You can bet if anyone was the feds would soon be paying them a visit to explain to them they were wrong.If we can, then can we move to Texas, build the stuff, and move back home (or to another red state) with it, and everything's kosher?
One kid lives in ID now and I have been looking at it as a nice place to go when I can stop working. If TX really did make it so I could have NFA stuff with no hoops to jump through I would be telling Wife lets head back where you're from.If we can, then can we move to Texas, build the stuff, and move back home (or to another red state) with it, and everything's kosher?
The NFA technically should only apply to interstate commerce, so some states have declined to prosecute people who "keep it in the state". In reviewing current TX law, I can see that they are apparently not that state. Also, there is no guarantee that the feds won't go after you, even if the state refuses to help them.One kid lives in ID now and I have been looking at it as a nice place to go when I can stop working. If TX really did make it so I could have NFA stuff with no hoops to jump through I would be telling Wife lets head back where you're from.
There is NO WAY I would mess with NFA stuff without buying the stamps any more. When I was young, stupid, and thought myself indestructible I did play with this stuff. That was LONG ago. While I feel the NFA laws are bogus I find it hard to feel bad for those who play with this stuff and get burned. Especially when they want to go on line to tell anyone who will listen what they are doing. It sounded like this guy who got bit was telling a lot of people what he was doing. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Even as a VERY dumb kid, when I did this I did NOT tell or show anyone what I was doing. Social Media seem to turn a lot of people's brain off for some reason.
Jeez, simmer down, Bevis.There is NO WAY I would mess with NFA stuff without buying the stamps any more. When I was young, stupid, and thought myself indestructible I did play with this stuff. That was LONG ago. While I feel the NFA laws are bogus I find it hard to feel bad for those who play with this stuff and get burned. Especially when they want to go on line to tell anyone who will listen what they are doing. It sounded like this guy who got bit was telling a lot of people what he was doing. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Even as a VERY dumb kid, when I did this I did NOT tell or show anyone what I was doing. Social Media seem to turn a lot of people's brain off for some reason.
Social Media has been a GREAT friend to Cops since it took off. An AMAZING number of crimes are found by the perps putting themselves on the net doing stuff. It has been amazing to watch.Jeez, simmer down, Bevis.
I'm not encouraging any illegal activity.
Always surprising how many people think 'Sanctuary Laws" mean that laws don't apply and not understand that all it means is that the state / city will not spend any resources helping the Feds enforce the laws
While I agree, several states have unsuccessfully tried this and to my knowledge all have lost.
I believe you, but that site doesn't support the HTTPS protocol. Not going there.
Hell when I was a kid I was into some REALLY stupid crap. Even then though I was smart enough to not show it off. Social Media had not been invented but if it was I sure as hell would NOT have been putting the stuff we were doing on there like so many now. I still just do not get the people who do stuff they know is not cool who then want to put it on the net?I'm not encouraging any illegal activity.
Coward
The 9th Circuit? Screw those guys, they hate everything.Coward
Metropolitan News-Enterprise
Monday, August 26, 2013
Page 3
Ninth Circuit Cites Commerce Clause, Throws Out Pro-Gun Montana Law
From Staff and Wire Service Reports
State laws seeking to define the scope of the Commerce Clause so as to bar federal regulation of gun makers who manufacture and sells their weapons within a single state are preempted and unenforceable, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday.
The panel sided with the federal government, upholding U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy's dismissal, for failure to state a claim, of a suit by the Montana Shooting Sports Association and its president, Gary Marbut. The court held that the 2009 Montana Firearms Freedom Act does not give Marbut the right to manufacture a gun, solely for sale within the state, without a federal license.
Marbut said he wanted to manufacture a small, bolt-action youth-model rifle called the "Montana Buckaroo" for sale to Montana residents only. Marbut said his potential customers "do not want . . .and will not buy" the Montana Buckaroo if manufactured by a federal firearms licensee," and that he also has an opportunity to sell ammunition to a state agency if he can manufacture it without a federal license.
Following passage of the MFFA, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms informed all Montana gun dealers that the statute conflicts with federal firearms laws, and that federal law supersedes the state act and continues to apply. The ATF also warned Marbut, in response to his inquiry, that "unlicensed manufacturing of firearms of ammunition for sale . . . is a violation of Federal law and could lead to . . . potential criminal prosecution."
Judge Richard Clifton, writing for the Ninth Circuit, agreed with Marbut that he had an economic interest in the matter, and therefore had standing to sue. But he said the district judge was right on the merits, because the federal government has the power to regulate gun making, even under the circumstances envisioned by Marbut.
He pointed to a case that concluded homemade machine guns could affect the regulated interstate market of machine guns.
"But even if Marbut never sells the Buckaroo outside of Montana, Congress could rationally conclude that unlicensed firearms would make their way into the interstate market," the judge wrote. "This result does not change because the Buckaroo will bear a 'Made in Montana' stamp to distinguish it from firearms that may be sold in the interstate market."
Senior Judge A. Wallace Tashima joined Clifton's opinion. Judge Carlos Bea wrote separately, saying he agreed that Marbut needed a federal license to make the Buckaroo, but that it was unnecessary to determine whether the MFFA was preempted.
Marbut said he expected the appeals court would rule against the law.
"This was about as good of a ruling as we could have expected from the 9th Circuit. We must get to the U.S. Supreme Court to accomplish our goal of overturning 70 years of flawed Supreme Court rulings on the interstate commerce clause," Marbut said in a release. "Only the Supreme Court can overturn Supreme Court precedent."
Marbut said the federal government has become a "monster," that abuses the interstate commerce clause to intrude on states.
The case was argued by Quentin M. Rhoades of Missoula for the plaintiffs, Mark R. Freeman of the Department of Justice for the government, and Nicholas C. Dranias of The Goldwater Institute for that organization and the Cato Institute as amici.
Gil N. Peles and Noemi A. Blasutta of Proskauer Rose LLP in Los Angeles authored an amicus brief for the Brady Center and other pro-gun control and law enforcement groups.
Among those authoring amicus briefs supporting the plaintiffs were Steve Bullock, who was attorney general of Montana when the brief was written and is now its governor; Timothy C. Fox, who was in private practice at the time and is now the state attorney general; former Alaska U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller; Gary G. Kreep, formerly of the United States Justice Foundation and now a San Diego Superior Court judge; the attorneys general of Utah, Alaska, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, West Virginia, and Wyoming; former California attorney general candidate John Eastman; and Sharon L. Browne and Adam R. Pomeroy of the Pacific Legal Foundation.
The case is Montana Shooting Sports Association v. Holder, 10-36094.
Copyright 2013, Metropolitan News Company
The feds pick and choose what they will allow this to happen with. The current one is not going to ignore NFA stuffPerhaps Texas is like Portland, in that they won't spend any money, or allow their officers to become involved in, enforcing Federal restrictions. In Portland, immigration enforcement is an example, and in Texas, it could be NFA enforcement.
This is a perfect chance for the constructionist Supreme Court to overturn Wickard v. Filburn. That case justified the Federal government regulating production of an item (in that case wheat) that would otherwise be either sold within the state in which is was produced, or consumed by the farmer in excess of a quota set by the Federal government. Some sources refer to an opinion supporting the majority in this case applying this reasoning to crops grown for personal consumption because they might otherwise be bought from another state.Coward
Metropolitan News-Enterprise
Monday, August 26, 2013
Page 3
Ninth Circuit Cites Commerce Clause, Throws Out Pro-Gun Montana Law
From Staff and Wire Service Reports
State laws seeking to define the scope of the Commerce Clause so as to bar federal regulation of gun makers who manufacture and sells their weapons within a single state are preempted and unenforceable, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday.
The panel sided with the federal government, upholding U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy's dismissal, for failure to state a claim, of a suit by the Montana Shooting Sports Association and its president, Gary Marbut. The court held that the 2009 Montana Firearms Freedom Act does not give Marbut the right to manufacture a gun, solely for sale within the state, without a federal license.
Marbut said he wanted to manufacture a small, bolt-action youth-model rifle called the "Montana Buckaroo" for sale to Montana residents only. Marbut said his potential customers "do not want . . .and will not buy" the Montana Buckaroo if manufactured by a federal firearms licensee," and that he also has an opportunity to sell ammunition to a state agency if he can manufacture it without a federal license.
Following passage of the MFFA, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms informed all Montana gun dealers that the statute conflicts with federal firearms laws, and that federal law supersedes the state act and continues to apply. The ATF also warned Marbut, in response to his inquiry, that "unlicensed manufacturing of firearms of ammunition for sale . . . is a violation of Federal law and could lead to . . . potential criminal prosecution."
Judge Richard Clifton, writing for the Ninth Circuit, agreed with Marbut that he had an economic interest in the matter, and therefore had standing to sue. But he said the district judge was right on the merits, because the federal government has the power to regulate gun making, even under the circumstances envisioned by Marbut.
He pointed to a case that concluded homemade machine guns could affect the regulated interstate market of machine guns.
"But even if Marbut never sells the Buckaroo outside of Montana, Congress could rationally conclude that unlicensed firearms would make their way into the interstate market," the judge wrote. "This result does not change because the Buckaroo will bear a 'Made in Montana' stamp to distinguish it from firearms that may be sold in the interstate market."
Senior Judge A. Wallace Tashima joined Clifton's opinion. Judge Carlos Bea wrote separately, saying he agreed that Marbut needed a federal license to make the Buckaroo, but that it was unnecessary to determine whether the MFFA was preempted.
Marbut said he expected the appeals court would rule against the law.
"This was about as good of a ruling as we could have expected from the 9th Circuit. We must get to the U.S. Supreme Court to accomplish our goal of overturning 70 years of flawed Supreme Court rulings on the interstate commerce clause," Marbut said in a release. "Only the Supreme Court can overturn Supreme Court precedent."
Marbut said the federal government has become a "monster," that abuses the interstate commerce clause to intrude on states.
The case was argued by Quentin M. Rhoades of Missoula for the plaintiffs, Mark R. Freeman of the Department of Justice for the government, and Nicholas C. Dranias of The Goldwater Institute for that organization and the Cato Institute as amici.
Gil N. Peles and Noemi A. Blasutta of Proskauer Rose LLP in Los Angeles authored an amicus brief for the Brady Center and other pro-gun control and law enforcement groups.
Among those authoring amicus briefs supporting the plaintiffs were Steve Bullock, who was attorney general of Montana when the brief was written and is now its governor; Timothy C. Fox, who was in private practice at the time and is now the state attorney general; former Alaska U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller; Gary G. Kreep, formerly of the United States Justice Foundation and now a San Diego Superior Court judge; the attorneys general of Utah, Alaska, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, West Virginia, and Wyoming; former California attorney general candidate John Eastman; and Sharon L. Browne and Adam R. Pomeroy of the Pacific Legal Foundation.
The case is Montana Shooting Sports Association v. Holder, 10-36094.
Copyright 2013, Metropolitan News Company
Texas House Bill 957, passed in 2021, expressly exempts from federal regulation firearm suppressors that are made in, and remain in Texas. Federal law regulates firearm suppressors, making it illegal to own a firearm suppressor for personal use without paying a tax.Feb 24, 2022
Except that IIRC that case was declined ten years ago. Woulda been, if we'd had a conservative/Constitutionalist Court... if only Shrub had had the integrity to make Thomas Chief.
It once was, and some would like it if it was again.
And you will still get a visit from the ATF if they find out you don't have a stamp for your suppressor.
