digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Don't surrender so quickly on Firearms Freedom Acts

examiner.com — Although it may claim to be done under Congress's tax power, that claim will fail and the fall-back position of the federal government will be Congress's authority to regulate commerce "among the states." Thus, NFA-asserted tax power would actually fall exactly under the commerce clause power challenge that is the core of the MFFA...

Who dugg this?

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

3 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • stompk291, on 11/12/2009, -0/+3remember that when the NFA was enacted, a $200 tax on machine guns and silencers was being applied to equipment that itself only cost around $5.

    If it were enacted today, on a new M16, which for government contract is roughly $1000
    the tax to register it would be $40,000 !!
  • stompk291, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2true. since the M16 i bought up is not available to you and I REGARDLESS of cost, since it was made after 1986.

    HOW, I wonder, is an M16 made in 1984 less dangerous than one made in 1987, or 2007 ?

    it's more than a tax, it's a sidestep around the 2nd Amendment.
  • rizzo2008, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2A legal select fire pre-86 M16 is still like $20,000 because of the artificial shortage on legal automatic weapons imposed by the ATF.

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.