Posted on 01/26/2010 4:15:51 AM PST by marktwain
“Mr. Hamblin clearly states that he was in a State Guard Unit, not a National Guard Unit, which is part of the army”
Hmmm. I blew right past that assuming it was typical media indifference.
You should google it, if you haven’t already. The State Guard aren’t a part of the military as far as I can tell. They are an all volunteer, nonpaid force, that is under the control of the governor, only. Their mission is to support the National Guard and state agencies during in state emergencies. I do not believe that they are deployable as they can not be called up by the feds.
That would explain the lack of weaponry. Thanks for pointing that out.
Correction! 1932 should have been 1939 or later. The Miller decision was in 1939.
This guy needs a really good lawyer.
The way to have a good case is to jump through (or attempt to jump through) all of the administrative hoops that are presented. Failure to do so gets you dismissed on a technicality. That's why he should have applied for the NFA stamp and, once turned down, then gone ahead and filed a suit challenging the Constitutionality of 922(o).
My preference is to do that one better. Find an existing owner of a pre-ban M16, and have him apply for a tax stamp on a post-ban M16 made by Colt that is as identical to the one he already owns as possible. He will be, by definition, a law-abiding citizen - and perhaps it'd be better from the standpoint of taxes if he has a security clearance and regularly has access to full autos as part of his job (i.e. military, LEO, some kind of security consultant, etc.).
I'm older than you (48) and am also aware of my mortality. I'd like to be able to buy a full auto for $1,000 or $1,500, and do so without the tax stamp and the permission letter from a local LEO. But I'm not going to urge that a case be brought that isn't airtight, just because I've got an itch. I'd rather wait, even to the point that only my kids their kids will be able to enjoy this right, than to be in a rush and blow this issue FOREVER. That's what the hoplophobes did in '86 - they tried to forever limit the number of full autos, knowing that doing so would gradually and inexorably limit the ability of the American public to resist tyranny - and we'll only get one shot to do it right in front of the Supremes. Remember that precedent is what guides the courts, and that if you blow a case because of bad facts we may never get another shot. My advice is: we're not 17 anymore, so let's keep it in our pants and let the big head do the thinking.
Uh, TACTICS. I had a talk with a CPA, and that was on my mind.
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.