[hanamizu]

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.

[Yo-Yo]

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.

Interesting tidbit: The reason why short barreled shotguns and short barreled rifles are in the NFA as $200 taxable items is because congress originally intended to also include all handguns in the NFA, and tax them at $200 each as well.

However, the handgun portion was removed from the NFA bill, but the SBS and SBR provisions remained.

[Ancesthntr]

“In Heller, arms and devices that have been banned a long time, ergo “not in common civilian use,” the ban is constitutional. This was done so that bans on military arms (in particular, the M-16 and others banned by 1986 Act) would stand.”

---

That’s an inherent contradiction, and should be unconstitutional, just like the ‘86 law should have made the ‘34 NFA requirement for a $200 tax stamp illegal.