So far what we’re hearing is that no transport of any opened alchoholic beverage is allowed. Not really something I do often, though I’m certainly NOT leaving my half full bottle of Bombay Sapphire Gin at a party! :dubious:
As for the speed limit, I don’t really remember why they reinstituted it, whether it was blackmail by the feds for highway spending money, increased death-toll on the highways, or any other reason.
And the smoking ban is statewide now too. Does not currently apply to bars/casinos, but will in, I believe, 2009.
Here’s the wikipedia cite for the current speed limits in Montana and the old system…sure do miss that old system for getting across Eastern Montana a whole lot faster than I can now at 75. We never abused it much, I remember putting it on 90 once just because I could. But there was ALWAYS a speed limit, it was called “reasonable and prudent”.
Which backs up my post that it wasn’t because of the feds
Hearing that from who?
My prior post came from the state of Montana itself. It says:
When can open containers be transported?
**In a locked glove compartment or storage compartment
*In a vehicle trunk or luggage compartment
*In a truck bed or cargo compartment
*If a vehicle is not equiped with a trunk:
*Behind the last upright seat In a closed container in an area not normally occupied by passengers
That brochure comes from the state itself. Did you follow the link? Who is telling you otherwise?
I was going from memory on the reason–I recall the outrage. It will take me some digging to find a cite. I’ll see what I can do.
Well, it’s not called a drinking and driving law, it’s called an open container law. I certainly could transport that bottle of wine home if I emptied everything out of my glove compartment and locked the bottle in there with a key, or if I put it in the bed of my pickup and let it rattle around and break. Yeah, I read the brochure. None of their other exceptions apply to my truck. In my Jeep, I could put the bottle behind the last seat if I borrowed something to brace it in with so it wouldn’t break. It’s so much easier (and safer) to just set it on the back seat, but that’s illegal.
The point, though, is that it’s a completely useless law. I’m all for laws against driving under the influence. Heck, I wouldn’t have complained if they made an open container probable cause for a breathalyzer test. But a law against a completely sober adult transporting a container of alcoholic beverage? It’s just silly.
I don’t think you’ll find it. I searched like crazy. Not only that, but I have quite a bit of knowledge about the feds and speed limits as I had to enforce 55, and then 65 in the 80’s and deal with th NHTSA and the paperwork. But all that went completely away in '95. But if you can find something I want to read it. It bugs me when the feds stick their nose into state business!:mad:
You might be thinking of Nevada. They raised their limit to 70 for one day back in circa 1986. Then took the signs down when the feds threatened.
But “reasonable & prudent” in Montana happened after the complete repeal of the national speed limits.
I did happen by again. I didn’t in any way mean to suggest that libertarians are more likely to be wife-beaters; if anyone took it that way I apologize. It was a semi-serious snarky comment upon government inrusion or"intrusion" depending upon one’s point of view. This sounds like a cliche but “I have libertarian friends” (I do!). The fact of the matter is that some people do think that a man has a right to control his household by any means, inlcuding corporal, and this is something that is been counteracted in our society by noosy government interfering in family life.
I don’t think I’m at all confusing libertarianism and anarchism. There are governments in the Third World and they do provide military (all too much of this in fact), police (of varying reliability) and fire departments. And, often, not much else.
Incidentally those ‘libertarian’ western states have been shown to spend more federal tax money per capita than the East Coast, which is paying a higher share of federal taxes.
Yes, my bad on the feds and the speed limit issue.
The ads/notices regarding the new open container law that were on the radio/tv and in the newspapers have been verrrry vague–suspiciously so. I had never seen your list posted anywhere certainly and I thank you for doing that. I’ll print it and put in in my vehicle so that if I ever am transporting it, I’ll have the info.
I know that in Montana, and perhaps the other geographically large, but low population density states, that is largely because of the sheer number of federal highways that the state maintains.
Also in Montana, there is the huge amount of federal land in the state (according to wikipedia the feds administer 36,000,000 acres) and also the very long national border with Canada (545 miles also according to wiki). While the proportion of federal dollars seems high when looking at the population (912,195 persons), there are these other factors to tak into consideration.
They differ in what they hope will happen once government has disappeared. Anarchists hope that everyone will just get along, share everything and live in communal happiness, while anarcho-capitalists hope that everyone will compete fiercely for everything, thus creating the best society imaginable, where the strong and able are rewarded.
I’m sorry… State taxes? So the US Federal Government takes a chunk of your pay cheque, and then the State you live in does too?
Wow.
The Australian system involves the Commonwealth Government taking your money in the form of Income Tax and GST, and then divvying it up amongst the States based on population and a few other things.
The States do have ways of earning money, of course- car registration, “stamp duty” on things like, well, anything that might involve a Government Department issuing a permit or anything like that, and payroll taxes on companies- but there would be angry mobs storming Parliament House if they even thought about having a Commonwealth Income Tax and a State one…
Hardly. Until WW2, the States of Australia levied income taxes, and the States still have the constitutional power to do so. (On the other hand, they cannot levy a sale tax – only the federal government can do that in Australia.)
First the Feds tax your income, then the state taxes it. And most income is taxed. After you pay your taxes on your paycheck, if you put money away in the bank the interest on that is taxed.
Then theres a state sales tax of anywhere between 4-8% on most things you buy. That doesn’t include special little sales taxes for things like light rail systems and baseball stadiums for millionaires to play a childs game in. That sales tax also doesn’t include the combinesd state/federal tax on gasoline which is over half a dollar a gallon in most places. And don’t forget property taxes. Every year I have to pay over $4000 just to live in my own house. Then theres all the little fees we pay. Annual auto registration, garbage collection, etc…
I have to pay $50 a year per vehicle just to be able to park my cars on the street in front of my own house!!
Before I hijack this into a pit rant, I’ll tell you that I live in Wisconsin which has more taxes than many other places in the U.S… Also, states that have lower/no taxes tend to get you somewhere else. Higher fees and things.
Somebody will soon be by to tell you that we’re not taxed enough/as much as other countries. When I live in those countries I’ll worry about it!
UncleBeer, I wondered about those ratings as well. If you look at the bottom of that page, they talk about where they got their info for each category. The concealed carry ratings came from Handgun Control, Inc., so it looks like they just took the ratings directly from that, with no conversion. So, what HCI things is a bad rating is viewed as a good rating by the author of the website, I guess.
And in some jurisdictions, there’s still more. Fer instance, the largest near where I live (Toledo, Ohio) also has a local income tax - 2½% currently. That’s pretty typical around here; all of the incorporated suburbs of Toledo have their own city income tax.
Yes, the ratings are backward. In other words, it appears to me that a “F” gives the loosest concealed carry laws, and an A the lowest chance. CA & NY both rate a B, Nevada gets a D. The owner of the sites gives a +1 for a rating of "D+ or lower. Thus it appears that Vermont has an extremely Libertatian Carry law.
Something I haven’t seen the Brady Bunch confront is Open Carry. In some states it’s not only legal, it’s also a very acceptable practice. That sounds pretty libertarian to me.
That map is wrong.Defining “open carry” of a loaded firearm woudl make CA a red state, as that is illegal here. As to an unloaded firearm, well, that is ambigous.
Did you click on california and read what it says?
California is not a traditional open carry state. Open carry is generally prohibited except in unincorporated areas where the county has not made open carry illegal, or, pursuant to a CA open carry permit issued and valid only in a county with a population of less than 200,000 persons.
Although I’m not completely defending the accuracy of the site:
Wisconsin is an open carry state. They have complete state preemption for firearms laws. However, you may not openly carry a firearm in a vehicle.
That seems to indicated that OC is perfectly legal, but it isn’t. As a law enforcement officer in Wisconsin I can tell you that there are no specific laws against open carry in and of itself, and the preemption law invalidated local ordinances against it. However, there are no specific laws allowing it either. For the most part OC will get you at least investigated, or charged with disorderly conduct. I’ve open carried off duty, but when I did I put my badge on my belt next to the holster.
I have personally seen open carry in Arizona, Idaho, & Montana. There didn’t seem to be much problem with it.
We never abused it much, I remember putting it on 90 once just because I could. But there was ALWAYS a speed limit, it was called “reasonable and prudent”.
