ATF accidentally allowing newly manufactured machineguns?

[Brad Johnson]

Crossing state lines negates state call recording allowables. It's reasonable to presume the BATFE agent in the call was from their national headquarters in Washington, or a the very least a call center in a suburb. This places it under interstate (federal) regs.

Brad

[Marnoot]

Crossing state lines negates state call recording allowables. It's reasonable to presume the BATFE agent in the call was from their national headquarters in Washington, or a the very least a call center in a suburb. This places it under intrastate (federal) regs.

Brad

Federal only requires consent from one party: See (2)(c) & (2)(d) in 18 US Code 2511 here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2511

[cordex]

Crossing state lines negates state call recording allowables.

Then what federal law did he break?

It's reasonable to presume the BATFE agent in the call was from their national headquarters in Washington, or a the very least a call center in a suburb.

He asked the guy to mail something to him addressed to West Virginia.  Could just be a mail processing point, but I think a more reasonable presumption was that the BATFEman was in WV.

This places it under intrastate (federal) regs.

Even stipulating that, Federal regs only require consent of one party, so I'm still not seeing the beef.

[Brad Johnson]

Federal only requires consent from one party: See (2)(c) & (2)(d) in 18 US Code 2511 here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2511

Good change, that. Used to be a severe PITA if you wanted to document a call.

Unfortunately the guy in the youtube link didn't give any notifcation of the recording so he still faces felony wiretapping charges should the BATFE decide to get pissy about it.

*edit to add* Strike that. The caller counts as the informed party so fed requirements are met.

Brad

[Balog]

Now that we've established that "one part consent" means just that...

Here's where to go to join the class action if you got an approved Form 1 for new MG that was then rescinded.

http://blog.princelaw.com/2014/09/11/did-atf-approve-your-making-of-a-new-machinegun-and-then-rescind-it-contact-us-to-discuss/

[Balog]

Another lawyer jumping on the badn wagon for class action, let's hope a really solid and competent attorney gets on board and picks the right case to push forward with. I specify good attorney because the jackwagon below is repeating the lie about the Akins Accelerator being approved then not approved. Akins was a damned con man who got one design approved then sold a completely different one that was not approved.

Good Morning,

Okay, so a while back the ATF said that a trust is NOT A Person.

BUT . . . 922 says that a "Person" may not make a Machine gun.

Then several trusts submitted form 1's to make Machine guns.

At least one form 1 was approved.

Then the ATF calls this guy and says . . hey, a trust is not a person . . unless we want the trust to be a person . . but the trust isn't a person because we say its not . . unless you re talking about Machine guns . .then a trust is a person . .you following this?

so, you have to listen to this. It shows that the ATF really is making their interpretation of the laws up as they go along, to suit the outcome that they are politically inclined to obtain. Its not a nation of laws, but a nation ruled by government agencies that make it up as they go along.

If you think about this . . it should scare the hell out of you.

So, think about this: The Sig MPX lawsuit in which the ATF ruled that there muzzle brake was really a suppressor and refused to let them sell it as a muzzle brake . . all the while allowing OSS to sell their muzzle brake which is an integral part of their silencer.

Or the Adkins Accelerator . . . the sliding spring loaded stick that ATF approved and then after the investors spent hundreds of thousands of dollars, the ATF reversed its approval.

There is a reason that the ATF has a horrible reputation. they make the EPA look like rocket scientists.

So, if you have had a form 1 for a machine gun approved by the ATF. Contact me ASAP!

seancody@houstonattorney.org

[Brad Johnson]

I picked up on the AA reference, too. Hopefully he doen't make the legal rep team.

Brad

[brimic]

This is all pissing in the wind.
The feds hold all of the cards in the legal realm.
Until gun owners start organizing (I don't mean piling into the NRA clown car) and doing mass civil disobedience, there will  be discussions 20 years from now on who will be the test case for selling a firearm to a friend or family member without going through a NICS check, filing a 4473, giving a blood sample, and paying $200 tax to the BATFE for the 'permission' to transfer a firearm. None of this now or in the future is even constitutional.

If we can get a million people, heck, 100,000 people to start making fully automatic and suppressed machine guns in their basements or garage, what is the BATFE going to do about it?

[cordex]

This is all pissing in the wind.
The feds hold all of the cards in the legal realm.
Until gun owners start organizing (I don't mean piling into the NRA clown car) and doing mass civil disobedience, there will  be discussions 20 years from now on who will be the test case for selling a firearm to a friend or family member without going through a NICS check, filing a 4473, giving a blood sample, and paying $200 tax to the BATFE for the 'permission' to transfer a firearm. None of this now or in the future is even constitutional.

I get where you're coming from, but over the past fifteen or so years the gun community has made astronomical strides.  Mostly at the state level, I'll allow, but some at the federal level.  Things are not just stagnating, they are improving.  If you told me in 1999 that the AWB would sunset, every state in the union would have some sort of carry permit and six states will move partially or completely toward constitutional carry (and that similar legislation will be in the works for 17 other states besides), AR-15s could be bought in some WalMarts, gun manufacturers would be federally protected from misuse of their products, and the Supreme Court would rule that firearms are an individual right, I'd have laughed right in your face.  Thankfully, my pessimism turned out to be wrong.

[brimic]

I get where you're coming from, but over the past fifteen or so years the gun community has made astronomical strides.  Mostly at the state level, I'll allow, but some at the federal level.  Things are not just stagnating, they are improving.  If you told me in 1999 that the AWB would sunset, every state in the union would have some sort of carry permit and six states will move partially or completely toward constitutional carry (and that similar legislation will be in the works for 17 other states besides), AR-15s could be bought in some WalMarts, gun manufacturers would be federally protected from misuse of their products, and the Supreme Court would rule that firearms are an individual right, I'd have laughed right in your face.  Thankfully, my pessimism turned out to be wrong.

Yes, but...
If a person were raped 3x a day and were to negotiate with the attacker to get it down to 2 rapes/day, they would have made astronomical gains, and they would only be 2/3 as violated as before.

Asking for and paying for the priveledge of self-preservation is at least nice to have now, but its still asking for and paying for the priveledge of a natural right. That sits really wrong with me.

[AJ Dual]

To me what's the most interesting is the "100 initial approvals" number.

If that's true, no way in HELL the examiners in the WV office would all just independently decide the "trust argument" invalidates the 992(o) Hughes Amendment to the '86 FOPA. The examiners, and more importantly some level of the ATF management decided collectively "Well shucks, they got us!" and approved those stamps.

Once.. twice... five times on accident? Sure. But not 100 stamps for post-86 MG's on F1's.  That's... Just... Not... Gonna... Happen... It was a policy decision to do that.

Then later on they got cold feet and changed their mind, or from higher up the hammer came down.

I think at least some of the ATF believes/believed that they had to chose between rule 41p -OR- allowing post-'86 MG's on trusts.

Personally, I want to win it all, who wouldn't? But I think deep-sixing 41p and the requirement to get CLEO sign-off on F1 and F4 trust applications is more important, and would be damn happy with just that. The Obama/Holder admin people who dreamed this up know full well that the population is weighted towards urban/suburban areas and the non-signing CLEO's who's jurisdiction they live in, and was intentional to choke off as many NFA applications as possible.

The Hughes Amendment was a horrid dirty trick to be sure, but rule 41p is the new one, the fresh one, and triage demands that be defeated first.

[Scout26]

Yes, but...
If a person were raped 3x a day and were to negotiate with the attacker to get it down to 2 rapes/day, they would have made astronomical gains, and they would only be 2/3 as violated as before.

Asking for and paying for the priveledge of self-preservation is at least nice to have now, but its still asking for and paying for the priveledge of a natural right. That sits really wrong with me.

I understand where you are coming from and I (and many other here I would bet) have the same frustration.  However, they didn't do it all in one stroke.  It took 60 years, from the '34 GCA to get to their highwater mark of the '94 AWB.  Thing is, since then, they have suffered defeat, after defeat, after defeat.  I never thought I'd see CCW in Illinois, but it's here.  And we came damn close to FOID carry.   We are winning court case, after court case, after court case.  Even in California !!!

Even after Sandy Hook, the anti's weren't (and haven't been) able to get anything passed.  Yes, Obama signed a bunch of EO's, but they pretty much did nothing.   There was no AWB, or Universal background checks.  In fact 3 Dems in Colorado got the boot for voting for those in that state.  And it looks like the governor that signed off on those bills will get the boot as well.

It's frustrating.  But "Going All In", you generally lose.  Look at what those "open rifle carry" *expletive deleted*tards in Texas did.  They've turned private businesses into battlegrounds.  Now instead of fighting what we want to fight for, we waste precious time and resources fighting to let restaurants and retail stores allow carry (per state law) in their stores.   One of the major rules of warfare is "Never let your enemy pick the terrain or ground you will fight upon."   And Momnonsenseberg is picking the terrain, Kroger and Panera for now, who knows what stores will be next.   It's not a fight we should be fighting.  But we have to fight everywhere.

[birdman]

Another lawyer jumping on the badn wagon for class action, let's hope a really solid and competent attorney gets on board and picks the right case to push forward with. I specify good attorney because the jackwagon below is repeating the lie about the Akins Accelerator being approved then not approved. Akins was a damned con man who got one design approved then sold a completely different one that was not approved.

Also, any lawyer who can't properly use there and their isn't a good one.

[Tallpine]

Also, any lawyer who can't properly use there and their isn't a good one.

Your right 

[birdman]

Your right 

Damn you,  damn you to hell. :)

[Jim147]

Your right 

 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

And if someone leaves you a voicemail it is not subject to the same regulation that you recording a phone call is.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RevDisk]

Also, any lawyer who can't properly use there and their isn't a good one.

Used to work for a lawyer, who was a senior attorney in a decent sized legal department for a multinational megacorp. She once told me that about half of being even a decent lawyer was a fanatical attention to spelling and grammar. Apparently, even a coma in the wrong place can cause a world of legal hurt.

This is a lady didn't even blink at the concept of giving me a corporate amex card with virtually no limit and telling me to repo a hundred million plus aircraft, yet she'd pathologically scour even routine documents for minor spelling/grammar issues.

[dogmush]

Apparently, even a coma in the wrong place can cause a world of legal hurt.

A malpractice suit at the least, I would imagine.

[Tallpine]

A malpractice suit at the least, I would imagine.

What about a semi-coma, where you know what's going on and can't do anything about it 

[brimic]

What about a semi-coma, where you know what's going on and can't do anything about it 

You are lawless with your puns.

[AJ Dual]

Trying to suss out the details, but there's a possibility that 922(o) was only held as constitutional as long as the ATF or any other branch of the treasury refused to collect taxes on post-'86 MG's, if they've issued 100+ stamps... 

Now this could be complete bull, but I'm throwing it out there just in case it has legs.

[Jocassee]

This is a lady didn't even blink at the concept of giving me a corporate amex card with virtually no limit and telling me to repo a hundred million plus aircraft

Wait wait wait.

Slow down, back up. I want to hear that story.

[Scout26]

Trying to suss out the details, but there's a possibility that 922(o) was only held as constitutional as long as the ATF or any other branch of the treasury refused to collect taxes on post-'86 MG's, if they've issued 100+ stamps... 

Now this could be complete bull, but I'm throwing it out there just in case it has legs.

Now that would be sweet.  And funny as all hell.


I would pay money to see the look on Watts' and Bloomberg's faces should that come to pass...

[AJ Dual]

Now that would be sweet.  And funny as all hell.


I would pay money to see the look on Watts' and Bloomberg's faces should that come to pass...

I don't know that it would be a huge deal to them.

1. The anti's and MSM have for a LONG time been deliberately confusing the non-gun public that semi-automatic military styled rifles are fully-automatic already. Making a stink now runs the risk of exposing the falsehoods. "Wait... whut? Thems M4's yous always on da news bitch'n 'bout n the schools gettin shot up, they's aren't automatics?"

2. Because of the confusion, sensationalism, and fear-mongering, the anti and fence-sitting public already thinks full autos are "legal" and "common".

3. Despite the floodgates being opened on NFA due to the shrinking dollar vs. the $200 tax, and the Internet getting people educated on the process, it's still a tiny fraction of the total gun purchases/transfers in America each year. And even with the education and more dealers than ever willing to walk you through the process, the extra $200 the forms, making a trust or CLEO sign-off, and the wait is still a huge barrier to entry to all but the most fervent gun-nuts.  Take away the tax, and I bet 90%+ of the "go to Cablea's once a year" type of gun buyer would still never bother.

IMO, those who have willfully tried to mess with the NFA on the Federal level, namely Hughes with (what he thought would be) the poison-pill amendment to the '86 FOPA, and now Obama/Holder with 41p. Which I personally believe was the one quick and easy, or so they thought, way they could claim they did some "gun control by executive order" and keep the press off Obama's back about it.

Either way, the anti-gun activity targeted at the NFA, what little there is, has always kind of been a backhanded swipe at a small consolation prize. I don't think NFA has ever been mainstream enough to make it a major gun control target. We have to step outside our worldview from the Internet gun boards and realize that it's just not on the radar for the majority of pro or anti-RKBA people.