Blkhrt13
Member
It appears they have made long barrel pistols an aow? Now requiring NFA regulation?
It appears they have made long barrel pistols an aow? Now requiring NFA regulation?
I hope you are being sarcastic? Problem we often run into is a LOT of "gun people" think that is how it is. The BATF can change anything, any time they want. The "rules" they come up with have the same force as "laws". Sure people can take them to court and try to get a black robe to change it. Black robes supposedly can not make law either yet they do it daily.No Federal agency - ATF or not - can change a law. Only the legislature can do that.
No Federal agency - ATF or not - can change a law. Only the legislature can do that.
Really? Did you fail Jr. High civics or something?
That's just basic stuff right there.
Sadly you are either trying to be funny, or woefully ignorant of how it works. Sadly a LOT of gun owners chose to remain woefully ignorant of how this all works. Feds change "rules" all the time. If you end up on the wrong side of some new "rule" you have fun telling the Judge that they never took Civics class. While you sit in jail shaking your head wondering what just happened <shrug>Really? Did you fail Jr. High civics or something?
That's just basic stuff right there.
I think its "tax evasion" they charge you with, for failing to pay for your stamp.So when you get arrested, do you get charged with breaking "ATF rule whatever whatever" or do you get charged with violating the law on possessing an unregistered AOW?
That's a true statement, for the most part, but it's also irrelevant to this specific discussion. The laws passed by the Legislative Branch are enforced by the Executive Branch. Commonly, the Legislative Branch will craft laws to either pass authority for regulation of an issue whole-cloth to the Executive Branch, or the words in the law will contain significant room for interpretation by the Executive Branch.No Federal agency - ATF or not - can change a law. Only the legislature can do that.
Why do you think that? Do you have any evidence to support that claim? In fact, you obviously didn't do any research and just made that up.I think its "tax evasion" they charge you with, for failing to pay for your stamp.
...On March 22, 2000 Defendant was arrested and found in possession of "a firearm, namely a destructive device in the form of a glass bottle containing a flammable liquid, more commonly known as a " ;Molotov Cocktail." Indictment. The device was not registered to him in the National Firearms Registration and transfer Record as required by Chapter 53, Title 26 of the United States Code. Id. Based upon these facts, on or about June 23 2000, a grand jury sitting in Newark, New Jersey, returned a one-count indictment, charging Defendant with knowingly possessing an unregistered firearm, namely, a Molotov cocktail, in violation of the National Firearms Act, 26 U.S.C. § 5801, et seq. ("NFA")....
...A federal grand jury indicted Grier, Lewis, and Middleton with conspiracy to possess, transfer and make machine guns in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 5861(c), (e), and (f); three counts of making firearms in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861(f); two counts of possessing firearms in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861(c); three counts of transferring firearms in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861(e); and one count of possessing firearms by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).....
...the Legislative Branch passed the GCA'68, which says (in part) that the anyone in the business of selling firearms must be licensed and regulated by the Federal Government. But 18 USC 923 does not define what it means to be 'in the business' of selling firearms. As a result, the ATF defines 'in the business' via regulation, and we're stuck with the interpretation / regulation until it's successfully challenged in court / the ATF changes it again / Congress adds a definition / test to the law.....
(21) The term "engaged in the business" means-
(A) as applied to a manufacturer of firearms, a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to manufacturing firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the sale or distribution of the firearms manufactured;
(B) as applied to a manufacturer of ammunition, a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to manufacturing ammunition as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the sale or distribution of the ammunition manufactured;
(C) as applied to a dealer in firearms, as defined in section 921(a)(11)(A), a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms;
(D) as applied to a dealer in firearms, as defined in section 921(a)(11)(B), a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to engaging in such activity as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional repairs of firearms, or who occasionally fits special barrels, stocks, or trigger mechanisms to firearms;
(E) as applied to an importer of firearms, a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to importing firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the sale or distribution of the firearms imported; and
(F) as applied to an importer of ammunition, a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to importing ammunition as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the sale or distribution of the ammunition imported.
.... As another example - in 2011 the ATF issued an 'emergency' regulation (still in force, nine years later) that required Type 1/2 dealers to provide notification to the F Troop for every instance of multiple semiauto rifle/pistol sales (two or more, within five (5) consecutive days). There is no single sentence in 18 USC 923 that allows / requires this. ...
... (A) Each licensee shall prepare a report of multiple sales or other dispositions whenever the licensee sells or otherwise disposes of, at one time or during any five consecutive business days, two or more pistols, or revolvers, or any combination of pistols and revolvers totalling two or more, to an unlicensed person. The report shall be prepared on a form specified by the Attorney General and forwarded to the office specified thereon and to the department of State police or State law enforcement agency of the State or local law enforcement agency of the local jurisdiction in which the sale or other disposition took place, not later than the close of business on the day that the multiple sale or other disposition occurs....
What is the definition of 'regular course of trade' and 'principal objective' in the statute? As far as I know, there is none (and is subject to regulatory interpretation).I'm sorry, but that's not entirely accurate. In fact Congress defined "engaged in the business" by statute (18 USC 921(a)(21)):
Very good - thanks for the clarification. That'll teach me to link to the current code without re-reading it.And that's not entirely accurate either. See 18 USC 923(g)(3)(A):
rbernie said: .... As another example - in 2011 the ATF issued an 'emergency' regulation (still in force, nine years later) that required Type 1/2 dealers to provide notification to the F Troop for every instance of multiple semiauto rifle/pistol sales (two or more, within five (5) consecutive days). There is no single sentence in 18 USC 923 that allows / requires this. ...
And thats not entirely accurate either.......And that's not entirely accurate either. See 18 USC 923(g)(3)(A):
... (A) Each licensee shall prepare a report of multiple sales or other dispositions whenever the licensee sells or otherwise disposes of, at one time or during any five consecutive business days, two or more pistols, or revolvers, or any combination of pistols and revolvers totalling two or more, to an unlicensed person. The report shall be prepared on a form specified by the Attorney General and forwarded to the office specified thereon and to the department of State police or State law enforcement agency of the State or local law enforcement agency of the local jurisdiction in which the sale or other disposition took place, not later than the close of business on the day that the multiple sale or other disposition occurs....
See 18 USC 921(a)(22)What is the definition of 'principal objective' in the statute? As far as I know, there is none.....
...Very good - thanks for the clarification. That'll teach me to link to the current code without re-reading it. My understanding is that this text was not part of the GCA68. I know that this is a rabbit hole, but I have to ask anyway - is there a way to trace when that was added?
...What rbernie is referring to is the 2011 ATF requirement for licensed dealers in CA, AZ, NM & TX to report the multiple sales of "certain rifles" (semiautomatic, centerfire, caliber greater than .22, that accept a detachable magazine)
Unlike the required reporting for the multiple sale of handguns in 18USC923(g)(3)(A)........rifles aren't mentioned. Instead ATF got creative, claiming its authority to require such reporting came from 18 USC 923(g)(5)(A).
Multiple Sale of Certain Rifle form: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/f...ition-certain-rifles-atf-form-331012/download
... (A) Each licensee shall, when required by letter issued by the Attorney General, and until notified to the contrary in writing by the Attorney General, submit on a form specified by the Attorney General, for periods and at the times specified in such letter, all record information required to be kept by this chapter or such lesser record information as the Attorney General in such letter may specify.....
...federal agencies have tremendous authority wielded by unelected bureaucrat functionaries who are unaccountable to the citizenry. These agencies have the power, by their rule making and interpretation abilities, to seemingly circumvent the law and the Constitution. ...
Sadly you are either trying to be funny, or woefully ignorant of how it works. Sadly a LOT of gun owners chose to remain woefully ignorant of how this all works. Feds change "rules" all the time. If you end up on the wrong side of some new "rule" you have fun telling the Judge that they never took Civics class. While you sit in jail shaking your head wondering what just happened <shrug>
... governmental agencies must still act within Constitutional and statutory parameters. These and other limits have been codified, for the most part, into the overall statute known as the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and state analogs, which provides for the roles and powers of all the agencies, and the procedures by which they must abide by in all their functions. APA categorizes administrative functions into formal and informal rulemaking and adjudication, which have binding effects, as well as guidance, which has no binding effect. The APA further prescribes certain procedural rules by which the agencies need to follow before acting in one of the functions listed....
Sorry Frank, just joking... I know this probably isnt the thread for that, but thanks for the codes!Why do you think that? Do you have any evidence to support that claim? In fact, you obviously didn't do any research and just made that up.
See, for example, U.S. v. Dougherty, Crim. No. 00-425 (WGB) (D. N.J. 4/23/2002) (D. N.J. 2002), slip op at 1:
See also, U.S. v. Grier, 354 F.3d 210 (3rd Cir. 2003), at 212:
So NFA indictments will charge the specific NFA statutes the grand jury decides were violated.