View Full Version : USA v. Matthew Hoover challenging NFA ban on machine guns.
The defendant in this case is on trial for attempting to manufacture a machine gun. The defendants lawyers are filing a motion that asserts their client's case should be dismissed based on a recent supreme court case. Effectively, their argument is that the NFA ban on machine guns is unconstitutional, so the case should be dropped and the law overturned.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/22080197-machine-gun-usa-v-matthew-hoover-supplement-to-motion-to-dismiss070122
Page 5 of the motion to dismiss is really interesting.
I'm not big on spraying bullets, but this would be cool if they stand a chance.
"attempting to manufacture"?? If you don't succeed, how can you have done anything illegal? Any convictions I've seen before involved the gooberment making sure the gun fired more than one round per squeeze.
I was wondering how long this would take. I can’t even imagine being able to walk into an LGS and walk out with a full auto MK18 and can.
Not getting my hopes up of course.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Outlander Systems
07-08-22, 15:24
I dream about it every night.
I can’t even imagine being able to walk into an LGS and walk out with a full auto MK18 and can.
I was wondering how long this would take. I can’t even imagine being able to walk into an LGS and walk out with a full auto MK18 and can.
Not getting my hopes up of course.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Page 5 of the motion hits at the regulatory heart of the atf’s ability to violate the 2nd amendment.
Outlander Systems
07-08-22, 15:30
I’m with Wake; I’m far too blackpilled to ever believe it’s possible.
Page 5 of the motion hits at the regulatory heart of the atf’s ability to violate the 2nd amendment.
titsonritz
07-08-22, 15:31
I would love to read a Clarence Thomas majority opinion and hear the wails and gnashing of teeth from all the liberal ****sticks.
They are doing this backwards.
Even if they get a win, they will be subject to the 1968 GCA which regulates what firearms are acceptable for domestic production and the Hughes amendment of FOPA 1986 which closed the registry. If they do this wrong, and changes are made to the 1934 NFA by the supreme court, we could lose everything.
The NFA didn't ban the manufacture of new machine guns for private use, the Hughes amendment did.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-08-22, 19:16
Page 5 of the motion hits at the regulatory heart of the atf’s ability to violate the 2nd amendment.
They are doing this backwards.
Even if they get a win, they will be subject to the 1968 GCA which regulates what firearms are acceptable for domestic production and the Hughes amendment of FOPA 1986 which closed the registry. If they do this wrong, and changes are made to the 1934 NFA by the supreme court, we could lose everything.
The NFA didn't ban the manufacture of new machine guns for private use, the Hughes amendment did.
I’m with Steyr. This is a loser case. The cleaner case is opening the registry. I have a feeling that a majority of SCOTUS even now would allow the tracking of the things like cans and machine guns.
Also, the current value of a 1934 $200 tax stamp with inflation?….
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-08-22, 19:16
Page 5 of the motion hits at the regulatory heart of the atf’s ability to violate the 2nd amendment.
They are doing this backwards.
Even if they get a win, they will be subject to the 1968 GCA which regulates what firearms are acceptable for domestic production and the Hughes amendment of FOPA 1986 which closed the registry. If they do this wrong, and changes are made to the 1934 NFA by the supreme court, we could lose everything.
The NFA didn't ban the manufacture of new machine guns for private use, the Hughes amendment did.
I’m with Steyr. This is a loser case. The cleaner case is opening the registry. I have a feeling that a majority of SCOTUS even now would allow the tracking of the things like cans and machine guns.
Also, the current value of a 1934 $200 tax stamp with inflation?….
I was wondering how long this would take. I can’t even imagine being able to walk into an LGS and walk out with a full auto MK18 and can.
Not getting my hopes up of course.
I think the timeline for that will coincide with Hell freezing over! Best guess anyway.....
He was selling "autokeycard" it was a piece of metal with laser outline of a drop in auto sear. It is hardly a machine gun, it merely artwork. Cutting it out and i stallong it would be the felony. Its the ATF precrime division teyi g to remain relevant.
Interesting summary
https://youtu.be/ImF-9GR9rpc
I think some or most in here are missing the point.
This is ATF prosecuting citizen not the other way around.
I’m with Steyr. This is a loser case. The cleaner case is opening the registry. I have a feeling that a majority of SCOTUS even now would allow the tracking of the things like cans and machine guns.
Also, the current value of a 1934 $200 tax stamp with inflation?….
$4428.73 by the CPI inflation rate.
I dream about it every night.
Same here brother, same here.
I’m with Steyr. This is a loser case. The cleaner case is opening the registry. I have a feeling that a majority of SCOTUS even now would allow the tracking of the things like cans and machine guns.
Also, the current value of a 1934 $200 tax stamp with inflation?….
We even have to be careful with the Hughes amendment to FOPA, the original version did not allow for the transfer of any NFA items. That means all the machine guns, SBRs, suppressors, etc. would be grandfathered to their owner in 1986 but couldn't be transferred after that.
Before we go screwing around with the 1934 NFA, we better have ALL of our legal safety nets in place. If we removed the NFA right now, the ban on foreign machine guns (1968 Gun Control Act) and the ban on domestic machine guns (FOPA 1986) would still be in place. And that would put every NFA item in very precarious legal territory.
The "starting point" for any serious talk about reversing any gun control would be the "sporter clause" within the 1968 Gun Control Act which allows ATF to decide if a firearm is "particularly suitable for sporting purposes", get rid of that and you get rid of ATFs power to decide what guns you can own or import based upon a "sporting application."
That alone would undermine the Hughes amendment and the ban on semi auto imports and machine guns regulated by the 1968 GCA and open them both up to challenges without risking updates to the 1934 NFA. And if we did pull that off, the registry would be open and you'd be able to buy new machine guns at current "real world" prices and honestly who gives a shit about a $200 tax that barely pays for the background check at that point.
He was selling "autokeycard" it was a piece of metal with laser outline of a drop in auto sear. It is hardly a machine gun, it merely artwork. Cutting it out and i stallong it would be the felony. Its the ATF precrime division teyi g to remain relevant.
It is whatever ATF decides it is, because we have allowed them to change their own definitions when it suits them.
OutofBatt3ry
07-08-22, 22:31
I was wondering how long this would take. I can’t even imagine being able to walk into an LGS and walk out with a full auto MK18 and can.
Not getting my hopes up of course.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It'll never happen. Props to those fighting it though.
I think some or most in here are missing the point.
This is ATF prosecuting citizen not the other way around.
But the basis for their defense, if successful, could create lots of problems.
In the Heller case, Heller was being prosecuted.
BoringGuy45
07-08-22, 22:37
My hope would be that the court would refuse to hear this case right now.
I agree that this is putting the cart before the horse. We need to walk backwards with 2A infringements as they've been enacted. The next thing on the chopping block needs to be assault weapon bans and mag capacity limits. The question of what weapons other than revolvers and semi-automatic pistols are "common use" has not yet been officially settled. What exactly "common use" means, and who exactly it pertains to (military, civilians, or both?) hasn't been settled yet. Then, they have to answer the question of what a machine gun would be considered? Common use? Dangerous and unusual? Or maybe something in between? If they're common use, does that mean they are regulated the same as any other weapon, or does it mean they remain NFA but the registry has to reopen?
So many questions yet to be answered before we just try and take down the NFA completely.
I highly, highly doubt that we'll ever see machine guns available over the counter with only a standard NICS check. I could potentially see the registry reopen someday with machine guns being ruled as "common use" and thus protected from outright bans, but still highly regulated due some special exception they find the Constitution allows...just my guess.
Full Auto Suppressed Rattler.
My hope would be that the court would refuse to hear this case right now.
I agree that this is putting the cart before the horse. We need to walk backwards with 2A infringements as they've been enacted. The next thing on the chopping block needs to be assault weapon bans and mag capacity limits. The question of what weapons other than revolvers and semi-automatic pistols are "common use" has not yet been officially settled. What exactly "common use" means, and who exactly it pertains to (military, civilians, or both?) hasn't been settled yet. Then, they have to answer the question of what a machine gun would be considered? Common use? Dangerous and unusual? Or maybe something in between? If they're common use, does that mean they are regulated the same as any other weapon, or does it mean they remain NFA but the registry has to reopen?
So many questions yet to be answered before we just try and take down the NFA completely.
I highly, highly doubt that we'll ever see machine guns available over the counter with only a standard NICS check. I could potentially see the registry reopen someday with machine guns being ruled as "common use" and thus protected from outright bans, but still highly regulated due some special exception they find the Constitution allows...just my guess.
While that is the sensible route, it would also be possible to remove assault weapon and magazine bans with the removal of the "sporter clause." As for over the counter legal machine guns, honestly back in the 80s I never thought I'd see the current open carry laws that were brought about by "almost" nation wide conceal carry laws.
Frankly I think this guy should be pointing to the laws as his defense. Straight up black letter law defining what a machine gun is, and his stupid widget ain't it.
Going after NFA, while I admire the spirit of it, ain't good legal strategy.
But the basis for their defense, if successful, could create lots of problems.
In the Heller case, Heller was being prosecuted.
I say let’s go full bore. I’m not worried about what could happen, it’s already happening. So let’s go, it’s time to win or not comply.
Matt is a good guy, the atf crossed the line!
I say let’s go full bore. I’m not worried about what could happen, it’s already happening. So let’s go, it’s time to win or not comply.
Matt is a good guy, the atf crossed the line!
So if they want to win, they need to go after the Hughes amendment in the 1986 FOPA. That is the one that made his lightning link card illegal, it was legal before the Hughes amendment.
I'm not saying don't fight, I'm saying adjust your fire.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-09-22, 06:46
Frankly I think this guy should be pointing to the laws as his defense. Straight up black letter law defining what a machine gun is, and his stupid widget ain't it.
Going after NFA, while I admire the spirit of it, ain't good legal strategy.
It seems more like a 1st Amendment case. He can make the thing, but if someone turns it into a machine gun, that is the second person's problem, not the widget guy.
We need to walk backwards with 2A infringements as they've been enacted. The next thing on the chopping block needs to be assault weapon bans and mag capacity limits.
Now is the time to bring these cases as you are not likely to have a more favorable SC.
The place to start is the ATF and all of their silly ****ing rules that are unconstitutional and illegal.
I agree with the OP, page 5 is the interesting part, the recent EPA smackdown that Agencies cannot just change the rules on a whim is likely what is going to win this case. This will be a 2A win even though not as nice as a NFA repeal.
I dream about it every night.
1st thing id do is build a technical.
They are doing this backwards.
Even if they get a win, they will be subject to the 1968 GCA which regulates what firearms are acceptable for domestic production and the Hughes amendment of FOPA 1986 which closed the registry. If they do this wrong, and changes are made to the 1934 NFA by the supreme court, we could lose everything.
The NFA didn't ban the manufacture of new machine guns for private use, the Hughes amendment did.
If the NFA was struck down, how would the Hughes Amendment matter? Having the registry closed won't matter if there's no requirement to register.
That's what we need to help the ammo issues, a massive influx of new no registration required FA's. :D Now being able to walk in and buy a suppressor like I can a magazine, that I could get behind.
If the NFA was struck down, how would the Hughes Amendment matter? Having the registry closed won't matter if there's no requirement to register.
Because 1968 Gun Control still exists which also regulated the registry and gives the ATF the ability to classify ANY firearm as unsuitable for importation or domestic production.
The NFA could be completely wiped out and NY, CA, IL and the rest of the usual suspects will continue to say “the 2A does not apply here” and pass more unconstitutional laws banning firearms.
Because 1968 Gun Control still exists which also regulated the registry and gives the ATF the ability to classify ANY firearm as unsuitable for importation or domestic production.
OK, so the GCA would still matter, but the Hughes Amendment would be dead? Sounds like a win to me, even if it would need an additional component of the ruling or even a separate case to be a total win.
OK, so the GCA would still matter, but the Hughes Amendment would be dead? Sounds like a win to me, even if it would need an additional component of the ruling or even a separate case to be a total win.
They are talking about getting rid of the 1934 NFA which would leave the Hughes amendment in place because it is part of FOPA 1986. They could simply use the sporter clause (1968 GCA) to completely close the transfer of ALL NFA weapons.
We all want mostly the same thing, but you have to do it in a specific order.
Kevslatvin
09-15-22, 10:19
They are talking about getting rid of the 1934 NFA which would leave the Hughes amendment in place because it is part of FOPA 1986. They could simply use the sporter clause (1968 GCA) to completely close the transfer of ALL NFA weapons.
We all want mostly the same thing, but you have to do it in a specific order.
Just saw this video by him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFVGQsCJEhQ&t=614 He doesn't mention his legal strategy but does call out the 68 GCA as unconstitutional. Maybe he is going for a twofer. Getting both the NFA and the '68 GCA ruled unconstitutional. Though it sort of sounds like his main focus is still the NFA.
Just saw this video by him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFVGQsCJEhQ&t=614 He doesn't mention his legal strategy but does call out the 68 GCA as unconstitutional. Maybe he is going for a twofer. Getting both the NFA and the '68 GCA ruled unconstitutional. Though it sort of sounds like his main focus is still the NFA.
Hope he knows what he's doing. If we got rid of the 1968 GCA everything that derives it's foundation from the 68 GCA would be baseless. The 1968 ban on foreign machine guns, the 1986 ban on domestic machine guns, the 1989 import ban on semi autos and pretty much any ATF "determination" would simply cease to exist.
If that happened, one could import surplus AKMs for probably a couple hundred bucks, used MP5s would cost about $600 and brand new M4s would be about the same price as a 6920. With that accomplished, going after the NFA itself would be much easier.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.