NFA-Hughes Amendment Repeal Possible?

[PaGunner]

I would love to see a repeal- but not until just after I sell that VERY overpriced Colt M16 that's laying around the shop.
A repeal is unlikely- another '68 type amnesty, might be a possibility.

What was the '68 amnesty?

[Orion0317]

What was the '68 amnesty?

F/A's made before 1968 are still legal to be transferred.

[Azzy]

I would love to see a repeal- but not until just after I sell that VERY overpriced Colt M16 that's laying around the shop.
A repeal is unlikely- another '68 type amnesty, might be a possibility.

This is one of the reasons I see getting that ban repealed will have trouble.....

[ScotsGuards]

What was the '68 amnesty?

Part of the Gun Control Act of 1968 was a provision for any NFA type item to be registered per the National Firearms Act of 1934 with no penalties or taxes. It lasted a certain time frame after which these items had to be surrendered or destroyed. This did not apply to new guns being made and registered by licensed manufacturers, mearly older arms which had not been NFA registered prior, including war trophys and others. The 1986 law change prohibited any new NFA weapons from being registerable to non-dealer licensed individuals.

I hope this gives you some background.

[ScotsGuards]

F/A's made before 1968 are still legal to be transferred.

As long as they were registered as transferable before or during the amnesty. If no paperwork exists for that particular weapon it is not eligeable to be registered at all and hence an illegal NFA item.

Lots of weapons never were which is very sad as there are many really nice classic/historic weapons out there that no one can legally posess.

[Orion0317]

As long as they were registered as transferable before or during the amnesty. If no paperwork exists for that particular weapon it is not eligeable to be registered at all and hence an illegal NFA item.

Lots of weapons never were which is very sad as there are many really nice classic/historic weapons out there that no one can legally posess.

I was unaware of that, thank you Sir.

[amext]

Over at ar15,

GET THIS OUT TO EVERYONE YOU CAN THINK OF...

S has HTF

It's 31 pages long if anyone want to read the whole thing you can download it here. I think this is it!!

https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=...NGJiZDgz&hl=en

There is one part of the transcript that has me confused. Can someone explain this!!! The recorded vote shows more NOES than AYES!! Unless I'm looking at something completely different.


AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. HUGHES TO THE AMENDMENT, AS AMENDED, OFFERED BY MR.
VOLKMER AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF
A SUBSTITUTE, AS AMENDED

132 Cong.Rec. H1741-06 Page 16 of 31

Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment to the amendment offered as a substitute for the
committee amendment in the nature of a substitute.
PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state it.
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, before the amendment is read, I would like to know if the amendment
was one of those printed in the RECORD prior to today.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will so inquire of the gentleman from New Jersey whether his amendment
has been printed in the RECORD?
Mr. HUGHES. It has been printed in the RECORD, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, has it been printed in the RECORD by Mr. HUGHES?
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, it is not required that the sponsor of the amendment have it printed
in the RECORD.
The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. HUGHES to the amendment as amended, offered by Mr. VOLKMER as a
substitute for the Judiciary Committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended:
Section 102 of the matter proposed to be inserted is amended-
(1) in paragraph (7), by striking out "and";
(2) in paragraph (8), by striking out the period at the end and inserting in lieu thereof "; and"; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
(9) by inserting after the subsection added by paragraph (8) of this section the following:
"(o)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess
a machinegun.
"(2) This subsection does not apply with respect to-
"(A) a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any
department or agency thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or
"(B) any lawful transfer or lawful possession of a machinegun that was lawfully possessed before the
date this subsection takes effect.".
Section 110 of the matter proposed to be inserted is amended by adding at the end the following:
(c) MACHINEGUN PROHIBITION.-Section 102(9) shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this
Act.
Mr. HUGHES (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be
considered as read and printed in the RECORD.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Jersey?
Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I object.
The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard.
The Clerk continued the reading of the amendment.
Mr. HUGHES (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I renew my request that the amendment be
considerd as read and printed in the RECORD. I ask my colleagues, in all fairness and rationality-we
only have 3 minutes left-to give me an opportunity to explain why machineguns should be banned.
Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, regular order and reserving the right to object––
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk continued the reading of the amendment.
Mr. HUGHES (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I renew my request for a waiver of the reading of
the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Jersey?
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I object.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk continued the reading of the amendment.
Mr. HUGHES (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I renew my request for a waiver of the reading of
the amendment. I do not know why anyone would object to the banning of machineguns.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Jersey?
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I object.
The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard.
The Clerk concluded the reading of the amendment.
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Is it the Chair's understanding that the gentleman from New Jersey moves that the
Committee do now rise?
Mr. HUGHES. That is my motion, Mr. Chairman. I move that the Committee do now rise.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from New Jersey <Mr.
HUGHES>.
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

RECORDED VOTE
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were-ayes 124, noes 298, not voting 12, as
follows:
<Roll No. 73>


AYES-124
Ackerman Akaka Anderson Annunzio Anthony Aspin Atkins Barnes Bates Beilenson Bennett Berman
Biaggi Boland Bonior (MI) Borski Boxer Broomfield Burton (CA) Carper Clay Collins Conyers Cooper
Coyne Crockett Dellums Dixon Donnelly Downey Durbin Dwyer Dymally Early Edgar Edwards (CA)
Evans (IL) Fascell Fawell Fazio Feighan Foglietta Ford (TN) Frank Garcia Gejdenson Gibbons Gonzalez
Gordon Gray (PA) Green Guarini Hawkins Hayes Henry Hertel Howard Hoyer Hughes Jacobs Kaptur
Kastenmeier Kennelly Kildee Kleczka LaFalce Lehman (CA) Lehman (FL) Leland Levin (MI) Levine (CA)
Lipinski Lowry (WA) Manton Markey Martinez Matsui Mavroules McKinney Mikulski Miller (CA) Miller
(WA) Mineta Moakley Moody Morrison (CT) Mrazek Oakar Owens Porter Price Rangel Rodino Roe
Rostenkowski Roybal Russo Sabo Savage Scheuer Schroeder Schumer Seiberling Smith (FL) Solarz
Spratt St Germain Stark Stratton Studds Torres Torricelli Towns Traficant Udall Vento Visclosky
Walgren Waxman Weiss Wheat Whitehurst Wolpe Yates


NOES-298
Alexander Andrews Applegate Archer Armey AuCoin Badham Barnard Bartlett Barton Bateman Bedell
Bentley Bereuter Bevill Bilirakis Bliley Boehlert Boggs Boner (TN) Bonker Bosco Boucher Breaux
Brooks Brown (CA) Brown (CO) Broyhill Bruce Bryant Burton (IN) Bustamante Byron Callahan
Campbell Carney Carr Chandler Chapman Chappell Chappie Cheney Clinger Coats Cobey Coble Coelho
Coleman (MO) Coleman (TX) Combest Conte Coughlin Courter Craig Crane Daniel Dannemeyer
Darden Daschle Daub Davis de la Garza DeLay Derrick DeWine Dickinson Dicks Dingell DioGuardi
Dorgan (ND) Dornan (CA) Dowdy Dreier Duncan Dyson Eckart (OH) Eckert (NY) Edwards (OK)
Emerson English Erdreich Evans (IA) Fiedler Fields Fish Flippo Florio Foley Ford (MI) Fowler Franklin
Frenzel Frost Fuqua Gallo Gaydos Gekas Gilman Gingrich Glickman Goodling Gradison Gray (IL) Gregg
Gunderson Hall (OH) Hall, Ralph Hamilton Hammerschmidt Hansen Hartnett Hatcher Hefner Hendon
Hiler Hillis Holt Hopkins Horton Hubbard Huckaby Hunter Hutto Hyde Jeffords Jenkins Johnson Jones
(NC) Jones (OK) Jones (TN) Kanjorski Kasich Kemp Kindness Kolbe Kolter Kostmayer Kramer
Lagomarsino Lantos Latta Leach (IA) Leath (TX) Lent Lewis (CA) Lewis (FL) Lightfoot Livingston Lloyd
Loeffler Long Lott Lowery (CA) Luken Lundine Lungren Mack MacKay Madigan Marlenee Martin (IL)
Martin (NY) Mazzoli McCain McCandless McCloskey McCollum McCurdy McDade McEwen McGrath
McHugh McKernan McMillan Meyers Mica Michel Miller (OH) Mitchell Molinari Mollohan Monson
Montgomery Moore Moorhead Morrison (WA) Murphy Murtha Myers Natcher Neal Nelson Nielson
Nowak Oberstar Obey Olin Ortiz Oxley Packard Panetta Parris Pashayan Pease Penny Pepper Perkins
Petri Pickle Pursell Quillen Rahall Ray Regula Reid Richardson Ridge Rinaldo Ritter Roberts Robinson
Roemer Rogers Rose Roth Roukema Rowland (CT) Rowland (GA) Rudd Saxton Schaefer Schneider
Schuette Sensenbrenner Sharp Shaw Shelby Shumway Shuster Sikorski Siljander Sisisky Skeen
Skelton Slattery Slaughter Smith (IA) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smith, Denny (OR) Smith, Robert (NH)
Smith, Robert (OR) Snowe Snyder Solomon Spence Staggers Stallings Stangeland Stenholm Strang
Stump Sundquist Sweeney Swift Swindall Synar Tallon Tauke Tauzin Taylor Thomas (CA) Thomas
(GA) Traxler Valentine Vander Jagt Volkmer Vucanovich Walker Watkins Weaver Weber Whitley
Whittaker Whitten Williams Wilson Wirth Wise Wolf Wortley Wyden Wylie Yatron Young (AK) Young
(FL) Young (MO) Zschau

NOT VOTING-12
Addabbo Boulter Gephardt Grotberg Heftel Ireland Lujan Nichols O'Brien Schulze Stokes Wright


WTF??

UPDATE: over at usacarry.com

Originally Posted by n00b:
Is there anyone that we could possibly send this to in order to challenge it? I don't think the actual transcript had ever been found. Could this possibly be used as new evidence for a person charged with possession of a machine gun to be released of all charges? I mean this is proof isn't it?

It should be available via the National Archives/CSPAN as well as the audio & video which I know reflects the transcript that we are now reading...
Because I watched it & heard it sometime back...

Regarding Hughes Amendment #777 of the so-called FOPA of 1986; I have had discussions at length with a two-well known Constitutional Lawyers on the Second Amendment; one was Alan Gura and you can search this sites archives for related info & my thoughts on that P.O.S. whom is doing us no favors...

The other is fellow Nevadian, Army Ranger, Yale Educated & Respected Constitutional Attorney Stewart Rhodes, whom is also the founder of Oathkeepers...
Oath Keepers Oath Keepers – Guardians of the Republic

I have not had the opportunity to discuss this transcript with him thus-far; but I did discuss possible ways to challenge this particular federal law that is clearly in conflict with the Second Amendment...

He stated the fastest way to git rid of this abomination is to get Congress to Amend/Repeal it...

Hence my suggestion to start getting this in front of as many of the 80 million & counting owners of 270 million & counting firearms and their U.S. Senators and Congressmen/Women...
And as I mentioned in the o/p of this thread; Wayne LaPierre & the NRA need to STEP UP & KEEP THEIR WORD !!!
And thats not going to happen unless we start hammering the NRA, GOA, SAF, JPFO, Guns & Ammo Magazine and others to sh*t or get off the pot...

WE THE PEOPLE have been silent on this issue way too long...

The second way he suggested was to get as many people as possible in different parts of the country (that do not live in a state like California whom has separate, redundant legislation) to concurrently file the form 4 request with the BATFE via your local Class III dealer for a post May 19th, 1986 manufactured weapon such as a Select Fire F/A M-16/M-4 etc...
http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-5320-4.pdf

It will cost you $200.00 just to file the form ... (Refundable upon denial)

In order to get denied by the BATFE so you can challenge at least the 2nd/5th Amendment Constitutionality of USC 18 922 (o) et.al. without breaking the law...
Giving us yet another opportunity to bring this transcript into the public eyes and forefront...

This is consistent with what Heller and others did...

Their mistake was they got Alan Gura Esq. to represent them as did McDonald ...

The First Fundamental Principle of Constitutional Interpretation: Your Rights Don't Come From Government ...
Oath Keepers: CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC 101: YOUR RIGHTS DON’T COME FROM GOVERNMENT

So far I have a couple of people here in Nevada that are willing & able to join me, but obviously we need a more diverse representation of Second Amendment supporters whom realize that if they can ban one complete type/class of firearm they can ban them all; as has been demonstrated over & over again in the history of the world...

We cannot, must not let this stand, regardless of whether or not you have any desire to own a f/a at anytime in your life or not...
Either the Constitution Matters or it does not...

Also yet another reason to get people to read the fricking so-called Firearm Freedom Acts state's like Montana are passing and others are copying...

I should add WAY TOO MANY PEOPLE THINK F/A'S WERE BANNED BY THE 1934 NFA... NOTHING COULD BE FARTHER FROM THE TRUTH...

May 19th, 1986 ... Thank so-called uber-conservative Ronald Reagan and the shenanigans of the 99th U.S. Congress and the NRA dropping the ball for that one ...

Oh snap!!! Let's get this moving people!! Our brothers over at usacarry are willing to file form 4s in order to challenge them once they are denied, lets give them a hand.

http://www.usacarry.com/forums/firea...1986-fopa.html

The poll is to let us all know when we have ALL the 9 applicable federal courts covered.

Once we have reached that milestone, we can circle up via pm/otherwise and coordinate the concurrent/simultaneous BATFE Form 4 filings.

Once we have all received our denials, we will begin phase II, challenging the denial(s) in court, also on a concurrent/simultaneous basis. (Circling up via pm/otherwise and coordinating this effort).

At that point perhaps Wayne LaPierre, the NRA will finally keep their word and step up to the plate; and GOA, SAF, JPFO, Guns & Ammo Magazine, et.al. will get off their collective arses and bring some more clout into the fight.

With so-many of us being various tea party members, or knowing tea party members, it would be great to get that kind of national support, as this abomination is yet another side effect of out of control, unchecked big government...

80 Million & Counting Firearm Owners of 270 Million & Counting Firearms in the U.S... WE CAN MAKE THIS HAPPEN !

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." - Samuel Adams


We need to spread this further!!

[nfafan]

Yeah, NFA were not "banned" by the NFA of 1934 - merely regulated. So - the anti-gunners can always point to the fact that the 2A was preserved by the NFA of 34.

Regardless, we will not see any GCA 68-like amnesty (where the ATF lost half the papers for anyway...) or a lifting of the 1986 ban anytime soon.

Didn't happen under Bush I or II - supposedly the 2A Friendly Party(??), and it won't happen now.

Unless;

Enough congress-critters can be persuaded to to offer and support such an act in the name of FRESH revenues to the US Treasury and job opps for the MAC-mfgs and Stemples and Flemings and OOWs of the world.

Not to be a curmudgeon - but don't bank whats left of your assets on it.

Waaaaay to many states against the NFA of 34 as it is already, they could care less if the ban stays.

Plus a bunch of connected people who would rather not see their treasures deflate in paper-value in a matter of days. Would you want to see your "shootable investment" suddenly devalue?

Would you want to know that the Westy 1928 TSMG you just paid $14K and put the family into debt for - was suddenly devalued while the rest of us could order up a BRAND NEW Kahr 1928 TSMG for under $2K?

I BTDT, and I don't think many of you want to be there either.

And no, I'm not talking cheap-ass MACs, I'm talking the expensive stuff that you bought - that could now be again obtainable cheaper - HK trigger packs, RDIAS, RR ARs, RR Uzis, tuber MP40s, fresh MK760s for $700.00 again, et al.

Didn't think so.

[Kramer]

Plus a bunch of connected people who would rather not see their treasures deflate in paper-value in a matter of days. Would you want to see your "shootable investment" suddenly devalue?

Would you want to know that the Westy 1928 TSMG you just paid $14K and put the family into debt for - was suddenly devalued while the rest of us could order up a BRAND NEW Kahr 1928 TSMG for under $2K?

And no, I'm not talking cheap-ass MACs, I'm talking the expensive stuff that you bought - that could now be again obtainable cheaper - HK trigger packs, RDIAS, RR ARs, RR Uzis, tuber MP40s, fresh MK760s for $700.00 again, et al.

Although I have three MGs, yes I would like to see it repealed so I can go out and buy a bunch more MGs cheap!

BTW the original type C&R stuff would still retain quite a bit of value because they will never be made again.

BTW-II good post!

[nfafan]

Although I have three MGs, yes I would like to see it repealed so I can go out and buy a bunch more MGs cheap!

BTW the original type C&R stuff would still retain quite a bit of value because they will never be made again.

BTW-II good post!

True that. Even with inflation, if MACs, MKs, Stemples and STENs could be made again - what fun us bargain hunters could have again. I remember LMO used to advertise 6-packs of MACs for like $300.00 each in the MGNews back before the ban.

After weraing out the pages of Fred Rexer and JC Earl catalogs in the 70's, my 1st NFA was going to be a Reising commercial M50, complete with fitted Reising hard case and 4 20rd mags - for a whopping $120.00. Freakin stamp was more than the gun itself.

But couldn't find diddly on the Reising back then at all anywhere, and 20rd mags in a subgun???

So I ended up getting a NIB PS MAC-10/45, complete with warranty card, cleaning rod, bagged manual for - $75.00 and a $25.00 inter-state CL3 xfer fee. At least MACs could be seen in the movies...

Little did I know that the SWD M11/9 "MACs" would later be tagged to the "Miami Vice" craze as the "TSMG of the 80's" - and help fuel the 86 ban.

oh well.

Pretty sure that some states ONLY allow C&R full-auto, so they will still do OK if the ban is lifted, not great, but still "OK". MACs and tube-guns will drop in value - which is fine by me.

Anyway, if the ban is lifted look for me on the evening news; I'll be the one arrested for running the streets of a PGH suburb naked, except for being wrapped in Form-1s.