Classification as destructive device

[xryan.jacksonx]

The newest (and probably most likely) scenario floating around the internet about gun control is the idea that Obama could have the ATF reclassify all semi auto firearms as destructive devices. I could see how any shotgun larger than a 410 could be classified as such with Eric Holder declaring there are no shotguns which meet the sporting requirement. Is there any language in the NFA or GCA that would allow the ATF to reclassify semi auto rifles as DD?


How Obama Will Ban Guns without Congressional Approval « Gun Owners of America

 

[windellmc]

I just read that article and the list of "Destructive Devices" did not include semi-auto rifles. If that list is in the law then Obama will have trouble overriding that without Congressional approval. If the law is vague and does not specifically list the "Destructive Devices" then all best are off.

The "Sporting Requirement" is unconstitutional based on both framer's intent and previous Supreme Court opinions. In fact there was a case in the '50s where the court said that the 2nd specifically protected civilian possession of weapons used by the military. Unfortunately that case was sent back to the appelate courts and the defendent was murdered before he could provide evidence that the gun in question was in fact something commonly used by the military. It seems likely NFA or at least parts of it would have been ruled unconstitutional if the defendent had lived to finish the challenge. It makes you wonder if his murder was related.

 

[amafrank]

Wow....lots of misinformation here. The case you speak of concerned the NFA of 1934 and was US vs Miller. The defendant dying had little to do with the case not being brought forward. Lack of time and money to pursue the case was more likely the reason.
Here is a link to info. United States v. Miller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The sporting purposes clause was first brought up in the GCA of 1968 and while its not mentioned in the constitution there has been no real decisions that affect it in real life. Its a sham for sure but not based on supreme court actions.

Obama and his henchmen cannot legally declare semi auto rifles to be DD's unless they have a bore diameter of larger then .50 cal. Shotguns maybe but even then it would be tricky. They (clintons commies) did do it for the street sweepers, USAS 12 and Striker 12 based on the fact that they were high capacity shotguns with no sporting purpose. It was a special case that could be done only because the guns were larger than .50 cal. Pretty hard to do with an AR15. Sure they can come up with some BS to screw with us but this one has been a bit of internet myth for a long time and attributed to more than obama and his gumbies.

You can look up and read the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968 on google. While you're at it have a look at the McClure/Volkmer Act of 1986 and the illegally/immorally/improperly tacked on hughs amendment. Once you read the actual law it will give you a better idea which are myths and which have a chance.
Frank

 

[subtlesixer03]

The more I read stuff like this the more pissed I get about what I have learned and read for myself about the 14th amendment and several key moves afterward. He can and is doing what he wants because of history. It is why he uses Excec Orders. There is a lot of crap but dig though it and what you find will change you. I believe in the FOR not the OF.