NFA
 

Now, on to repealing the ban on new manufacture of MG’s. The “history” of the 2a tells us that a group of ordinary citizens stockpiled “military arms” and picked a fight with a tyrannical super-power on a bridge in Massachusetts back in April, 1775. Since EVERY single Soldier, Sailor, Marine, and Airman is trained on and generally issued a Machine-Gun, the ordinary citizen should have access to the same.

While I don’t like or personally agree with the $200 Stamp, the complete ban on MG’s should now be viewed (at least by the courts) as un-Constitutional…..

I'm not asking for much - just that my government work as hard to protect MY freedoms as they are for people in Ukraine.

Originally that $$ amount was viewed as being a deal breaker for many. The fee hasn't changed and here we are in 2022. I'd like to know what other type of "background check" is being done that's several orders of magnitude more thorough than the phone call into NICS to buy a firearm - yet takes months in some cases depending on whether you want to SBR your pistol, or it's a can that's in jail for a year.

IMO, the whole thing needs to go away.
[/harrumph]
:)

it doesn't take a lot of research to find that the original cost of 'the stamp' was arbitrary - the government knew then (as they know now) that the NFA was not going to curb crime - the stamp was set at that price because it absolutely priced legal ownership well beyond the grasp of the rank and file citizen...

Right from the ATF Website:
They knew citizens couldn't afford it and criminals wouldn't pursue it because IT SERVES AS A REGISTRATION DATA BASE and criminals don't register their weapons. Gun control isn't about guns - its about control.
...of course I ask that you forget the fact that it was crime on crime violence co-mingled with elements of government corruption while THE CITIZENS got left holding the bag with an infringement on their rights and a directive to pay "taxes" secondary to shitty governance and even shittier police work


SAME AS IT EVER WAS

Now that the 2nd Amendment has been put on par with the other rights listed in the Bill of Rights, it’s time to apply Murdock v. Pennsylvania.

The government has already conceded that machine guns are legal, they’re just taxable.
Time to eliminate that taxing burden and then the associated bureaucratic nonsense won’t have a legal anchor.

Lets go back to 1939 US vs. Miller. Tax on a sawed off shotgun was upheld to the NFA because it wasn't a militia weapon at the time. WWI used 20" shotguns. The opinion stated militia weapons were constitutional. Today select fire short barreled rifles with suppressors are the infantryman's weapon (M4/M5). Short barreled shotguns of 10" and 14" are issued to US military in the 870 MCS and M26 (under barreled)

Go back to the Second Militia Act of 1792. 18-45 yo were required to bring their own arms (ie militia weapons of the time) with ammo, bayonet, hatchet and kit. Read todays 10US Code 246 Militia: Organized and Unorganized. The Unorganized are NOT supplied arms and therefore implied need to supply their own. The NFA is in violation of Text, History and Tradition and there for unconstitutional. As there were NO bans on militia weapons till that time. Sullivan Act was 1902 and just found unconstitutional.


CD

If nothing else, I'm enjoying a great deal of schadenfreude as millions of American lib abortion supporters are suddenly learning what being a gun owner in the US is like.

Well... let's see what happens. ("Autokeycard" case)

LINK to Full Story

I'm very interested in how the courts, states, & congress will accept SCOTUS's ruling on "bureaucratic over-reach" as it pertains to ATF's Monstrosity??

Congress has shirked its duties for too long. Letting, No Encouraging sub-level bureaucrat minions rule the nation with little fear of the results. :mad::mad:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinion...-1530_n758.pdf

Here’s the supplement to the motion to dismiss:

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documen...miss070122.pdf

This line from the filing (I’m only about half way through reading it) really stands out…..

“the Government must prove the particular regime in question is consistent with the history and tradition of the United States. Id at *15. Furthermore, the question of whether a weapon is “in common use at the time,” necessarily pins the analysis to the time before the prohibition. To consider otherwise would incentivize the Government to legislate wantonly and aggressively, seizing arms, then later evade constitutional scrutiny by suggesting that the arms cannot be in common use, because the Government prohibited them. Such circular logic would be inconsistent with any fundamental rights jurisprudence”

Thanks for that pdf link.

bubba, you and I can read stuff like that and say, "well... yeah, of course."
But this is going to be a slog, although going after the NFA is the right thing. Told a friend after that raucous week of decisions that the NY decision as well as the downstream effects of the EPA decision were going to be epic. Wasn't sure it would be this soon.

If it gets dismissed and the NFA is left alone, the ATF is unlikely to appeal.
If the NFA is ruled unconstitutional, that will almost certainly go to the 11th Circuit.

The balance of judges there looks favorable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...eventh_Circuit

GS,

Thank you for the supplement to dismiss and to declare unconstitutional the 1934 NFA. Good reading, as it is short and concise.

I now have high hopes that the “act” will soon be history, and have a clear vision of the Anti-2nd crowd’s heads exploding.:D

SnT

I'm all for being able to walk in and buy a can or a lower with the extra hole without the hassle and $200. Or throw an 11" upper on a lower with a stock without worry. As for heads exploding, unfortunately heads exploding is like horse play in that sooner or later it will lead to a blood letting of sorts.

The big weakness in the NFA is Murdock v. Pennsylvania.

The syllabus:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/319/105/

Agreed. Had that puppy in my backpocket for sometime. The pushback "but..." was before a SCOTUS decision has affirmed that the 2nd is not a second-class amendment.

Some back-story on Second Amendment
 

Many on the other side of this issue, especially nowadays, will call judges activist when an opinion doesn't come out how they like. But they want that activism when they screech "But we can't know what the Founders were thinking when they wrote that amendment!" Except that, yes Virginia, we can.

Grabbed from a reddit post and hosted at The Captain's Journal, here are some extracts from the contemporary writings of those men regarding their views - at the time & going forward - on the need of the citizen to be armed:

------------------
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” – Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

“The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” – Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788

“As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.” – Tench Coxe, Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789

“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.” – Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785.

“The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824

“I enclose you a list of the killed, wounded, and captives of the enemy from the commencement of hostilities at Lexington in April, 1775, until November, 1777, since which there has been no event of any consequence … I think that upon the whole it has been about one half the number lost by them, in some instances more, but in others less. This difference is ascribed to our superiority in taking aim when we fire; every soldier in our army having been intimate with his gun from his infancy.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to Giovanni Fabbroni, June 8, 1778

“To disarm the people…is the most effectual way to enslave them.” – George Mason, referencing advice given to the British Parliament by Pennsylvania governor Sir William Keith, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adooption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788

“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.” – George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.” – Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787.

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” – Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

“This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty…. The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.” – St. George Tucker, Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1803.

------------------
:cool:

Missouri AG tells the FBI to pound sand.

https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-sour...vrsn=5fbbdf7_2

Four Words: “Shall NOT be INFRINGED!”

FUCK-Yeah!

Has this hit the street, does FOXNEWS know??

There have been various news reports coming out about this incident, but this one has a little more detail.

https://youtu.be/NQXOHsHkJV4

<edit>

I realize this is more a case of current news, but it has significant Second Amendment implications.

Here is the police press conference:
https://youtu.be/REhMnc4CHbs

AG Schmitt has performed his job well for the state of Missouri, he has now set his sights on Roy Blunts US Senate seat. AG Schmitt is one in a field of twelve candidates the includes Eric Greitens and Marc McCloskey that is vying for Blunt's Senate seat.

https://themissouritimes.com/missour...y-blunts-seat/

I hope that he can stay where he is. This often happens unfortunately, and it seems he can actually serve the people of MO better as their AG than as just another DC writer of "strongly worded letters."

That letter was epic and should get "Distribution A" as we used to say.

Miller v. Bonta was decided over a year ago and the California assault weapons ban was struck down.
California appealed and managed to get a stay on the lower court’s ruling.

After the recent SCOTUS ruling, there was a motion to lift the stay.
California wants the stay to be kept in place, the ruling vacated, and have the case remanded back to the district court.

This is just an attempt to stall.
The district court ruled using the correct test.

Here is the response to California’s motion:
https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fir..._Lift_Stay.pdf

Nice, thanks.

:) Like you post JJ. I think Bruen and WV vs EPA decision 20-1530 has not reached full potential in Legal review. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinion...-1530_n758.pdf
ATF’s new rulemaking 2021r-05f must be sued for totally invalid.
This... Page 3 of text.....

"EPA explained that the Clean Power Plan, rather than setting the standard “based on the application of equipment and practices at the level of an individual facility,” had instead based it on “a shift in the energy generation mix at the grid
level,” id., at 32523. The Agency determined that the interpretive
question raised by the Clean Power Plan fell under the major questions
doctrine. Under that doctrine, it determined, a clear statement is necessary for a court to conclude that Congress intended to delegate authority “of this breadth to regulate a fundamental sector of the economy.” Id., at 32529. ""It found none"". The Agency replaced the Clean Power Plan by promulgating a different Section 111(d) regulation, known as the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule. Id., at 32532. In
that rule, EPA determined that the BSER would be akin to building
block one of the Clean Power Plan: a combination of equipment upgrades and operating practices that would improve facilities’ heat rates. Id., at 32522, 32537."

Sure it invalidates the EPA. This same standard of review "Major Questions doctrine" can be said and surely will for the ATF.
https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regula...ceiver/summary

Surely this all falls under Supreme courts definition of "Text, History, Tradition"!

It's why I smiled bigly when that EPA decision came down.

Dominoes are starting to fall from the Bruen decision.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...16528.18.0.pdf

From the TRO:

“The Court is sympathetic to the Town’s stated reasoning.
However, the Court is unaware of historical precedent that would permit a governmental entity to entirely ban a type of weapon that is commonly used by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, whether in an individual’s home or in public.”

Excellent. I especially enjoy the Judge's granting of the TRO based on their high likelihood of success at trial. It's a criteria normally seen and, in a lot of polite words, he shredded the city's position as "have some cheese with your whine."

:thumbsup and I ROFLOL

GOA and 17 states take on ATF.

https://www.scag.gov/media/r3dhdlmk/...27-to-file.pdf


It’s important to note that the 17 states didn’t merely file amicus briefs.
The 17 states are actually plaintiffs.

Rocky Mountain Gun Owners challenges Colorado magazine ban in federal court.

https://rmgo.org/wp-content/uploads/...bComplaint.pdf

The barristers need to continue bringing their A-game. The jungle of jargon is formidable, and it's not a pretty jungle like on a TV vacation prize. Judges need mentoring.

:munchin:lifter

I'll will be interesting to know the Judges name on this!


Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen View Post
Dominoes are starting to fall from the Bruen decision.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...16528.18.0.pdf

This is Pure Awesome
 

This is Pure AWESOME!

To see this in a law suit makes me happy….

“332. In other words, ATF has created an informal definition, within another informal definition, within a regulatory definition, within another regulatory definition, within a statutory definition, of a statutory term.

333. If that does not sum up the problems with this nation’s vast and unchecked administrative state, it is hard to see what would.”

God Bless the States that filed this!

The 9th circuit is enabling California’s stalling tactics.
Hopefully plaintiffs will seek an injunction

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fir...pdf?1659399440

Thanks for continuing to track this.

The Ninth circuit is THE most over-turned judicial district in the country. Basically, look to see what they are doing and then do the opposite, you'll be fine.

That may be true - but conservative justices like John Roberts are why people in Vegas gamble on EVERYTHING - so, you never know...
After all, Obama Care is a tax - or its not a tax or it is a tax but not THAT kind of tax - whatever - its legal
...dont forget, Roberts was trying to talk the other conservatives out of voting down the Roe-v-Wade case until the leak forced his hand.