Posted on 06/10/2003 5:34:28 AM PDT by Copernicus
Interesting read, but the context of the debate in regard to Richmond Times is the sunset of the AWB and the writer has completely crossed his/her wires.
Best regards,
No they are not.... they are indeed illegal for mere citizens to own
Please note the obvious disconnect in your post.
On the federal level, one can get a license for all sorts of illegal substances and items. That doesn't alter the fact that they are illegal.
But they are not. Failure to pay the tax is illegal. And anyone without a criminal record can apply for a tax stamp. This is unlike other illegal substances where only a very restricted subset of the population can even apply for the permit or license. I'll grant that those machine guns manufactured since 1986 for civilian sue are illegal.
Of course on a higher, and somewhat theoretical, level, it's the laws purporting to make some arms illegal, including the NFA, that are themselves illegal and invalid.
To become a registered owner, a complete FBI background investigation is conducted, checking for any criminal history or tendencies toward violence, and an application must be submitted to the BATF including two sets of fingerprints, a recent photo, a sworn affidavit that transfer of the NFA firearm is of "reasonable necessity," and that sale to and possession of the weapon by the applicant "would be consistent with public safety." The application form also requires the signature of a chief law enforcement officer with jurisdiction in the applicant's residence.
Since the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of May 19, 1986, ownership of newly manufactured machine guns has been prohibited to civilians. Machine guns which were manufactured prior to the Act's passage are regulated under the National Firearms Act, but those manufactured after the ban cannot ordinarily be sold to or owned by civilians.
Please note the term "unlawful" (i.e., illegal) above and also note that I'm not arguing that obtaining a permit for a fully automatic weapon is possible. However, without the background check, permits, etc. it is *illegal*.
So is carrying a concealed firearm in most states. The point still remains that it can be legal for ordinary citizens to own machineguns or carry a concealed weapon. Such "permits" and "taxes" are "infringements" of course.
I just thinks it's somewhat disingenuous to say that something is illegal, and leave out the caveat, "without a permit". Heck it's illegal to add a carport or covered parking spot for your boat, to your property without a permit virtually anywhere in the country that is inside or near a town or a city. Does that mean carports are illegal? Or cars for that matter, since you have a license to operate them on public roads, two in fact, one for the operator and one for the vehicle. Are cars and/or driving thus illegal?
In one way you are correct. If charged with not registering and paying the tax on a machine gun, you must prove that you did, rather than the government prove that you did not. That in itself probably a violation of your rights under the 6th amendment, and of your common law right to be presumed innocent protected by the 9th amendment.
The fact that one can obtain a permit for an object or substance that is illegal doesn't make that object or substance legal -- it's done all the time with illegal drugs etc -- all it does is exempt a specific person from the law.
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.