Posted on 07/11/2021 1:53:20 PM PDT by marktwain
U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- Texas recently passed HB 957 into law. It will become effective on 1 September, 2021. The law repeals the Texas state ban on the possession of silencers/suppressors/gun mufflers, puts into effect a “no commandeering clause” for federal enforcement of the National Firearms Act (NFA) for silencers, and sets up a federal test case of the NFA in federal court.
In a previous article, the repeal of the Texas law and the anti-commandeering section were discussed. The likely federal test case was not.
HB 957 came from the brain of Representative Oliverson of Texas District 130, north of Houston. Dr. Oliverson is not a lawyer. This correspondent was able to talk to Representative Oliverson about how he formed the idea for the law.
Dr. Oliverson came up with the idea to reform suppressor law in Texas because he had purchased two suppressors. He personally experienced the bureaucratic insanity it takes to legally obtain a silencer/suppressor/gun muffler in the United States.
Representative Oliverson:
I had this idea, last session, and it was something I sort of came up with on my own. The basic idea was, you know, states obviously, in the last decade, I am aware, have in a variety of ways, pushed back against federal law that they thought was overreaching and unnecessary, by simply opting out, and just saying look, we are not invalidating federal law, but as far as the state is concerned, we do not recognize this in the same way that you do, and you cannot use our resources to enforce the law. If you want to enforce it, knock yourself out, but we are not helping you, and we are done.
The first thing Representative Oliverson noticed about states which enacted anti-commandeering laws
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
Texas makes it illegal for Texas officials to aid in the federal prosecution of people for possession of silencers.
Texas sets up a test case for the NFA.
The NFA test case is for silencers in the NFA.
No enumerated power for the NFA. It is in violation of the 10th Amendment.
Just a question. Does the law only apply to silencers made in-state and sold in-state? No interstate commerce?
I think that is the justification for legal marijuana: everything is in state.
Is that what this is about?
Not a lawyer, but wasn’t that idea what Wickard v Filburn was all about. SCOTUS ruled that stuff that didn’t cross state lines could still affect interstate commerce and thus could be regulated by Congress.
Other court cases have stated that sneezing could affect interstate commerce but that wasn’t what the interstate commerce clause was for.
Yes, even intrastate sales of bubble bath is a federal issue.
Equal protection or some such. Anyway, they wanted control and, after the disaster at Appomattox, they took it.
The Wickard v Filburn ruling was an atrocity. It gave Congress unlimited power to regulate everything in our lives.
I think that is the justification for legal marijuana: everything is in state.
Is that what this is about?
Partly. The test case seems to be to give the Supreme Court a chance to expand on the idea that the Commerce Clause does *not* give the federal government power over all commerce.
There have been four Supreme Court cases since 1994 which have trended in that direction.
Surprisingly, Obamacare was one of them.
This is in the article at AmmoLand.
The Wickard v Filburn ruling was an atrocity.
Or a phrase “...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” and say that ‘people’ means the state, and ‘not be infringed’ means ‘can be infringed whenever the government feels like it’.
Yes. That's in the article. They also have to have "Made in Texas" stamped on them.
Not a lawyer, but wasn’t that idea what Wickard v Filburn was all about.
Correct, and you can bet the federal courts will strike down the state law if it gets challenged there, which will probably happen quickly. It's a fantasy to think this is somehow just like states refusing to enforce marijuana laws. The feds don't want to be in the weed suppression business anymore and those state laws give them cover to ignore the domestic weed business. But the Democrats are insanely opposed to the private ownership of guns and you can bet they'll rise to any challenge to their power to regulate it.
What would the ATF do if states began nullifying their power to regulate firearms? They don't chase bootleggers anymore. Hardly anyone smokes tobacco anymore. Congress had to give them explosive to regulate a few years back just so they would have enough to do.
Gun dealers in this country are some of the most strict observers of federal regulation of any merchant you're likely to meet. The feds keep such a close eye on them I doubt if any are going to violate a federal regulation just because the state says it won't use state resources to prosecute them. If you were a gun dealer would you bet your business and possible your freedom on something that weak. Texas dosn't say they will defend anyone arrested by the feds after all do they?
Without that ruling, maybe Texas could make it illegal for liberals to move there.
Now THAT has an affect on the state.
Bkmk
Please, don’t tease!
Ping for later
Gun dealers in this country are some of the most strict observers of federal regulation of any merchant you’re likely to meet.
_____________________________________________
Money quote, right there. I’ve worked with the ATF before. Agents I worked with were great and rather Pro-2A. Can’t speak for the higher ups who get political. Not once in my interactions were we ever going after a dirty gun dealer. Every case was based on drugs and the guys carrying guns.
With regards to the NFA, I have cans and SBRs. Stamps for all of them. All the NFA does is create an obstacle and make it a pain to buy the stuff.
And to think that the very same checks to get a firearm are the same checks one goes through to get an SBR or can, but with the added paperwork, additional $200 and the unnecessary wait.
https://www.quora.com/Which-European-country-allows-to-buy-a-gun-suppressor …… as strict as Europe is about guns, amazing how they treat cans
The NFA is such a tired and outdated law. Originally for full autos, the laziness of Congress allowed the ATF to creep. And the funniest thing is, it isnt hard to get the licenses to be able to get a full auto gun. Most anti-gun folks would have a massive stroke of they ever went to Knob Creek
Don’t know if you’re familiar with the Botkin family but the older brother does a phenomenal job taking apart the NFA, etc….
Everything You’re NOT Supposed to Know About Suppressors
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1VWcGwPJQfc
Exactly, but they have to create an alliance with all the states in the southeast, Midwest and mountain states.
I’d hate for Texas to close their doors to liberals and have all of them move to Georgia. They make me sick.
Which has just about nothing to do with the challenge to federal law.
This law attacks the weak underbelly of the NFA, silencers.
Safety equipment which should never have been in the NFA.
Safety equipment even the BATF doesn't want in the NFA anymore.
Safety equipment there is no logical argument to treat as nuclear waste (to be overly dramatic).
Safety equipment that is easily made in home workshops.
Maybe it shouldn't, but clearly it does.
From the article:
In Kansas, an attempt was made to challenge the NFA law on silencers. Two people relied on that change and were convicted of federal felonies. The Kansas Attorney General defended the law, but the federal Court ruled the arrests were lawful under the federal taxing power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.