Nationwide call to action: Amend/Repeal/Challenge Constitutionality of 1986 FOPA - Page 5

View Poll Results: I Will File A Form 4 With The BATFE For A Post 5/19/1986 F/A Weapon In...

Voters
14. You may not vote on this poll
  • District 1

    0 0%
  • District 2

    0 0%
  • District 3

    2 14.29%
  • District 4

    0 0%
  • District 5

    1 7.14%
  • District 6

    4 28.57%
  • District 7

    0 0%
  • District 8

    2 14.29%
  • District 9

    3 21.43%
  • District 10

    1 7.14%
  • District 11

    1 7.14%
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 68

Thread: Nationwide call to action: Amend/Repeal/Challenge Constitutionality of 1986 FOPA

  1. Alright we have the House thankfully most Americans woke up and fired their deadbeat politicians. We made some progress in the Senate which will surely be ours and hopefully the White House come 2012. Now let's get down to business. Our window to bring this action is opening a little wider for us.

    I am willing to file in the 3rd Circuit as I mentioned earlier. I also am in my first year of law school meaning I have access to all the materials needed (LexisNexus, WestLaw, etc.) and more importantly for free.

    I was going to go talk to my Civil Procedure professor tomorrow or next week in regards to challenging the Hughes Amendment on a procedural error as well, considering it was not passed properly and Rangel who has been found in numerous ethical violations said it was passed. This might help our case and attack his credibility. Optimistically it would lead to his permit termination from Congress which didn't happen this November thanks to the morons in NY's 15th Congressional District who kept him in office.

    Regardless of our plan of attack I say we get this going while we have the momentum. If we go for the legislative approach we would most likely have the House Majority back us. Democrats in the senate may also see it as a way to regain some voters in an attempt to save their seats in 2012 and we'd only need a few to cross the proverbial aisle to gain majority here. The next step would be to overcome the almost guaranteed Veto from Obama. We would then need 2/3s of the Senate. This may be possible depending on the time frame, who knows if it happens after 2012 we may have everything we need in order.

  2.   
  3. So whats the status on this? Has everyone already filed and gotten denied yet?

  4. Quote Originally Posted by Dinodom000 View Post
    So whats the status on this? Has everyone already filed and gotten denied yet?
    Nothing's happened just yet. We really need to find some attorneys who would rally to our cause. Do you think Alan Gura would be interested?

  5. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Midnight View Post
    Nothing's happened just yet. We really need to find some attorneys who would rally to our cause. Do you think Alan Gura would be interested?
    I hope the Alan Gura part is a joke...

    He is not on our side...

    He is the last guy we want...

    Stewart Rhodes founder of oathkeepers will be whom I start with in Nevada...

    NOBODY should be filing anything yet...

    this has to be a cordinated effort...

    FIRST: All districts need to be covered, we are not there yet...

    WHEN you see all districts covered in the poll for this thread, then we are ready for a offline coordinated simultaneous filing...

    "The people never give up their liberties, but under some delusion." - Edmund Burke

  6. Quote Originally Posted by Bohemian View Post
    I hope the Alan Gura part is a joke...

    He is not on our side...

    He is the last guy we want...

    Stewart Rhodes founder of oathkeepers will be whom I start with in Nevada...

    NOBODY should be filing anything yet...

    this has to be a cordinated effort...

    FIRST: All districts need to be covered, we are not there yet...

    WHEN you see all districts covered in the poll for this thread, then we are ready for a offline coordinated simultaneous filing...
    While Alan gets a lot of flack for some of his anti MG rhetoric when he was before the supreme court, It is my understanding (from some very long and involved conversations I've had with his personal friends and others who are involved with his cases) that he personally does believe that the 2A supports private ownership of all small arms including MG's (in fact military type MG's are arguably the MOST protected of all armaments)

    His arguments against MG's was a tactic employed to ensure that the supreme court did not rule against the 2A being an individual right. (which it very nearly did)


    With regard to being denied a MG permit and appealing, it is my opinion that the best bet for success is NOT actually a coordinated attempt at registration but rather carefully targeting a specific district and working through it.

    The 10th circuit
    * Colorado
    * Kansas
    * New Mexico
    * Oklahoma
    * Utah
    * Wyoming

    Is in the unique position of having already declared the 86 MG ban to be void as it invalidates the premise of the 34 NFA in the case of US v Rock Island Armory.

    U.S. v. Rock Island Armory, Inc., 773 F.Supp. 117 (C.D.Ill. 1991)

    I believe the best way to move forward would be to incorporate a company in Wyoming and obtain an 07FFL/02 for it.

    The company would be privately held, and money for it could be raised through private stock issuance to firearm owners.

    The company could then file a number of form 1's (I would suggest 100 or more) for M16 lower receivers which it could pre-sell for $500 (300 to cover operations, 200 for the tax stamp)

    The ATF would either have to deny the form 1's at which point you would have grounds to take them to court (using rock island as precedence) Or you would have your form 1's approved and have 100 fully transferable machine guns for only 20000 + cost

    If denied, you would have grounds to appeal the 86 MG ban to the SCOUTS on the grounds that it is a revenue raising measure which does not raise revenue (and there is a LOT of good SCOTUS precedent to be found there)

    In my opinion pursuing that line of attack would be better since gun owners would be able to pool resources into a company for a single point of attack which would maximize the chance for certiori in the supreme court, and minimize the risk of bad circuit court precedent being set.

  7. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by AJAX22 View Post
    While Alan gets a lot of flack for some of his anti MG rhetoric when he was before the supreme court, It is my understanding (from some very long and involved conversations I've had with his personal friends and others who are involved with his cases) that he personally does believe that the 2A supports private ownership of all small arms including MG's (in fact military type MG's are arguably the MOST protected of all armaments)

    His arguments against MG's was a tactic employed to ensure that the supreme court did not rule against the 2A being an individual right. (which it very nearly did)

    ...
    Alan Gura was the first one I talked to... he did not want anything to do with it for any amount of money...

    Actually to quote Alan Gura from personal conversations I have had with him telephonically, and he re-iterated via email...

    "OK, so you want machine guns and RPGs on airplanes – any weapon any place or time, right? Got it. Thanks. Good luck with that. Then you can move on to residential noise ordinances and laws punishing extortion, bribery and perjury, which all interfere with free speech." - Alan Gura Esq. 10/1/2009

    The coordinated approach is recommended by at least two noted authorities and attorneys that I have discussed this with...
    Basically, we only have the one ruling that was never appealed...
    We need one or more different rulings so that we guarantee it gets in front of SCOTUS...

    The nationwide coordinated approach is recommended by at least two noted constitutional authorities and subject matter expert attorneys that I have discussed this with...

    Notwithstanding the CATO Institute, whom spearheaded Heller to begin with...

    Basically, we only have the one ruling that was never appealed... the one you mentioned...

    We need one or more different rulings so that we guarantee it gets in front of SCOTUS...

    This is the same approach that was taken by the Heller & McDonald cases... they were filing all over the country in key areas...
    Because, Congress has created the mythology of the in-common use firearm criteria, we need more people to step up to the plate nation-wide to see it for what it is; a clear-concise Second Amendment Infringement...
    A ban of an entire type/class of weapon by law-abiding u.s. citizens, that are not politicians, or a member of their staff or police or military or other member of the federal government...
    Good old ethically challenged Charlie Rangel created a privileged class of the population with his act...

    Make sense?


    http://www.usacarry.com/forums/firea...-criteria.html

    They can not make MG ownership out to be a uncommon desire if every stinking district is raising the same issue...
    And their in-common use weapon critera falls flat as well...

    I believe your approach can be used in conjunction with this one... they are both a means to the same end...

    I only disagree that putting all our eggs in one basket is the way to go...

    "The people never give up their liberties, but under some delusion." - Edmund Burke

  8. Quote Originally Posted by Bohemian View Post

    "OK, so you want machine guns and RPGs on airplanes any weapon any place or time, right? Got it. Thanks. Good luck with that. Then you can move on to residential noise ordinances and laws punishing extortion, bribery and perjury, which all interfere with free speech." - Alan Gura Esq. 10/1/2009

    *snip*

    I believe your approach can be used in conjunction with this one... they are both a means to the same end...

    I only disagree that putting all our eggs in one basket is the way to go...
    Interesting, I'll have to follow up with Alan et all. on that... I've heard him make similar statements, but usually in the context of tactics and what is feasible with regard to the current system of governance we face. particularly the sensitive area language, which is likely never going away.

    I agree that multiple approaches are not a bad idea, I just have worries with regard to not coordinating through a single legal team from the outset for two main reasons:

    1) cost- having a number of individuals with independent legal teams is substantially more costly than having one legal team do research once and file the paperwork for everyone.

    2)consistency- the appeals really do have to be constructed well, and the language use will be critical, particularly as it relates to the precedent in the various circuits.


    While I realize that the initial solicitation for applicants in no way precludes proper coordination later on, I just worry about not having the legal team (backed up by a properly incorporated 501c3 to solicit tax exempt donations) in place ahead of time. If your plan in any way depends on the NRA getting involved, it probably won't happen. the success of Heller was in spite of the NRA, not because of them... and they made no overtures to allow for the use of their funding/infrastructure/ or organization.

    They will pile on once you are appealing to be granted cert, but that will be well into the fight.

    As I've learned from my own attempts to solicit the NRA's participation in activist endeavors, (such as the Montana project)

    How much would you pay for Valid LEO credentials (issued to you)? - Calguns.net

    they just are not interested... they wave their hands, they cry about the UN... but when it comes time to taking back lost ground they are utterly impotent.

    The only organization I've ever even heard of who was able to get the NRA involved in an active project instead of a passive project was the calguns foundation.. and those guys have networking skills that are rather incredible.

    I'd be very interested in laying out an action/organization plan with you with regards to structuring this project, securing financing, and soliciting talent for later steps in the process.

  9. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by AJAX22 View Post
    ...

    Alan Gura is definitely not interested in getting into any litigation involving full-auto's, he personally believes it is a waste of time and that ITS OK to BAN UNCOMMON weapons such as MG's...


    And he compromised in front of SCOTUS when he did not have to...
    even without being asked he gave up without a fight...

    You can't go in front of the court one time and say its ok to ban mg's than than go back in front of them and say no you can't, his statements are a undeniable matter of record and will be used against us going forward you can count on it, and it does not help that the NRA & SAF were contributing to his bank account as well...

    As history has shown us, IF they can ban one, they can & will ban them all...

    that being said, first things first, I have a initial legal team available and have consulted them as do others...

    first order of business is... getting a district wide agreement to agree to take action...

    once we have the individuals whom are willing, in the right zip codes, we have to coordinate the simultaneous filings with the batfe for the anticipated administrative denials, including yours if possible, once those roll in; it will be time to round up and coordinate the applicable legal teams in each jurisdiction for the next (court) filing(s) in that case...

    "The people never give up their liberties, but under some delusion." - Edmund Burke

  10. If you have the matter of the legal team handled, I would still strongly suggest incorporating a foundation (if you want to retain control of the direction of the project) as your other options will include partnering with an existing entity which will NOT let you retain control of the direction.

    Incorporation is fast and cheap, but the 501c3 application can take time, and you will want to get the 501c3 and begin fundraising asap.. (htere are a number of grants which are nearly 'shall issue' bu you have to apply for then)

    Just my 2 cents

  11. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by AJAX22 View Post
    If you have the matter of the legal team handled, I would still strongly suggest incorporating a foundation (if you want to retain control of the direction of the project) as your other options will include partnering with an existing entity which will NOT let you retain control of the direction.

    Incorporation is fast and cheap, but the 501c3 application can take time, and you will want to get the 501c3 and begin fund raising asap.. (there are a number of grants which are nearly 'shall issue' but you have to apply for then)

    Just my 2 cents
    thanks for the info will look into it, also PM me so we can chat more about this without clogging up this particular thread with minutia...

    "The people never give up their liberties, but under some delusion." - Edmund Burke

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Nationwide Call To Action: Oppose S.1261
    By Bohemian in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-15-2009, 06:04 AM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-27-2009, 08:28 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-10-2009, 10:06 AM
  4. Nationwide Call To Action: Oppose S.843
    By Bohemian in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-26-2009, 05:30 PM
  5. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-24-2008, 06:09 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast