Direct challenge to the NFA

Should the NFA be abolished?

  • Yes, I'm an abolitionist and on the correct side of history

    Votes: 99 97.1%

  • No, I support the second ammendment but...

    Votes: 3 2.9%
  • Total voters
    102
Status
Not open for further replies.
CapnMac said:
Well, technically, Congress could make a Law Repealing NFA. That's unlikely given the composition of what we are presently forced to call Congress. But, it is possible. You are correct in that, realistically, only SCOTUS is like to rid us of that foul McDuff.
Click to expand...
There is a third option, though very unlikely. Secretary of the Treasury is empowered under the 1968 GCA to establish any number of 90 day amnesty periods during which anyone could build and register NFA firearms free of charge. While not a repeal of the NFA, it would certainly reduce the prohibitory nature of the law.
 
If they can ban tax one, they can ban tax them all.

Once again, remember that $200 of the Act in 1934 is roughly equivalent to $2700 today.

Terry, 230RN
 
Last edited:
theotherwaldo said:
Only judicial action can take out the NFA.
In fact, a strict reading of the constitution automatically destroys the NFA in its entirety.
Click to expand...
As much as I would like to see a Supreme Court decision invalidating the NFA, it will be years, if ever, before this happens.

And such a decision won't last long without buy-in from Congress, and the people. Already the SC is out on a limb with the Dobbs and Bruen decisions. A few more like that, and it will get expanded to 15 members, or have other constraints put on its jurisdiction. It simply cannot get too far out ahead of public opinion.
 
General Geoff said:
There is a third option, though very unlikely. Secretary of the Treasury is empowered under the 1968 GCA to establish any number of 90 day amnesty periods during which anyone could build and register NFA firearms free of charge. While not a repeal of the NFA, it would certainly reduce the prohibitory nature of the law.
Click to expand...
The Hughes Amendment, being a later enactment, overrides the GCA amnesty provision (as regards machine guns). You'd have to have new legislation.
 
I was half hoping someone would do that for its shock value.

I was using my olde pharte flat average long-term inflation rate of 3% (1.03), but I notice recently Wiki has been coming up with 1.035 (3.5%) when quoting old numbers converted to "today's."

I feel sorry for the WIki editors who have to correct all those "today's" numbers. I guess the smart authors have used "in (insert year) dollars" so corrections are not critical.

The point of course is that the $200 was a punitive and restrictive tax for 1934 money. I think that could be called an "infringement" in those days. Thus, translated to "today's dollars," who would buy a suppressor if you had to pay (in my numbers) $2,700 tax for that $100 suppressor, let alone (your numbers) $4,593?

You see. even in 1934, there were antis who would do anything possible to <ahem> "legally" violate the Second Amendment's plain simple 27-word intent.

Terry, 230RN
 
Last edited:
This is the guy Matthew r Hoover of "USA vs Matthew r Hoover".
Literally thumbing his nose and trash talking the ATF.

Normally if some one in this situation made a video about their case their lawyers would be have having strokes.
So he has:
Unlimited money for legal fees (unlikely).
His lawyers know the governments case is unwinnable.
Lawyers know the only option for the government to not take an L is to dismiss the case (par for the course).

I say chip away at the NFA, but if the nuclear option becomes available, vaporize the NFA.
Make it so the only place you will ever see a tax stamp is in a museum.
 
N555 said:
Lawyers know the only option for the government to not take an L is to dismiss the case (par for the course).
Click to expand...
They're probably banking on the feds dismissing all charges instead of pursuing a decade-long court battle that could very possibly result in partial or total nullification of the NFA.
 
I've often thrown out the idea that the consequences of a literal interpretation of the Second Amendment are far more favorable than the consequences of infringing on that right.

I have met resistance to that concept.

But I wouldn't mind seeing our "20,000" laws reduced to 19,999. Or better yet, only 1.
 
Last edited:
N555 said:
This is the guy Matthew r Hoover of "USA vs Matthew r Hoover".
Literally thumbing his nose and trash talking the ATF.
Click to expand...
Literally dumber than a bag of hammers. The old saying "perception is reality" applies here.


Normally if some one in this situation made a video about their case their lawyers would be have having strokes.
So he has:
Unlimited money for legal fees (unlikely).
His lawyers know the governments case is unwinnable.
Lawyers know the only option for the government to not take an L is to dismiss the case (par for the course).
Click to expand...
You left out a few other options:
- he's a moron.
- He's a huge moron.
- all of the above.

Hanging his white rapper ballcap on the Texas law? He ain't talked to Jeremy Kettler and Shane Cox.
His understanding of how the USSC hears cases is flawed as is the number of NFA cases he thinks have reached the USSC ...."hunnerds".:rofl:

Not only that but he doesn't understand dominoes either.:scrutiny:
 
N555 said:
The case is not going well.
For the aft.
Click to expand...

For those who would prefer to read instead of watch a video

https://www.ammoland.com/2022/08/uncovered-documents-destroy-governments-case-autokeycard/

Cliff notes: Uncovered previous ATF documents stipulate the AutoKeyCard does not meet the definition of machine gun. Kinda hard to successfully prosecute a case against someone that hinges upon a constantly changing and nebulous set of definitions.

But the federal government has a lot of experience doing just that.
 
And a 1986 letter saying that sten gun receiver tubes with "cut here" marked out on the tubes are not machine guns. You know exactly like the auto key card.
Literally tons of sten receiver tubes with "cut here" maked out have been made and sold since 1986.
 
dogtown tom said:
Literally dumber than a bag of hammers. The old saying "perception is reality" applies here.



You left out a few other options:
- he's a moron.
- He's a huge moron.
- all of the above.

Hanging his white rapper ballcap on the Texas law? He ain't talked to Jeremy Kettler and Shane Cox.
His understanding of how the USSC hears cases is flawed as is the number of NFA cases he thinks have reached the USSC ...."hunnerds".:rofl:

Not only that but he doesn't understand dominoes either.:scrutiny:
Click to expand...

Just wondering since you feel so strongly pessimistic about it, do you own any NFA weapons?
 
dogtown tom said:
Three Rem 870 SBS
Four AR15 SBR's
Six silencers
and I have around four hundred customer silencers, SBR's, SBS's and machine guns in my safes.

You?
Click to expand...

Just an interesting observation I’ve made that the only time I see anyone have an argument to make against taking real steps towards demolishing the NFA, they also happen to have a financial stake in 68GCA and FOPA86 remaining in place.

Im a regular working class person who can’t afford to pay for a bunch of tax stamps, or for prices artificially inflated by (unconstitutional) government meddling. Maybe one day I’ll be able to get into it, however I would prefer that the whole absurd scheme comes unglued and goes the way of the Volstead act.
 
RevolvingGarbage said:
Just an interesting observation I’ve made that the only time I see anyone have an argument to make against taking real steps towards demolishing the NFA, they also happen to have a financial stake in 68GCA and FOPA86 remaining in place.
Click to expand...

While this is true. Doing away with the NFA would actually help guys like dogtown tom. Imagine how many more suppressors, SBRs, ad SBSs thy would sell if all that was deregulated.
 
12Bravo20 said:
While this is true. Doing away with the NFA would actually help guys like dogtown tom. Imagine how many more suppressors, SBRs, ad SBSs thy would sell if all that was deregulated.
Click to expand...

Thats a fair point, and I would like to believe that a lot of people who might be in such a position would choose to look at it that way. I certainly would be disappointed if we had people who we would otherwise have on the side of firearms rights supporting an investment they’ve made over a restoration of those firearms rights.
 
dogtown tom said:
Literally dumber than a bag of hammers. The old saying "perception is reality" applies here.



You left out a few other options:
- he's a moron.
- He's a huge moron.
- all of the above.

Hanging his white rapper ballcap on the Texas law? He ain't talked to Jeremy Kettler and Shane Cox.
His understanding of how the USSC hears cases is flawed as is the number of NFA cases he thinks have reached the USSC ...."hunnerds".:rofl:

Not only that but he doesn't understand dominoes either.:scrutiny:
Click to expand...

For better or worse he is now the guy striking at the heart of the NFA, so I'd like to see more constructive criticism and less name-calling for Mr. Hoover.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

hso
  • Locked
ATF Stabilizing Brace "Objective Factors" Open Comment Period
Replies
20
Views
2K
vintovka
vintovka
O
  • Locked
Is That Thing Legal: Understanding NFA 34
Replies
15
Views
1K
ptmmatssc
P
I
  • Locked
AU - Guns, Guns, Guns
Replies
8
Views
735
Thefabulousfink
T
hso
  • Locked
BATFE Comment Period:Application of the Definition of Machinegun to “Bump Fire” Stocks
Replies
3
Views
1K
Theohazard
Theohazard
J
  • Locked
The Feds are cracking down on local corruption...Maybe we can get them to Chicago
Replies
10
Views
905
standingbear
S
Back
Top