1986 FOPA Hughes Amendment Vote (machine gun ban) footage located

[Ajax22]

I feel we stand a much better chance of a legal battle in the courts challenging the ban itself in light of current 2nd Amendment victories.

Strictly speaking the ban itself can probably be challenged successfully in the 10th circuit where they have the precedent of U.S. v Rock Island Armory....

If you did challenge in the 10th circuit (i.e. you incorporate a legal entity in Wyoming, apply for your 07FFL, then apply to make a machine gun on a form 1 to obtain standing)

You would have an exceedingly good chance of either getting your MG form 1 approved (in which case you could publicize and publish all documents on it and another individual could bring an equal protection suit against the ATF) OR, they would deny you, issue a new opinion at the circuit level, and you would have an excellent chance of obtaining Certiori on the issue of the 34 NFA being justified as a revenue raising measure, and the 86 ban preventing the tax from being collected.

[Yellowfin]

You'll never get this Congress, or the upcoming one, including our sitting Prez, to sign into law a bill overturning the Hughes Amendment,

Intentionally as a stand alone bill, definitely not, but as part of a bill they must pass and/or don't read, entirely possible. It could already have been in the Healthcare Sabotage bill they passed for all we know.

[bac0nfat]

All I know is if they do somehow overturn this, or rule that it was never passed, I'm gonna be buying sears and RR's by the pallet. It could be a matter of weeks before they pass another bill banning it again.

[JayBell]

please remember to post subjects like this to the Firearms Related Law & Politics form, where I have just moved it

[Connal]

This is actually interesting. It raises questions on what else has happened along these lines, and what if anything, is going to be done about it.

[Ajax22]

please remember to post subjects like this to the Firearms Related Law & Politics form, where I have just moved it

My apologies,

Since this was in regards to the footage I thought it was a general firearm topic.

[tsafa]

Anybody else getting that feeling of butterflies in their stomach?

I'm already making my shopping list!

Wishful thinking... but I am going to do some wishing all the same.

I think we need to do a lot more work in bringing people to our side. A lot of hunters don't don't even care much about this. We need to get the Hunters on board, then the LTC people... then we can start trying to get non-gun owners on board.

No, not at all. This is nothing we can get the courts involved in. They don't get involved in matters of legislative procedures. So we stand very little chance of having any influence on exposing another Rangel case of fraud. You'll never get this Congress, or the upcoming one, including our sitting Prez, to sign into law a bill overturning the Hughes Amendment, and those are the only ways this is going away in regards to this being exposed as a fraudulent legislative procedures being used to push the amendment. I feel we stand a much better chance of a legal battle in the courts challenging the ban itself in light of current 2nd Amendment victories.

We will need to take the rest of the Congress in 2011 and the White house in 2012. This CAN be done, because Democrats are self-destructive by nature. My biggest worry is that a war breaks out in Korea that makes Obama look like a hero. I see the stars lining up like that. If North Korea attacks again, any military adviser worth anything, would advise Obama to use the opportunity to attack North Korea's nuclear facilities. Its a no-brainer. If Obama, were to find his testicles and do this... he would be a very tough opponent in 2012.

[andrewjs18]

Makes me curious to what else they have deceived us with. I find it hard to believe that in 210 years that this was the first.

we could probably fill up an entire small state with the amount of documents pertaining to how often the government deceives the people.

[eXceLon]

It shouldn't an issue of reversing it, because without following proper procedure, it never passed, and if it never passed, the amendment should never have been in the final version of the bill.

Do we have any constitutional lawyers in the house?

My understanding is that matters like amending bills are entirely a matter of internal House/Senate rules, and not a matter of law. In other words congress can make whatever rules it pleases regarding how bills are amended.

If that's the case then I don't know that there would be any standing to challenge the law, as all that would matter is that the final version of the bill was properly passed by congress and signed into law. Which so far as I'm aware, it was.

I don't know if there is any standing to challenge the congressional procedures by which bills are introduced, amending, brought to a vote, and so forth.

Though I'd certainly be interested in hearing otherwise...

[Kramer]

Anybody else getting that feeling of butterflies in their stomach?

I'm already making my shopping list!

Don't worry this won't happen overnight so you can take more time making your shopping list.