Missouri and Machine Guns (Possible Nullification of NFA Laws?)

[GlockSpock]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Available+Jobs+in+Tennessee

 

Saw this earlier today in the breakroom on CNN. Doubt it'd ever happen, but with the recent happenings on marijuana, perhaps a state will give NFA laws a try and see what happens?

[Wiljo05]

. Edited September 12, 2013 by Wiljo05

[GlockSpock]

Oops. Pasted wrong link earlier. Will edit the original when I can. Use this for now.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/11/missouri-moves-legalize-machine-guns-and-outlaw-fe/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That's a good thing. They may get it, too. They are going to attempt to override the gov's veto. Now, why can't some

of the wimps in the great state of Tennessee get on this?

[Garufa]

Now, why can't some of the wimps in the great state of Tennessee get on this?

 

One letter from the AG or ATF is usually all it takes.

Edited September 11, 2013 by Garufa

[Dane]

So would a resident of Missouri be able to purchase post 1986 automatic weapons?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[DaveTN]

Tennessee has done it (although not on full auto weapons). But the law has not been tested. The BATF has said it does not recognize the TFFA (or others states either), and no one wants to be the guy to test it. Lose and you are looking at prison time.
However, Legislators should know better than make threats they can’t back up. They can’t (legally) arrest a Federal Agent enforcing federal law.

[DaveTN]

So would a resident of Missouri be able to purchase post 1986 automatic weapons?
 

Sounds like it, but where in the world would they find someone to sell them one? Someone with an NFA legal item or an FFL isn’t going to do it.

[Dane]

Sounds like it, but where in the world would they find someone to sell them one? Someone with an NFA legal item or an FFL isn’t going to do it.

The streets of course. Where else do you find the good stuff? :-)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Tennessee has done it (although not on full auto weapons). But the law has not been tested. The BATF has said it does not recognize the TFFA (or others states either), and no one wants to be the guy to test it. Lose and you are looking at prison time.
However, Legislators should know better than make threats they can’t back up. They can’t (legally) arrest a Federal Agent enforcing federal law.

For the reasons you state is why very few are interested in challenging
such unreasonable laws: fear. It takes a mass of like minded people to
affect change and, unfortunately, there are very few, even on this forum,
who would join together with other groups to challenge laws like some
of the rather unjust ones we have. Thats a very sad statement to have
to make. We live in a very Orwellian world, already. Fear is a great
demotivater.

[DaveTN]

For the reasons you state is why very few are interested in challenging
such unreasonable laws: fear. It takes a mass of like minded people to
affect change and, unfortunately, there are very few, even on this forum,
who would join together with other groups to challenge laws like some
of the rather unjust ones we have. Thats a very sad statement to have
to make. We live in a very Orwellian world, already. Fear is a great
demotivater.

 

Well I’ll step right up and say fear keeps me from doing it. I got a letter from the BATF basically saying the TFFA had no standing with them and if I violated Federal law they would arrest me. I learned enough in law enforcement to know that the state can’t do jack to protect me and the states implication that they would stop Federal agents is ridiculous.

 

I’ve asked this question before and I’ll ask it again. As far as challenging the law why do we have to wait until someone violates it? There were no crimes committed or criminal defendants in Heller or McDonald. Why can’t we as a group file a case against the Federal government when they (BATF) have said we would be arrested for actions the state has deemed legal?

Edited September 12, 2013 by DaveTN

[dlm37015]

I don't know why it wouldn't work. Colorado and Washington State have bypassed Federal drug laws so why wouldn't it work for firearms.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Well I’ll step right up and say fear keeps me from doing it. I got a letter from the BATF basically saying the TFFA had no standing with them and if I violated Federal law they would arrest me. I learned enough in law enforcement to know that the state can’t do jack to protect me and the states implication that they would stop Federal agents is ridiculous.

I’ve asked this question before and I’ll ask it again. As far as challenging the law why do we have to wait until someone violates it? There were no crimes committed or criminal defendants in Heller or McDonald. Why can’t we as a group file a case against the Federal government when they (BATF) have said we would be arrested for actions the state has deemed legal?

I've wondered the same thing for the same reasons. Fear is what should
be kept out of the equation and that's difficult. It's also what the Fed uses
to intimidate and stop many challenges. We should stick together on
issues like this and start pushing back, but I understand how submissive
many are when will gripe about Lamar but do nothing to get rid of him.
Same principle applies.

[Static_USMC]

i AGREE, but twinke / ding dong eating stoners don't seem nearly as scary as twinke / ding dong eating machine gun toters. 

 

 

(not refering to me as being fearful, talking about certain other groups)

Edited September 16, 2013 by Static_USMC

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Twinke Ding Dong eating stoners would probably not be interested in machine gun ownership. I think the argument

you may be trying to make is about anyone owning one(mg), so place restrictions on them. That's what happened

with the very first law on them. You can't restrict the 2nd Amendment without infringing on someone's right to keep

and bear. The very first time a law abiding citizen breaks the 2nd Amendment by committing a crime, he should be

held accountable, like any criminal, but not to ruin everyone else's rights. Blanket laws are bad laws and Congress

has no right to make them. The public good be damned. So cliche.

 

That would be a reasonable law, rather than making a blanket law restricting or taxing something out of reach. Any

law that abridges someone's rights is unconstitutional when compared to something found in the Bill of Rights, or

elsewhere in the Constitution. I'm not worried about some stoner. He is a self-fulfilling prophesy waiting to happen.

Edited September 16, 2013 by 6.8 AR