Arsenal Found on the Cape!

[kiver]

.

.

 

[SemiAutoSam]

I am of the opinion that its more than just a matter of paying a 200.00 tax stamp for any MG that he was in possession of as on May 19 1986 the door slammed shut for any new registration of MG's.

IE if the items he was in possession of were not registered prior to such a date he is SOL and this also means that the items he was in possession of are considered contraband.

I would hope in time Heller would overturn FOPA 1986 but I wont hold my breath.

So not paying a $200 tax for each of them means now that he's a criminal? That sound right to you?

 

[Nickle]

SAS, Ross was referring to the unconstitutionality of NFA '34 and FOPA '86.

See, a punitive tax ($200 registration for a $100 gun) isn't legal in the US, nor is banning what already has been determined to be constitutionally protected firearms (military weapons).

(US v Miller already laid out that IF Miller had been in possession of an M1918 BAR or an M1919 series MG, he would've been acquitted, as both would be used by a legitimate "militia". He was in possession of a "sawed off shotgun", which the US attorney lied through his teeth and said the US Army didn't use. Truth be known, they did use M97 and M12 Riot Guns in the trenches in WW1.)

 

[Blitz1]

 

[TY43215]

What truly bothers me is the impression that "nearly 1000" rounds of ammo is excessive.

Any 3 gun shooter will have that and more in his car on match day.

I have no inside info but looking at the pics in the various news rags, it looks like the press is calling folding stock shot guns sawed off. There could be NFA firearms there, but I will take a wait and see attitude.

 

[namedpipes]

You need help!

 

[Executive]

OK now that's some funny sh!t right there.


Chris

 

[SemiAutoSam]

Thanks for that, I wasn't aware of the US V Miller case.

I will look it up and attempt to educate myself, Or if anyone has a link ?

SAS, Ross was referring to the unconstitutionality of NFA '34 and FOPA '86.

See, a punitive tax ($200 registration for a $100 gun) isn't legal in the US, nor is banning what already has been determined to be constitutionally protected firearms (military weapons).

(US v Miller already laid out that IF Miller had been in possession of an M1918 BAR or an M1919 series MG, he would've been acquitted, as both would be used by a legitimate "militia". He was in possession of a "sawed off shotgun", which the US attorney lied through his teeth and said the US Army didn't use. Truth be known, they did use M97 and M12 Riot Guns in the trenches in WW1.)

 

[jcr]

He was in possession of a "sawed off shotgun", which the US attorney lied through his teeth and said the US Army didn't use.

Which US attorney would that be?

I've read the DoJ brief in Miller and amongst comments about "gangster and the desperado" I saw no arguments regarding use or not of sawed off shotguns by any military. Nor was there mention that (obviously) machine guns were used by the army or militia.

The only mention was that such guns in private hands were only of use to the aforementioned desperados.

So, besides the Solicitor General and two assistant AGs, there are three (presumably US) attorneys listed on the brief, Strine, Kneip and Smith. Which one "lied through his teeth"? And where, so I can document it?

 

[Nickle]

Thanks for that, I wasn't aware of the US V Miller case.

I will look it up and attempt to educate myself, Or if anyone has a link ?

Wikipedia is your friend.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller

 

[dwarven1]

Also, IIRC, the Treasury (or BATF, I forget which) decided that they would not ACCEPT any new "registrations" after 1986, thus resulting in a defacto ban on new machine guns - it wasn't an actual law passed.

I'll have to do some research tonight and post more info.

 

[drgrant]

Also, IIRC, the Treasury (or BATF, I forget which) decided that they would not ACCEPT any new "registrations" after 1986, thus resulting in a defacto ban on new machine guns - it wasn't an actual law passed.

Actually it was a law- it was part of FOPA-86 signed by President Reagan. The "no new MG registrations" was last minute part of that bundle. 922(o), IIRC.

Of course there's some fun interpretation here...

(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.

Course, if you take (2)(A) literally this means that BATFE could possibly authorize such a transfer (eg, see highlighted words... ) Of course, if they're given the authority to do this, they can simply abuse it and not do it, I guess. Who knows. 922(o) is widely considered to be not going anywhere without a legal challenge or getting it struck from the books.

-Mike

 

[mark056]

Don't forget it could also be .30-06...

Actually if it was NATO it could be 7.62 (.308)

Mark L.

 

[dwarven1]

Course, if you take (2)(A) literally this means that BATFE could possibly authorize such a transfer (eg, see highlighted words... ) Of course, if they're given the authority to do this, they can simply abuse it and not do it, I guess. Who knows. 922(o) is widely considered to be not going anywhere without a legal challenge or getting it struck from the books.

-Mike

Thank you, that's precisely what I'm referring to. They could if they wanted to, but they don't. Can't let the peons have full auto weapons, y'know.

 

[C-pher]

Actually if it was NATO it could be 7.62 (.308)

Mark L.

Crap...that's what I meant. I'm a dumbass sometims. Thanks for being the ONLY person to catch that.. LOL!

 

[namedpipes]

I Googled 'marstons mills arsenal' to see if there was any new news, which there pretty much is not, except he pled not guilty and they bumped his bail to 50k.

However, seems other parts of the country are talking about it as well. I came across a forum in the south east that could not grasp why this was an issue in the first place. Finally one person explained: "In mass, like Chicago, you have to have a license just to BUY a gun." You could just see the incredulity in the typed words.

Anyway, for anyone not Marstons Milled out, the link is

http://forums.somd.com/news-current-events/147846-oh-noes-guns-ammo.html

 

[Blues508]

The guns are probably already in the hands of Peter Dowd.

 

[Len-2A Training]

The guns are probably already in the hands of Peter Dowd.

Not likely. Turns out that Marc Cohen has a bonded warehouse on the Cape.

ETA: if they are considered "evidence" of a crime (the case here), the PD must maintain control until the case is adjudicated. Then they are likely off to the crusher.

 

[namedpipes]

Not likely. Turns out that Marc Cohen has a bonded warehouse on the Cape.

ETA: if they are considered "evidence" of a crime (the case here), the PD must maintain control until the case is adjudicated. Then they are likely off to the crusher.

Nope. Some of the cooler items will not be crushed. Something else will go in its place. Maybe with the publicity, but I doubt it will all be destroyed.