Apparently the city of Missoula, MT decided it was going to be naughty to let one rancher sell a rifle to another rancher without background checks. The State AG (Tim Fox) challenged that, saying it ran afoul of the 2A and the state's constitution. The Missoula District Court disagreed, and ruled to allow the city to require the background checks. Fox took it to the state supreme court, and won. Montana Supreme Court shuts down the city's background check requirement. Said there's nothing in state code that allows a city ordinance like that, and that the ordinance went beyond the state's reasonable restrictions on the possession of guns (criminals can't have them, people ruled mentally unfit, etc) and got into the transfer area, which the state law left alone.
Of note, the state DOES have an instant background check system, and people who are transferring guns can of course still use it if they want to. The article notes that a lot of activist types have been supporting the establishment of local ordinances like this struck-down city law SPECIFICALLY knowing that the local law violates state-level preemption. Why? In hopes that a friendly anti-gun judge will, in hearing a challenge to such a law, do something to wound the state level preemption. That tactic totally failed in this case. Good.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/monta...kground-checks-for-firearm-sales_3127648.html
Of note, the state DOES have an instant background check system, and people who are transferring guns can of course still use it if they want to. The article notes that a lot of activist types have been supporting the establishment of local ordinances like this struck-down city law SPECIFICALLY knowing that the local law violates state-level preemption. Why? In hopes that a friendly anti-gun judge will, in hearing a challenge to such a law, do something to wound the state level preemption. That tactic totally failed in this case. Good.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/monta...kground-checks-for-firearm-sales_3127648.html
