National Firearms Act: Unconstitutional, Period!

What did the NFA really do? Did it prevent crime? Can you even give an answer to that question? Does it conflict with the literal meaning of the Second Amendment? How did it come to encompass so many other types and components of firearms? After its passing, in 1934, what effect did it have, and still have to this day on the American citizen?


Nothing. Not a damned thing, except who gets to point them at you and I.


The act was supposedly intended to stem the violent times of the leftover parts that the Volstead Act gave us. About the only thing the Volstead Act intended was to make the consumption of alcohol illegal. It didn’t even accomplish that. Instead, it gave us a gift that kept on giving: violent criminal activity from organized and not so organized crime, and many were using Thompson submachine guns. Heck, I can imagine some folks getting violent just over the idea that the government made their cocktails illegal. I’d be angry, too.

The act, in my opinion, was a political and emotional response that only infringed on the Second Amendment, which was officially the beginning of the War on Guns. Politicians don’t want us to have guns, and the NFA was only the beginning of gun control. There were other starts, like keeping freed slaves from owning firearms.  The problem with the NFA is that there was no history, tradition or anything textual in the Constitution around that magic date, 1791, to support the Act. That is the best reason I can think of to give Justice Clarence Thomas a hug, since he made that as part of his decision in the New York Pistol and Rifle Assn. v. Bruen. And folks, it is the fundamental grounds for terminating any and all gun control laws in this country, unless someone can come up with any hint at text, history and tradition that disagrees with that. They can’t.

Our country is so deeply based on liberty that our patriots of past had to pick up the only tools of war they could muster, and the basic tool was a gun, the musket, the long rifle, Pennsylvania or Kentucky, take your pick, and fight a bloody revolution because that King was the ultimate in gun control. King George made it illegal to export firearms to the colonies, in the run up to the Revolutionary war, knowing he stirred up a hornet’s nest. So, those who think there is a thread of any history or textual evidence that gun control was ever a thought, other than how to control a gun while shooting it, give it a good try, and get back to me.

It most definitely conflicts with the literal interpretation of the Second Amendment. You have to be pretty twisted, or on some of Brandon’s meds, to be able to interpret the Second Amendment as only meaning for militias, so there, lefties! The Second Amendment is there for a main reason, to aid in the defense of aggressors against our countries, and, it is there for us to defend against tyranny. So how can we defend ourselves against the tyrannical politician, who dreams up every scheme under the sun, to keep a firearm from our hands? Don’t say voting them out of office. We’ve been trying to do that since the founding of our country, and with very poor results, not too mention illegalities in elections.

Another thing that the NFA did was eventually drive the cost of the machine gun to the prices of rare commodities, like gold, when that has nothing to do with preventing crime. Go try to buy an Ingram Mac-10. I remember when they were cheap enough that I could go and pay hundreds for one, and just wait on the ATF(minit mart taxing authority and criminal governmental agency) to issue the stamp so I could pick up my weapon. Too bad I liked those lever action commemorative rifles, back then. I drooled over Golden Spikes, Canadian Centennials when I should have pony’d up and bought the Ingram, which are still in active use as a preferred weapon by criminals everywhere.

Some people will say “Well, they are just too dangerous to be in the hands of just anyone, and should be restricted.” They will say that for the same reason that they say AR-15s are scary. The person picking up any gun and using it is going to do good or evil with it, not the gun. What firearm is not dangerous? Purpose is built into the mind of the one using the tool he has in his hands, whether it be a Mossberg pump shotgun or a Barrett .50 cal rifle, or an M2 Browning machine gun, not the gun, itself. Utility is built into the gun because of its potential uses, but only directed by the one behind the trigger. All firearms are only tools. Using the distinction of curb appeal is pure emotion, and is a bad way to go about limiting something’s ability to be purchased. Even us who like and appreciate firearms get caught up in appearances, but it is for different reasons. We can get caught up in the design, just like a car buff appreciates a 1953 Corvette, or my favorite, any year of a Shelby Cobra, so the gun grabber shouldn’t be able to get away with using appearance to ban a firearm, just like they shouldn’t be able to use lethality or ability.

Going back to 1791, the authors of the Constitution either didn’t know about that stuff, decided it wasn’t necessary or desirable to place such limits on the ability to keep and bear firearms, or they decided that the basic text of the 2nd Amendment, in its original form was the way it should be and enshrined exactly what they intended. After all, the original use of the firearm, whichever one holds, wasn’t just meant for hunting.

It seems pretty easy for me to consider that the government just doesn’t want it being aimed at them. I’d be willing to bet that it is the government who wants all that dangerous and lethal power aimed at you and I, instead, to make us compliant.

Make them be left throwing rocks. We might get our government back where it was when we put the roadblock to tyranny back where it was once. I don’t want to do anything more, than having equal power, so a senator or a president can’t do what we have been subjected to, just the last few years. They know the same thing that Mao knew. It’s time we were the ones who took that power back, and kept it as them serving the people, not the other way around. I’ll bet Justice Thomas agrees with me.

If you want a government to run right, keep the guns away from Democrats, and even stray Republicans who gave up on liberty, and instead, chose power. The phrase that I believe makes this necessary: Life, Liberty and The Pursuit of Happiness. Doesn’t get more basic than that. Plus, your vote doesn’t mean much if you don’t have the gun on your side. The opposition already knows that

If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN

Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
CloutHub: AFNN_USA

Leave a Comment