Firearms Freedom Act: Six States Aboard

The Tennessee Senate has voted 22-7 to approve their state’s version of the Firearms Freedom Act (“the Act”). It passed in the House 87-1 and now awaits the governor’s signature. Despite any misgivings he may have, Bredesen knows that the legislature has the votes to override a veto, as they did today with another gun bill. The Act will pass, with or without the governor’s blessing.

Tennesse now joins Montana, in which Governor Schweitzer signed the same bill on April 15. The Montana Act goes into effect October 1st. Then we’ll see the fireworks.

It’s is also making headway in Texas, Alaska, South Carolina and Minnesota.

In each state, the Firearms Freedom Act asserts the state’s sovereignty within its own borders and rejects Federal regulation over arms possessed within the borders of those states. Traditionally, the Federal government has justified such meddling via the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution, as well as through 18 USC § 922.

Strictly speaking, the Fed’s mandate only applies in situations involving commerce across state lines, and in matters that could affect said activites. If an item is assembled in-state, from parts manufactured in-state, and it isn’t sold across state lines, then there’s a real question of whether of not the Federal government can interfere.

Taking cues from the 9th and 10th Amendments, many states are saying that it can’t.

This could end up being a logistical nightmare if the Fed doesn’t want to accept it. The Supreme Court has tradionally come down on the side of the Federal government in cases like this, beginning in 1942 with Wickward v. Filburn and reaching up to present day with Gonzales v Raich (2005).

If we were talking about one state, it might shape up to be something of a Mexican standoff. In this case, we’re talking about six, with possibly more to follow.

Tennessee and Montana have led the way, but the Act is gaining steam in Texas, where the bill requires the state to protect its citizens from Federal prosecutions. The Alaska Act passed 32-7 in the House, and is headed for the Senate. I expect Sarah Palin to look upon it favorably with those marvelous auburn eyes of hers.

S794 has been referred to the Judiciary Committee in South Carolina. Minnesota comes as a bit of a surprise, considering concealed carry was a major political dustup in 2005, but the Act was introduced as HF2376 on April 15.

As for Georgia, I’m a bit disappointed. The legislators I’ve spoken with seem to have no interest in the matter. Their reactions ranged from, “I like it, but I don’t think it’ll fly,” to, “you’re kidding, right?” This isn’t shaping up to be a good year for us. I’ve been given the impression that, when Congress reconvenes at the end of the month, most of their energy will go towards begging for Federal bailout money.

So much for the rugged individualism HR 280 seemed to proclaim.

As for what the Act does, I’ll quote directly from the Montana bill:

[Sections 1 and 2 provide definitions of state sovereignty, and affirms this through the 2nd, 9th and 10th Amendments.]

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.

All well and good, but notice the last bit. You can’t alter a firearm manufactured outside of the state, you’d have to start from the ground up. So, if you get a barrel made in another state, you’d still be running afoul of Federal law if you had it shortened to less than 16″ without the tax stamp. You could have a shorter one made in Montana, though.

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.

Subsection 4 invalidates the idea of manufacturing automatic weapons, as well as anything resembling a drop-in auto sear.

It also implies you can build silencers.  At that point, things could get very dangerous if the BATFE gets squirrely.  They tend to shoot people and burn churches down when that happens.

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.

Two questions remain here. First, how move from state to state without running afoul of the law? If Alaska has the same law, will they allow you to take a gun you made in Montana? At what point could it be considered “interstate commerce?”

Second, what happens if some yokel does sell a Montana gun across state lines? At what point can the Feds jump in and go, “OK, here’s our chance?”

We may end up writing a whole new chapter in jurisprudence here. In any case, a change like this won’t take place without some major drama.  I’m just hoping people don’t have to go to jail to test it.