Montana Shooting Sports Association

--<div>off bs</div><div>
</div><div>---</div><div>3/19  omg</div><div>
</div><div>Montana legislators are now on their mid-session break.  Yes, the legislative session is half way done.  It’s time for an update about the various measures MSSA is working on.  I’ll include (S) for bills MSSA SUPPORTS, and (O) for bills MSSA OPPOSES.  An * indicates a priority bill, for or against.HB 145 (S) – to eliminate the requirement that a CWP-holder must notify law enforcement when changing county of residence.  Passed House and Senate and sent to the Governor for his signature or veto.HB 155 (S) – to prevent cities and counties from enacting local rules regulating knives.  Passed the House and assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee; public hearing scheduled for 3/12.HB 226 – MSSA’s bill to exempt nonprofit shooting ranges from property taxes.  Passed by House; public hearing held before the Senate Taxation Committee on 2/25; waiting for action by committee (keep messages coming to S-Tax Committee members urging support for this bill).HB 322 (S) – to it make optional for a CWP applicant provide an SSN on a CWP application.  Passed the House and scheduled for a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on 3/13.HB 325 (S) – to amend the Montana preemption law to prevent local governments from creating a patchwork of local gun control laws across Montana.  Passed the House and scheduled for a public hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on 3/15.HB 357 (S) – identical to HB 325, but a referendum to go to a vote of the people should Governor Bullock veto HB 325.  Passed the House and scheduled for a public hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on 3/15.HB 435 (O) – to allow come communities near tourist attractions to impose a broad sales tax, to include on firearms, ammunition, and accessories.  Hearing before the House Taxation Committee on 2/27; no committee action yet.HB 477 (O) – to authorize the Office of Public Instruction to devise rules for safe firearm storage, to distribute these rules to schools to schools for instruction of children, and to create a penalty for unsafe storage of firearms.  Scheduled for a public hearing before the House Judiciary Committee on 3/12.HB 480 (O) – HB 477 on steroids, establishing storage requirements for firearms and creating criminal penalties for violation of requirements. Scheduled for a public hearing before the House Judiciary Committee on 3/12.Dead.  HB 582 (O) – to require suicide prevention materials from the Department of Public Health and Human Services to be distributed by the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks at Hunter Education classes.  Died on Second Reading in the House on 2/28.HB 646 (O) – to provide a tax credit of up to $300 for the purchase of a (expensive) gun safe.  (Note:  The next step will be to require that all guns be kept unloaded and locked in gun safes.)  Not assigned to a committee or scheduled for a hearing yet.Dead.  *SB 95 (O) – basically to create a “red flag” law.  Tabled by the Senate Judiciary Committee on 1/24.Dead.  *SB 303 (O) – to require reporting certain mental health records to the FBI for the NICS system.  Tabled by the Senate Judiciary Committee on 2/26.Stay tuned for MSSA alerts about messages needed to legislators.Best wishes,<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72" style="box-sizing: border-box; overflow: auto; padding: 12.5px; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 13px; line-height: 1.625; word-break: break-all; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(245, 245, 245); border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); border-radius: 4px;">-- Gary Marbut, president</pre></div><div>=</div><div>
</div><div>OMFG</div><div>
</div><div>SUCCESSFUL WORK FOR FIREARM OWNERS, HUNTERS, AND PEOPLE OF MONTANA“Montana has the best gun laws in the U.S., probably the World, primarily because of the effective pro-gun and pro-hunting political work MSSA has done in Montana.”  – David Kopel, legal scholar, Independence Institute. Following are some of the political and legal successes MSSA has achieved for Montana gun owners and hunters.1985 – Local governments preemption. Even prior to founding MSSA, the founding members worked hard for your gun rights.  These founders backed law preventing local governments from passing arbitrary gun control ordinances, except for regulating the discharge of firearms inside city limits, and regulating the carrying of firearms into public parks and public buildings.1987 – Prevention of non-defective firearm liability. MSSA-backed law protects firearm manufactures and sellers from damages caused by firearms that are not defective.1989 – Sporting goods stores may exceed fire codes for storage of smokeless powder and primers. The Unified Fire Code used to specify that stores could not exceed 20 pounds of smokeless powder or 1,000 primers on premises at any time.  This MSSA-backed law supersedes the UFC and allows stores to stock up to 400 pounds of smokeless powder and up to 125,000 small arms primers.1991 – Mandatory Issue Concealed Weapon Permits. MSSA-backed law states that law abiding residents can now get a permit issued within 60 days of application.  Although many of your own law enforcement agencies fought against your right to carry, MSSA prevailed.1991 – Montana  Shooting Range Protection Act. MSSA-backed law prevents range closures due to contamination of soils by lead, copper, & other claims.  Anti-gun groups use this to shut down ranges all over the USA.  Not in Montana!1991 – Right to Keep and Bear Arms Week. This MSSA bill establishes law where the first week of March is an official period for Montanans to celebrate their cherished right to keep and bear arms.  Go celebrate!1991 – Hunting Heritage Week. This MSSA bill establishes law where the third week of September is set aside to celebrate Montana’s heritage and culture of hunting game animals.  Go celebrate!1991 – Gun safety in schools. This MSSA Senate Joint Resolution encourages gun safety training in the elementary schools of Montana and directs schools to adopt a gun safety program for kids.1991 – Shooting sports in schools. This MSSA Senate Joint Resolution encourages the adoption of rimfire competition as an intramural and interscholastic sport in the high schools of Montana.  In shooting sports, small, rural schools can compete on an equal footing with larger, urban schools.1993 – Easements to secure a safety zone around a shooting range. Owners and operators of a shooting range need to secure a safety zone of property adjacent to the range, but often do not have the financial resources to buy the necessary land.  This MSSA-authored law allows range operators to use easements to secure safety zones around ranges.1993 – Handgun hunting districts MSSA-backed law helped establish allowing big game hunting with handguns in special districts restricted to shotguns and muzzleloaders.1993 – Game Lawfully Taken Becomes the Personal Property of the Hunter. Prior to this law, all game was the property of the State.  Even if it was in your freezer.  MSSA-backed law states game (lawfully taken and tagged) is now your personal property.1993 – Second Conviction of Hunter Harassment is a Felony. Formerly, conviction of hunter harassment was only a misdemeanor crime.  MSSA-backed law makes second conviction a felony, with hard time in state prison.  Since passage of this law, Montana hunters have incurred no second hunter harassment incidents by protesters!1995 – Firearm Safety Instructors Exempt from Liability. It has become more and more difficult to recruit firearm instructors because of possible exposure of instructors’ personal assets to lawsuits over gun accidents by an instructor’s student.  This law by MSSA exempts firearm safety instructors from acts or omissions of students as long as the instructor did not use gross negligence in training the student.1995 – Repeal the Brady Law. MSSA successfully lobbied through the Legislature a Joint Resolution of the House and Senate calling upon Congress to repeal the unwanted and unneeded federal Brady Law.1995 – Gun buys for CWP-holders under the Brady Law. MSSA-backed law specifies that if a person has a Montana Concealed Weapon Permit where they have already had a background check pursuant to the federal Brady Law, they may buy guns from federally licensed dealers without submitting to or waiting for a background check.1997 – Gun owners not liable for criminal acts committed with stolen firearms. The 1997 Legislature passed an MSSA-backed law clarifying that a gun owner is not responsible for the misuse of a stolen firearm.  Prior to this, you could be charged with the crime committed with your stolen firearm!1997 – Over-zealous federal officers. Many people are concerned about the actions of over-zealous federal officers.  MSSA believes the county sheriff should be able to protect us from federal police who exceed their authority.  This MSSA-authored resolution passed in 1997: a) asks all federal officers to notify the county sheriff prior to any arrest, search or seizure in the sheriff’s county, b) requires the Montana Department of Justice to maintain a log of federal operations in Montana and note which ones happened with the advance notice to the sheriff c) requires the Montana Secretary of State to send copies of this resolution to a long list of federal agencies.1997 – Montana exempted from the federal “gun-free school zones” Federal law makes it a Federal crime to travel within 1,000 feet of a school grounds if you have a firearm in your vehicle that is not both unloaded and locked away.  Since Montana schools are on the main streets, this federal law makes criminals of a majority of Montana citizens over the course of the year.  Thanks to MSSA, state law is now in place that exempts anyone in Montana who is protected by Montana’s constitutional right to keep and bear arms (all non-criminal adults) from this Federal law.1997 – Terrorist-free America Act. MSSA successfully lobbied in the House and Senate to pass a declaration that citizens must remain armed for national security against terrorism.  Congress is now asked to pass a federal law to implement this determination.1999 – Funding shooting range development. MSSA-backed bill establishes the Shooting Range Development Act creating a program for matching grants for shooting range establishment and improvement using money from hunting license fees and administered by the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks.  Every two years MSSA must fight for legislative appropriation to fund the SRDA.  Since establishment of this program by MSSA, over $6 million in improvements to Montana shooting ranges have occurred under the SRDA.1999 – Preventing cities from suing gunmakers. MSSA-backed bill now prevents Montana cities from filing harassment lawsuits against gunmakers.1999 – Machine guns and silencers – removal of old laws. MSSA-written law wipes old laws off the books.  As a holdover from the Prohibition era, Montana had laws making it illegal to possess full auto firearms using pistol-caliber ammo, or silencers, both in conflict with current federal law.1999 – Concealed Carry in “prohibited places”. Because of some under-the-table deal-making in 1991, the Montana law about concealed weapons permits had provisions preventing the exercise of CWPs in “prohibited places”; bars, banks and public buildings.  MSSA successfully advanced two bills in 1999 to roll back the “prohibited places” restrictions.1999 – Concealed Carry Reciprocity. MSSA-backed bill recognizes the permits of any states which do a criminal background check before issuing a CWP, and where the permittee has the permit and an official ID (e.g. drivers license) in possession.  Many states have “we’ll recognize yours if you recognize ours”-type laws.  Montana will gain immediate reciprocity with these states. Montana now recognizes the permits from most other states.2001 – Prevention of Victim’s liability for injuries to a criminal. MSSA-backed law prevents a criminal injured by his intended victim from suing the victim for injuries sustained in the attempted crime.2001 – Wolf delisting. MSSA-backed resolution specifies the state must negotiate terms of wolf delisting favorable to Montana.2003 – Right to Hunt. MSSA-backed law creates a Right to Hunt fully reserved in the Montana Constitution.2003 – Large predator management. MSSA-backed law requires the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks to manage wolves, lions and bears for the preservation of hunting opportunities, protection of livestock and pets, and the safety of people in outdoor activities.2003 – Lautenberg warning. MSSA-backed law passed requiring judges to warn a person if an action is pending before a court that might have the effect of triggering a firearm possession disability under the federal Lautenberg law, such as a firearms-debarring divorce-action restraining order, or a guilty plea or conviction for a domestic disturbance.2005 – Non-resident minor children of Montana residents may hunt as residents. Some children of split homes have a parent who resides in Montana.  Such parents have asked why their kids can’t come to Montana and hunt with them using resident licenses.  This MSSA-authored law clarifies the non-resident minor children of Montana residents can hunt in Montana as residents.2003 – Game counts and methods made public.  87-1-201 MSSA-backed law requires FWP to publish annually both game counts and game count methods, so the public may see if FWP is repairing faulty game-counting methods in the performance audit done by the Legislative Auditor.2007 – Be Safe, MSSA gun safety program for kids. This MSSA Senate Joint Resolution recognizes MSSA’s Be Safe as the most suitable firearm safety program for kids in all Montana schools.2007 – No confiscation of firearms in a declared emergency. MSSA-backed law outlaws confiscation of firearms in a declared emergency.  After Hurricane Katrina, many Louisiana residents were forcibly disarmed by law enforcement authorities.2007 – Increased shooting range funding by 683%. The amount of money from hunting licenses to fund shooting range development was increased from $180,000 to $1,000,000 for the 2007 biennium.  This money taken from hunter licenses would otherwise end up in the state general fund.2009 – Montana Firearms Freedom Act. MSSA-backed law declares that any firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition made and retained in Montana are not subject to any federal authority to regulate commerce “among the states.”  Clones of our MFFA are now enacted in six other states and introduced in 25 other states.2009 – Self defense. MSSA’s landmark HB 228, passed in 2009 makes many important changes in Montana law about when and how a person may possess or use a firearm for self defense without fear of prosecution for doing so.  This bill does the following: – Creates clear policy statement by the Legislature that self defense is a natural right and that self defense by citizens reduces crime – Makes clear policy statement by the Legislature that the right to bear arms in Montana is a fundamental (important legal term) and individual right – Reverses guilty-until-proven-innocent for people defending themselves – Previously, defenders must have proven that they were justified in using force – Legislative declaration of policy that a defender has no duty to summon help or flee before using force to defend in any place the defender has a lawful right to be – Declares that open carry is legal in Montana – Clarifies that a defender may announce “I have a gun,” with no more fear of prosecution under Montana’s overbroad felony “Intimidation” statute – Clarifies that a person may show an attacker that the defender is armed, and may even draw the gun if the defender genuinely fears attack – Requires that when police investigate an incident where self defense is claimed investigators must collect evidence that may support a claim of self defense as well as any other evidence – Improves conditions for a defender to use force in any occupied structure.  This applies to all occupied structures, not just a dwelling. – Requires that police may not destroy any firearms seized – any firearms seized must either be returned to the rightful owner or sold back into the marketplace – Specifies that landlords may not prevent tenants from possessing firearms.  This not only protects travelers staying in motels, but also protects those who cannot afford to own their own homes. – Allows restoration of the right to bear arms for people convicted of non-violent crimes who have done their time and been released from state supervision – this will not apply to a person who committed a violent crime or a crime where a weapon was used VSSVOTING? – Creates the ability to use reasonable force to affect the citizen’s arrest of a person believed to have committed a crime – to be able to hold the person until law enforcement can be summoned.2009 – Guns in National Parks MSSA-backed bill urged Congress to permit visitors to National Parks to be able to carry firearms for self-defense (Congress subsequently passed a law to this effect.).2009 – Recruiting and retaining young hunters. MSSA-backed law allows full-time, non-resident college students, and Montana kids going to college out-of-state to purchase hunting licenses for the same cost as resident licenses.2011 – Preventing FWP from banning lead in ammunition An MSSA-sourced bill prohibits the Department of Fish Wildlife and Parks from regulating the type of ammunition that may be used for hunting.2011 – Shooting ranges are not “nuisances” An MSSA-suported bill to clarify that shooting ranges may not be considered to be “nuisances” to be attacked by lawsuits.2013 – Concealed Weapon Permit info confidential An MSSA-supported bill to require that information submitted by applicants for concealed weapon permits may not be released publicly by sheriffs or MT DoJ.2013 – Medical privacy for gun owners Health care providers may not inquire about patients’ ownership or use of firearms.2013 – “Discharging firearms” not disorderly conduct The act of “discharging firearms” is no longer a crime of disorderly conduct. State laws and restrictions Montana does NOT have: No registration of firearms. No registration of firearm owners. No permits required to buy firearms. No permits required to own firearms. No permits required to possess firearms. No permits required to transport firearms. No permits required to buy ammunition. No storage requirements for firearms or ammunition. No state waiting period for firearm purchase. No limit on the firearms a person may buy in a specified period. No sales tax on firearms or ammunition. No personal property tax on firearms or ammunition. No limit on the number of firearms a person may own. No limit on the number of firearms a person may keep at home. No “arsenal license” required for storage of multiple firearms. No gun locks required by law. No state background check for firearm purchase. No regulation of private firearm sales between individuals. No legal duty to retreat or flee if attacked. No permits needed to operate a shooting range outside cities. No permit required to carry concealed weapons outside cities – (99.4 percent of Montana). No licenses, permits or registration to own machine guns. No licenses, permits or registration to own silencers (but can’t be used to hunt game). No restrictions on firearm type or caliber for general game hunting. No regulation of gun shows or firearm sales at gun shows. No permits for gun shows. Virtually no restrictions to shooting on public or private lands outside cities.Other activities – affiliations. – MSSA is the primary organization providing gun safety materials to Montana schools. – MSSA does an annual, pre-hunting season, multi-media campaign encouraging hunters to police their own ranks for hunter ethics. – MSSA conducts an annual campaign encouraging hunters to donate excess game meat to food banks and the needy. – MSSA is affiliated with the National Rifle Association, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and the Second Amendment Foundation, and associated with Gun Owners of America.</div><div>
<div><div style="box-sizing: border-box;">The Missoula Current (a liberal Missoula Website) reports that the Commissioner of Political Practices (CoPP) has filed a lawsuit against MSSA in state District Court in Helena.  Allegedly, this lawsuit is an enforcement action over claimed campaign irregularities from 2014.</div><div style="box-sizing: border-box;"><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;">If this report is correct (unconfirmed at this point), CoPP is asking the Court to fine MSSA $28,000 because one staple was missing from documents MSSA properly filed with CoPP in 2014.  Yes, $28,000 because of one missing staple!</div><div style="box-sizing: border-box;"><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;">I have posted more detail about this at:</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://progunleaders.org/Roberts/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background: transparent; text-decoration-line: none !important; outline: none !important;">http://progunleaders.org/Roberts/</a></div><div style="box-sizing: border-box;"><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;">So, if you see more about this in the media, now you know the Rest of the Story, as Paul Harvey used to say.</div><div style="box-sizing: border-box;"><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;">If you read the linked material, you will see that CoPP has been weaponized by anti-gun, liberal political elements to try to emasculate and sideline MSSA, your highly successful political warrior asserting the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.</div><div style="box-sizing: border-box;"><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;">Stay tuned for more.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;"><div style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Best wishes,</div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">ref</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style=""><div align="center" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Roberts v. MSSA

The Montana Shooting Sports Association state political action committee

and the Montana Commissioner of Political Practices (CoPP)

the "Missing Staple" case
</div> <div align="center" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">CoPP wants MSSA to pay fines of $28,000 over a missing staple
</div><div align="center" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">

</div> In 2014, MSSA's state PAC sent out postcards in support of some candidates for the Legislature, before the June Primary Election. In 2016, candidate Don Roberts filed a Complaint ("Roberts v. MSSA") with the Commissioner of Political Practices, alleging that MSSA PAC had made certain errors in reporting its financial activity in relation to the 2014 Primary.  In 2016, Commissioner Motl released his <a href="http://politicalpractices.mt.gov/Portals/144/2recentdecisions/RobertsVMSSADecision.pdf" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Decision</a> which contained errors of fact, and in which the Commissioner ultimately asserted that MSSA had violated Montana campaign laws in two respects: 1)  That MSSA PAC had not provided CoPP with required copies of its reports to the Federal Elections Commission for its federal PAC (a different entity); and 2)  That MSSA had not attached the provided list of candidates affected by its 2014 postcard mailings to the correct form filed with CoPP. Since the Commissioner's Decision in 2016, CoPP has conceded that MSSA PAC did provide CoPP with copies of its FEC filings for MSSA's federal PAC (See *1, below).  Since the Commissioner's 2016 Decision, there has been considerable interchange between MSSA and CoPP, as CoPP has attempted to bully MSSA into admitting that MSSA broke the law and to bully MSSA into paying a fat fine (CoPP calls it a "settlement"). Throughout this process, CoPP has refused to correct the public record with information that tends to exonerate MSSA and MSSA PAC, including, for example, CoPP's admission that MSSA had provided CoPP with the requested FEC reports even before the initial Complaint was filed in 2016 and before the Commissioner's Decision was published later in 2016. Now (06/03/18), some Online media are reporting that the CoPP has filed a lawsuit against MSSA PAC in state District Court in Helena, asking the Court to levy fines totaling $28,000 against MSSA PAC.  No other information about this possible lawsuit is available as of this writing. Because CoPP has refused to correct its mistaken facts, refused to correct its mistaken allegations, and refused to correct its mistaken public record, MSSA takes this opportunity to set the record straight by using its First Amendment-reserved right to publish a correct set of facts concerning Roberts v. MSSA. Perhaps the best explanation of existing facts in this case is contained in a letter to CoPP from MSSA dated January 28, 2018.  Here is the text of that letter: Original printed on MSSA letterhead and mailed via U.S. Mail January 28, 2018 Jaime MacNaughton Chief Legal Counsel for the Office of the Commissioner of Political Practices P. O. Box 202401 Helena, Montana  59620-2401 Re:  Roberts v. MSSA Dear Ms. MacNaughton, This matter is overdue to be resolved.  We ask that it be dismissed.  Please allow me to recap the history of this matter for you. On March 28, 2016, Mr. Roberts filed a Complaint with the CoPP.  The Complaint alleged that the Montana Shooting Sports Association (MSSA) had violated various campaign finance laws.  We are unaware of any other complaints that have been filed that may relate to this matter.  After considering the merits of this lone Complaint, on August 16, 2016 the Commissioner rendered and published a Decision regarding the Complaint.  In that Decision, the Commissioner held that there were two deficiencies in how MSSA had conducted its affairs vis-a-vis Montana campaign finance laws.  These two deficiencies were: 1.  That MSSA had not provided the CoPP with copies of reports it had filed with the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) (Finding of Fact No. 10); and 2.  That MSSA had not adequately supplied CoPP with a list of candidates about whom MSSA had sent postcards to voters (Sufficiency Finding No. 2). There were no other deficiencies of MSSA's conduct found in the Commissioner's Decision and response to this Complaint. Concerning deficiency No. 1 above, MSSA has since provided CoPP with evidence that the Commissioner's Finding of Fact No. 10 was incorrect, and that MSSA had provided CoPP with all of the required FEC reports.  The CoPP investigation simply failed to discover that MSSA had actually provided the FEC reports, thus CoPP's error.  CoPP has subsequently conceded this point, so the alleged MSSA failure to provide FEC reports is now moot. Concerning deficiency No. 2 above, this issue logically divides into three parts.  Those three parts are: a.  Whether or not MSSA was required to provide a list of candidates who were not named on mailed postcards but who may have been affected because they were opposing candidates who were mentioned only generically as opponents; b.  Whether or not MSSA provided a list of candidates that were named on the postcards, as required by law; and c.  Whether or not MSSA attached a provided list of candidates to its C-2, Statement of Organization. Concerning issue a. above, the Commissioner concedes on Page 10 of his Decision that MSSA did provide CoPP with a list of candidates named on the postcards MSSA mailed.  About this, the Commissioner says in his Decision, "To its credit, the MSSAMT expenditure disclosed in FOF No. 14 is more complete and therefore distinguishes itself from the disclosures described in the Decisions listed in Footnote 13." Further, about the question of unnamed candidates being required to be identified in CoPP reports, the Commissioner concludes on Page 12 of his Decision that before the Roberts v. MSSA Complaint and this Decision there was no interpretation of the law requiring political action committees to report the names of unnamed candidates.  The Commissioner clarifies in this Decision that requiring reporting of names of unnamed candidates is a new interpretation and will be applied prospectively, but not for this Decision.   Specifically, the Commissioner says on Page 12 of his Decision, "Having agreed with Candidate Roberts as to the law, the Commissioner, however, declines to find MSSAMT in a campaign practice violation for its actions in this matter.  The COPP interpretation of statute set out above was not made until this decision.  The Commissioner will apply this interpretation prospectively." So, there is no deficiency associated with prong a. of this analysis. Concerning b. above, the Commissioner concedes on Page 10 of his Decision that MSSA did provide CoPP with a list of candidates named on the postcards MSSA mailed.  About this, the Commissioner says in his Decision, "To its credit, the MSSAMT expenditure disclosed in FOF No. 14 is more complete and therefore distinguishes itself from the disclosures described in the Decisions listed in Footnote 13." So, there can be no deficiency associated with prong b. of this analysis. Concerning c. above, the Commissioner's Decision admits that MSSA's C-2, C-7, and the provided list of named candidates were all filed and received by the CoPP in a timely manner and on June 2, 2014.  The only remaining question is whether or not the received list was attached to and associated with the C-2. MSSA has testified that the C-2, the C-7, and the list of named candidates were all mailed to CoPP in one envelope, which is consistent with and explains why the Commissioner's Decision admits they were all properly and timely filed on June 2, 2014. That leaves open the question of whether the supplied list was attached to the C-2 or the C-7.  MSSA has testified that the supplied list was unattached to either and was simply in the envelope with the C-2 and the C-7.  If the list became attached to the C-7, rather than to the C-2 as it was supposed to be (according to CoPP), then it was the CoPP that attached the list to the wrong CoPP form. About this, the Commissioner's Decision says on Page 10 and 11, "MSSAMT's approach to its C-2 reporting is perplexing.  MSSAMT's Statement of Organization [C-2] was filed on June 2, 2014, the same day that MSSAMT filed a C-7 report listing [included, separate, unattached list] the 18 candidates on which it made expenditures.  (FOF No. 7, including FN 2.)" So, the Commissioner's Decision admits that all required forms and lists were supplied by MSSA, and were received by CoPP in a timely fashion on June 2, 2018.  The only remaining basis for any alleged deficiency is the assertion that the required list was attached to the C-7 when it should have been attached to the C-2. MSSA argues that even if the list of candidates were not attached to the C-2, but were simply contained in the same envelope as the C-2 and C-7, that this offense, if any, would be de minimis and would not warrant any CoPP action against MSSA (N.B.: Canyon Ferry Road Baptist Church of East Helena v. Unsworth). MSSA further argues that it was actually CoPP which attached the provided list to the C-7, rather than to the C-2 that CoPP believes it should have been attached to.  That is, CoPP is pursuing enforcement action against MSSA because an alleged misplaced staple or paperclip, again de minimis, and likely one that CoPP misplaced. If CoPP can provide evidence of any other existing complaints that raise any additional issues, MSSA is willing to respond to those separately from Roberts v. MSSA.  If CoPP provides evidence of any other deficiencies directly declared in (not inferred from) the Commissioner's Decision in Roberts v. MSSA, MSSA is willing to respond to those.  If CoPP can produce evidence that it was MSSA and not CoPP that attached the provided list to the wrong C form, MSSA is willing to consider that.  Please, show us the evidence. Otherwise, CoPP is in the position of stigmatizing MSSA publicly as a lawbreaker and bad actor, and threatening MSSA with thousands of dollars of expense for fines and court costs, all because of one misplaced staple, a staple that was likely misplaced by CoPP itself. Again, MSSA requests that CoPP dismiss this matter with prejudice and cease all further enforcement action in Roberts v. MSSA. Sincerely, /s/ Gary Marbut, President Montana Shooting Sports Association = Conclusion CoPP wants MSSA to pay a fine of $28,000 because of a missing staple.  CoPP admits that MSSA provided CoPP with the allegedly missing FEC reports (1).  CoPP admits MSSA provided it with the required forms C-2, C-7, and with the required list of affected candidates (Decision).  CoPP admits it received these forms and the list on the same day (Decision).  These forms and the list were all in one envelope.  The bottom line is, CoPP wants MSSA to pay $28,000 and admit to being an outlaw because the provided list was not attached to the form C-2 instead of the form C-7.  This then is the "Missing Staple Effect", and why CoPP wants the Court to force MSSA to pay $28,000 for a missing staple.  Therefore, this entire affair ends up being more of a comment on the nature and actions of CoPP than on the law-abiding character and actions of MSSA PAC.  $28,000 demand for a missing staple! 1 Letter from CoPP, 06/13/17:  "In response to the COPP's request for additional information regarding MSSA State PAC's 2012 and 2014 opening and closing report balances, on December 4, 2015, Mr. Marbut emailed the COPP 37 copies of MSSA's Federal PAC's Federal Election Commission's reports and disclosures.  This statement of fact contradicts Commissioner Motl's finding of fact number 10 in the Sufficiency Decision, and is corrected through this disclosure." (Note re *1:  CoPP admitted here almost a year after Commissioner's Motl's adverse Decision that MSSA had actually provided CoPP with the requested FEC reports, and had provided those over a year before the Roberts v. MSSA Complaint was filed and a year and a half before Commissioner Motl's Decision was published.  That CoPP failed to discover these previously-filed MSSA PAC FEC reports in its in-house CoPP records is CoPP's error.) (Note 2 re *1:  MSSA had argued that all of the requested FEC reports are available on the FEC Website, 24/7, with only a few mouse clicks, to anyone in the World with an Internet connection, so it was unnecessary to provide copies of these reports to CoPP.  At the time, Copp had no method to make these reports available Online.  CoPP argued that for public disclosure purposes it was necessary for CoPP to print copies of these FEC reports and put them in a file cabinet so that if someone wished to travel from Eureka or Ekalaka and visit CoPP offices on a week day, during government office hours, these reports would be available for public inspection.  So, MSSA provided electronic copies of 37 quarterly FEC reports to CoPP in December of 2015.  Then, despite CoPP's claim of need for these FEC reports to satisfy public disclosure, CoPP could not find these reports within its own file system when it investigated MSSA PAC for Roberts v. MSSA.  Because CoPP could not locate its own copies of these documents in its own files, documents it held to be critical for proper public disclosure, Commissioner Motl found MSSA PAC to be in violation of Montana laws.)</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">off bs</div><div style="">Quentin M. Rhoades, Esq. Rhoades & Siefert 430 North Ryman 2nd floor Missoula, Montana 59802 qmr -AT- montanalawyer.com 406.721.9700 406.721.5838 <a href="http://www.montanalawyer.com/" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; background: transparent; text-decoration-line: none !important; outline: none !important;">http://www.montanalawyer.com</a>Steve Darty, Esq. NFA & Gun Trusts Missoula MT 406-549-0306Tim Baldwin 20 N. 29th St. Billings MT 59101 timbaldwin -AT- outlook.com tim -AT- libertydefenseleague.comRoyal (Roy) Davis 1400 N. Benton Helena MT 59601 406.442.4909James E. Brown Attorney at Law The James Brown Law Office, PLLC, provides quality services in the areas of law, government lobbying, and association management. Based in Helena, Montana, James Brown works hard to protect your legal and constitutional rights. The James Brown Law Office, PLLC 30 South Ewing Street, Suite 100 Helena, MT  59601 Phone: 406.449.7444 Fax: 406.443.2478 <a href="http://www.thunderdomelaw.com/" target="blank" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none !important; outline: none !important;">http://www.thunderdomelaw.com/</a></div><div style="">
<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">rw talk</div><div style="">http://newstalkkgvo.com/montana-gun-group-moves-to-intervene-in-missoula-lawsuit/</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">july 2018</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="content" data-reactid="248" style="box-sizing: border-box; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; line-height: 3.2rem; position: relative; margin-bottom: 30px; padding: 30px 98px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="pod-content" data-reactid="249" style="box-sizing: border-box; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased;">On Friday, the Montana Shooting Sports Association moved to intervene in the City of Missoula’s lawsuit against <a href="http://newstalkkgvo.com/missoula-gun-ordinance-shot-down-by-new-attorney-general-opinion-now-unenforceable/" data-reactid="252" style="box-sizing: border-box; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold;">Montana Attorney General Tim Fox</a> over the ‘Bloomberg Ordinance’.Missoula’s gun ordinance was ruled as unenforceable by the Attorney General as it conflicts with state law.MSSA President Gary Marbut said the intervention is to protect the rights of the organization’s members.<div class="in-article-oop-container sharethrough-container" data-reactid="257" style="box-sizing: border-box; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; text-align: center; float: left; width: 784px;">“The Attorney General is making statements about state law and how it preempts and prevails over a city ordinance,” said Marbut. “We believe there is a constitutional dimension to this and so, especially with the Bloomberg Ordinance would deprive Montana and Missoula citizens of the right to bear arms that the Montana Constitution says cannot be called into question.”The City of Missoula has sued the State Attorney General asking the federal courts to overturn the AG’s opinion.Marbut said the Attorney General’s opinion holds the force of law regarding the gun ordinance unless and until it is overturned by a higher court.“We’ll have to see what the District Court says and whether there will be an appeal to the Montana Supreme Court or even the U.S. Supreme Court,” he said.The disagreement between the city of Missoula and the Attorney General centered on an exemption to a state statute prohibiting municipalities from regulating the transfer of firearms.</div></div><div class="content-footer" data-reactid="265" style="box-sizing: border-box; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; padding: 0px 98px; margin: 0px auto; clear: both; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="tags-lines" data-reactid="269" style="box-sizing: border-box; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; margin: 0px; border-top: 1px solid rgba(69, 68, 74, 0.25); padding: 25px 0px 11px; line-height: 17px; clear: both;"><div class="wrapper" data-reactid="270" style="box-sizing: border-box; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; margin-bottom: 16px;">Filed Under: <a href="http://newstalkkgvo.com/tags/attorney-general-tim-fox/" data-reactid="276" style="box-sizing: border-box; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">Attorney General Tim Fox</a>, <a href="http://newstalkkgvo.com/tags/missoula-gun-ordinance/" data-reactid="279" style="box-sizing: border-box; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">Missoula Gun Ordinance.</a>, <a href="http://newstalkkgvo.com/tags/montana-shooting-sports-association/" data-reactid="282" style="box-sizing: border-box; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">Montana Shooting Sports Association</a></div></div></div></div><div style="">=
<div style="">Gary Marbut’s phone is ringing all the time these days with calls from national news organizations, along with lawmakers and citizens.As some gun rights advocates call for increased firearms control, and others clam up entirely, Marbut is the go-to guy for quotes about maintaining the status quo or – better yet, he’d say – loosening gun regulations.“I hear people say there needs to be a national dialogue about these bad guns,” said Marbut, president of the Montana Shooting Sports Association. “I would respond to them to say I think there needs to be a national dialogue about the horrible public policy failure of the alleged gun-free zones. That’s the dialogue.”Marbut is hardly alone in opposing gun-free zones. But for the past few days he’s been largely on his own as a gun advocate speaking openly about his positions in the aftermath of the shooting at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school that took the lives of 20 children and six adults.The National Rifle Association took down its Facebook page after the shooting. The page went back up Tuesday, with a statement from NRA President Wayne LaPierre saying “we have given time for mourning, prayer and a full investigation of the facts before commenting,” and adding that the NRA will offer “meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again.” Pierre promised a “major” news conference Friday.The Newtown-headquartered National Shooting Sports Foundation (not affiliated with Marbut’s group) posted a short statement on its website Friday, the day of the shooting:“Our hearts go out to the families of the victims of this horrible tragedy in our community. Out of respect for the families, the community and the ongoing police investigation, it would be inappropriate to comment or participate in media requests at this time.”On Tuesday, it expanded upon that, pointing out that in a small community like Newtown, “not suprisingly, we had family, friends and acquaintances that were affected. We are weighed down by their heartbreaking stories and the sorrow that has blanketed our community.” That statement reiterated the group’s decision not to publicly discuss the issue.Marbut said Tuesday that three issues require focus in the aftermath of the Newtown massacre: Perspective. Armed teachers. And gun-free zones.He’s strongly in favor of the first two, and just as vehemently opposed to the last.In terms of perspective, he likened the odds of a child being injured by “an insane active shooter” to being hit by lightning. In 2011, 240 people were injured by lightning and 39 died, according to the National Weather Service.This year, the shootings in Newtown, at a Christian college in California and at a school cafeteria in Oregon killed a total of 36 people.Marbut suggested that people concerned about protecting children might, “in a more rational world,” want to focus on the far greater risks posed by automobiles and water, he said. The Centers for Disease Control lists accidents as the leading cause of death for people ages 5 to 24. The second-leading cause for those ages 5 to 14 is cancer; for 15- through 24-year-olds, it’s homicide, according to the CDC.As for arming teachers – and Marbut stressed that should be on a volunteer basis only – “if we believe that the potential for crazy people to shoot up schools is a genuine risk we need to address, then the rational way to do that ... is to allow, through public policy, teachers who are willing to undertake the responsibility” to carry.On Monday, Virginia Gov. Gov. Bob McDonnell, R-Va., told a local radio station that a discussion is needed on arming teachers.One school district in Texas has been allowing teachers to carry for years. Superintendent David Thweatt told Fox News in 2008 that “we are seeing a lot of anger in society. … When you make schools gun-free zones, it’s like inviting people to come in and take advantage.”Marbut said such zones defy logic, requiring the belief that “some madman who will ignore the most profound prohibition for any society, the prohibition against taking innocent life … somebody who has crossed all those stark lines would get to the edge of a gun-free zone and think to himself, ‘They have a policy against guns here, so I’d better go home and play computer games.’ ”“Anyone who believes that,” Marbut added, “needs help.”When it comes to the Newtown shootings, Marbut said that “like everybody else, I was stunned that a human being could be so crazy as to do something like that.”That was his first reaction. His second?“I wish I could’ve been there. If I had been there, it would have been one (victim) and done.”Reporter Gwen Florio can be reached at 523-5268, gwen.florio@missoulian.com or @CopsAndCourts.</div><div style="">
</div><div style="">
</div><div style="">===</div><div style="">
</div><div style="">v holder</div><div style="">on October 1, 2009, Montana passed the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, the purpose of which was to regulate guns manufactured and kept within Montana state lines under a less restrictive regulatory regime than federal law provides. That same day, to ensure that Montanans could enjoy the benefits of this less restrictive state regulation, the Montana Shooting Sports Association filed a declaratory judgment claim in federal court. The lawsuit’s importance is not limited to Montana, as seven other states have passed laws similar to the MFFA and 20 states have introduced such legislation. The goal here is to reinforce state regulatory authority over commerce that is by definition intrastate, to take back some of the ground occupied by modern Commerce Clause jurisprudence. The district court granted the government’s motion to dismiss, however, and MSSA appealed to the Ninth Circuit. Now on appeal, Cato has joined the Goldwater Institute to file an amicus brief supporting the MSSA and arguing that federal power does not preempt Montana’s ability to exercise its sovereign police powers to facilitate the exercise of individual rights protected by the Second and Ninth Amendments. More specifically, for federal law to trump the MFFA, the government must claim that the Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clauses give it the power to regulate wholly intrastate manufacture, sale, and possession of guns, which MSSA argues is a state-specific market distinct from any related national one. Our brief argues that federal preemption would violate the “letter and spirit of the Constitution” and that heightened judicial scrutiny is required whenever the federal government invokes an implied power to override state sovereignty. The MFFA should not be preempted because: (1) principles of state sovereignty limit federal power; (2) preemption would violate the federalism framework established in National League of Cities v. Usery; and (3) preemption would not allow state sovereignty to serve its role as a proper check of federal power. The Supreme Court has made clear that Congress is not the sole venue for states and individuals to seek protection from federal overreach and so this case is fundamentally a dispute over federalism — which should allow for state regulation of local matters to flourish in concert with federal power over “truly national” concerns. Allowing preemption here would have the perverse effect of allowing the federal government to regulate “states as states” while impairing states’ ability to operate in areas of traditional governmental functions. The Ninth Circuit should thus find that district court committed reversible error in dismissing the lawsuit and, as a result, MSSA should be allowed to pursue its case beyond the pleadings stage.</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>