Join INGunOwners For Free
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Grandmaster Alamo's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Does the Affordable Care Act mean the Feds can no longer regulate machine guns?!

    ... or maybe even did the 1986 implementation of 18 U.S.C. 922(o) gut the Federal Government's power to regulate machine guns?

    Inquiring minds want to know...

    As I understand it so far (a first quick read and thus subject to error):
    The DOJ just dropped, or is in the process of dropping, an indictment for unlawful machine gun possession that was granted cert by SCOTUS because they may fear the "no machine guns" law as it is now promulgated may be ruled unconstitutional. And not (directly) on 2A grounds but on the fact that Congress's ability to legislate on firearms at all is based on its taxing authority (NFA is a 'revenue measure' under the IRS code). If they won't levy a tax on a machine gun, and in fact refuse to take a tax payment on it, have they removed entirely the government's ability to regulate them?

    Came across this reading Clayton Cramer's blog. See his post here: https://claytonecramer.blogspot.com/...o-believe.html

    He references this post at Volokh Conspiracy about the case and the relationship to the ACA and the government's position on the "tax" that used to be required if you didn't have health insurance. https://reason.com/2020/04/22/doj-di...n-was-pending/

    Cramer also references this much earlier case where part of an indictment for unregistered machine gun was dismissed by the federal district court because the 1986 law forbid the registration and taxing of machine guns: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...&as_sdt=200006

  2. #2
    Grandmaster DoggyDaddy's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Wouldn't that be delicious irony... Obama... still trying to be the best gun salesman ever even after he's out of office.

  3. #3
    Master Beowulf's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    It's a nice dream, but I'm not going to hold my breath.
    Minimum Government, Maximum Freedom.

  4. #4
    Grandmaster Leadeye's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Ever since RCRA, CERCLA were passed and enforced I don't count on the government obeying the constitution if it decides differently.
    Where's the Kaboom? There was supposed to be an earth shattering Kaboom.

    Marvin the Martian

  5. #5
    Master Twangbanger's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    What?

    "...Congress's ability to legislate on firearms at all is based on its taxing authority (NFA is a 'revenue measure' under the IRS code)"

    I'm amazed at the extent to which some nerdy people think the real world is obligated to follow rules of consistency. "Yeah, well, the court said this about healthcare..."

    Not a law technician, but it would seem all that's needed is one example of a court-upheld firearms law involving an untaxed firearm of any kind, to shoot this theory.

    If there were any real possibility of C3 items be(com)ing unregulated, I bet you'd have the Supreme Court canceling their vacations to hear the case and shoot it down. And failing that, you'd probably have all Congressional Democrats and half the Republicans lining up to fill the hopper with "legislative remedies" to regulate them.

  6. #6
    Grandmaster GodFearinGunTotin's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    INGOer #18,319

  7. #7
    Expert DadSmith's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Constitutionally i don't see how they can tax arms or ammunition as it does infringe on those rights to keep and bear arms. Just like being forced to get a handgun carry permit to carry off property that's infringement. When you limit or try to undermine the 2nd that is infringement.
    Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

  8. #8
    Grandmaster Cameramonkey's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by DadSmith View Post
    Constitutionally i don't see how they can tax arms or ammunition as it does infringe on those rights to keep and bear arms. Just like being forced to get a handgun carry permit to carry off property that's infringement. When you limit or try to undermine the 2nd that is infringement.
    Ive argued for years its a poll tax of sorts. Imagine telling people to exercise their right to vote they have to pay for a tax stamp on their ballot. (of course, its more dangerous than a gun could ever be) They'd go ballistic. Yet they tell me I cant have an NFA item unless I pay a tax. Thats a direct taxation of the 2A. If you say "but what about the rest of the guns you CAN have without a tax?" OK, how about this that equates it more equally; No tax required to vote in the state elections. Vote all you want for your locals. But if you want to vote for the feds/prez, thats a tax stamp.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirk Freeman View Post
    A confused cop is an arresty cop.
    Quote Originally Posted by hoosierdoc View Post
    also, where do we sign up to touch Frank's equipment?

Posting Permissions

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