Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
NFA & Class III Discussion
Short Barrel Shotguns
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="marksmandcs" data-source="post: 1666041" data-attributes="member: 7605"><p>The handbook is not better than the law. But, even "plain written law" at times takes the U.S. Supreme Court to fiqure out what it means. Therfore, I would rather depend on a legal academics' interpretation than my own. In the case of the NFA handbook, it is the ATF themselves who did the interpretation of their own law and made a handbook to help us understand the law. Now i don't see why i'm getting a hard time from people about that reasoning. To answer your question about my quote, if you read through chapter six if gives specific instructions on what you are to do as a non-licensee making a NFA weapon. Then, if you are required to put your info on the gun, it directs you to chapter 7.4 for engraving requirements. Who knows, maybe its written wrong on purpose. The letter from the ATF thats claimed you do not need to mark the gun with your own name was contradicting to the follow up letter stating that you do. This shows that the law can be interpreted both was by even the ATF. Yes, marking the gun is the safer way to go, but i still think maybe anti-gun Houchens is giving us a runaround.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="marksmandcs, post: 1666041, member: 7605"] The handbook is not better than the law. But, even "plain written law" at times takes the U.S. Supreme Court to fiqure out what it means. Therfore, I would rather depend on a legal academics' interpretation than my own. In the case of the NFA handbook, it is the ATF themselves who did the interpretation of their own law and made a handbook to help us understand the law. Now i don't see why i'm getting a hard time from people about that reasoning. To answer your question about my quote, if you read through chapter six if gives specific instructions on what you are to do as a non-licensee making a NFA weapon. Then, if you are required to put your info on the gun, it directs you to chapter 7.4 for engraving requirements. Who knows, maybe its written wrong on purpose. The letter from the ATF thats claimed you do not need to mark the gun with your own name was contradicting to the follow up letter stating that you do. This shows that the law can be interpreted both was by even the ATF. Yes, marking the gun is the safer way to go, but i still think maybe anti-gun Houchens is giving us a runaround. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
NFA & Class III Discussion
Short Barrel Shotguns
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom