PDA

View Full Version : Hughes Amendment 25 years later


BobB35
08-20-2011, 1:01 PM
Just read in the recent edition of the Rifleman the "Second Shots" section p37.

It was a look back 25 years and I thought it was somewhat humorous. The NRA was vowing to have the law overturned, new legislation was being written and yada, yada, yada.

What do we have now....A group of gun owners who would violently oppose overturning this law because of their "investments."

Kind of makes you wonder what hope we really have: Criminals (Rangel, et. al.) illegally pass a law (watch the video) with no basis in reality and 25 years later we are still waiting for something to happen to let law abiding gun owners exercise their 2nd amendment rights according to the supreme courts interpretation of the NFA via Miller.

The Fourth Turning is coming and I don't think it will be pretty....

mag360
08-20-2011, 1:22 PM
this was discussed here a couple days ago. the consensus was that most pre 86 or 68 owners of these nfa guns would be more than happy to see their investment go down in value if it meant they could get more guns. they will always be worth more because they have historical value, just not as pricey as they've been.

Gray Peterson
08-20-2011, 1:27 PM
Just read in the recent edition of the Rifleman the "Second Shots" section p37.

It was a look back 25 years and I thought it was somewhat humorous. The NRA was vowing to have the law overturned, new legislation was being written and yada, yada, yada.

What do we have now....A group of gun owners who would violently oppose overturning this law because of their "investments."

Kind of makes you wonder what hope we really have: Criminals (Rangel, et. al.) illegally pass a law (watch the video) with no basis in reality and 25 years later we are still waiting for something to happen to let law abiding gun owners exercise their 2nd amendment rights according to the supreme courts interpretation of the NFA via Miller.

The Fourth Turning is coming and I don't think it will be pretty....

There was a more detailed description I believe by David Kopel. There was actually NRA-supported litigation, specifically Farmer v. Higgins (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15259938584023232827&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr)

Litigation at that point on 2A grounds would have been really stupid. Silveira: Second Amendment Suicide (http://www.calgunlaws.com/index.php/articles-memoranda-and-commentary/78-commentary/471.html) by Don Kates shows this to be the case, and that was for an "semiauto ban". Machine guns would be a harder road to be fair. We need carry, we need semi-auto bans tossed first.

wilit
08-20-2011, 1:45 PM
I did an unofficial poll on 1919A4.com once. There's a lot of MG owners there and I'd say 99% of them would LOVE to have the Hughes Amendment overturned. The reasoning is they'd be able to own a lot more MG's and be able to buy MG's that were not available in May of '86.

Here's the thread.
http://1919a4.com/showthread.php?29205

Uxi
08-20-2011, 5:26 PM
Best chance is a rider on a piece of legislation Barry doesn't dare veto. Unless of course, we can get a decent supporter of the RKBA in 2012 instead, of course.

yellowfin
08-20-2011, 5:54 PM
^ Perry would probably LOVE to sign an overturn of the 86 ban, and I'd love to watch him do so.

racerguy180
08-20-2011, 10:54 PM
^ Perry would probably LOVE to sign an overturn of the 86 ban, and I'd love to watch him do so.

I would jump for joy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

mag360
08-21-2011, 10:37 AM
I'd pay down the national debt to have him sign it on my back!! Haha like Jerry did with the "dream act" .

CCWFacts
08-21-2011, 12:23 PM
^ Perry would probably LOVE to sign an overturn of the 86 ban, and I'd love to watch him do so.

NOTE! The ban doesn't need to be overturned. Congress doesn't need to do anything. The law already allows a 90-day amnesty period (http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/26C53.txt) to be declared whenever the Secretary of the Treasury feels like it. I would like 922o to be overturned but (I hope) President Perry could achieve the same effect just by ordering the Treasury to do it. I hope he does! Even if this was something done at the end of a second term, that would be a big help.

I also hope the NRA will get involved in this and start applying pressure to ALL the Republican hopefuls to do this.

Voting in the next election is important because, if we get Perry, we'll have a very strong 2A supporter who might do things like that, and who will nominate iron-clad 2A supporter to the courts. It's not just the Supreme Court that matters, but also all the Federal courts. He will also oversee a major shake-up of the BATF, which has gone off the rails and is ripe for a big shake-up.

yellowfin
08-22-2011, 10:28 AM
Hmm, 90 days should be plenty of time to engrave a couple million AR, AK, Uzi, PKM, 1919, Ma Deuce, FAL, M60, RPD, MP5, and Sten receivers, plus plenty of sear packs too. Would the Form 1's have to be approved or merely sent in within that time frame?

mag360
08-22-2011, 11:58 AM
Hmm, 90 days should be plenty of time to engrave a couple million AR, AK, Uzi, PKM, 1919, Ma Deuce, FAL, M60, RPD, MP5, and Sten receivers, plus plenty of sear packs too. Would the Form 1's have to be approved or merely sent in within that time frame?

that would be fantastic. I'd take one of each!

CCWFacts
08-22-2011, 2:12 PM
Hmm, 90 days should be plenty of time to engrave a couple million AR, AK, Uzi, PKM, 1919, Ma Deuce, FAL, M60, RPD, MP5, and Sten receivers, plus plenty of sear packs too. Would the Form 1's have to be approved or merely sent in within that time frame?

They would not need to be approved, just submitted. At least that's what I assume.

Yes, I'm sure a million sears, receivers, tubes, sideplates, and whatever else would be registered within 90 days. That would render the whole 922(o) thing ridiculous and hasten its repeal or its demise in court. "Common use" and all that.

I hope our next president is Republican and will go down this route. Literally the only way Congress could prevent this would be by passing legislation by a veto-proof margin to repeal the amnesty provision, which is basically impossible.

We should demand a commitment from the Republican candidates to do this. This is one of the very few unilateral areas where a president can really help us with Congress having no say-so. It's also perhaps the only way the Hughes Amend will ever be undone. I think it's an iffy proposition that SCOTUS will someday strike down the Hughes Amend and I doubt Congress would do it either.

It would also be fitting for a for a Republican president to undo the harm to our rights done by a previous Republican president.

Merc1138
08-22-2011, 3:22 PM
this was discussed here a couple days ago. the consensus was that most pre 86 or 68 owners of these nfa guns would be more than happy to see their investment go down in value if it meant they could get more guns. they will always be worth more because they have historical value, just not as pricey as they've been.

Exactly. The truly collectible items wouldn't suddenly become worthless, the museum pieces would still be just that. Considering that a number of the more recent owners of pre '86 and '68 NFA items had to pay through the nose(I'd have typed another orifice but it'd be inappropriate) to get them, I'm sure they'd all jump at the chance to be able to get more. Yeah, there are probably a few who own them for the sake of cash but if you look at videos of something like the big sandy machine gun shoot in Arizona, those people appear to be in it for the fun.

As nice as it is to think that a new president might invoke the 90 day amnesty period, I seriously doubt something like that would happen within a first term. It seems like more of a "LOL, check out what I can do and there's nothing you can do that'll stop me!" maneuver. That said, I don't think it's unlikely to ever happen since I find that I'm running into more and more people in their 20's-30's wondering "wait, why can't I have that but the 60 year old dude over there can?" and then needing to explain the crappy laws, registration deadlines, ban dates, etc. with the usual response being "well that's bull****". We just may get some politicians in office eventually who are sick of the restrictions put in place that screws them out of rights that seem to have skipped a generation.

mauser6863
08-29-2011, 12:25 PM
Hi Guys,

The Hughes Amendment has always been illegal, but now we have proof...

It's one thing to make laws that are oppressive, it is quite another to use simple fraud to include language in a bill which was voted down on the house floor. One wonders what would happen to a mere clerk if they inserted or altered language in a house bill to change its meaning. I would imagine the house would act to correct this lawlessness and demand that the perpetrator be prosecuted by the Attorney General. Since the criminal in this case appears to be Charles Wrangle (some pigs are more equal than others), I'm sure he will get a pass.

The "amended" bill was sent to the Senate and both houses passed it, so is it a real law or not??? My gut tells me "No", that criminals should not reap any profit from their crimes, but this is Washington.

Only now that the CSPAN archives are public, do we have proof of this blatant disregard for the law. I suppose this act of tyranny will continue to stand, for now. The courts are very, very reluctant to police the rules and procedures of the congressional floor, so relief from them will not happen.

Check out the article and watch the video:

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-national/was-hughes-amendment-illegally-passed

I'd be interested in hearing Gene's take on this whole thing from a lawyer's point of view. Haven't heard anything from the NRA ILA on this subject.

mauser6863