constructive possession.
Lack of action does not make it constitutional. The NFA is almost exactly the kind of thing that got a bunch of colonists to take on the biggest empire on earth 150 years earlier.
OH, I agree totally with you, but until it is ruled unconstitutional, it is the law. Supreme Court makes that determination. If we truly believe these laws to be unconstitutional, ( which most of us do ), we need to be working toward that end. However, we have had many years and have accomplished nothing toward even getting a case much beyond District Federal Courts.
We like to condemn those cities that have decided that they are above the law and have declared themselves as sanctuary cities or states. Until they get a ruling in their favor, they are acting illegally. The same is true for a great many special interest groups, and we fall into that category of citizens.
Unfortunately, what we consider an "infringement" is considered, by many voters, as a "common sense" change.
We like to condemn those cities that have decided that they are above the law and have declared themselves as sanctuary cities or states. Until they get a ruling in their favor, they are acting illegally. The same is true for a great many special interest groups, and we fall into that category of citizens.
Unfortunately, what we consider an "infringement" is considered, by many voters, as a "common sense" change.
To be fair, the NFA was challenged and upheld by SCOTUS in 1937, but it was upheld as a tax. Since then it has become clear it’s not a revenue measure, that’s just an excuse. In addition, since then, the Supreme Court has ruled that rights cannot be taxed.
GOA is currently challenging the constitutionality of the NFA.
GOA is currently challenging the constitutionality of the NFA.
Which begs the question, "Do all these parts have serial numbers and are they listed in a manufacturer's "A and D" book somewhere as machinegun parts?" I can't think of any way to trace them and prove they are or are intended to be machinegun parts within the scope and intent of the law. (The Second Amendment has been considered notwithstanding for the sake of discussion.) Until all the parts are assembled into a machinegun receiver - the part of the gun with the model and serial number that states it is a machinegun receiver as designated in a manufacturer's "A and D" book - all you have is parts.
Analogy: Rape is illegal. Rapists have a penis. I have a penis. The fact that I have the same type of equipment as a rapist doesn't make me a rapist. Machine guns have a trigger. My gun has a trigger. That doesn't mean my gun is a machinegun. It is what the rapist does with his penis that makes him a rapist. It's the same with a machinegun. If the trigger is not identified and adorned with a serial number and traceable specifically as a machinegun part in a manufacturer's "A and D" book, it is just a part.
Woody
Last edited:
All good arguments, and we all agree, but the law still stands. We need one of you to get arrested, charged, and convicted, appealing to a higher court, and continuing that process until it reaches the Supremes, and then we have a chance of changing the law.
A penis has other uses, machine gun parts likely do not.
Well, these Glock conversion kits were marketed as parts to convert a Glock into a machine gun, so it would be hard to argue that they’re not designed and intended to be used to convert a weapon into a machine gun. But even if parts were marketed generically without referencing machine guns or full auto, the fact that they can be used to convert a gun into a machine gun is pretty good evidence that that’s what they were designed and intended for.
A trigger isn’t a good example. All guns have triggers. Not all guns have auto seers.
For reference, the ATF website quotes the definition of “machinegun” from the relevant law.
A trigger isn’t a good example. All guns have triggers. Not all guns have auto seers.
For reference, the ATF website quotes the definition of “machinegun” from the relevant law.
I’m in favor of repealing the NFA as much or more than the next guy. I’m for mail order suppressed full auto belt feds for everyone. But, unless you’re willing to test the law and lose, I think the best advice is to comply with the intent of the law, which is pretty clear here. I don’t think they’d have any trouble enforcing the law for any part that is, in reality, designed to convert a weapon to full auto.
Already happening. See the link I posted above from GOA. Disabled veteran in Kansas convicted of possession of a suppressor. Perfect test case. The Supreme Court is expected to hear the appeal.
Similar threads
