Texas leads the way

[ladder13]

TX is going to butt heads with the Feds declaring Made in Texas exempt from NFA requirements.


Texas Passes Bill to Remove NFA Suppressor Requirements for 'Made in Texas' Cans - GunsAmerica Digest

 

[LVSteve]

TX is going to butt heads with the Feds declaring Made in Texas exempt from NFA requirements.


Texas Passes Bill to Remove NFA Suppressor Requirements for 'Made in Texas' Cans - GunsAmerica Digest

If I ate popcorn I'd get some ready.

 

[SAFireman]

Well, the states that allow recreational drug use have done essentially the same thing. I guess that we will have to wait and see.

Thanks for bringing this up Mike, I hadn't heard about it before.

 

[4barrel]

Just what we need. A 500 that sounds like a 22.

 

[ladder13]

Hopefully more states follow.

 

[CQB27]

God Bless Texas!

 

[ggibson511960]

The Republic of Texas is on pretty firm Constitutional ground to do this. The bill is thoroughly thought out to preserve the Constitutional allowance. Precedents in other state are legion. The drug use pandering is a good one. The one with largest commercial impact is California's self declared right to dictate automobile pollution and performance standards. Tolerance of this deviation by the feds has been going on for decades.

 

[Justin T]

Did wyoming not do this years ago?

 

[LostintheOzone]

Maybe the Feds will just let it slide and hope nobody notices.

 

[HeyJoe]

I wouldnt advise volunteering to be the test case

 

[Muss Muggins]

Where does the steel come from? Or their packaging? Or their machinery? I’m betting all of that is involved in interstate commerce. And will the manufacturers use the internet to process orders, with credit cards? And it’s not the Republic of Texas that will face prosecution. It will be the manufacturer and the purchaser of the suppressors. Form over function feel good stuff. Good luck with that . . .

Edit: Texans should call their respective legislators and tell ‘em to take the passion out of this and consider their vote carefully before a bunch of constituents get indicted . . .

TX is going to butt heads with the Feds declaring Made in Texas exempt from NFA requirements.


Texas Passes Bill to Remove NFA Suppressor Requirements for 'Made in Texas' Cans - GunsAmerica Digest

 

[steelslaver]

Texas leads the way???? Hardly

Montana did that in January of 2009 with the Montana Firearms Freedom Act

30-20-104. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.

The a "firearm accessory" part included cans

Similar laws were subsequently passed in Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, South Dakota, Utah, Tennessee, Kansas, and Wyoming

 

[Muss Muggins]

I got ten bucks and a beer that says that hundreds of people in each of those states have been convicted and sentenced in federal court under 18 USC 922(g) . . .

Edit: Five minutes on Google. I imagine that this Montana fella wants to talk to his legislator. I’ve got dozens more . . .

Man pleads guilty to manufacturing homemade silencers

Edit: Everyone in the states mentioned in steelslaver’s post needs to contact their legislators and encourage them to investigate the veracity of the enacted legislation and if necessary, pursue a correction. . .

Texas leads the way???? Hardly

Montana did that in January of 2009 with the Montana Firearms Freedom Act

30-20-104. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.

The a "firearm accessory" part included cans

Similar laws were subsequently passed in Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, South Dakota, Utah, Tennessee, Kansas, and Wyoming

 

[SchemaEnigma]

I got ten bucks and a beer that says that hundreds of people in each of those states have been convicted and sentenced in federal court under 18 USC 922(g) . . .

Edit: Five minutes on Google. I imagine that this Montana fella wants to talk to his legislator. I’ve got dozens more . . .

Man pleads guilty to manufacturing homemade silencers

Edit: Everyone in the states mentioned in steelslaver’s post needs to contact their legislators and encourage them to investigate the veracity of the enacted legislation and if necessary, pursue a correction. . .

A guy has no shot.

However, an organization with money can convince a guy who has been charged and/or convicted to take this to the SCOTUS.

Or, even better, a coalition of state AGs taking the guy's case in defense of the state law, and state sovereignty.

The states should not back down to the overbearing out-of-control Federal power grabbers.

 

[Justin T]

Where does the steel come from? Or their packaging? Or their machinery? I’m betting all of that is involved in interstate commerce. And will the manufacturers use the internet to process orders, with credit cards? And it’s not the Republic of Texas that will face prosecution. It will be the manufacturer and the purchaser of the suppressors. Form over function feel good stuff. Good luck with that . . .

Edit: Texans should call their respective legislators and tell ‘em to take the passion out of this and consider their vote carefully before a bunch of constituents get indicted . . .

The article makes all of this clear. And we should be lobbying exactly opposite of your recommendations.

 

[steelslaver]

ya, that guy had also been doing a bunch of other interesting things that first attracted their attention.They went after him for explosives. About 2 weeks ago I had lunch with the guy who retired as chief of police in Miles City when that went down. I bet you money he could have cared less about the silencers if that was all the guy had been doing.

 

[bulletslap]

The perverted expansion of the Interstate Commerce Clause should be overturned, but I am not holding my breath waiting for it.

A hundred thousand Texans need to build one.

 

[Muss Muggins]

But aren’t explosives also regulated and prosecuted by ATFE?

ya, that guy had also been doing a bunch of other interesting things that first attracted their attention.They went after him for explosives. About 2 weeks ago I had lunch with the guy who retired as chief of police in Miles City when that went down. I bet you money he could have cared less about the silencers if that was all the guy had been doing.

 

[Bucher33]

Didn't the federal government sue Arizona for trying to enforce federal immigration law? But yet we have hundreds of sanctuary cities and several sanctuary states as well. And as mentioned all the marijuana initiatives that are now legal in how many states?
But violate gun law go to jail with key thrown away. There is no end to the hypocrisy, over reach and double standards of the federal government.

 

[steelslaver]

But aren’t explosives also regulated and prosecuted by ATFE?

Ah, they never found any of those and wanted the guy gone. The feds did get involved.

READ the article; A subsequent search warrant turned up a shoe box labeled as containing dynamite and explosive devises, and two homemade silencers without serial numbers.

A box with a label that says explosives is not illegal. Plus, many forms of explosives are legal per BATF. i can make a bunch of Nitro legally. Key word is business



§ 842. Unlawful Acts(a) It shall be unlawful for any person—(1) to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials without a license issued under this chapter;

ATF advises: "Persons manufacturing explosives for their own personal, non-business use only (e.g., personal target practice) are not required to have a Federal explosives license or permit." A prohibited person (a person barred by federal law from buying or owning a firearm) cannot legally possess mixed explosives.

Possession Of Silencer in Montana

45-8-336. Possession of silencer. (1) A person commits the offense of possession of a silencer if the person possesses, manufactures, transports, buys, or sells a silencer and has the purpose to use it to commit an offense or knows that another person has such a purpose.

NOTICE the part "and has the purpose of committing an offense
'. Just building it and shooting targets is OK or in Montana even hunting with it would be OK by the state. if you propose to commit a crime while using it THEN it becomes illegal.

the earlier law I posted only states it is not subject to the BATF as there is no interstate commerce.

I know you a ex Fed and hate the idea of states actually doing what they think best.