Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-27-2022, 1:46 AM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 9,618
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default TEXAS-SUPPRESSORS-NFA-BRUEN

OK folks, saw this last year. https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/...ght=suppressor

Didn't think much of it AT THE TIME.

AND THIS, seems to have flown under the CG radar, back in Feb of this yr.
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov...biting-firearm

Here is the filing. https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov...it%20BATFE.pdf

THEN I GOT TO THINK'N, ..... [yes, I know some will doubt that last comment]

This was all prior the the NYSRPA v Bruen brilliance of SCOTUS. Which we all saw as the STARTING BLOCK for the race to destroy 50 yrs of oppressive legislation and court decisions.

I believe the Texas Suppressor case may be a first domino to topple NFA. At least in part.

Yeah I know there were no suppressors in 1791. But thanks to Gaetano, that should not be an issue.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-27-2022, 12:10 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 3,279
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

The AGs of the free states should join in a suit to challenge the constitutionality of the ban and tax on suppressors.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-27-2022, 2:56 PM
ziegenbock ziegenbock is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 138
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ishootforblood View Post
Itís interesting. Idaho tried something similar about 10 years ago. As I recall, they passed a law declaring that NFA Laws didnít apply in Idaho in regards to suppressors made in Idaho and kept in Idaho. I donít recall any legal proceedings, etc. Also, Missouri passed a law that prohibits state and local police from reporting Violations of the NFA to the Feds. There are fines and other civil remedies that can be brought against the police if they violate the law. Evidently, Missouri doesnít have State Laws against suppressors.

And now we have Texas playing the Bruen Card, and following what appears to a legitimate legal path. Yes, interesting.í
https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSecti...&bid=33624&hl=

571.020 subsection 1, subdivsion 6(c) --class D felony
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-27-2022, 7:33 PM
Fyathyrio's Avatar
Fyathyrio Fyathyrio is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Free 'Murica
Posts: 1,002
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Kansas tried the suppressor thing, didn't work out so well for the test case dudes. Feds don't care.
__________________
"Everything I ever learned about leadership, I learned from a Chief Petty Officer." - John McCain
"Use your hammer, not your mouth, jackass!" - Mike Ditka
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Earl Jones
The world is filled with violence. Because criminals carry guns, we decent law-abiding citizens should also have guns. Otherwise they will win and the decent people will lose.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-28-2022, 1:12 AM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 9,618
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fyathyrio View Post
Kansas tried the suppressor thing, didn't work out so well for the test case dudes. Feds don't care.
Yet, that was then. And this is now. POST BRUEN. The 2A is a 2nd Class Right no longer. Two-Step is dead. And "THT" is the KING of PRECEDENTS.


FROM THE LINK;

Quote:
The men challenged the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act, alleging it is an invalid exercise of congressional power and an invasion of the Second Amendment right to bear arms. They also challenged the lower courtís ruling that their reliance on the state law provided no defense to the federal charges.

Separately, Kettler argued further that his prosecution resulted from the dispute between Kansas and the federal government over the Kansas law.

The appeals court panel rejected all the defense arguments in a 47-page decision. It concluded the federal gun law falls within Congressí power to tax.
First bolded in above quote. Appears to be a clear and definite SMACK DOWN. Thanks to Bruen-"THT".

And as to the second bolded sentence. Since 2A is now A FULLY ENUMERATED RIGHT. TAXING IT, using congress's POWER TO TAX. IS or SHOULD be OFF THE TABLE. Due to this;


Quote:
AMENDMENT XXIV - Passed by Congress August 27, 1962. Ratified January 23, 1964.

Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax
No poll taxes are allowed, in order to exercise a right to vote. Taxing any aspect of the 2nd-A, protected by "THT". Would NOW be a clear 14th-A violation.

Congress can't just pick and choose which RIGHTS, it can/will tax. Based solely on which rights the current controlling party likes/dislikes. 14th said "NONE or ALL" equally.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-30-2022, 9:24 AM
ddestruel ddestruel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 874
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Wasnít the Idaho case similar to Kansas and Montana where the state was trying to exempt commercial production and commercial sale of firearms items for sale within their state. Where as this is Texas challenging the basic concept of tge 80% home build for personal use and not for sale ?

I wish the tx ag would have dove off into the ďin common useĒ weeds as well because it in essence creates a bar where regulation even of machine guns becomes more common and accepted and the oversight or burdens are no longer justified. I also wonder if a state ag challenge can attack the concept of prohibition of anything under police powers.
__________________
NRA Life member, multi organization continued donor etc etc etc

Last edited by ddestruel; 07-30-2022 at 9:30 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-29-2022, 3:26 PM
Fyathyrio's Avatar
Fyathyrio Fyathyrio is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Free 'Murica
Posts: 1,002
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Update on the case here by a couple TX attorneys, current status and comparison to the mistakes made by KS & MT.
__________________
"Everything I ever learned about leadership, I learned from a Chief Petty Officer." - John McCain
"Use your hammer, not your mouth, jackass!" - Mike Ditka
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Earl Jones
The world is filled with violence. Because criminals carry guns, we decent law-abiding citizens should also have guns. Otherwise they will win and the decent people will lose.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-28-2022, 1:18 PM
bigdaddyz1776's Avatar
bigdaddyz1776 bigdaddyz1776 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Location: California
Posts: 215
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Well this news is weird coming out of Texas.

Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-28-2022, 2:59 PM
Daithi Daithi is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2022
Posts: 11
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
AMENDMENT XXIV - Passed by Congress August 27, 1962. Ratified January 23, 1964.

Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax.


No poll taxes are allowed, in order to exercise a right to vote. Taxing any aspect of the 2nd-A, protected by "THT". Would NOW be a clear 14th-A violation.

Congress can't just pick and choose which RIGHTS, it can/will tax. Based solely on which rights the current controlling party likes/dislikes. 14th said "NONE or ALL" equally.
Just to be clear. Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 is the case that ruled poll taxes were illegal and the 24th Amendment didn't matter. This case was a state election and not even a federal election, so it had nothing to do with the 24th Amendment. SCOTUS simply ruled that poll taxes to exercise your right to vote were unconstitutional and a violation of the 14th Amendment, period. It didn't matter if it was a federal election covered by the 24A because the 14A covered all elections regardless. Logically, the same should apply to laws that use taxes as a means to restrict our 2A rights as well, but we still need a court to come out and say it.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 8:00 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy

Tactical Pants Tactical Boots Military Boots 5.11 Tactical