Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30

Thread: Legalities of building a full-auto MG

  1. #11
    Gunco Veteran mike26038's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Glen Dale, WV
    Posts
    1,523
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by saintarctangent
    Another thing - most guys who own pre '86 mg have no interest in having the ban repealed. They have thousands if not 10s of thousands of dollars in investments that would deflate overnight if the BATF approved form 1s. Think about it, if you had a pre ban registered M-16 and paid say $750, they're now going for about $15-20. Do they want the BATF to approve guys like me to make my own M-16 yeah right!
    Here is where you are absolutley positively 199% wrong!!! Most if not all folks that have pre-86 MGs would rejoyce at the repeal of the 86 MG ban, and they would care a shit less about their money lost.. They would be more happy to have our freedoms garunteed by the 2nd restored.

    Ohh you will have a few that will cry the blues baout the loss of money, just as there is a few crying about loosing the value of their preban guns.. But to me these folks that worry more about their money, than ther freedom are pinko-commies ***s, no different than the anti gun liberals that wish to control this country..
    Repeal FOPA NOW!!!!!



  2. #12
    RIP Sangrun Hunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,413
    Feedback Score
    28 (100%)

    Default

    We need to go back to pre 1934 laws with maybe a few mods, but it will never happen.

    Can you imagine going to the hardware store and buying a full auto Sub gun?

  3. #13
    Applied Homeland Defense saintarctangent's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    115
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    Mike,

    Just my observations from talking to wealthy class 3 owners at work. I showed one guy the 9th circuit court decision and he nearly turned pale white. He literally has 10s of thousands of dollars invested in old WWII class 3 weapons. If this 9th circuit thing is upheld, he stands to lose a hell of a lot of money.

    I guarentee he won't be writing his congressman to change a thing. In fact, maybe he'll start donating money to Sarah Brady's group . . . .

  4. #14
    Applied Homeland Defense saintarctangent's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    115
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yosuthnmasa
    So, since he wasn't involved in interstate commerce that couldn't regulate it...hmmm. Sounds really good to me. But, how then would you register the MG if you legally owned it. Kinda like a catch 22. If you didn't register it, you would be breaking the law for not having your MG registered. I'm pretty sure the other circuits have ruled against such similar situations. But, if all goes well and you live in the 9th circuit you may be able to convert your own some day. I would have to move to Florida....nice beach and MG's!
    Yosuthnmasa-

    I wish I had buckets of money.

    The proper way to challenge this would be to send a form 1 to the BATF for manufacturing your own unique mg, have it denied and then file a civil suit against them. Unfortunately, the gov't has a hell of a lot of tax $ to use against me. I don't think the ACLU would take this one on gratis - do you?

    The risky way to challenge this would be to make your own mg and hope you don't get caught. If you get caught, challenge the charges based on the Stewart ruling.

    Oh, the state's jurisdiction is much greater than interstate commerce, so you need to be cognizent of those laws as well.

    Either way, only the lawyers will make $$.

    In my case, since I live in KY, there are no state laws against mg - at all - nil.

  5. #15
    Gunco Veteran mike26038's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Glen Dale, WV
    Posts
    1,523
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by saintarctangent
    Mike,

    Just my observations from talking to wealthy class 3 owners at work. I showed one guy the 9th circuit court decision and he nearly turned pale white. He literally has 10s of thousands of dollars invested in old WWII class 3 weapons. If this 9th circuit thing is upheld, he stands to lose a hell of a lot of money..

    Then I'm sorry to say, he is misguided..

    If you value money more than freedom, you do not belong in this country...

    I don't have any full autos, but I do have quite an investment in pre-ban semi's that I am going to lose money on in 4 weeks.. Do I care? HELL NO!!!! I am estatic that we have won some freedom back... All gun owners should be... Because freedom is our number one most valuable possesion, not costly pre-ban semis, or transferable MGs.. Without freedom you have nothing!!!!



    Quote Originally Posted by saintarctangent
    I guarentee he won't be writing his congressman to change a thing. In fact, maybe he'll start donating money to Sarah Brady's group . . . .
    And if he would donate to the Brady bunch, he should be thrown from the country.. What kinda of gun owner would think that, let alone say it...


    Gun owners have enough enemys, we don't need our own kind turning against us..
    Last edited by mike26038; 08-16-2004 at 10:01 AM.
    Repeal FOPA NOW!!!!!



  6. #16
    Gunco Regular droog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    north dakota
    Posts
    704
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)

    Default

    I think the 9th district is on the other side of the country.I beleive it takes up nevada utah Arizonia and a few other states in that part of the country.Seening how Bob Stewart was living in Mesa Arizona I doubt he would have gone to court in Florida.

  7. #17
    Gunco Rookie robert ibe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    15
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    The Ninth Circuit is the largest of the 13 federal
    circuits and includes all
    federal courts in
    California, Oregon,
    Washington,
    Arizona,
    Montana, Idaho,
    Nevada, Alaska, Hawaii,
    Guam and the Northern
    Mariana Islands.

    ( I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY )I believe the stewert case boiled down to the question of what does possession of a machinggun have to do with interstate commerce which is the basis for the feds authority (Section 8. The Congress shall have power to To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes)

    It seems the 9th circuit decided that sec 922 (o) had nothing to do with interstate commerce and was not constitutionaly supported

    The law

    sec 922 (o)
    (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun.

    The 9ths decision

    Findings

    The court finds that (1) possession of a machine gun is not economic in nature, (2) the connection between possession of a machine gun and interstate commerce is attenuated, (3) the statute has no explicit jurisdictional hook into the Commerce Clause and (4) legislative findings purported to support the constitutionality of ? 922 (o) actually have no bearing.

    Conclusion: The conviction under ? 922 (o) is reversed.

  8. #18
    Gunco Regular droog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    north dakota
    Posts
    704
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SangRun Hunter
    We need to go back to pre 1934 laws with maybe a few mods, but it will never happen.

    Can you imagine going to the hardware store and buying a full auto Sub gun?
    My grandfather s brother bought a Thompson in about 30 or 31 I cant remember which but he paid $175 for it back then.He refused to register it in 34 and rather than turn it in he destroyed it.I get sick every time I think about it as he had no kids so I could have possibly ended up with it after my uncles all died off.BTW he bought this in a hardware store in a little town that doesnt even exist anymore.

  9. #19
    Gunco Veteran AClay47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Winston-Salem, NC
    Posts
    1,341
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    I began a topic today on the 9th Circuit decision. You can review it at: http://www.gunco.net/forums/showthre...1584#post21584

    Just my observations from talking to wealthy class 3 owners at work. I showed one guy the 9th circuit court decision and he nearly turned pale white. He literally has 10s of thousands of dollars invested in old WWII class 3 weapons. If this 9th circuit thing is upheld, he stands to lose a hell of a lot of money.
    No, the decision only allowed possession without intent to sale or transfer. It will not open commerce of automatic weapons. Remember, it is also a decision on Federal law in one of the Country's many appellate Circuits. It does not change State laws, and Federal courts in other Circuits are not required to follow it.

    Federal Prosecutors are seeking to have the matter heard by the United States Supreme Court. I would be astounded if the High Court accepted the case.
    Necessity is the plea of every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants, it is the creed of slaves." William Pitt 1783

    "The said Constitution shall never be interpreted to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeoping their own arms." Samuel Adams

  10. #20
    GuncoHolic yosuthnmasa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    SW, GA
    Posts
    2,068
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)

    Default

    Wouldn't that just be nice....possession wouldn't be illegal. So...we could start building our own. I still don't see how he got around having it and it not being registered in the database.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Search tags for this page

There are currently no search engine referrals.
Click on a term to search our site for related topics.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •