PDA

View Full Version : Speaking of Dave Kopel; Very interesting mention about Machine Guns


aileron
04-18-2008, 11:45 AM
Thanks to savasyn for the WSJ article and AfricanHunter who left the link to his website when commenting about Kopel. I went there and read the "What the anti's are thinking" article and found a little gem inside. :D

I quoted the interesting comments from Cummings about machine guns to the House Ways & Means Committee.


Attorney General Cummings explained: “If we made a statute absolutely forbidding any human being to have a machine gun, you might say there is some constitutional question involved. But when you say, ‘we will tax the machine gun’ and when you say that ‘the absence of a license showing payment of the tax has been made indicates that a crime has been perpetrated,’ you are easily within the law.”

Lewis followed up: “In other words, it does not amount to prohibition, but allows of regulation.” Attorney General Cummings replied: “That is the idea. We have studied that very carefully.” (Hearings Before The House Committee on Ways and Means on h.r. 9066, 73rd Congress, 2d Session, 1934, pages 18-19.)


The whole article is worth a read, very fun to see him poke holes in the briefs filed by the anti's in heller.

http://www.davekopel.com/2A/Mags/What-are-the-antis-thinking.pdf

mymonkeyman
04-18-2008, 11:55 AM
Except judges aren't that dumb. If you go from a tax/license to a tax/license where you can't get the tax stamp/license, they realize it's a ban. That's exactly what happened in DC with the handgun ban. That is what happened with post 1986 machine guns. Similarly, if you make someone jump through too many hoops to exercise a constitutional right, they will strike that down too. Just look at all the 1st amendment cases regarding requiring permits for demonstrations/parades. It's very clear that the justices in Heller who will be voting to strike down the DC handgun ban want a 2nd amendment with teeth (especially Roberts, who gets to decide who will write the opinion).

Sgt Raven
04-18-2008, 1:23 PM
Except judges aren't that dumb. If you go from a tax/license to a tax/license where you can't get the tax stamp/license, they realize it's a ban. That's exactly what happened in DC with the handgun ban. That is what happened with post 1986 machine guns. Similarly, if you make someone jump through too many hoops to exercise a constitutional right, they will strike that down too. Just look at all the 1st amendment cases regarding requiring permits for demonstrations/parades. It's very clear that the justices in Heller who will be voting to strike down the DC handgun ban want a 2nd amendment with teeth (especially Roberts, who gets to decide who will write the opinion).


Another case was the 1937 Marihuana Tax Act, which was struck down by the SCOTUS.

In 1969 in Leary v. United States, this act was found to be unconstitutional since it violated the Fifth Amendment, since a person seeking the tax stamp would have to incriminate him/herself. ;)