ATF being sued over approving legal machine guns

[Laufen]

fund sent-

Laufen- I see the logic, but disagree. Rights are inherent. The gov't was created to protect those rights, not to determine them. If the Gov't doesn't fulfill it's obligation to protect rights, the rights don't cease to exist. .

They certainly do. Only if the following government recognizes your enumerated rights do they still exist. Otherwise, they are gone. What recourse would you have if your rights were violated? None, and without legal recourse your "rights" are worthless.

If you ever find yourself in a country with a gun ban, try to buy a gun and claim that it's your right as a human to possess a firearm.

 

[jcountry]

Correct they won't lift the '86 ban but they wouldn't need to if we win. The reason why we are fighting because the law doesn't state an entity can't make a MG, only person can't make MG.

Honest question:

What difference does it make? A post-87 MG can't be transferred anyhow.

This lawsuit is all fluff and I think it is a borderline scam. Some guy seems to be trying to shake a bunch of money from those who want to think there is hope. There is absolutely no way that this suit will go anywhere good. It may actually result in getting trusts outlawed-and maybe even the items within trusts confiscated.

Not a good idea to piss on the ATF's jack boots.

 

[mkdhotrod]

Honest question:

What difference does it make? A post-87 MG can't be transferred anyhow.

This lawsuit is all fluff and I think it is a borderline scam. Some guy seems to be trying to shake a bunch of money from those who want to think there is hope. There is absolutely no way that this suit will go anywhere good. It may actually result in getting trusts outlawed-and maybe even the items within trusts confiscated.

Not a good idea to piss on the ATF's jack boots.

Because a TRUST is not a PERSON, therefore legally, they would be able to make MG's.

 

[jcountry]

Because a TRUST is not a PERSON, therefore legally, they would be able to make MG's.

Exactly my point.

NFA trusts are (and always have been) a loophole. Pissing off the ATF is just going to make them close that loophole.

This suit will not go anywhere good.

(And the technicality of the trust not being a person is irrelevant. The person who makes it is still committing the act of manufacturing the NFA item. The ATF's lawyers are gonna eat the crap out of whomever is unlucky enough to be a test case on this one.)

 

[Kaikias]

Because a TRUST is not a PERSON, therefore legally, they would be able to make MG's.

And because they APPROVED new machine guns for trust holders, until someone higher up the food chain said no no and they started rescinding approvals which is unheard of. And because there's tales of form 1 approvals being handed out as political favors- if true this will be shown by the FOIA request filed and would be a major game changer.

 

[mkdhotrod]

And because they APPROVED new machine guns for trust holders, until someone higher up the food chain said no no and they started rescinding approvals which is unheard of. And because there's tales of form 1 approvals being handed out as political favors- if true this will be shown by the FOIA request filed and would be a major game changer.

Bingo, politicians mmay have been pushing approvals for high level officials that are not government entities, or corporations on behalf of a govt entity. FOIA should tell us. What this does is gut the law, the ATF pissed on their on boots this time.

 

[jcountry]

I would love to see the 87 ban go away.

I would love to see the NFA repealed. But I just don't like the smell of this one. There is good reason the NRA has never messed with this stuff much. It could be made a lot worse. Trusts are based on the "interpretation" that the ATF gave to certain parts of the NFA that interpretation is very favorable right now. It is very easy for them to change that interpretation to disallow all trusts. Or maybe to jack the $200 transfer fee up to $3500 (to adjust for inflation.)

http://www.dollartimes.com/calculators/inflation.htm

(I wouldn't be surprised to see Obama do these sorts of things with executive orders-right after the election.... Just as a way to say **** you to those who wouldn't pass a ban after sandy hook.)

I think what a lot of people are missing here is that the NFA is a LAW. The '87 ban is also LAW. For argument's sake, let's say that some mistakes and abuses have happened (and they certainly have.) Let's say that the ATF gets its pee-pee wacked by the courts (it won't.) Neither of those things will serve to invalidate existing law. We are talking about administrative interpretations and enforcement of laws-not about anything which would somehow get those laws abolished or repealed.

There is no way that anything good will come from this suit There is absolutely no upside for gun owners and enthusiasts. This will end poorly.

(And does anyone seriously think that the ATF would let someone get away with manufacturing a MG-simply because their name is on a trust? Really?) Not trying to be insulting-but that absolutely won't fly. Someone will do 10 years in prison for trying it.

*Plus-Does anyone think that this thing could even possibly make it to trial for the money raised? It would probably take a couple hundred k to get in front of any kind of federal appeals court ( where it may eventually get bumped up to the supreme court-or they could just refuse to hear it.) The original stated goal of 10K seems MIGHTY LIGHT. I don't like the smell of this one on multiple levels.

 

[No2sc2]

Jcountry. You know why NRA didn't say anything about NFA? Because they is the one who sponsored the Hudges amendment.

 

[NWSharpshooter]

Jcountry. You know why NRA didn't say anything about NFA? Because they is the one who sponsored the Hudges amendment.

You would think after 28 years people would quit spreading that half truth.

The NRA encouraged Reagan to sign the Firearm Owners Protection Act (you know, the bill the Hughes amendment was attached to) into law because the bill did so much more good than harm, and in 86 there was no line item veto. Like buying guns in your local GS? Thank the 86 FOPA. Like ordering ammo on the internet? Thank the 86 FOPA.

The NRA told Reagan to sign it into law and the Hughes amendment would get kicked out once it made it to the SC. Until now, nobody has had standing to take it in front of the USSC.

 

[Aimless]

I would love to see the 87 ban go away.

I would love to see the NFA repealed. But I just don't like the smell of this one. There is good reason the NRA has never messed with this stuff much. It could be made a lot worse. Trusts are based on the "interpretation" that the ATF gave to certain parts of the NFA that interpretation is very favorable right now. It is very easy for them to change that interpretation to disallow all trusts. Or maybe to jack the $200 transfer fee up to $3500 (to adjust for inflation.)

http://www.dollartimes.com/calculators/inflation.htm

(I wouldn't be surprised to see Obama do these sorts of things with executive orders-right after the election.... Just as a way to say **** you to those who wouldn't pass a ban after sandy hook.)

I think what a lot of people are missing here is that the NFA is a LAW. The '87 ban is also LAW. For argument's sake, let's say that some mistakes and abuses have happened (and they certainly have.) Let's say that the ATF gets its pee-pee wacked by the courts (it won't.) Neither of those things will serve to invalidate existing law. We are talking about administrative interpretations and enforcement of laws-not about anything which would somehow get those laws abolished or repealed.

There is no way that anything good will come from this suit There is absolutely no upside for gun owners and enthusiasts. This will end poorly.

(And does anyone seriously think that the ATF would let someone get away with manufacturing a MG-simply because their name is on a trust? Really?) Not trying to be insulting-but that absolutely won't fly. Someone will do 10 years in prison for trying it.

*Plus-Does anyone think that this thing could even possibly make it to trial for the money raised? It would probably take a couple hundred k to get in front of any kind of federal appeals court ( where it may eventually get bumped up to the supreme court-or they could just refuse to hear it.) The original stated goal of 10K seems MIGHTY LIGHT. I don't like the smell of this one on multiple levels.

I am going to try to be as polite as I can here in the hopes that you grab a clue and move on. You have been negative about this for a few pages now. Every nonsensical, pointless and down right stupid reason for your negativity has been shot down time and time again. Yet here you are still thumping your chest how this is some sort of scam. You have jumped, skipped and hopped from reason to reason why this wont work. It is clear that you do not understand the details of this case. You have no understanding of how the NFA process works. If you did you wouldn't be in this thread saying dumb things like how the ATF will just change their interpretation on trust's or raise the "fee". First it is not a fee. It is a tax. They don't get to just change this tax as they see fit. When this tax was first introduced it was very prohibitive in 1934 dollars. Even in today's dollars a $200 is prohibitive to some. For this reason alone there is a legal argument to be made that the NFA act unconstitutionally blocks a citizen from exercising their right to the 2nd Amendment. Going to court on something like that would be a very bad thing for the ATF. I am not even going to get started on your even dumber "Obama executive orders" bull****, I will just keep it simple. You don't understand how executive orders work either.

Finally we come to the scam nonsense you keep ranting about. This suite already made headlines. $50K is not a bad starting point for a case like this and you have to craw before you can walk or run. Right now it is a matter of filing things like FOIA requests to find out if the NFA system has been abused for political gain among other things. Right now it is all about moving your pieces into position. That is what this money push is for right now. Will it cost more than $50K? You bet but you have to start the fire first in order to get the people out to watch it burn. Once people start hearing more and more about this it will continue to move forward with a lot of momentum. We have the numbers all we have to do is be willing to fight against government encroachment. You don't want to fight? That is alright, you have made that clear over and over again in this thread. People far better than you or I will fight on your behalf. You can go back to burying your head in the sand with the other naysayers. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

BTW currently at $27,245 in 4 days.