Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 75

Thread: Stag Arms Gets FFL Revoked

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    CONUS
    Posts
    2,246
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 26 Inf View Post
    Honestly, thinking about it critically, our main power and defense is the citizen soldier and the independent nature of our people. There are enough serving officers, NCO's and troops at any one time who understand the Constitution and the oath they took that widespread attacks on the citizens and confiscation would be a non starter. That is true now and into the near future, far future, it depends on how the world evolves.

    On an emotional basis, I would like NFA to go away. On a cognitive basis, I've never been down with the 'if you can afford anything, iyou can have anything' mindset. My concern is not with full auto weapons and silencers, my concern is that most folks can't simply afford to buy MBT's, SAMS, attack aircraft, etc. so we could be at the mercy of evil minded individuals or organizations who mean us harm.

    Think of the richest folks in America with standing armies, not security forces, armies with tanks, air defense artillery, attack aircraft and fighters. As long as they were for the citizens it would be okay, but, to me, it is bad enough the government has that power, much less the Koch Brothers, George Sorros, Warren Buffet, or Bill and Melinda Gates.

    Those are my thoughts FWIW.


  2. #62
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,663
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by pinzgauer View Post
    The whole Sabre thing "stank" and we mainly are hearing the gov's side. But who knows, aspects were fishy, especially the international aspect.

    That said, at the heart of the sabre mess was unserialized receivers, inaccurate logs, etc, and NFA "machine gun" parts. In that regard, similar to Stag.

    The ATF has enough history of aggressive enforcement that I'll give mfgs benefit of doubt until proven otherwise. I know enough smaller FFL's harassed out of existence based on interpretation, not law. Ex: invalidating 4473s based on abbreviation of the state, or not. (I know FFL's who have been hammered one way or the other, clearly contradictory directions by the ATF.)
    No, the investigation of Sabre Defense was started because of a report about a residential burglary taken by local law enforcement. Something was fishy, so they dug deeper. Feds got involved. Then they found paperwork "issues", and ultimately it ended with false bottoms in conex boxes, suppressors marked as lawnmower parts, doubled serial numbers, with a shitload of damning evidence right on their e-mail servers (one line I recall went something like "if we can find someone dumb enough to sign the shipping documents").

    Inaccurate logs are not the same thing as falsified logs.

    Many investigations start as one thing then morph into another once a string gets pulled. The only similarities here are that they were both firearms manufacturers.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    AZ-Waging jihad against crappy AR's.
    Posts
    24,902
    Feedback Score
    104 (100%)
    Thank you. ITAR is a big deal and will sink you. Some people don't get it and need to find a conspiracy behind every grassy knoll.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave_M View Post
    No, the investigation of Sabre Defense was started because of a report about a residential burglary taken by local law enforcement. Something was fishy, so they dug deeper. Feds got involved. Then they found paperwork "issues", and ultimately it ended with false bottoms in conex boxes, suppressors marked as lawnmower parts, doubled serial numbers, with a shitload of damning evidence right on their e-mail servers (one line I recall went something like "if we can find someone dumb enough to sign the shipping documents").

    Inaccurate logs are not the same thing as falsified logs.

    Many investigations start as one thing then morph into another once a string gets pulled. The only similarities here are that they were both firearms manufacturers.



    Owner/Instructor at Semper Paratus Arms

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SemperParatusArms/

    Semper Paratus Arms AR15 Armorer Course http://www.semperparatusarms.com/cou...-registration/

    M4C Misc. Training and Course Announcements- http://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=141

    Master Armorer/R&D at SIONICS Weapon Systems- http://sionicsweaponsystems.com

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    674
    Feedback Score
    32 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonB1 View Post
    They had an agenda from the start. The supreme Court gave a thumbs up to the alien and sedition acts even earlier which were intended to keep John Adams in office by making it an offense to criticize Adams in any way. Care to explain how that doesn't abridge freedom of speech?
    Sure. No they didn't.

    ETA: But I think we may be bordering on going off topic so we may just have to agree to disagree on this particular constitutional issue.
    Last edited by TF82; 12-24-15 at 18:45.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    CONUS
    Posts
    2,246
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by zibby43 View Post
    Firearms are tied up in "interstate commerce."

    The "Necessary and Proper Clause" (Article I, Section 8, Clause 18) -

    "The Congress shall have Power ... To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

    "Commerce Clause" (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3) -

    Gives the U.S. Congress the power ". . . to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes."

    The "Necessary and Proper Clause" has been paired with the "Commerce Clause" to provide the constitutional basis for a wide variety of federal laws.

    Constitutional law is not my specialty (energy/utilities law is) but this is just some basic stuff.

    Hope that makes sense. In a nutshell, both the "Necessary and Proper Clause" and "Commerce Clause" give the federal government broad power to regulate anything involving interstate commerce - and firearms unequivocally fall into the interstate commerce basket.

    So while the Constitution does not necessarily specifically enumerate all of the federal government's powers, it does have critical sections which are written very broadly/generically, in turn giving the federal government vast and sweeping power.
    As a practicing J.D., you must be familiar with Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942), a case wherein the SCOTUS ruled that regulation of economic activity that was only indirectly related to interstate commerce (in this case, a farmer growing wheat for the sole purpose of feeding his own animals on his farm) was constitutional. The SCOTUS has greatly stretched the original meaning of the US Consititution, and that is why the feds are in everybody's face. The monster the Founding Fathers warned us of has been realized. Disarmament is next, to allow for complete control of the population.

    POTUS exemplifies Australia as a "common-sense" approach to solving the gun violence problem, but very few people point out that the Australian government confiscated and melted down hundreds of thousands of firearms belonging to law-abiding citizens. Licensing and registration are the means by which to confiscate our arms. Arms in the hands of free men have no serial numbers.


  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,824
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave_M View Post
    No, the investigation of Sabre Defense was started because of a report about a residential burglary taken by local law enforcement. Something was fishy, so they dug deeper. Feds got involved. Then they found paperwork "issues", and ultimately it ended with false bottoms in conex boxes, suppressors marked as lawnmower parts, doubled serial numbers, with a shitload of damning evidence right on their e-mail servers (one line I recall went something like "if we can find someone dumb enough to sign the shipping documents").

    Inaccurate logs are not the same thing as falsified logs.

    Many investigations start as one thing then morph into another once a string gets pulled. The only similarities here are that they were both firearms manufacturers.
    I had forgotten about the wire fraud, ITAR violations, etc. I'll concede Sabre had many additional charges, and intent. And Stag may have just been sloppy.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,824
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    Thank you. ITAR is a big deal and will sink you. Some people don't get it and need to find a conspiracy behind every grassy knoll.
    Not to defend Sabre execs, they clearly conspired to bypass ITAR.

    But part of the court record and emails is that they had applied for export legally, and state had been sitting on it due to policy, etc. At the time, and presumably even currently even semi AR's are considered "weapons of war", etc.

    The execs (Savage) frustration about State sitting on their applications is apparently what lead to the conspiracy based on emails in the court record. (Again, I'm not defending)

    They had three lucrative federal contracts, was selling everything they built, as fast as they could ship it. They got greedy, and lost it all.

    Grassy knoll conspiracy? clearly not. Caught up in federal politics? Quite possibly.

    But you are right, AECA/ITAR is the law, and the feds take it seriously. They should have known better.

    We can't have AR parts out in the rest of the world, they are dangerous you know. :-) Just thinking of how silly it is to ban legal export of AR-15 components as "weapons of war" when there are unlicensed mfg's making AR parts in several countries, friend and foe.

    ITAR is one of those crazy federal things that results in nonsensical behavior. Ex: PRC-77's are functionally obsolete radios. They are widely available surplus in the UK, Germany, etc. No restrictions, and dumped by the US military there. It would be to our advantage if bad guys tried to use them, as they are heavy, low power, and don't do encryption. IE: Bad guys would have no interest. Yet regularly US citizens unknowingly commit ITAR violations selling parts or radios to an individual on ebay, etc. And the feds come down hard, even on individuals. There are many similar examples.

    What the Sabre execs did is indefensible. But that does not mean ITAR is a good thing, clear cut, easy to follow, etc.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    CONUS
    Posts
    2,246
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by pinzgauer View Post
    Not to defend Sabre execs, they clearly conspired to bypass ITAR.

    But part of the court record and emails is that they had applied for export legally, and state had been sitting on it due to policy, etc. At the time, and presumably even currently even semi AR's are considered "weapons of war", etc.

    The execs (Savage) frustration about State sitting on their applications is apparently what lead to the conspiracy based on emails in the court record. (Again, I'm not defending)

    They had three lucrative federal contracts, was selling everything they built, as fast as they could ship it. They got greedy, and lost it all.

    Grassy knoll conspiracy? clearly not. Caught up in federal politics? Quite possibly.

    But you are right, AECA/ITAR is the law, and the feds take it seriously. They should have known better.

    We can't have AR parts out in the rest of the world, they are dangerous you know. :-) Just thinking of how silly it is to ban legal export of AR-15 components as "weapons of war" when there are unlicensed mfg's making AR parts in several countries, friend and foe.

    ITAR is one of those crazy federal things that results in nonsensical behavior. Ex: PRC-77's are functionally obsolete radios. They are widely available surplus in the UK, Germany, etc. No restrictions, and dumped by the US military there. It would be to our advantage if bad guys tried to use them, as they are heavy, low power, and don't do encryption. IE: Bad guys would have no interest. Yet regularly US citizens unknowingly commit ITAR violations selling parts or radios to an individual on ebay, etc. And the feds come down hard, even on individuals. There are many similar examples.

    What the Sabre execs did is indefensible. But that does not mean ITAR is a good thing, clear cut, easy to follow, etc.
    What the colonists did was surely indefensible too, yet we, and maybe even you, celebrate it every 4th.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,663
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    Not worth the fight. It's Christmas.
    Last edited by Dave_M; 12-25-15 at 03:59.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    278
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by 7.62NATO View Post
    As a practicing J.D., you must be familiar with Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942), a case wherein the SCOTUS ruled that regulation of economic activity that was only indirectly related to interstate commerce (in this case, a farmer growing wheat for the sole purpose of feeding his own animals on his farm) was constitutional. The SCOTUS has greatly stretched the original meaning of the US Consititution, and that is why the feds are in everybody's face. The monster the Founding Fathers warned us of has been realized. Disarmament is next, to allow for complete control of the population.

    POTUS exemplifies Australia as a "common-sense" approach to solving the gun violence problem, but very few people point out that the Australian government confiscated and melted down hundreds of thousands of firearms belonging to law-abiding citizens. Licensing and registration are the means by which to confiscate our arms. Arms in the hands of free men have no serial numbers.
    Yes sir! Very familiar with that case. I remember it distinctly as I was called upon to provide a case brief.

    And you understood my original post perfectly, as it was meant to demonstrate how SCOTUS and Congress have, in piecemeal fashion, used particular clauses from the Constitution in order to broaden federal government power.

    Completely agree with your points.

    At least SCOTUS had the sense to reign in the Commerce Clause, albeit marginally, in Lopez v. United States, 514 U.S. 549 (1995). This time, the Court restricted interpretation of the Commerce Clause (with respect to firearms).

    I am sure that you are familiar with that case as well. For those that are not, a brief synopsis:

    The defendant was charged with carrying a handgun to school. This violated the federal Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990. The defendant argued that the federal government had no authority whatsoever to regulate firearms in local schools. The government asserted that this regulatory power fell under the Commerce Clause, as possession of a firearm in a school zone would surely lead to violent crime, thereby affecting "general economic conditions." Talk about a stretch!

    Chief Justice Rehnquist rejected this argument, holding that Congress only has the power "to regulate the channels of commerce, the instrumentalities of commerce, and action that substantially affects interstate commerce." Thus, the Court declined further expanding the Commerce Clause, writing that “. . . to do so would require us to conclude that the Constitution's enumeration of powers does not presuppose something not enumerated, and that there never will be a distinction between what is truly national and what is truly local. This we are unwilling to do.”

    And his reasoning ties back into my original post about what is specifically enumerated by the Constitution, and what has been enumerated/crafted by broad readings/interpretations of particular clauses.
    Last edited by zibby43; 12-25-15 at 02:24.

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •