The Achilles Heels of the Firearms Freedom Act

Pro-Gun New Hampshire ^ | 11/6/09 | Evan F. Nappen

[Revtwo]

Both Montana and Tennessee have passed FFAs, and they are to be commended for their commitment to the right to keep and bear arms. Unfortunately, the FFAs passed in Montana and Tennessee have serious problems that make their probability for success in the courts highly unlikely. Both states' FFAs contain items regulated by the federal government not under its power of interstate commerce, but under the federal government's power of taxation. It specifically includes silencers and destructive devices (firearms over .50 caliber).

[ClearCase_guy]

It would be good for the courts to revisit that issue. My understanding is that taxation may be used as a revenue tool, but is not to be used as a tool of regulation or restriction.

It seems pretty obvious that the tax stamp for firearms is part of an effort to restrict the right to keep and bear arms. I don't know how successfully that could be demonstrated, but perhaps a case could be made.

[taxcontrol]

I disagree. The Federal government’s ability to tax is limited to income (not applicable here) and interstate commerce. Thus the tax stamp for a silencer derives from the power to regulate interstate commerce.

[Leg Olam]

‘destructive devices (firearms over .50 caliber)’

I assume that applies to modern firearms and not to my .54, .58 or .62 cal flintlocks.

[shooter223]

Gun control act of 1968: (3) The term “firearm” means (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon; (C) any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or (D) any destructive device. Such term does not include an antique firearm. (16) The term “antique firearm” means —

(A) any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock,

percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or

before 1898; and

(B) any replica of any firearm described in subparagraph (A) if such

replica —

(i) is not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or conventional

centerfire fixed ammunition, or

(ii) uses rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition which is

no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily

available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade.

[La.daddyrabbit]

Anything over 85 decibels and OSHA says I need hearing protection.
Instead of earplugs and/ or muffs, I’d like to just silence my guns, but suppressors are just so expensive!

[Mack the knife]

I am under the impression that the BATFE has stated that they are refusing to accept payment of such “taxes”, thus converting the tax (legal) into a prohibition (illegal).

Didn’t an appeals court a few years ago throw out the conviction of a man for possessing a machine gun with out the tax paid when the BATF refused to accept payment of the tax?

[Lurker]

My understanding is that taxation may be used as a revenue tool, but is not to be used as a tool of regulation or restriction.

Drexel v US