The more I learn about this case, the more I laugh at the desperation of those who want to take our guns. It used to be a right to dispense information. The BATFE(ATF) wants to change that. But that is not the reasoning. They want to ban the 1st Amendment as well as the 2nd Amendment. That maybe wasn’t their intent, but that’s what makes it so ridiculous. The case in question is the Hoover Key Card Case, one that is just funny, if not sad. However, the two being charged are the ones hanging out to dry, and should be rigorously defended. It’s time for the NFA to fall.
Anyone remember “The Anarchist’s Cook Book?” That book was written in 1971 that was “The” book for people who wanted to do a lot of dastardly things in the name of revolution, I think primarily for the left. It went into how to make explosive devices, stop the government from spying on you, and lots of other things. It is protected by the 1st Amendment. However, a simple drawing, etched on a piece of metal, is not, according to the overlords of all things guns: The ATF.
I wonder where the ATF goes if they have any chance of winning with this? Maybe a ruling against Picasso, or Paganini’s long jointed fingers? It is that preposterous, but so are bans on bump stocks and forced reset triggers. Hey, the NFA and the GCA made the rules that defined machine guns. Creative minds found ways to make products that went around their definitions of what a machine gun is. I can use my finger and belt loop and mimick a machine gun. Does the ATF have a right or any lawful authority to make my finger and belt loop an illegal machine gun? Ponder that for a year or two if you need to. You don’t.
What is at stake with this case, involving a drawing etched on a piece of metal, is exactly that. The ATF claims that, since this is an actual size drawing on that steel plate, it is a machine gun. Since when does the authority of the federal government enter into art? You can make a lightning link out of a beer can. The better beer cans are those that were made of tin, the ones that came from recycled B-17 bombers and once glorious battle ships from WWII, but you still can make one. I’ve seen it done, years ago by someone else, who is probably dead, so ATF don’t waste your time trying to get me to rat them out.
Is this the way we want a so-called government agency acting? What’s funny is the desperation they display, trying to justify their existence, and the existence of the all powerful Mao followers, who believe the power comes from the barrel of a gun, their gun, not yours. From what I understand, the ATF really wants this case to go away, now that they have been caught in a lie, and the lie is that they defined something one way, but hold to the belief that they are the sole authority of how one uses his or her own creativity, like what the 1st Amendment absolutely protects(outside of hollering “Fire” in a crowded theater).
Maybe it will end up that the ATF wins this case, but I don’t see how it can. I’m not a big beer drinker, but I think there are times when “This Bud’s for you” hits the mark. And hopefully it will be in a can that can make a lightning link, because, unless they outlaw a beer can, there is nothing that can stop a creative mind. I’m very positive that the ATF will fail. You should be, too.
When the government steps in it’s own poop, let them. That’s exactly what they did. Many happy returns! But you idiots should at least clean your shoes before trying stupid stunts, like going after art.
Just to make my position known to all, there are very limited uses for machine guns, none that I have any for, that I can think of, but there are uses, and the fact that the words inscribed in the 2nd Amendment includes “shall not be infringed” means that there is no rationale behind the “F” in ATF, and that it should never even have come into existence, and that if you want to have(keep) and hold(bear) a machine gun, you have that right, as much as a shot gun or a LAWS rocket, because, just because.
A machine gun is a weapon of war, same as a musket. We have the right to own a musket. We need to finish off the obstruction to the rest of that same right. I’ll delve into “Weapons of War” some other time, maybe after I have that beer.
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
Parler: https://parler.com/AFNNUSA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA
Sadly, I thought someone was going to point out the obvious in the legality of the National Firearms Act of 1934. The NFA34 was only defended one time in the US Supreme Court and like a lot of things involving our government, the outcome was rigged from the start. Riddle me this Batman, who was in front of the Supreme Court defending Jack Miller’s rights under the law? Here, let me save you some time while hell freezes over. The answer is ***NOBODY.** That’s right, the landmark case contesting the legality of the NFA34 only had one side (the government) giving arguments in the case. This is one of the many ways that bad case law is made.
Hmm, I thought I did. I understand about the Miller case, that it never got the defense it should have. It never had a chance, and that the chances of it being challenged, ever since, were finally to able happen when Bruen was decided. No one in the federal court system was ever going to get a case to try to challenge it because no one was around who even had the slightest interest in letting it come before the Supreme Court.
How’s that, Robin?
Now that the National Firearms Act is on display, with no text, history or tradition backing it up, from the period when the 2nd Amendment became a part of the Bill of Rights, it has a strong chance of being overturned. Besides, the ones who made the law acknowledged that it was unconstitutional if it were simply presented as a ban. That’s why they made up that bit about taxing it. That’s also unconstitutional.
Something else to consider. All the bad case precedents that can be made, can also be wiped out by one piece of good case law. All American citizens have had to put up with this lousy rigging of bad case law, and that can’t be changed. Now is the time that can reverse all of it.
As in Roe v Wade, the Dobbs case changed that, so can the challenges to the NFA through suits filed against the BATFE by Texas AG Paxton, and the case involving the auto key card, which show just how extraordinarily ridiculous the BATFE can be. Also, the West Virginia v. EPA case gives the Court even more reason to overturn the bad law, by demonstrating how corruptible bureaucracies become, over time, and end up writing their own versions or interpretations.
I, too, have been mad about the past, but you can only point the future in the right direction, not change the past. We now have the opportunity to do just that, and right the wrongs in those laws.
Great article… I particularly enjoyed the video.
The problem with the ATF, or any of the other alphabet agencies, is really a symptom. The country has a large enough population that it makes sense to fight what are, essentially, holding actions and address the most egregious violations of our constitutional rights but we run the risk of getting fixated on each new violation of those right and losing sight of the bigger picture and the reality that, as symptoms of the disease, in treating each new symptom as it manifests itself we are really just playing whack-a-mole and forcing another of the symptoms to pop up and catching our attention.
I guess the challenge is in figuring out how to do that.
Thanks, Tony. Armed Attorneys are a good place to get the legal stuff. another one, Four Boxes Diner, on Youtube, does very well with the legal stuff, as well.
We have to pick our battles carefully, but this is really low hanging fruit, when you consider that it never got a good challenge, and that particular part of the gun laws were kind of considered off limits, due to who picked the cases to hear, at the Supreme Court, for literally decades. Thank God for originalists being appointed in sufficient numbers.
Another reason this one is a good one to get the endoscopy from the Supremes, is the rest of the federal gun laws rather rely on the original NFA act, and would make it easier to take down a lot of other laws that are standing in the way of law abiding citizens.
Good assessment. I think these are but two facets of government which need to be repealed completely. There are several others which started when a guy named Woodrow Wilson presided over the Nation and promoted the new left.
One suggestion to make this more readily understandable.
Please spell out words before using abbreviations of acronyms. Not all of us understand government alphabet soup.
Sorry about that. National Firearms Act of 1934, aka Machine Gun Act.
BATFE Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, aka ATF, the old name. Everyone still refers to them as the ATF, even they do in their forms and letters, such as ATF form 1.
Thanks, I’ll do better next time.