Replies

In 1934, Congress knew what the Second Amendment meant, and when they wished to ban silencers/suppressors and machine guns, they didn't try to pass an outright ban, they passed the 1934 National Firearms Act which instituted a then outrageous $200 tax on each suppressor or machine gun. That is $3,800 in 2019 dollars.

If Congress today wishes to ban suppressors, they can simply amend the 1934 NFA to increase the tax to $100,000, and given that Roberts is on the Court, the Supremes would have no trouble upholding the tax increase.

“In 1934, Congress knew what the Second Amendment meant, and when they wished to ban silencers/suppressors and machine guns, they didn’t try to pass an outright ban, they passed the 1934 National Firearms Act which instituted a then outrageous $200 tax on each suppressor or machine gun. That is $3,800 in 2019 dollars.”

Yes, that is what happened. But then in 1986 Congress passed a bill, and Reagan signed it, which made it unlawful for the government to issue any more tax stamps for full-auto (machine) guns to civilians after 5/19/86. Thus, they outwitted themselves, and we only require a Supreme Court that can actually read and comprehend the law to make that a fact. You see, you cannot say that something is not a ban, but is legal because it is only a tax, and then turn around and make it illegal to charge that very same tax. IMHO, all of the ‘34 NFA was unconstitutional from Day One, but as of 1986 for certain the part requiring a tax stamp to purchase a full auto firearm was rendered illegal itself.

they didn’t try to pass an outright ban, they passed the 1934 National Firearms Act which instituted a then outrageous $200 tax on each suppressor or machine gun.

They did the same thing with drugs/marijuana. Back then, they didn’t feel they had the power to ban, but they could tax. So if you were caught with the drug without paying the tax, you got busted. Oh, and they refused to sell the drug tax stamps.