Go Back   Professional Soldiers ® > At Ease > The Soapbox

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-22-2016, 06:08   #1
35NCO
Guerrilla
 
35NCO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: CONUS
Posts: 403
Kansas man's homemade gun silencers clash with federal law

I had said before this was going to happen. Again, so Colorado can legalize pot and Fed will not prosecute. Kansas and Montana legalize Suppressors and the Fed prosecutes....? Ridiculous.


http://www.charlotteobserver.com/new...116276598.html


By ROXANA HEGEMAN
WICHITA, Kan. —



When Shane Cox began selling his homemade firearms and silencers out of his military surplus store, he stamped "Made in Kansas" on them to assure buyers that a Kansas law would prevent federal prosecution of anyone owning firearms made, sold and kept in the state.

The 45-year-old Chanute resident also handed out copies to customers of the Second Amendment Protection Act passed in 2013 by the Kansas Legislature and signed by Gov. Sam Brownback, and even collected sales taxes. His biggest selling item was unregistered gun silencers that were flying out of the shop as fast as Cox could make them, prosecutors said later. One of those customers — 28-year-old Jeremy Kettler of Chanute — was so enthusiastic about the silencer that he posted a video on Facebook.



But last week a jury found Cox guilty of violating federal law for the manufacture, sale and possession of unregistered firearms and silencers. Kettler was found guilty on one count for possessing the unregistered silencer.

The case could reverberate across the country because it cites the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, pitting the federal government's right to regulate firearms against the rights of states. The judge overseeing the case expects it ultimately to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

At trial, defense attorneys contended their clients believed the Kansas law made their activities legal, arguing they are "caught in the crossfire" of the struggle between the state and the federal government over gun control.




Cox and Kettler were convicted under the National Firearms Act, which is a part of the Internal Revenue code enacted under Congress' power to levy taxes. The case raises the question of whether that taxing authority can be used to regulate firearms that stay within state borders. Advocates for state's rights also contend such guns do not fall under Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce.

Kettler told jurors he bought the unregistered silencer "because of a piece of paper signed by the governor saying it was legal." Before trial, he criticized Kansas for "setting up its citizens to be prosecuted" by the federal government.

Jim Howell, a former Republican state representative, said he physically carried the bill around the Capitol and got 55 legislators to co-sponsor the legislation, which won bipartisan support. Lawmakers knew when they passed the law that there was going to be disagreement on who has authority to regulate firearms if they stay inside the state of Kansas, he said.

"I think these gentlemen understood that when they made a choice to do what they did," Howell said.




Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt has intervened to defend the state law's constitutionality in the first criminal case that has used the Kansas law as a defense. Schmidt said in a statement that buyers' reliance on the state law as a defense is "reasonable, and it is consistent with the State's interest in ensuring the Second Amendment Protection Act itself is defended."

That state law says firearms, accessories and ammunition manufactured and kept in Kansas are exempt from federal gun control laws. It also made it a felony for the federal government to enforce them.

A day after it took effect, then-U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder advised Brownback that the state law criminalizing federal enforcement of gun laws was unconstitutional.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence challenged its legality in a 2014 civil lawsuit that was thrown out because a judge deemed the group did not have standing to sue.




Kansas modeled its law on the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, which the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has found to be invalid, according to court filings.

State firearm nullification laws, or firearms freedom acts as they are sometimes called, have been signed into law in nine states. In addition to Montana and Kansas, other states with them include Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and Wyoming, according to Everytown For Gun Safety, which advocates common-sense gun control laws.

The legal maneuvering comes against the backdrop of President-elect Donald Trump's election following a campaign that made gun rights a rallying cry for his supporters. A new U.S. attorney general will also be in place at the Justice Department.

And in another twist, the man who helped write the state's gun law — Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach — is now a potential pick for a job in the Trump administration. Kobach has called this case "a perfect example of a prosecution that should never occur."

Sentencing is set for Feb. 6.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/new...#storylink=cpy
35NCO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2016, 06:17   #2
35NCO
Guerrilla
 
35NCO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: CONUS
Posts: 403
More:

http://www.guns.com/2016/11/15/jury-...te-exemptions/

http://ag.ks.gov/media-center/news-r...constitutional

Appears they are charging them for not paying the federal tax and not in or about the state law.

Hopefully the HPA passes in the new political climate and we can be done with this nonsense.
35NCO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2016, 07:49   #3
35NCO
Guerrilla
 
35NCO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: CONUS
Posts: 403
PM sent instead.

Last edited by 35NCO; 11-22-2016 at 08:12.
35NCO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2016, 08:10   #4
35NCO
Guerrilla
 
35NCO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: CONUS
Posts: 403
From SilencerTalk

http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/vi...98e92a#p940661

"JohnDoe3: So...the Feds went after the unpaid tax angle to convict the 2 people, and not whether the Kansas law is constitutional based on the Commerce Clause. The Judge said that the Kansas legislature failed to write into their law that 'made in Kansas' firearms are also free of federal taxes. It sounds like that will be the basis of the appeal, that the basis of the NFA taxes are for interstate commerce of firearms and 'made in Kansas' firearms are not part of interstate commerce and thus should not be taxed federally."
35NCO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2016, 23:24   #5
frostfire
Area Commander
 
frostfire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lone Star
Posts: 2,153
Quote:
Originally Posted by 35NCO View Post
Hopefully the HPA passes in the new political climate and we can be done with this nonsense.
seems HPA has to survive demonizing studies such as this one:
http://www.vpc.org/studies/silencers.pdf

This one is more impartial, but older:
http://www.westerncriminology.org/do...08n2/clark.pdf
__________________
"we also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope" Rom. 5:3-4

"So we can suffer, and in suffering we know who we are" David Goggins

"Aide-toi, Dieu t'aidera " Jehanne, la Pucelle

Der, der Geld verliert, verliert einiges;
Der, der einen Freund verliert, verliert viel mehr;
Der, der das Vertrauen verliert, verliert alles.

INDNJC
frostfire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2016, 08:24   #6
35NCO
Guerrilla
 
35NCO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: CONUS
Posts: 403
I had read Clark before. The vpc was new to me. Thanks.

All of it revolves around guns are only for hunting and surprise, people committing crimes break the law when they break them intentionally.

I can see the argument of the NFA makes them less accsessable. However the a dressing of the vpc does not cite nfa registered suppressors for each crime. In any of them, the criminals are committing numerous crimes anyway.

The Dorner incident was one of the first registered crimes for NFA devices in a very long time. But, he was also breaking the law on his aquisition and transport.

I see no difference in 4473 availability and if a criminal intends to commit a crime. They can aquire the devices either way, or make them.

It also makes the assumption that the devices are more dangerous because they are scary...and people commit crimes .Not really any technical reasoning to why on how they make people more dead.

The military application was a terrible choice in argument in that it should argue more for how they do fall into the 2nds original intent. Also, a strange angle in that so many things could be used as weapons or efficiency equitment to make killing/mission acomplishment more effective but does not mean that is their main application or use. Ban active ear pro? Ban efficient camo uniforms?

I am not holding my breath on the HPA either. Just a nice thought and chances do seem more possible now....we shall see.
35NCO is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:29.



Copyright 2004-2022 by Professional Soldiers ®
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies