
The Montana Resolution’s position finds its basis in the law of contracts, compacts, and treaties and is eloquently set forth in the conclusion of the Resolution’s Argument:
In 1889, Montana and the other several states entered into a contract - struck a bargain. That contract was reduced to writing and is found today as Montana’s Compact with the United States and is recorded at Article I of the Montana Constitution. In that contract, via adoption of the corollary and required Ordinance 1, Montana adopted the U.S. Constitution, definitely including the Second Amendment. Congress and the President, acting as agents for the states, allowed Montana into the union contingent upon Montana proffering an acceptable state constitution. That constitution, as it was accepted by Congress and the President, included the reservation of the right of “any person” to bear arms, a clearly individual right maintained and asserted today in exactly the same verbiage used in 1889.
The arguments set forth in the Montana Resolution make the case that if a collective right is found then the United States would have breached the contract/compact it made in good faith with the people of Montana.[i] This could ultimately lead to Montana deciding that they are no longer in the Union. What would President Obama do? I am drawn to this argument because I believe that the Second Amendment was the founding father’s ace card to protect against the rise of a dictator or fascist government in the United States. The People, each person, might have some degree of power to stand against whoever is threatening to corrupt of the highest principles that were articulated in the Constitution.
So why is this important today? What’s the urgency? If the 08 Election goes as many have said, we could very well have a House and Senate led by a bigger Democratic majority. While many Democrats and Republicans are in the middle politically, basically in touch with the core of American values and people, and want to work together (I hope) to pass laws that support our values, our interests, and respect our military - given the current political environment, it is hard to do. Especially given that many in today’s Democrat Party seem highly influenced by an extreme left that makes a lot of us feel as though they really do hate America, despise our military and our principles. My opinion of the legislative process that this 2006 Congress, led by Sen. Reid and Rep. Pelosi, has operated under is that they are only interested in vilifying their way towards legislation. They do not appear interested in making legislation that protects individual liberties, allows us to quickly be energy independent, protects our economy or fosters individual responsibility. What they do seem to be intent on doing is creating the ultimate nanny state where the voters will be so dependent on them that they never get thrown out of office.
Additionally, there exists the distinct possibility that the Executive Branch might be led by the most liberal and inexperienced person ever to pursue the office, Sen. Obama. This is a person who has not been looked at very closely by the main stream media and the more we discover, the more the Senator’s past and current associations appear very suspect. This is a person whose campaign has been given a pass by the media for most things that they would have jumped on had it involved Sen. Clinton or Sen. McCain. If it were not for Talk Radio we would not have found out about any of Sen. Obama’s warts. The media and Obama supporters are also complicit in trying to cover up issues that continue to follow the Senator.[ii] This is a person if you look at his upbringing, past mentoring, and associations point to a life view that believes the government must control all aspects of our lives. This is a person that doesn’t know the difference between Memorial Day and Veteran’s day.[iii] I could go on and on.
Taken together, what this means is:
- That the Supreme Court have activist judges appointed when openings occur.
- That we will lose more and more access to opposing views. Talk Radio will be in jeopardy. It is the only voice that presents any news or opinions different from the mostly liberal main stream media.
- That our economy will have a drastic down turn because taxes will be increase on corporations to the point that they will not be competitive. They will only pass the extra cost on to the consumers (you and me). They will be forced to decrease their work force to reduce costs to stay as competitive as they can be.
- AND, The Second Amendment will be eviscerated.
This is why we should support the Montana Resolution. When the remaining 49 states go into their deep decline, they will be the model that we can look to for the way forward. They are good people, with strong ties to the earth, practical people, reasoned people and they are a part of a dying breed of people that still have a concept of limited government. We all need to be reminded of that. I do understand that the government will not let Montana withdraw from the Union. I’m a rural Independent Voter.
