NY Judge rules that you only have constitutional rights if you're rich

[Nebor]

Obfuscational & immaterial.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090208100642AA1yRuX

As the owner of several transferable title 2 weapons, and the son of a ~20 year SOT 3 FFL, I feel I'm pretty familiar with the NFA, thanks.

What I was pointing out was the fact that the Hughes Amendment to the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act, which closed the automatic weapon registry to new fully automatic weapons, has been found invalid in federal court. Since the NFA is at it's root a tax law (you pay for tax stamps varying in cost from $5 to $200 in order to validate the paperwork that allows the transfer of title 2 weapons,) by discontinuing all tax revenue from the law, it became invalid and unconstitutional. The federal government never appealed the decision, since it's extremely simple and sound, and would result in the overturning of the Hughes Amendment, costing many very influential people millions of dollars in the lost value of suddenly (relatively) worthless machine guns, as well as flooding the streets, so to speak, with new fully automatic weapons (think of the children.)

But I appreciate your dismissive, short response. Feel free to continue to wallow in ignorance and discard others attempts to edify you. While you're down there, consider sucking several bags of dicks.

 

[Jhhnn]

As the owner of several transferable title 2 weapons, and the son of a ~20 year SOT 3 FFL, I feel I'm pretty familiar with the NFA, thanks.

What I was pointing out was the fact that the Hughes Amendment to the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act, which closed the automatic weapon registry to new fully automatic weapons, has been found invalid in federal court. Since the NFA is at it's root a tax law (you pay for tax stamps varying in cost from $5 to $200 in order to validate the paperwork that allows the transfer of title 2 weapons,) by discontinuing all tax revenue from the law, it became invalid and unconstitutional. The federal government never appealed the decision, since it's extremely simple and sound, and would result in the overturning of the Hughes Amendment, costing many very influential people millions of dollars in the lost value of suddenly (relatively) worthless machine guns, as well as flooding the streets, so to speak, with new fully automatic weapons (think of the children.)

But I appreciate your dismissive, short response. Feel free to continue to wallow in ignorance and discard others attempts to edify you. While you're down there, consider sucking several bags of dicks.

Aww... you're so cute when you're testy, when you've attempted to obfuscate. The fact remains that the govt quite successfully regulates the acquisition of full auto weapons, and the acquisition of new ones to bonafide ffl's with law enforcement customers & law enforcement.

Obviously you don't like that, but I really don't care. The decision you cite actually changed nothing, & we both know it. You even admit that, yet dragged it out as a red herring to the discussion at hand.

Various state & local govts invoke that great shibboleth of the Right, States Rights, to ban the possession of such weapons entirely. I'm sure that some firearms enthusiasts see that as unconstitutional, but they'll have to make the necessary appeals from prison to find out.

Feel free to volunteer as a test subject for that or any federal firearms statute.

I merely pointed out 2 things- first, that NY efforts wrt handguns follow along the same lines as other seemingly constitutional efforts wrt full auto firearms and that alternatives to handguns exist, ones that would likely serve the average citizen better w/o the expense of NY licensing & the training & practice required to become proficient with handguns.

I'm not anti-gun, I'm just anti- armed looneytune & anti- fearmongering. If I were anti-gun, I certainly wouldn't have pointed out constructive alternatives to NY's registration fees wrt handguns.

 

[Nebor]

I wasn't trying to obfuscate anything (whatever that $10 word means.) I was pointing out that the law is not constitutional, as you stated. It's merely because it wasn't allowed to rise to a higher level that the 1986 machine gun ban still stands.

I'd prefer a NY style expensive licensing system nationwide. Texas purposely set their concealed handgun licensing price as one of the highest in the nation in order to keep the huddled brown masses from legally carrying firearms. If you look at the distribution of CHL licenses in the state, you'll find there are ~450,000 licenses in the state of 25 million people, and the licenses are extremely disproportionally distributed to the wealthiest areas of Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Austin and El Paso.

Personally I'm fine with the system as it stands. Guns should be the realm of the police, military and the wealthy. When the poor get guns, they kill other people. When the police, military and wealthy have guns, they (typically) only kill the poor.

As far as the efficacy of the regulation of full auto weapons, I recommend taking a look at the number of transferable (non LEO or dealer samples) machine guns in the registry according to the BATF in 1989, and comparing it to the number in the registry in 2010 according to the BATFE. Careful reading of the Hughes Amendment will show that all that's required to register new, transferable machine guns is "government approval." And savvy politicians on both sides of the aisle have been trading $700 machine guns (purchased on the open market) for $25,000 campaign donations (value of the same machine gun in the "closed" registry market) for about a decade (the oldest post-1986 ban transferable Form 1 my father or I have seen is from 1999.)

But like I said, it's a good system. It ensures that typically only the people that can be responsible with machine guns (military, police, wealthy) obtain them, as is evidenced by a near total lack of crime committed with legally registered machine guns in the last 50 years.

I don't have a dog in the fight, as a military officer, reserve municipal Texas LEO and owner of $50,000 worth of transferable machine guns. Though I wouldn't be happy if machine guns became legal again overnight and mine were worth $5,000.

 

[davmat787]

I don't have a dog in the fight, as a military officer, reserve municipal Texas LEO and owner of $50,000 worth of transferable machine guns. Though I wouldn't be happy if machine guns became legal again overnight and mine were worth $5,000.

Sweet mother Mary of Joseph that is awesome!!! Party at NEBOR's!!! I will bring the beer and ammo!! :biggrin:

 

[Nebor]

Sweet mother Mary of Joseph that is awesome!!! Party at NEBOR's!!! I will bring the beer and ammo!! :biggrin:

Sadly that's only 3 weapons, heh. And I try to keep the wear on them to a minimum. I haven't shot any of them in over 3 years. They stay at my house in Dallas until I'm done with the Army.

 

[cybrsage]

What is the point of having guns you are not going to shoot?

 

[Nebor]

What is the point of having guns you are not going to shoot?

For the same reason I have cars that I don't drive, and dozens of Steam games that I'll never play, consumerism and compulsion gone mad.

Of course, when you're talking transferable machine guns, there's also the fact that my 3 were only worth $15,000 when I bought them. Not a bad ROI. As long as the law keeps supply very low, and other people continue to shoot, break, and lose theirs, then mine will become more valuable.

 

[cybrsage]

For the same reason I have cars that I don't drive, and dozens of Steam games that I'll never play, consumerism and compulsion gone mad.

Of course, when you're talking transferable machine guns, there's also the fact that my 3 were only worth $15,000 when I bought them. Not a bad ROI. As long as the law keeps supply very low, and other people continue to shoot, break, and lose theirs, then mine will become more valuable.

Ah, ok. Seems like a waste to me. Like buying a toy but keeping it in the box and not playing with it. Toys cry at night due to that...and I think your guns cry at night too.

 

[davmat787]

Sadly that's only 3 weapons, heh. And I try to keep the wear on them to a minimum. I haven't shot any of them in over 3 years. They stay at my house in Dallas until I'm done with the Army.

Would one of yours happen to be a BAR? What do you have if you don't mind sharing?

 

[davmat787]

Ah, ok. Seems like a waste to me. Like buying a toy but keeping it in the box and not playing with it. Toys cry at night due to that...and I think your guns cry at night too.

Apparently Nebor doesn't know about Chris at Red Jacket firearms. He can break... err I mean fix anything. :biggrin: