S. Dakota, Colorado File “Firearms Freedom Act” Bills

The movement continues nationwide as state after state gets on the bandwagon seeking 10th Amendment separation of state and federal government. Seemingly fed up with the strong arms and broadening Federal Government controls, states are hoping a law, the same or similar to Montana’s Firearms Freedom Act, will set the ball rolling to regain some of the states’ sovereignty.

For those not familiar, the nation’s first Firearms Freedom Act, appeared in Montana, sponsored by the Montana Shooting Sports Association. The Act essentially declares that any guns or gun parts manufactured in Montana and remain in Montana, cannot be regulated by the Federal Government. Montana passed that Act and it was signed by Gov. Schweitzer. The state is seeking declaratory judgment from the courts.

South Dakota and Colorado are the two latest states to file bills that are clones or near replicas of Montana’s bill. State Senator Larry Rhoden has introduced the South Dakota Firearms Freedom Act as SB 89. In Colorado, Senator Dave Schultheis has just introduced the Colorado Firearms Freedom Act as SB 10-092.

This now makes Firearms Freedom Acts passed in Montana and Tennessee, and introduced in these 21 states: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming.

It’s likely that FFAs will be introduced soon in West Virginia, New Mexico, Idaho, Kansas, Arkansas, Louisiana, North Carolina and possibly elsewhere.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Proposed New Jersey Bill Would Bring Back Bear Hunting

Assembly Bill 181, proposed by Assemblyman Gary Chiusano (R- Frankford Township) and Assemblywoman Alison Littell McHose (R- Franklin), would allow for the reinstatement of bear hunting as part of a scientific approach to wildlife management.

Under the rule of Gov. Jon Corzine and his appointed director of the Department of Environmental Protection, Lisa Jackson (now with Barack Obama’s administration), bear hunting was canceled, along with the state’s court-approved bear management plan.

AB 181 would put control and authority of wildlife issues back in the hands of the wildlife commission. The bill would prohibit any authority the DEP head had to this point to stop or overturn any commission approved wildlife management plan, including hunting.

Sportsmen in New Jersey are strongly encouraged to contact your representative in support of this bill.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Feds Respond to Firearms Freedom Act Lawsuit

Motion to Dismiss “Expected”

MISSOULA – The United States has made its first response to a lawsuit filed in federal district court in Missoula to test the Montana Firearms Freedom Act (MFFA), passed by the 2009 Legislature and signed into law by Governor Schweitzer.

The MFFA declares that any firearms, ammunition or firearms accessories made and retained in Montana are not subject to federal regulation under the power given to Congress in the U.S. Constitution to regulate commerce “among the several states.” The MFFA is a states’ rights challenge on Tenth Amendment grounds, with firearms serving as the vehicle for the challenge.

This lawsuit to validate the MFFA was brought by the Montana Shooting Sports Association (MSSA) and Second Amendment Foundation (SAF). The suit names U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder as defendant, and is referred to as MSSA v. Holder.

The first response to the lawsuit by the United States is a Motion to Dismiss, submitted January 19th and considered to be a standard procedural maneuver in lawsuits against the U.S government . This motion seeks to avoid the legal merits by asserting that the Plaintiffs lack standing to sue, that a justiciable controversy does not exist, and that prevailing case law is against Plaintiffs.

MSSA President Gary Marbut, also a Plaintiff in the lawsuit explained, “The first import of this response is that the legal game is now on. There was some concern that the defendants would forfeit the game with no response in an effort to prevent this important issue from being adjudicated properly. We are now beyond that hurdle.” However, the Motion to Dismiss by Washington also seeks to sidestep proper adjudication.

SAF Chairman Alan Gottlieb said, “We are disappointed but not surprised that the government would try to kill this suit on standing, rather than arguing about the merits of the case.”

The MFFA concept has gained traction across the Nation since its passage in Montana. Tennessee has enacted a clone of the MFFA, and other clones have been introduced in the state legislatures of 19 other states, including: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. . Ten or more additional states are expected to introduce yet more MFFA clones in the next few weeks. (See: http://www.FirearmsFreedomAct.com)

The U.S.’s Motion to Dismiss and Brief in Support are viewable at: http://FirearmsFreedomAct.com/montana-lawsuit-updates/

MSSA and SAF have assembled a litigation team for this effort consisting of three attorneys from Montana, one from New York, one from Florida and one from Arizona. Lead attorney for the Plaintiffs is Quentin Rhoades, partner the Missoula firm of Sullivan, Tabaracci and Rhoades. Other interested parties from both in and out of Montana are preparing to weigh in on this issue of national interest and national importance as amicus curiae (friends of the court).

Marbut commented, “The FFA concept has created a firestorm of interest nationwide. Lots of people and other states are watching carefully to see how Montana fares in this challenge to overbearing federal authority and to Washington’s attempt to control every detail of commerce in the Nation, especially including activity wholly confined within an individual state. That level of micro management certainly was not the intent of our founders when they gave Congress limited power in the Constitution to regulate commerce ‘among the states’.” (See: http://FirearmsFreedomAct.com/what-is-the-commerce-clause/)

MSSA is the primary political advocate for gun owners and hunters in Montana, having gotten 54 pro-gun and pro-hunting bills through the Montana Legislature in the past 25 years. SAF is a pro-gun foundation in Bellevue, Washington, established to press the rights of gun owners primarily in judicial fora. SAF has been a party to numerous lawsuits to assert the rights of gun owners across the Nation.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Montana High Court Says SSNs To Hunt And Fish Necessary

Gun Group Frustrated with Supreme Court Privacy Opinion Constitutional Rights for Sale?

MISSOULA – The Montana Shooting Sports Association (MSSA) was handed an unfavorable decision by the Montana Supreme Court in MSSA’s lawsuit claiming that it violates the right to privacy in the Montana Constitution for Montanans to be required to divulge a Social Security Number (SSN) in order to legally hunt and fish in Montana.

This MSSA lawsuit has been percolating through the courts since January of 2006. While MSSA argued that the requirement to provide an SSN to hunt and fish was unconstitutional, the State of Montana contended that it must collect SSNs to remain eligible under federal law for federal funds for the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services.

The lawsuit was handled by attorney Quentin Rhoades of Missoula.

In an Opinion released on January 19th, the Supreme Court sided with the State, holding that the SSN requirement to hunt and fish does not violate the constitutional right to privacy because the plaintiffs’ expectation that their SSNs be kept private is, as the Court put it, “unreasonable.” The Court held that SSNs are a government-issued identifier, not the personal property of the citizen to whom an SSN attaches, and that because the federal government issued the identifier, it is not reasonable to expect that it should be kept private from other government agencies, like the Montana DFWP. The court was further persuaded by the State’s argument that the federal money made available because of SSN collection was too important to risk.

MSSA President Gary Marbut commented, “While members of the Court talk a good game about constitutional rights, what they’ve said in this decision is that the constitutional rights that the people have reserved to themselves from government interference may be sold to a high bidder by state government if the price is right and the court-determined impact is low. We had hoped for relief for the people of Montana from the judicial branch. But, it appears that the judiciary is simply another governmental entity willing to support the legislative branch which passed the SSN requirement, and the executive branch which lobbied hard for the Legislature to pass the law.”

Continuing, Marbut said, “It will be interesting now to see what other constitutional rights will be sold to the high bidder, and how soon that will happen. How much federal money will the state get for tolerable infringement on freedom of the press, freedom of speech, or the right to bear arms? Certainly in this time of economic difficulty the state will be desperate for additional sources of revenue. Watch for other constitutional rights on Ebay as cash-strapped state agencies scratch for funding.”

MSSA was a plaintiff in the lawsuit. Individual named plaintiffs were Gary Marbut of Missoula, Robert Clark of Ryegate, and Carol Latta of Whitehall. Clark, a former Montana Highway Patrol officer and former legislator, quit buying hunting and fishing licenses when an SSN became required for that purchase. Latta suffered identity theft and tens of thousands of dollars of expense because her SSN was stolen. Marbut objected to surrendering his right to privacy in order to exercise his right to hunt.

The only remaining alternative for the plaintiffs in the lawsuit will be to ask the Legislature to respect the right to privacy by repealing the state law requiring SSNs to hunt and fish. However, it is predicted that the Department of Public Health and Human Services will use taxpayer funds to fiercely lobby the Legislature in opposition any such proposal.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Washington Introduces “Firearms Freedom Act” Bill

Representative Matt Shea has introduced HB 2709, the Washington Firearms Freedom Act, I believe now the 15th such bill to be introduced copying our Montana Firearms Freedom Act(MFFA).

In MSSA’s lawsuit to validate the principles of the MFFA, we have a preliminary pre-trial conference coming up on February 2. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and the United States (defendants in the lawsuit) have not responded to the suit yet.

We will continue to post new information about this movement at:
http://www.FirearmsFreedomAct.com

Gary Marbut, president
Montana Shooting Sports Association
http://www.mtssa.org
author, Gun Laws of Montana
http://www.mtpublish.com

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

New Legislation Will Protect Recreational Hunting and Fishing on Federal Land

(Columbus) – Two bills introduced by Senator Lisa Murkowski (R- AK) and U.S. Representative Dan Boren (D- OK) will protect recreational hunting, fishing and shooting on land administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Forest Service.

Backed by the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance (USSA), HR 3749 and the Senate legislation are companion bills collectively known as the Recreational Fishing and Hunting Heritage and Opportunities Act. They will prevent situations from emerging where public land is closed arbitrarily for hunting, fishing and shooting, mandating that such closures be done through a reasonable and transparent process.

Specifically, both bills would ensure that:

* Federal public land managers with the U.S. Forest Service and BLM provide for the use of and access to public lands for hunting, fishing and shooting,
* An “open until closed” policy is established for the lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service and the BLM unless public and Congressional notification is given,
* Land managers are urged to lease land for shooting ranges by having the lessee offer suitable assurances to remediate leased lands at the termination of the lease, thus remedying concerns expressed in the past by the BLM over damage to land used for shooting,
* Skilled volunteers be used on federal public lands not open to hunting when wildlife management requires the culling of animal populations,
* Congress receives an annual report detailing any closures of land to fishing, hunting, or shooting and the reasons for the closures.

“Both bills will guarantee that access for America’s sportsmen to prime public land won’t arbitrarily be denied,” states USSA President and CEO, Bud Pidgeon. “The USSA wholeheartedly supports these bills and urges sportsmen everywhere to contact you members of Congress and urge them to sign on.”

Cosponsors of the Senate legislation are Senators Mike Crapo (R- ID) and Ben Nelson (D- NE).

Cosponsors of HR 3749 are Representatives Marsha Blackburn (R- TN), Kevin Brady (R- TX), Ginny Brown-Waite (R- FL), Paul C. Broun (R- GA), Dan Burton (R- IN), Bill Cassidy (R- LA), Kathleen Dahlkemper (D- PA), John D. Dingell (D- MI), Brad Ellsworth (D- IN), Ron Kind (D- WI), Larry Kissell (D- NC), John Kline (R- MN), Donald Manzullo (R- IL), Thaddeus G. McCotter (R- MI), Jeff Miller (R- FL), Thomas Perriello (D- VA), Ciro D. Rodriguez (D- TX), Mike Rogers (R- AL), Mike Ross (D- AR), Paul Ryan (R- WI), James F. Sensenbrenner Jr. (R- WI), Heath Shuler (D- NC), Bill Shuster (R- PA), Michael K. Simpson (R- ID) and Zach Wamp (R- TN).

Other organizations supporting both bills include the National Rifle Association, Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, American Sportfishing Association, and Safari Club International.

*Editor’s Note*

The above is a press release sent out by the U.S. Sportsman’s Alliance. While I certainly support such action it should be noted that these bills, should they pass, will not “guarantee” or “protect” anything to do with hunting, fishing, shooting, etc. on federal public lands. What it does do is slow down any efforts to arbitrarily shut down federal public lands. The process is still in place to shut down and/or prohibit public use of federal public lands. It just make’s it a bit more difficult to accomplish.

The other issue which is encouraging is that of “skilled volunteers” being used to cull overgrown game herds on federal public lands “not open to hunting”. While this is a step in the right direction, in my opinion, it fails to define “skilled volunteers”.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

15 Groups Oppose Sunstein Nomination

Fifteen of the nation’s leading conservation and sportsmen organizations sent a letter today to all U.S. Senators requesting they oppose the nomination of Cass R. Sunstein to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA).

In the letter, the organizations express deep reservations about Sunstein’s views on animal rights and hunting. Sunstein has been quoted as saying, “we might ban hunting altogether, at least if it’s sole purpose is human recreation” as well as his discussions about offering animals the rights to sue humans.

The groups signing the letter include: Conservation Force, Dallas Safari Club, Fur Takers of America, Houston Safari Club, Masters of Foxhounds Association of North America, Mule Deer Foundation, National Shooting Sports Foundation, National Trappers’ Association, National Wild Turkey Federation, Pope and Young Club, Shikar Safari Club, Texas Wildlife Association, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance, Whitetails Unlimited, Inc. and the Wild Sheep Foundation.

Posted by Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Montana’s Trap-Free Initiative In Conflict With Constitution

The Montana Trap-Free Public Lands Initiative would ban trapping on public lands if passed. This appears to be in direct conflict with the Montana State Constitution.

Gary Marbut, President of the Montana Shooting Sports Association and the originator of the language that exists in the Montana Constitution that protects the heritage of hunting, fishing and trapping, responds to the initiative with comments accordingly.

Dear Mr. Johnstone,
ajohnstone@mt.gov

This is the comment of the Montana Shooting Sports Association concerning the proposed statutory initiative to prohibit trapping on public lands in Montana.

Please note, I was the originator of the language currently in the Montana Constitution to protect Montana’s heritage of harvesting wild fish and wild game animals in Montana, and MSSA was the chief proponent of that constitutional referendum before the Montana Legislature. That language is now found in Article IX of the Montana Constitution and reads:

“Section 7. Preservation of harvest heritage. The opportunity to harvest wild fish and wild game animals is a heritage that shall forever be preserved to the individual citizens of the state and does not create a right to trespass on private property or diminution of other private rights.”

This constitutional referendum came from House Bill 306 in the 2003 legislative session, sponsored by Rep. Joe Balyeat, and passed the House on Third Reading by a vote of 81-71 and passed the Senate by 49-1. When voted on by the people of Montana it obtained the strongest approval of any constitutional change in Montana history.

When I was developing language for HB 306, first drafts included language to constitutionally protect “hunting and fishing” in Montana. Then I was approached by representatives of the Montana Trappers Association who wished their members to be included in the protections offered. I revised the language to the more generic “harvest wild fish and wild game animals” very specifically to include trapping within the constitutional protection to be created. The legislative record for HB 306 will confirm that HB 306 was intended to protect trapping, as well as hunting and fishing. And, Greg Petesch, chief attorney for the Montana Legislative Services Division, assured sponsor Rep. Balyeat at the time that the placement and language of the measure in the Constitution would indeed accomplish the goal of protecting all “harvest wild fish and wild game animals” from statutory or other assault short of a constitutional amendment.

Therefore, the proposed initiative is clearly in conflict with the constitutional protection adopted by the people of Montana. If this statutory initiative is allowed to proceed at all, the constitutional protection afforded trapping in the Montana Constitution dictates several changes in the ballot statement and the fiscal note:

1. Some mention should be made in the statements of purpose and implication that this initiative is probably in conflict with the Montana Constitution’s protection for the “harvest wild fish and wild game animals.”

2. Because of the constitutional protection, there will almost certainly be litigation over this initiative. Such litigation could conceivably place the Attorney General in the awkward position of choosing either to defend the Montana Constitution or defend a statute. The likely costs of this litigation should be reflected in the fiscal note associated with the initiative.

3. The statement of purpose, “FOR / AGAINST prohibiting recreational and commercial trapping of animals on public lands in Montana” is misleading and prejudicial, especially the use of the words “recreational and commercial.” I suggest that these words be dropped, both because they are misleading and thereby prejudicial, and because they are unnecessary to the import of the statement. Further, I suggest that the word “wild” precede the word “animals” in the statement. With these changes, the statement would read, “FOR / AGAINST prohibiting trapping wild animals on Montana public lands.” Then I suggest you add, “This prohibition appears to violate constitutional protection for the ‘harvest [of] wild fish and wild game animals’ .” (Total of 25 words.)

4. The fiscal note should reflect much more than just the predictable loss of revenue from curtailed license sales by the state. What about the cost of public employee time lost to deal with rodent (“non-game wildlife”) infestations in public buildings (“public lands”) in local and state government across Montana? Under the initiative, pest control firms (“contractors”) could not be hired to address such problems. What about (non)containment of diseases carried or spread by the protected animals and the impact of such diseases on the Montana agricultural community? What about the impact on other wildlife species because FWP no longer has trapping available as a tool for wildlife management?

Sincerely,

Gary Marbut, president
Montana Shooting Sports Association
http://www.mtssa.org
author, Gun Laws of Montana
http://www.mtpublish.com

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

New Firearms Freedom Act Website

Please help us and support the new web site of the Firearms Freedom Act. Learn which states have passed legislation, which ones are pending and which ones need to get their act together.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

With Palin Out Of The Way, Congress Wants To Control Alaska Starting With Wildlife Management

The gutless swine who work and reside in Washington, D.C. are showing their true colors. Like vicious predators themselves, they wait in the dark until the opening presents itself and they move in for the attack, never wanting to face their prey head on.

Congress, being led by uninformed liars, Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Rep. George Miller, both from the failed socialist state of California, have reintroduced a bill that will force Alaska to stop its predator control programs.

In California, where they seem to think it a “necessary” wildlife management practice to kill millions of fish in order to restock bodies of water with game fish for their license holders to enjoy and slaughter elk on an island mostly for the purpose of preventing anyone from being able to hunt them, political representatives of the likes of Pelosi, Feinstein and Miller lead the charge to force their agenda-driven ideals on Alaska and her citizens.

Two Face Feinstein said this about killing wolves:

“It undermines the hunting principle of a fair chase and often leads to a slow and painful death for the hunted animals. This practice should be banned.”

What about those elk and fish in your home state Feinstein?

One tactic used to play on the emotions of people is to attempt to describe the aerial killing of predator wolves as inhumane, causing unnecessary suffering. What the hell is so humane about suffocating millions of fish using chemicals that essentially takes the ability to breathe away leaving them to gasp for air for hours on end? And how is slaughtering elk on Santa Rosa Island in order to better manage the island’s ecosystem in their opinion, any different than what Alaska does?

George Miller and his Gestapo-like friends tried before to weasel their way into this battle but that was when George Bush and Sarah Palin were in office. Now those two are out of the way and they have the support of the most radical administration in the history of America, who has shown that animals have rights and humans need to be killed to manage populations of wildlife.

Man is a predator but environmentalists in this country hate man and the evil things they do (in their demented minds) and therefore they want to control the actions of man by using animal protection as a means of doing such.

None of the 110 useless politicians who signed onto this bill, who only care about how much it’s going to cost them to buy another vote, have not one inkling of wildlife management knowledge. They suck up the lies being told them, simply because, like not bothering to read any bill they vote on, the same holds true about Alaska’s predator management program. They are clueless. Some fellow politician with an agenda told them lies and because of the corruption in Washington, one politician is beholding to another and business is conducted not as a matter of “for the people” but because of who owes who.

The efforts and timing of the introduction of this bill reeks of the spineless methods used by the low-lifes in Washington.

For God’s sake, remember this in November at the ballot box. If you want some hypocritical crook in California or some other socialist state telling you how to brush your teeth or wipe your backside, continue to sit idly by and let this bill pass. You’ll be next!

110 uniformed followers have signed onto this bill. Find out who they are. Only four are republicans…..hmmmmmm? And two of those four hail from the socialist republic of New Jersey – one from Obama’s home state and one from Delaware.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

U.S. Senate Bill Introduced To Allow For Importation Of Polar Bears

According to the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance, Senator Mike Crapo of Idaho, has introduced a Senate version of a House Bill introduced by Rep. Don Young of Alaska. This bill, S1395, would provide a means to import polar bears into the country.

Even though polar bears are listed as a threatened species by the United States Government, Canada does not recognize that listing and still provides limited polar bear hunting opportunities, as do other countries around the globe. The polar bear is far from being a threatened species as the population has grown significantly in the past few decades and continues even today.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Congress Introduces Legislation to Protect Hunting on Federal Lands

Hunting’s Importance Reaffirmed

(Columbus)-Companion bills, introduced yesterday in Congress, protect the rights of sportsmen to hunt on federal land while also recognizing hunting’s importance to all conservation.

The Hunting Heritage Protection Act, is made up of Senate bill 1348, sponsored by Senator Saxby Chambliss (R- GA) and H.R. 3046, sponsored by Representative Denny Rehberg (R-MT).

Both pieces of legislation require that federal land be managed in a way that supports, promotes, and enhances access for hunting and mandates that an annual report be submitted to Congress detailing any limitations that are imposed on hunting federal lands. It also will require a written notification be given to Congress prior to any agency action that limits hunting on large parcels of federal land consisting of 5,000 or more acres.

“Sportsmen across America owe Senator Chambliss, Representative Rehberg, and other member of Congress many thanks for the steps they are taking to preserve our hunting rights,” stated USSA President and CEO Bud Pidgeon. “In a time where access to suitable hunting land is becoming increasingly difficult, this legislation goes a long way towards curtailing that trend and guaranteeing current or increased hunting opportunities are available today and tomorrow.”

Sportsmen should contact their Congressional elected officials and ask them to support the Hunting Heritage Protection Act. Inform them that hunters and other sportsmen and sportswomen are great stewards of federal lands and should have full access to those lands whenever and wherever possible. To find your Congressional officials, go to the Legislative Action Center.

The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. For more information about the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance and its work, call (614) 888-4868 or visit its website, www.ussportsmen.org.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Crap And Invade

As the Marxist government of Barack Hussein Obama continues its march to destroy America – you know, the one he said was the greatest in the world and then invited others to help him change it? – we are once again witness to an out-of-control, completely ignorant and incompetent Congress who passed a House bill worth a cool $4 trillion. The bill was a thousand pages and not one idiot in Washington read it. Nor do they really care, I guess. And either you approve of this kind of business or you will do something about it at the polls.

I’ll call the bill, crap and invade, as it is all crap based on crap, spread like crap and it even tastes like crap. I’ll call it invade because it is an invasion into my freedoms of being an American. I am going to be forced into paying ungodly amounts of money to fund a corrupt program, based on theories concocted by non-scientists. This kind of government strong arm tactics does nothing except rob me of my liberty to be free and prosper.

The “settled science” of Al Gore’s lying, scheming and cheating global warming “inconvenient truth” is aimed at adding the finishing touches to the destruction of capitalism and America as we know it. The cost to administer this bill will sink us all and put us on target to become subjects of a dictatorial government led by one man who grew up learning to hate America and blame her for everything bad in the world. The man needs therapy, dudes!

Michelle Malkin unveils the web of deceit that the EPA seems to have undertaken to stifle any contrary opinions to Obama’s convenient science, the science he said would now be used in making decisions that should be based on science not ideology.

This comes as no surprise to me and it really shouldn’t to anyone else who is not an Obama Kool-Aid drinker. Did you really believe Obama’s statements last March when he declared he would “restore the scientific process” to decisions like the gray wolf and other endangered species? If you did you were a fool.

I said then that what we would see would be Obama’s science in rendering decisions and that is exactly what we are seeing. He wants to control every aspect of our lives and another way is to use climate change as a very powerful weapon because there are enough stupid people on this planet who hate humans and all that they do, therefore we are the blame for everything, including climate change. For that we must pay and we will pay big.

Obama selected a person well known for her disregard of law when he picked New Jersey Environmental czar under Gov. Corzine to head up his Department of Environmental Protection. There was a reason he picked her. She, along with Gov. Corzine, defied known science and opted to create their own science of convenience in dealing with such issues as an overgrown population of black bears in the Garden State. When Corzine, a known anti-hunter, liberal, human hater, took office, he appointed Jackson his puppet. One of her first acts as head of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection was to take a court-approved black bear management plan and toss it in the garbage. She cared less about existing science when it comes to wildlife management. It didn’t fit her and the governor’s ideology and therefore it was tossed aside. Since then both have refused to entertain any other opinions.

And this is the reason Obama picked Jackson. A veteran player willing to thumb their noses at sound, proven science and stand strong in opposition to any good science that might run contrary to the Obama administration’s “scientific process”.

Obama pushed to pass another thousand-page bill, which no idiot in Washington has read, while Jackson worked behind the scenes to stifle any science that would oppose Obama’s fascist actions to use any crisis, real or created, to pound the masses into submission.

We now know that Obama’s declaration to restore HIS science is an easy task, when having to work with a Congress so full of the most ignorant, lazy, gutless, inept people this country has to offer.

In short, Obama’s promise for hopenchange, is utilizing Washington’s business-as-usual, to manipulate the leaders of this country to do as he says, while the masses worry about poor Michael Jackson. This is a script even Hitler would have lapped his chops over.

Toast! Maybe even burnt toast!

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Tennessee Passes “Firearm Freedom Act”

Both Houses of the Tennessee Congress has passed a firearms freedom act. More info on this can be found at, “I Will Defend the Constitution“.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Complaint Filed Against Gary Marbut, President Montana Shooting Sports Association

Many of you probably are already familiar with Gary Marbut. Mr. Marbut, in his capacity as President of the Montana Shooting Sports Association is responsible for the promotion of several bills brought before the Montana Legislature over the course of the legislative season.

Perhaps the highest profile bill that recently wound its way through the Montana Congress and onto the desk of Gov. Brian Schweitzer, of which was signed into law, was HB246, the Montana-Made Gun Bill. This bill challenges the power of the federal government to impose gun restrictions on the citizens of the state of Montana. HB246 declares that any gun or gun product manufactured in Montana and remains in Montana cannot be regulated by the federal government.

Montana was the first state to enact such a bill and has since gone viral with other states enacting or proposing similar bills. Many of these bills are being recognized under the name of, “Firearms Freedom Acts“. They have gained in such popularity, that Marbut recently traveled to New York City to appear on the Glenn Beck Show to talk about HB246.

The complaint filed against Marbut comes from Jim Smith, a lobbyist for the Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (MSPOA). The complaint, lodged with the Commissioner of Political Practices, alleges that Marbut was being paid to lobby all or part of the Montana legislature on behalf of the MSSA and others, which would be a violation of Montana lobbying laws.

Marbut is not a registered and licensed lobbyist but neither is he paid for any of his lobbying. His position as President of MSSA, and he also sits on the Board of Directors, is strictly volunteer. His time spent promoting gun rights and related bills is his own. He is not employed by MSSA or any other groups he speaks for, according to Marbut.

Marbut has sent a letter to Mr. Dennis Unsworth, Commissioner of Political Practices, asking that the complaint be dropped.

Re: Complaint by Jim Smith

Dear Commissioner Unsworth,

I have reviewed the complaint filed by Jim Smith of the Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association accusing me of illegally lobbying without being registered with your office.

Specifically excluded from the definition of a lobbyist is any individual who receives payments from one or more persons that total less than the amount specified under Mont. Code Ann. 5-7-112 in a calendar year. I received no payments for my activities on behalf of MSSA before the Montana Legislature. My time was donated. Thus, I am not a “lobbyist”, as that term is defined in the Montana Code.

I request the complaint be dismissed.

Sincerely,

Gary Marbut

Back at the end of April 2009, Marbut worked with MSSA and others to get passed HB228. HB228 is really kind of a modified “stand your ground” gun rights bill. This bill was opposed by the Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association and the Montana County Attorneys Association. This leaves us wondering if this is some attempt by Smith to discredit or even harass Marbut. It certainly appears to at least be aimed at intimidation.

If Marbut is correct about his understanding of the Montana statutes governing lobbying and he has not received compensation for the work he has done, then Smith’s efforts are a waste of taxpayer money. Being a lobbyist himself, certainly he must know and understand the laws. If he has evidence to show otherwise that Marbut has been paid, then at some point that will have to be presented.

Stay tuned.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Next Page »