Home Forums Classifieds GT Store Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups


Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 08-18-2011, 15:00   #1
Senior Member
Norske's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 5,569
Is NFA 34 a house of cards?

Zak, I don't know if you are an expert on the legalities of Class III as opposed to a technical expert on Class III stuff, but here goes.

I think NFA 34 and the lone Supreme Court case that buttresses it, Miller 1939, is a legal house of cards that has never been blown to bits simply because no one has ever challenged them in court.

As I understand Miller '39, Miller was arrested and charged for transporting an NFA weapon, specifically a double barrelled shotgun, across a State line without having paid the $200 NFA "tax" on it.

The initial Federal Judge ruled in favor of Miller, effectively throwing NFA 34 under the bus, as a violation of Miller's 2nd Amendment rights.

When the case got to the Supreme court, only the Government's lawyers and the judges were there. There was no one there to argue the pro-Miller, pro-2nd Amendment, side of the case.

The government's case was that the lower court decision should be reversed because the specific arm in question, a sawed off shotgun, was not suitable for militia use.

The Supreme court accepted that argument, thereby reversing the lower court decision and re-instating NFA 34 which remains in effect to this day.

However, if you take the government's own argument one step further, which the Miller court did not and no court since has not, any weapon that does have a "militia use" should be protected under the 2nd Amendment. In other words, by the government's own argument the Class III stuff controlled under NFA 34 should not be controlled under NFA 34!

If Miller had had, say, a BAR instead of a sawed-off shotgun, the government would not have been able to make the "no militia use" argument and the lower court might have been sustained, and NFA 34 would have remained scrapped.

Am I wrong there?

Since then of course, we have had the 1986 "Ban" on production of new NFA weapons. If the combination of NFA 34 and the 1986 does not "infringe" the 2nd Amendment, I do not know what does!
Ceterum censeo, inferensus Islam delenda est"
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Norske is offline   Reply With Quote


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:59.

GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
GT Store

Users Currently Online: 1,109
273 Members
836 Guests

Most users ever online: 4,867
May 19, 2015 at 1:03