Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Golden Valley [AZ] man accused in machine gun conspiracy (illegal NFA mfg)
Kingman Daily Miner ^ | 10/25/2011 5:59:00 AM | By Mark Duncan

Posted on 10/25/2011 10:06:48 AM PDT by DCBryan1

Golden Valley man accused in machine gun conspiracy

GOLDEN VALLEY - A local gunsmith is among six men facing a 106-count federal indictment alleging a conspiracy to illegally manufacture and distribute machine guns.

According to the July 2010 indictment, George Dibril Clark III of Golden Valley and Gold Canyon and five other men - three from Arizona and two from Maryland - "harvested" serial numbers from pre-1986 machine guns, thereby destroying them. They would then allegedly weld the serial number, or the entire receiver side plate, onto a newly manufactured gun, file the required forms with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, then sell the weapons.

Clark, who operated a business, Universal Test Receiver, in Golden Valley, allegedly did most of the manufacturing and is charged in 80 of the 106 counts, which include conspiracy, mail and wire fraud, money laundering and false entry on an application or record.

He and the five co-defendants, Randolph Benjamin Rodman and Hal Paul Goldstein of Maryland, and Lorren Marc Kalish, James Patrick Arneberger and Idan C. Greenberg of Arizona, all face additional charges of illegal possession of a machine gun, even though all are federal firearms licensees and allowed to sell legitimate machine guns and submachine guns.

The National Firearms Act revision of 1986 made it illegal for civilians to transfer or possess machine guns manufactured after May 19, 1986. The indictment lists 32 instances in which the serial number of a pre-1986 weapon such as a MAC10A1A, with a 5.75-inch barrel and an overall length of 11 inches, would allegedly be transferred onto a fully-automatic replica of an Auto Ordnance Thompson machine gun ("Tommy" gun) or even a belt-fed "1919" machine gun similar to those used in world wars.

According to an affidavit filed in conjunction with the Maryland investigation into the case, ATF Special Agent Patrick Sean Sander had investigated the case, focusing on Clark, since 2007. Sander states in his report that he believes Clark had been doing serial number swaps since 1993.

Sander also states that Clark "admitted that he had done this for years and that he believed the serial number to be the actual gun."

Nonetheless, according to Sander, Clark and the co-defendants had transferred the guns among themselves, "making slight and subtle changes to ATF Form 3 or Form 4 that would slowly change the description of the machinegun so as not to raise any red flags with ATF."

No parties involved in the case have at this time returned repeated calls asking for comment.

The case is scheduled for trial before Judge Roslyn O. Silver beginning on Jan. 17, 2012, in Federal District Court in Phoenix.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: atf; banglist; batf; nfa
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-125 next last
To sum it up for you non-Title 2 NFA gurus, these idiots were taking "papered" guns, mostly cheap MACs in the late 1980s, which are on the registry, and then transfering their legal transfer tax status ($200) that is on the registry to machinegun parts sets.

Not only is this FRAUD (similar to using stolen VINs), it conspires against the NFA Act of 1934 and Gun Control Act of 1968 regulating FFL holders.

Basically, these idiots (ON PAPER) were taking this gun, worth $200.00 in 1986, $3,000.00+ today) :

and turning them into much more valuable.....

Thompson Submachineguns that sell for $11,000 to 50,000.00

...and belt fed....

M1919 that sell for $15,000-40,000.00

1 posted on 10/25/2011 10:07:06 AM PDT by DCBryan1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Boys will be boys.


2 posted on 10/25/2011 10:11:06 AM PDT by ImJustAnotherOkie (zerogottago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
These "idiots" were trying to get around plainly unconstitutional gun laws. There is a legal case to be made that the serial number of the gun is the part of the gun being licensed and should, therefore, be transferable.

Are you anti 2nd amendment or do you just automatically side with the state against anyone they claim is a criminal?

3 posted on 10/25/2011 10:15:50 AM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ImJustAnotherOkie
He should have done it in one of the states which passed the Firearms Freedom Act.

Oh, wait! He did do that in one of the FFA states!

Will Arizona defend him from the Feds?


4 posted on 10/25/2011 10:17:28 AM PDT by Aroostook25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

I don’t have a problem with it.

Tho’ why anyone would pay that much for a Thompson is beyond me.


5 posted on 10/25/2011 10:18:19 AM PDT by green iguana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

All these laws should be considered UN Constitutional. Our masters have made automatic firearms the toy for the rich. A poor man can only dream about exercising his right to keep and bear arms.


6 posted on 10/25/2011 10:19:21 AM PDT by Dogbert41 (Israel is real:))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

All these laws should be considered UN Constitutional. Our masters have made automatic firearms the toy for the rich. A poor man can only dream about exercising his right to keep and bear arms.


7 posted on 10/25/2011 10:19:30 AM PDT by Dogbert41 (Israel is real:))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Durus
Are you anti 2nd amendment or do you just automatically side with the state against anyone they claim is a criminal?

The point the OP is making is that these "idiots" are defrauding honest gun purchasers to the tune of $10,000-$50,000 each.

8 posted on 10/25/2011 10:19:44 AM PDT by sonofagun (Some think my cynicism grows with age. I like to think of it as wisdom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
Under what Constitutional authority is congress trying to regulate firearms of any sort?

Seems like they don't have the authority. And the 2nd just underlines that.

/johnny

9 posted on 10/25/2011 10:19:43 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

I don’t see any evidence that any of their customers felt defrauded. These honorable gentlemen sought to wade through the blatantly unconstitutional morass of gun control laws, and create some valuable firearms that collectors can use and enjoy.

Let me repeat: They were CREATING VALUE.

And the fedgov prefers its government monopoly on machine guns, so it ruins these men who have never committed a real crime against others in their lives.

I know people who have (legally) taken an old HK that was licensed as a machine gun, and taken the legal key element and installed it on a rare belt-fed HK parts kit. Lots of work, but it added $20,000 of value, and the buyer was delighted.

You seem overly affectionate with the worst of gun control laws.


10 posted on 10/25/2011 10:21:46 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Author of BullionBible.com - Makes You a Precious Metal Expert, Guaranteed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: green iguana

Big Thompson =
Little Johnson


11 posted on 10/25/2011 10:21:50 AM PDT by MindBender26 (Forget AMEX. Remember your Glock 27: Never Leave Home Without It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sonofagun

The point the OP is making is that these “idiots” are defrauding honest gun purchasers to the tune of $10,000-$50,000 each.


And there is no evidence of that in the article. People who are investing five figures in NFA items actually have a clue about serial numbers mean, and this would be obvious to any buyer. Also, these would not have commanded the prices of original collectibles, but are still worth a lot in their modified form.

The OP sounds like a jackboot-licker with his “conspiring against” gun control laws BS language.


12 posted on 10/25/2011 10:27:25 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Author of BullionBible.com - Makes You a Precious Metal Expert, Guaranteed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Durus

You are in violation of your own tag line “You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.”

The reality is that individual citizens do not choose what laws to obey and which ones to declare unconstitutional.

The Body Politic does; through the Courts. The Courts have held the FFA to be constitutional, and neither your opinion, nor mine has force of law.

Sorry, you may not like it, but reality can be a bitch.


13 posted on 10/25/2011 10:27:53 AM PDT by MindBender26 (Forget AMEX. Remember your Glock 27: Never Leave Home Without It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sonofagun
How are they defrauding anyone? They aren't selling a mac-10 and pretending it's a browning 1913. They are selling a browning 1913 that the government has unconstitutionally made “illegal”. Further the prices of machines guns was artificially created through governments unconstitutional actions not through the actions of using serial numbers from other guns.
14 posted on 10/25/2011 10:30:30 AM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

NFA revisions need to be repealed. The citizenry needs to be as well armed as the military in order to maintain the balance required by a Republic


15 posted on 10/25/2011 10:35:57 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

We should NB that the 1986 legislation was the handiwork of supposed “conservative” William J. Bennett, pundit, gasbag, gambler and all round two-faced meddler in American politics.


16 posted on 10/25/2011 10:41:15 AM PDT by NVDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba
Let me repeat: They were CREATING VALUE.

I understand that.

I can CREATE VALUE by rolling back the odometer of my '99 Ford and selling a fraudulant product.

17 posted on 10/25/2011 10:41:47 AM PDT by sonofagun (Some think my cynicism grows with age. I like to think of it as wisdom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

You are confusing reality with political expedience. The constitution says what it says and it doesn’t matter how many lawyers in black robed claim otherwise. People can do anything they wish as long as they are will to face the consequences of their actions, that includes either obeying unconstitutional laws or obeying them. The political class can do the same thing and pass all the unconstitutional laws they want. The reality is that one day the political class is going to face the reality of a public that is fed up. In the meantime the reality is that there are a lot of people right now that are completely fed up and wouldn’t in a million years sit on a jury and vote to convict these men.


18 posted on 10/25/2011 10:41:47 AM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
-- The reality is that individual citizens do not choose what laws to obey and which ones to declare unconstitutional. --

That's just an argument for superiority of the state, period. People routinely violate the law, and as far as I'm concerned, the law merits all the disrespect it gets. When it comes to the 2nd amendment, judges are dishonest lying hacks, and I put Scalia right in there with the bulk of them.

But you are right, that the state will use all the force violence at its disposal, in order to obtain conformity, and to exact revenge. Get caught in violation of the GFSZA, or NFA, etc., and you are screwed.

19 posted on 10/25/2011 10:44:03 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Durus

“There is a legal case to be made that the serial number of the gun is the part of the gun being licensed and should, therefore, be transferable.”

As a vehicle has a serial number (VIN) adn that refers to that specific vehicle, might I inquire as to how welding that bit of material with the number onto an entirely different gun is different than putting the VIN of a Mercedes onto a Pinto and calling the Pinto a Mercedes?

Aside from the Second Amendment issues, does not such switching become fraud?


20 posted on 10/25/2011 10:45:00 AM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is necessary to examine principles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Hard to violate an unconstitutional law. Where is the exception for federal government to regulate firearms in the Second Amendment? I hope I’m on the Jury, Not guilty.


21 posted on 10/25/2011 10:45:47 AM PDT by Mechanicos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
The Stewart case may apply here.

A fellow by the name of Stewart was arrested for being a felon in possession of a firearm. A search of his residence found homemade machine guns, so the feds prosecuted him for that, too.

He was convicted on both counts. On appeal in 2003, the Ninth upheld the conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. However, it overturned his conviction for the homemade machine guns, saying the Commerce Clause did not allow the feds to regulate them.

The US appealed the Ninth's ruling to SCOTUS. In 2006, SCOTUS remanded the case back for reconsideration in light of Raich [2005]. The Ninth then reversed itself and said the Commerce Clause does indeed allow the feds to regulate such things.

And drug warriors cheered the Raich decision.

22 posted on 10/25/2011 10:45:56 AM PDT by Ken H (They are running out of other people's money. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
-- NFA revisions need to be repealed. --

It won't happen. Congress is inclined to make the laws more strict, not less. The people aren't going to turn out the bums in enough number to make a difference.

23 posted on 10/25/2011 10:46:09 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Not that much different from this.
http://www.brpguns.com/categories/Machineguns/Stemple-Takedown-Guns-%28STG%29/


24 posted on 10/25/2011 10:47:40 AM PDT by smithandwesson76subgun (full auto fun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Durus
How are they defrauding anyone? They aren't selling a mac-10 and pretending it's a browning 1913. They are selling a browning 1913 that the government has unconstitutionally made “illegal”. Further the prices of machines guns was artificially created through governments unconstitutional actions not through the actions of using serial numbers from other guns.

My take is that the law created the artificially high prices and the "idiots" used that law to their benefit by fraudulently creating pre-1986 guns from recently manufactured guns.

In other words, taking a Thompson built yesterday and selling it as a Thompson built in 1985.

25 posted on 10/25/2011 10:49:35 AM PDT by sonofagun (Some think my cynicism grows with age. I like to think of it as wisdom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GladesGuru
-- Aside from the Second Amendment issues, does not such switching become fraud? --

As between the seller and buyer, only if the buyer is induced to believe that the firearm records show the S/N to be unique to the item in possession, and not transferred from a wrecked gun. Did these buyers think they were getting pre '68 iron? (other than the S/N that is).

As between the people and the government, the government wishes the number of legal to own automatic weapons decrease, over time, to zero. Of course the government is going to throw the book at these fellows - and they will be barred from possession of guns and ammunition. That makes the government happy.

26 posted on 10/25/2011 10:52:07 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
Of course the government is going to throw the book at these fellows - and they will be barred from possession of guns and ammunition.

At least these fellows survived a BATF investigation.

27 posted on 10/25/2011 11:03:03 AM PDT by sonofagun (Some think my cynicism grows with age. I like to think of it as wisdom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

I know, but one can hope for a change.

/bad pun


28 posted on 10/25/2011 11:09:47 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Sure these guys were scammers but, how about we repeal the 1934 and 1968 laws on full autos so civilian buyers are not limited to only purchasing existing pre-1986 machine guns?

If one can qualify for the transfer and ownership of a machine gun (plus afford the ammo) let a legal citizen or resident own one. Actual crime with full autos is almost non-existent.


29 posted on 10/25/2011 11:21:41 AM PDT by RicocheT (Eat the rich only if you're certain it's your last meal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sonofagun

I can CREATE VALUE by rolling back the odometer of my ‘99 Ford and selling a fraudulent product.


You missed the whole point. A fully-informed buyer of these smartly-modified guns would happily pay the price and receive the added value. A fully-informed buyer of your car would not receive any value from your rolling back the odo.

There is NO evidence that any buyers were deceived over the nearly 20 years this logical practice went on.


30 posted on 10/25/2011 11:48:18 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Author of BullionBible.com - Makes You a Precious Metal Expert, Guaranteed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]




Click the Pic               Thank you, JoeProBono

Gary and Harriet Leave the Reception in Their Honeymoon Shells

Follow the Exciting Adventures of Gary the Snail!


Abolish FReepathons
Go Monthly

If you sign up
A sponsor will donate $10

31 posted on 10/25/2011 11:53:55 AM PDT by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GladesGuru

As a vehicle has a serial number (VIN) adn that refers to that specific vehicle, might I inquire as to how welding that bit of material with the number onto an entirely different gun is different than putting the VIN of a Mercedes onto a Pinto and calling the Pinto a Mercedes?


Let me explain. Some of my best friends are machine gun dealers and manufacturers. Really.

The analogy is that the government bans cars made after 1986, except for government officials. Trucks, scooters, motorcycles and SUVs are still legal. People are allowed to buy and sell a very limited number of old cars, made before 1986. There is only one car per 1000 American citizens (excluding the government cars).

Those ownable cars are worth many times (10-20x) their original value, and worth many times more than new trucks and SUVs that would cost no more to make.

Ownable Mercedes are a lot more desireable than ownable Pintos. So some clever guy reads the arcane laws on the subject, and finds that the panel with the VIN is the “car” and everything else is “parts.” He then decides to take his pinto, and upgrade it with a while Mercedes “parts kit.” Those parts kits are available cheap at government surplus and from overseas, as long as the VIN part is destroyed.

So he welds the Pinto VIN on the Vin-less Mercedes, and creates a much more valuable car, without increasing the number of “evil” cars in circulation. The enterprising chap might even buy a new parts kit and instead of a 25-year-old Mercedes (still better than a 35-year old Pinto) he has created a NEW Mercedes!

So, no one could possibly be defrauded. And there is no evidence of fraud in the case.

All you do-gooders worried about poor innocent machine-gun collectors being fooled are really worried that the unconstitutional state might be threatened.


32 posted on 10/25/2011 11:57:43 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Author of BullionBible.com - Makes You a Precious Metal Expert, Guaranteed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Aroostook25

It doesn’t sound much like a manufacturing operation. More like a cut / paste outfit.


33 posted on 10/25/2011 12:02:16 PM PDT by ImJustAnotherOkie (zerogottago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
Paperwork crimes. Oh, the horror. The only reason this "crime" was necessary was because the government refuses to acknowledge and enforce the 2nd amendment. The ATF is one of the most evil of government agencies, and I wouldn't trust one of their agents to speak my weight.
34 posted on 10/25/2011 12:16:51 PM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Durus

Spoken like a true anarchist.


35 posted on 10/25/2011 12:43:56 PM PDT by MindBender26 (Forget AMEX. Remember your Glock 27: Never Leave Home Without It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

I’m sorry, but your post illustrates a lack of understanding of law and society.

We, as a civilized society, have decided a set of rules we all agree to live by. You don’t have to like them, agree with them, or accept them as just, but you do have to follow them, or face the penalty for violating them, or leave this society. Period.

Just as you don’t want me deciding that I have rights to occupy your property whenever you are not home, I don’t want 250,000,000 individuals deciding what laws they will obey and which they will not.

The answer to a disagreement with a law is to attempt to educate 51% of the people to agree with you. It is not in disobedience.

Are all gun laws unconstitutional? Do you want a person convicted of child abuse to be able to follow your child to school with a concealed weapon? Do you want 6 loyal Islamist followers of your local radical imam to sit on the street in front of your house with a loaded ZU-23, while drunk on cheap red wine?

It’s like playing Monopoly or Scrabble. We all agree to play by the same rules, or the game (or life) is worthless.

If you don’t like a rule, work to change it. If you can’t get people to agree to vote to change it, don’t blame the law; blame yourself.


36 posted on 10/25/2011 12:57:26 PM PDT by MindBender26 (Forget AMEX. Remember your Glock 27: Never Leave Home Without It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: All
There are two court cases that would be of interest to everyone concerned with class III weapons.

Naturally, the government refused to appeal these decisions, as it completely destroys their entire victim disarmement regime, as codified by the 1934, 1968, and 1986 GCAs.

37 posted on 10/25/2011 12:58:55 PM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

I remember back in 1968-1970 some company in Phoenix was selling new Thompson look alikes. Semi auto and ATF legal. They were advertised in the pages of gun magazines at that time.

Then the ATF called them all in and confiscated them when it was found that if you held in the safety and pulled the trigger it would go full auto.


38 posted on 10/25/2011 1:01:33 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (Click my name. See my home page, if you dare! NEW PHOTOS & PAINTINGS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

“All you do-gooders worried about poor innocent machine-gun collectors being fooled are really worried that the unconstitutional state might be threatened.”

Speak for thyself, John Alden - I am not in the least worried about unconstitutional aspects of governmment being ‘threatened’.

I am worried about unconstitutional aspects of government not being seen as so threatening that we are motivated to vote to shut down such ‘unconstitutional’ acts/agencies of government.


39 posted on 10/25/2011 1:07:29 PM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is necessary to examine principles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
And your point is?"
40 posted on 10/25/2011 1:11:41 PM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GladesGuru

Word....


41 posted on 10/25/2011 1:13:46 PM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
-- I'm sorry, but your post illustrates a lack of understanding of law and society. --

Heh. I understand it fine. When a judge can read precedent for the opposite of what it says, the judge is the problem. See chronic misapplication of Presser and Miller.

-- You don't have to like them, agree with them, or accept them as just, but you do have to follow them, or face the penalty for violating them, or leave this society. --

I have to follow them because the government has superior power of force, not because the government has the benefit of "moral right" by adhering to its own agreement with the people.

-- I don't want 250,000,000 individuals deciding what laws they will obey and which they will not. --

Well, the reality is many people don't follow the law, and don't respect (that is, hold as "proper") large swaths of it. They disobey, and take their chances.

-- Are all gun laws unconstitutional? --

I think no, but I think you find that if SCOTUS says they are, then they are.

-- Do you want a person convicted of child abuse to be able to follow your child to school with a concealed weapon? --

Of course I don't like creeps. I also don't suppose that the law prevents people from being creeps. Punish wrongdoing - but I'd not punish a person for being armed, unless they use that threat of force as a means to obtain what they aren't entitled to.

-- The answer to a disagreement with a law is to attempt to educate 51% of the people to agree with you. It is not in disobedience. --

The answer isn't either/or. Laws can be nullified by various means.

-- If you can't get people to agree to vote to change it, don't blame the law; blame yourself. --

I have nothing to do with Scalia's decision to circumvent precedent with illogic.

42 posted on 10/25/2011 1:26:23 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!”
Samuel Adams

I'm a conservative while you speak like a Tory.

43 posted on 10/25/2011 1:49:51 PM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
Not only is this FRAUD (similar to using stolen VINs), it conspires against the NFA Act of 1934 and Gun Control Act of 1968 regulating FFL holders.

Good thing they didn't drill any holes in the receivers, since each hole can be considered a seperate machinegun, per BATFE declaration. Hey, look: The air around us is just FILLED with unregistered machineguns. And if you breathe in any air, you're in possession....

44 posted on 10/25/2011 3:16:43 PM PDT by archy (I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
The reality is that individual citizens do not choose what laws to obey and which ones to declare unconstitutional.

That's just an argument for superiority of the state, period.

Exactly. An act of law does not ipso facto legitimize tyranny. The authority of the state is founded on the consent of the governed.

45 posted on 10/25/2011 3:39:33 PM PDT by no-s (B.L.O.A.T. and every day...because some day soon they won't be making any more...for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
If you can’t get people to agree to vote to change it, don’t blame the law; blame yourself.

It is an absurdity that the will of the majority is omnipotent and omniscient. If the majority of the people in a society believe a distinctly identifiable minority should be enslaved simply because the majority wants to have people as property, is that belief legitimized by passing a law? This is not an edge case. Similar arguments can be made against state sanctioned monopoly, for example.

Here in California people peacefully and legally protested arbitrary gun control laws with legal open carry. Rather than address the point of the protest, the state legislature enacted a law to outlaw open carry because of the police effort required to verify the protesters were following the letter of the law. What do you think of a law enacted to outlaw a freedom because of the cost of presuming guilt is too high?

46 posted on 10/25/2011 5:56:23 PM PDT by no-s (B.L.O.A.T. and every day...because some day soon they won't be making any more...for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
Suppose fedgov bans ownership of the Glock 27. Will you turn yours in?
47 posted on 10/25/2011 6:01:10 PM PDT by Ken H (They are running out of other people's money. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: no-s
It is an absurdity that the will of the majority is omnipotent and omniscient.

Then to which minority do you give such powers?

48 posted on 10/25/2011 6:05:35 PM PDT by MindBender26 (Forget AMEX. Remember your Glock 27: Never Leave Home Without It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

But what do you do when people disobey a law you do like?

To live in a world where we live by laws inconsistant with the wills of the governed is a dictatorship. That’s why Obamacare, or at least its creators, will not survice the 2012 General Election.

When people live in a world where each decides what laws they will follow, that is anarchy.


49 posted on 10/25/2011 6:12:02 PM PDT by MindBender26 (Forget AMEX. Remember your Glock 27: Never Leave Home Without It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Except that the BATFE, the agency in charge of such infractions, has no authority to do so because their original authority came from congress’s taxation-of-everything authority.
Now that the BATFE has nothing to do with collecting tax-revenue, as it is wholly under the DOJ and not the Treasury, they have no authority to deny the manufacture of machine-guns.

Legal precedent:
http://www.constitution.org/2ll/court/fed/us_v_rock_island.htm

Furthermore, even using the bastardized definition of Ex Post Facto [laws] that the USSC has for more than a century (ie that only criminal laws may violate the ex post facto prohibition), the GCA is plainly contra-constitutional as it made every ex-felon (those with felonies, but had served their sentence) “prohibited persons” thereby altering their sentence.


50 posted on 10/25/2011 6:23:16 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-125 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson