Reply
Go Back   TexasBowhunter.com Community Discussion Forums > Topics > The Other Side of the Ranch (Firearms)
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-28-2021, 04:03 PM   #1
duckmanep
Pope & Young
 
duckmanep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Northeast TX
Default HB957 - ATF response on TX made Suppressors

short version - you still need a stamp

long verson - excerpt from a letter the ATF sent to TX FFL's.
"The passage of Texas House Bill 957 (HB957), with an effective date of September 1, 2021, has generated questions from industry members as to how this state law may affect them while engaged in a firearms business activity. HB957 claims to exempt silencers (also known as suppressors) that are manufactured in Texas, and which remain in Texas, from Federal firearms laws and regulations, including the federal registration requirements. However, because HB957 directly conflicts with federal firearms laws and regulations, federal law supersedes HB957. In summary, all provisions of the Gun Control Act (GCA) and the National Firearms Act (NFA), including their corresponding regulations, continue to apply to FFLs and other persons in Texas.

As you know, 18 U.S.C. § 923 requires a license to engage in the business of manufacturing or dealing in firearms, even if the firearms remain within the same state. All firearms manufactured by a licensee must be properly marked. Additionally, pursuant to 27 CFR § 478.123, each licensee must record the type, model, caliber or gauge, and serial number of each firearm manufactured or otherwise acquired, and the date such manufacture or other acquisition was made. The required information must be recorded in the licensee's records not later than the seventh day following the date such manufacture or other acquisition was made.

In addition to possessing a license under the GCA, 26 U.S.C. § 5801 requires an FFL engaged in the business of manufacturing or dealing in NFA firearms, including silencers, to pay a special occupational tax. Furthermore, an approved ATF Form 4 and Firearms Transaction Record (ATF Form 4473) is required prior to the disposition of an NFA firearm (which under the NFA expressly includes a silencer) to an unlicensed person. The approved Form 4 indicates registration of the firearm/silencer to the transferee in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record. These federal requirements apply regardless of whether the NFA firearm/silencer has crossed state lines."
duckmanep is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 04:10 PM   #2
Briar Friar
Pope & Young
 
Briar Friar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default

Booooooo….

Mass noncompliance.
Briar Friar is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 04:18 PM   #3
muzzlebrake
Pope & Young
 
muzzlebrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Euless, Texas
Hunt In: Sterling County
Default

Is it time for Texas to become a sovereign nation again?
muzzlebrake is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 04:21 PM   #4
Clay C
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

Hide yo dog.
Clay C is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 04:51 PM   #5
M16
Pope & Young
 
M16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Hunt In: Colorado, LaSalle, ,Menard Counties
Default

So if you don't have an ffl you should be good to go. They should have implemented a TFL. Texas Firearms License issued by the State of Texas.
M16 is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 05:02 PM   #6
MadHatter
Pope & Young
 
MadHatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Default

Should we expect Texas to respond?
MadHatter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 05:20 PM   #7
Drycreek3189
Pope & Young
 
Drycreek3189's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Troup
Hunt In: Cherokee, Rusk Counties
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MadHatter View Post
Should we expect Texas to respond?
We should expect business as usual
Drycreek3189 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 05:34 PM   #8
Dale Moser
Pope & Young
 
Dale Moser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Wise Cty
Hunt In: Young Cty
Default

Guinea pig here, who wants to sell me 3? I got cash!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dale Moser is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 06:06 PM   #9
Brute Killer
Pope & Young
 
Brute Killer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Llano.
Hunt In: Pleasanton
Default

Defund the ATF!
They are law enforcement, after all.
Brute Killer is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 06:09 PM   #10
Brute Killer
Pope & Young
 
Brute Killer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Llano.
Hunt In: Pleasanton
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drycreek3189 View Post
We should expect business as usual
Especially from Dan Patrick. The Texas version of Mitch McConnell. And Lindsey Graham.
Brute Killer is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 06:14 PM   #11
Texas Grown
Pope & Young
 
Texas Grown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Burleson, Texas
Hunt In: Kick CoViD's tail!
Default

So, then how do states get away with selling narcotics? Aren't they controlled by the ATF also as illegal by Federal definitions? And are other states collecting tax on it from businesses or individuals? Seems two-faced to me.
Texas Grown is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 06:21 PM   #12
MadHatter
Pope & Young
 
MadHatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Default

Wasn't there something in there about, "Texas would fight the feds over it"?
Maybe I'm not remembering right, but I thought there was discussion, that if the FEDS came, Texas would step up for your right to do it.....(?)
MadHatter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 06:35 PM   #13
muzzlebrake
Pope & Young
 
muzzlebrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Euless, Texas
Hunt In: Sterling County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MadHatter View Post
Wasn't there something in there about, "Texas would fight the feds over it"?
Maybe I'm not remembering right, but I thought there was discussion, that if the FEDS came, Texas would step up for your right to do it.....(?)
Some of the red shirts might but all of the blue shirts will throw you under the bus.
muzzlebrake is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 08:36 PM   #14
texasforever
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: wharton
Hunt In: lavaca co.
Default

Hmmm wasn’t the federal judge ruling that were waiting on so **** em


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
texasforever is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 08:56 PM   #15
Hoggslayer
Pope & Young
 
Hoggslayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Manvel, TX mostly in the Doghouse
Hunt In: My Truck at night.
Default

So that goes for the sale of Suppressors. What about the guy making one in Texas and it staying in Texas. Sounds like the new Texas law might help a guy like that out.
Hoggslayer is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 09:23 PM   #16
trophy8
Pope & Young
 
trophy8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Georgetown Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoggslayer View Post
So that goes for the sale of Suppressors. What about the guy making one in Texas and it staying in Texas. Sounds like the new Texas law might help a guy like that out.
NFA items are regulated on the federal level. Not the state level.
trophy8 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 09:34 PM   #17
RifleBowPistol
Ten Point
 
RifleBowPistol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Briar Friar View Post
Booooooo….

Mass noncompliance.
Yep.
RifleBowPistol is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 09:35 PM   #18
RifleBowPistol
Ten Point
 
RifleBowPistol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muzzlebrake View Post
Is it time for Texas to become a sovereign nation again?
Yes.
RifleBowPistol is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 10:57 PM   #19
adam_p
Ten Point
 
adam_p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pilot Point
Hunt In: Cooke, Denton, Oklahoma
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trophy8 View Post
NFA items are regulated on the federal level. Not the state level.
So is marijuana.
adam_p is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 11:14 PM   #20
Spoiled_TN_boy
Ten Point
 
Spoiled_TN_boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Bastrop
Hunt In: Public Land
Default

If you don't talk about it, it doesn't exist. What are the chances you'll be asked for papers? If it looks legit, no one will question it. Now, if you have a coke bottle or oil filter duct taped to the end, then yeah, all bets are off.
Spoiled_TN_boy is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-28-2021, 11:26 PM   #21
trophy8
Pope & Young
 
trophy8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Georgetown Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by adam_p View Post
So is marijuana.
Agreed. I’m not saying I support it. I want the entire NFA branch abolished and want to buy MGs and stuff like normal guns. And suppressors like they were a rifle stock.

Just stating the facts. And someone is gonna get in bad trouble over this if they try to push the issue.

Build your own. Keep it to yourself. Y’all act like that hasn’t gone on forever anyway LOL.

Mine are all legal and registered for the record
trophy8 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-29-2021, 06:53 AM   #22
BTLowry
Pope & Young
 
BTLowry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Lindale
Hunt In: Behind the house and public in Texas; Kansas Unit 5
Default

How many have been checked out and by who when they had a legal suppressor (or any other NFA item)?

Mine are registered BTW, no plans to go to jail over a suppressor but think they should be able to be bought as easily as a firearm

I know of one person that got nailed for having an oil filter adapter thing. Don't know what he did to get caught (maybe talked about it online or bought it from a sting operation?) but he brought all his problems on himself.
BTLowry is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-29-2021, 05:57 PM   #23
Witchgrass
Ten Point
 
Witchgrass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Bandera Texas
Hunt In: Bandera County
Default

Who wants to be the first one to try it?
Witchgrass is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-30-2021, 09:07 AM   #24
tvc184
Pope & Young
 
tvc184's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Golden Triangle
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Grown View Post
So, then how do states get away with selling narcotics? Aren't they controlled by the ATF also as illegal by Federal definitions? And are other states collecting tax on it from businesses or individuals? Seems two-faced to me.
I said this about half a dozen times when it was being debated in earlier threads.

So I will do it again gladly.

The word “state” as a noun originally meant country. It’s still pretty much l mean that today. The head of state of Israel is the Prime Minister, head of state of Germany is the president and so on.

The colonies when they went to war against Great Britain were completely autonomous and banded together in an alliance as allies, not as a completely independent nation composed of colonies. To a lot of extent it was no different than the allies in World War II where countries came together to fight a common enemy. Early in the movie The Patriot, South Carolina delegates were debating whether to levy a tax in support of the Continental Army. At one point a colonel in the Army said that eight of the 13 colonies have levied a tax to support the soon to be made, Declaration of Independence. One of the delegates stood up and said, Massachusetts and Virginia might be at war with England but South Carolina is not. While the movie is fiction-based on the actual events, this part of the movie is pretty much on target. Even the Articles of Confederation which came not long afterwards, it was clear that the colonies were to be autonomous and sovereign. Thirteen years after we declared independence, the United States Constitution went into effect which scrapped the Articles.

Why is it important? I guess it really isn’t unless you just want the history of it but it tells where we are today. We are in effect, 50 independent countries under one central government for the common good, defense, etc. We could just as well have been called, the United Countries of America. This is all laid out in the Preamble to the Constitution. The effect of it is the people in any state are under two different country’s laws. In Texas we are under the laws of the country of Texas and other laws of the United States. The point of that is that Texas does not need consent of the United States in order to pass most laws. Texas has the authority to say what requirements doctors must have to be licensed, what are traffic laws, how much are taxes and what will they pay for, etc. So the country of Texas can pass drug laws on what is illegal. The United States government, also being autonomous and a sovereign nation, can pass its laws. It is called dual sovereignty. Unless otherwise specifically put into federal law or the Constitution, the country of the United States has a right to make and enforce laws which it sees fit and the country of Texas has the same authority. Generally speaking Texas does not need US permission to pass laws and the US government does not need Texas permission. With that, each can choose which laws it will prosecute.

This also comes into play in the constitutional guarantee against double Jeopardy. The country of Texas can charge you with a crime as can the country of the United States and even if it is the same crime with the same set a facts, as long as the elements are the same you can be convicted twice of the same crime. You can also be found not guilty under one set of laws and then found guilty on the other set of laws even though it’s the same crime at the same location. It is not double Jeopardy. The only requirement is that either the state or the federal government has the elements of that crime listed in their laws. If you want an example, look at the Rodney King incident from California. Some officers were charged under state law of beating up Rodney King. They were found not guilty by a jury. So it was over right? Doesn’t the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution guarantee that? No. California can try them one time under their state law. The federal government has the same authority. So after they were found not guilty, causing the Los Angeles riots, the federal government indicted and then convicted two of the officers of the same crime which they had just been found not guilty.

So yes most drugs are illegal under state law that are also illegal under federal law. The federal government does not prosecute most crimes however. They leave an overwhelming majority of that to the states. If a local cop arrest somebody for marijuana, yes the federal government could charge that person. Why would they want to? For every federal agent there are probably 100 local county and state police. Why would the DEA want to be tied up with a misdemeanor marijuana arrest in San Antonio when there are probably thousands oh state licensed police officers in that county?

So then it comes down to, what does the federal government wish to spend their time and money on? Yes they can prosecute people coming out of a store in Colorado with a half an ounce of marijuana. They simply choose to ignore it. They do not have enough resources to start arresting thousands of people in Colorado.

But…… that same federal government has laws against NFA firearms and accessories. Just like with marijuana in some states, do you really think the federal government will simply ignore NFA items such as machine guns, suppressors, short barrel rifle‘s, etc.? In particular what about the current administration) They are doing everything they can to take guns away from law abiding citizens. While it is easy to ignore the guy smoking a joint in Colorado or even in Texas, do you think the Biden administration will simply allow a state like Texas to ignore the federal firearms law? Not only that, it is a federal tax law.

Or if you don’t want to read all of that, I could have reduced it to this…..

The federal government has the authority to make arrests for marijuana but they simply choose not to out of resources. They could ignore federal tax and NFA laws if they wished but I do not think that will happen. They have discretion to choose which laws they will enforce and I think they will aggressively enforce firearms laws at this moment in time.
tvc184 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-30-2021, 11:00 AM   #25
muzzlebrake
Pope & Young
 
muzzlebrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Euless, Texas
Hunt In: Sterling County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvc184 View Post

The federal government has the authority to make arrests for marijuana but they simply choose not to out of resources. They could ignore federal tax and NFA laws if they wished but I do not think that will happen. They have discretion to choose which laws they will enforce and I think they will aggressively enforce firearms laws at this moment in time.
Agree and let's not overlook the IRS. These bastages will go after the tiniest of infractions. They are not going to roll over and ignore that $200 tax. They will hunt you down to the ends of the earth and use the ATF as their hit men. BTW, IRS has over 75,000 employees. ATF only has 5100 employees. There are 80,000 plus people in these 2 alphabet agencies all looking to make a name for themselves and most of them are gun haters. You still want to roll the dice?
muzzlebrake is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-30-2021, 11:21 AM   #26
ultrastealth
Ten Point
 
ultrastealth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Katy
Hunt In: Camp Wood, TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BTLowry View Post
How many have been checked out and by who when they had a legal suppressor (or any other NFA item)?

Mine are registered BTW, no plans to go to jail over a suppressor but think they should be able to be bought as easily as a firearm

I know of one person that got nailed for having an oil filter adapter thing. Don't know what he did to get caught (maybe talked about it online or bought it from a sting operation?) but he brought all his problems on himself.
I have been asked by range officers to see my stamps a couple of times. Not lately, but I have been asked in the past.
ultrastealth is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-30-2021, 11:24 AM   #27
Texas Grown
Pope & Young
 
Texas Grown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Burleson, Texas
Hunt In: Kick CoViD's tail!
Default

TVC, I totally agree with everything you wrote. And want to thank you for writing all that out for others here. And I did take Gov 101 many years ago . My beef is where the corporations are formed and opening store fronts for the gross sale of more than just a few ounces. Why don't the Feds go after those folk/businesses/corporations who are producing thousands of pounds for retailers of said drug? I do understand about limited resources as well. But you would think they would want the bigger fish rather than turn a blind check because it's a different industry.

The fish are biting, and there's hogs to be kill-t. Gotta go!
Texas Grown is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-30-2021, 02:24 PM   #28
dclifton
Pope & Young
 
dclifton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Lindale Tx
Hunt In: Lindale Tx, Crowell Tx, pearsall Tx
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ultrastealth View Post
I have been asked by range officers to see my stamps a couple of times. Not lately, but I have been asked in the past.
I gotta think to myself why should they even care..... Just some hard nose wanting to be somebody i guess. If i was a range officer and people showed up with a suppressor i would be happy. Could care less if legal or not that is the person in possession of its problem.
dclifton is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-30-2021, 02:42 PM   #29
Gunnyart
Associate Sponsor
 
Gunnyart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Mansfield, TX
Hunt In: Gouldbusk, TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ultrastealth View Post
I have been asked by range officers to see my stamps a couple of times. Not lately, but I have been asked in the past.
I'd be tempted to tell them to pound sand, unless they're law enforcement with probable cause.
Gunnyart is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-30-2021, 02:51 PM   #30
TxBowHntr
Eight Point
 
TxBowHntr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Katy, Tx
Hunt In: Lee, Bee, Nueces, Uvalde
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ultrastealth View Post
I have been asked by range officers to see my stamps a couple of times. Not lately, but I have been asked in the past.
I didn't think you had to show proof to a range officer, only law enforcement. Is this not the case?
TxBowHntr is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-30-2021, 04:29 PM   #31
texasforever
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: wharton
Hunt In: lavaca co.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TxBowHntr View Post
I didn't think you had to show proof to a range officer, only law enforcement. Is this not the case?

Technically only a federal agent. Might not get too far not showing an officer and might get denied use of range if not shown to the RO but legally only have to show a fed boy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
texasforever is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-30-2021, 06:59 PM   #32
HTOWN
Eight Point
 
HTOWN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Texas city
Hunt In: ROCKSPRINGS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TxBowHntr View Post
I didn't think you had to show proof to a range officer, only law enforcement. Is this not the case?
That RO is on a power trip. Unless it's range policy. If not, ask him for his badge. If he doesn't have one then tell him to kick rocks
HTOWN is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-30-2021, 09:56 PM   #33
tvc184
Pope & Young
 
tvc184's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Golden Triangle
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by texasforever View Post
Technically only a federal agent. Might not get too far not showing an officer and might get denied use of range if not shown to the RO but legally only have to show a fed boy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Uhhhh…… no.
tvc184 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-30-2021, 10:42 PM   #34
trophy8
Pope & Young
 
trophy8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Georgetown Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvc184 View Post
Uhhhh…… no.
Figured you’d get in on that action
trophy8 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-31-2021, 08:13 AM   #35
Mike D
Pope & Young
 
Mike D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: North Texas
Hunt In: Haskell County, TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvc184 View Post
Uhhhh…… no.

Not that I’m doubting you, but why would anyone else be privy to a tax document?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Mike D is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-31-2021, 08:59 AM   #36
tvc184
Pope & Young
 
tvc184's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Golden Triangle
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike D View Post
Not that I’m doubting you, but why would anyone else be privy to a tax document?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Because all NFA items are a crime in Texas. I could stop right there with a simple answer but….

An officer can detain a person with only reasonable suspicion that someone has committed a crime such as possession of an NFA item. If a person possesses any NFA item, that is probable cause to make an arrest.

It is not a matter of being privy to a tax document. All NFA items are a crime unless you possess that tax document. Probable cause does not require an officer to investigate every possibility. Basically it is on you to show that the item is legal, which is also under federal law.

It all comes down to dual sovereignty. If Texas had no such law involving an NFA item, they would have no authority. Texas does make it a crime to possess those firearms and accessories so they have every authority to either place you in jail or have you demonstrate the ability to lawfully possess the item.
tvc184 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-31-2021, 09:07 AM   #37
tvc184
Pope & Young
 
tvc184's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Golden Triangle
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike D View Post
Not that I’m doubting you, but why would anyone else be privy to a tax document?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
And speaking purely by the law, In the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure (which lays out the laws for arrest, search warrants, etc.) Section 14.01(a) it says that any person can arrest for a felony that occurs in his presence.

Possession of a machine gun is a felony. By law if any person witnesses you with a machine gun, that person can arrest you with probable cause that you possess it.

In my opinion…..
tvc184 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-31-2021, 12:44 PM   #38
trophy8
Pope & Young
 
trophy8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Georgetown Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvc184 View Post
And speaking purely by the law, In the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure (which lays out the laws for arrest, search warrants, etc.) Section 14.01(a) it says that any person can arrest for a felony that occurs in his presence.

Possession of a machine gun is a felony. By law if any person witnesses you with a machine gun, that person can arrest you with probable cause that you possess it.

In my opinion…..
And in walks defense of prosecution. And officers have NO excuse not to know the laws they enforce.

https://americansuppressorassociatio...egal-in-texas/
trophy8 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 07-31-2021, 11:52 PM   #39
tvc184
Pope & Young
 
tvc184's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Golden Triangle
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trophy8 View Post
And in walks defense of prosecution. And officers have NO excuse not to know the laws they enforce.

https://americansuppressorassociatio...egal-in-texas/
I am not sure what you are claiming that some officer is not aware of.

Defenses to prosecution are a court proceeding.

In a defense to a prosecution, the defendant has to bring up evidence that he is not guilty. In this case it would be by showing a federal NFA tax stamp/receipt.

That is the answer I gave Mike D. The issue is about a statement that you only have to show a tax stamp/receipt to a federal agent. That is incorrect as the article that you posted states.

The article while correct, implies by its headline and then in a bold statement that NFA item are simply legal in Texas. Then it goes on to explain that they are only legal if you possess a federal tax stamp and you are required to produce it an order to avoid prosecution. That was a question to begin with.
tvc184 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-01-2021, 12:24 AM   #40
trophy8
Pope & Young
 
trophy8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Georgetown Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvc184 View Post
I am not sure what you are claiming that some officer is not aware of.

Defenses to prosecution are a court proceeding.

In a defense to a prosecution, the defendant has to bring up evidence that he is not guilty. In this case it would be by showing a federal NFA tax stamp/receipt.

That is the answer I gave Mike D. The issue is about a statement that you only have to show a tax stamp/receipt to a federal agent. That is incorrect as the article that you posted states.

The article while correct, implies by its headline and then in a bold statement that NFA item are simply legal in Texas. Then it goes on to explain that they are only legal if you possess a federal tax stamp and you are required to produce it an order to avoid prosecution. That was a question to begin with.
Your comments come across like you don’t agree with NFA items being legal. Maybe I’m reading too much into that. But the rest of your comments I agree with.

I don’t carry my forms. I have them in files on my phone and they “should” pull up. I can’t possibly carry all my forms. I have never been hassled by any officer. In the rare event I get pulled over, most of them want to talk about them and enjoy seeing them.
trophy8 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-01-2021, 08:25 AM   #41
Saltaholic
Associate Sponsor
 
Saltaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Default

The other question is where are you going to find a dealer/mfg that will sell you one without a tax stamp? They face fed prosecution too
Saltaholic is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-01-2021, 08:35 AM   #42
Quackerbox
Pope & Young
 
Quackerbox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Magnolia
Hunt In: The woods
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M16 View Post
So if you don't have an ffl you should be good to go. They should have implemented a TFL. Texas Firearms License issued by the State of Texas.
To me it also reads if you build your own you're good to go

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
Quackerbox is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-01-2021, 09:28 AM   #43
tvc184
Pope & Young
 
tvc184's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Golden Triangle
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saltaholic View Post
The other question is where are you going to find a dealer/mfg that will sell you one without a tax stamp? They face fed prosecution too
I am sure that someone wants to test the Supreme Court over the taxing authority of Congress in Article I of the Constitution… which has already been decided. US v. Miller (discussed later)

I am all for a new SCOTUS case. Maybe this court is more favorable and they will rule that Congress does have the authority to tax however they cannot tax a right. They could use the rationale that the 1A gives you the right to freedom of religion but you don’t have to pay tax for the federal government to go to church. That would overturn the prior NFA ruling. SCOTUS will do that from time to time when they revisit an issue.

I am all for it and think that would be awesome. I don’t feel like getting convicted of a felony in hopes that in three or four years later I “might” be exonerated and released from prison. Think of the fame and the hero a person would be though. Mike D v US or trophy8 v. US. Awesomeness!!!

US v. Miller
DC v Heller
Future Case (maybe with a TBH member name attached)

Here is the case for a future appeal and I think it is valid.

In US v. Miller the SCOTUS (unanimous ruling) ruled that the Congress has the right to tax an NFA item. That is a landmark ruling which is often cited today, even by the NRA. There is a flaw in Miller in my opinion that later turned up in DC v. Heller. To my knowledge no one has attempted to file a lawsuit or has gotten it far enough to use Heller to overturn Miller.

Part of the ruling of Miller said that Congress does have the right to tax but it also said that Miller cannot claim the 2A because a sawed-off shotgun is not part of a well regulated militia. Let’s highlight that part of the ruling. Miller lost his 2A argument partly because a sawed-off shotgun does not comply with the militia component of the 2A. We do not have to agree with the SCOTUS opinion however it is the current Case law.

So here is where I see the flaw. Miller said the sawed-off shotgun was not part of a well regulated militia. Unless something overtones it, that is the law. In 2008 along comes DC v. Heller. In Heller the SCOTUS said that…. “The Second Amendment protects an individual right to a firearm unconnected in service with the militia, and to use that arm for traditional lawful purposes, such as self-defense within a home”.

So Miller in the mid-1930s said that they well regulated militia was absolutely part of the right to ownership of a firearm however Heller came back in 2008 and said that it is not. so Heller overrules Miller on the basis that the 2A applies only to a well regulated militia.

In my opinion, Heller overturned Miller. The Supreme Court however does not go back and correct or re-issue rulings. They generally only answer the question in front of them. In Heller they answered the question, can Washington DC tell a man that he cannot possess a handgun in working order inside of his own home. They will overturn a prior decision if the correct question is asked in front of them. To my knowledge that argument has not been made.

Even though Miller stands today as current landmark caselaw, I think Heller and not long after that McDonald in an almost identical case to Heller, both overturned Miller but somebody has to be the test case and hope the Supreme Court uses that case to correct the militia issue. We have two relatively new Supreme Court decisions that appear to overturn the premise of a prior decision.

Maybe the NRA or GOA is using that argument to try to get such a case. I have not seen one if that is true. I think it is a valid argument which has a very good chance if someone can get the backing of the NRA or GOA for the money resources needed to make the appeal
tvc184 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-01-2021, 09:29 AM   #44
tvc184
Pope & Young
 
tvc184's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Golden Triangle
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quackerbox View Post
To me it also reads if you build your own you're good to go

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
…… however does building your own overcome the required tax stamp?
tvc184 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-01-2021, 09:44 AM   #45
tvc184
Pope & Young
 
tvc184's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Golden Triangle
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trophy8 View Post
Your comments come across like you don’t agree with NFA items being legal. Maybe I’m reading too much into that. But the rest of your comments I agree with.

I don’t carry my forms. I have them in files on my phone and they “should” pull up. I can’t possibly carry all my forms. I have never been hassled by any officer. In the rare event I get pulled over, most of them want to talk about them and enjoy seeing them.
NFA items are not legal… UNLESS….. you have paid the required federal tax. Any police officer in Texas who sees a person in possession of an NFA item, on the face of it is witnessing a crime. The article you posted agrees with that. The headlines of the article do not but in the body of the report, it completely agrees that it is an incumbent upon the possessor of the NFA item, to produce the stamp.

In post #29 it says that law enforcement must have probable cause to see the text aunt. The NFA is a probable cause to see a tax stamp because Texas law says that it is illegal.

In post #31 it says that only a federal agent can ask for the tax stamp. The article that you posted from a gun rights organization overtuns that argument.

So I will stick with my opinion in post #36, you do not have to be a federal agent in order to ask to see a tax stamp that makes an NFA item legal. You do not have to be a federal agent to make an arrest for NFA irem because Texas law also has the same crimes listed.

NFA items are legal if you have the required tax stamp and a state licensed police officer has the authority to ask to see that stamp.

Last edited by tvc184; 08-01-2021 at 09:46 AM.
tvc184 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-01-2021, 09:56 AM   #46
camoclad
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: fort worth
Hunt In: central tx
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvc184 View Post
NFA items are not legal… UNLESS….. you have paid the required federal tax. Any police officer in Texas who sees a person in possession of an NFA item, on the face of it is witnessing a crime. The article you posted agrees with that. The headlines of the article do not but in the body of the report, it completely agrees that it is an incumbent upon the possessor of the NFA item, to produce the stamp.

In post #29 it says that law enforcement must have probable cause to see the text aunt. The NFA is a probable cause to see a tax stamp because Texas law says that it is illegal.

In post #31 it says that only a federal agent can ask for the tax stamp. The article that you posted from a gun rights organization overtuns that argument.

So I will stick with my opinion in post #36, you do not have to be a federal agent in order to ask to see a tax stamp that makes an NFA item legal. You do not have to be a federal agent to make an arrest for NFA irem because Texas law also has the same crimes listed.

NFA items are legal if you have the required tax stamp and a state licensed police officer has the authority to ask to see that stamp.
So your saying state law has adopted the NFA in state statutory law?

If that's true, didnt the new state law essentially exempt what NFA requires, in state statutory law?
camoclad is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-01-2021, 10:22 AM   #47
muzzlebrake
Pope & Young
 
muzzlebrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Euless, Texas
Hunt In: Sterling County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by camoclad View Post
So your saying state law has adopted the NFA in state statutory law?

If that's true, didnt the new state law essentially exempt what NFA requires, in state statutory law?
Pretty much. Just like the Merryjuana laws in other states already mentioned. It may or may not end up in court. I personally think if it does go to court the feds will prevail. Courts are scared ****less of the alphabet agencies even the SCOTUS. Roberts will side with ATF all the way. Feds have too much on him from the Epstein diaries.
muzzlebrake is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-01-2021, 10:22 AM   #48
Quackerbox
Pope & Young
 
Quackerbox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Magnolia
Hunt In: The woods
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvc184 View Post
…… however does building your own overcome the required tax stamp?
Yes, but all those laws are federal. Ad mentioned, plenty of states go over that with weed

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
Quackerbox is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-01-2021, 10:29 AM   #49
muzzlebrake
Pope & Young
 
muzzlebrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Euless, Texas
Hunt In: Sterling County
Default

Feds don't enforce the Pot laws because there is nothing in it for them. NFA law is a tax and they never let a good tax get away from them. As I mentioned before IRS would also be all over this too and will never let up on getting their pound of flesh. IRS will prosecute a retired invalid on life support for a 5 dollar bill they think is owed and take his last possession to settle it.
muzzlebrake is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-01-2021, 11:07 AM   #50
tvc184
Pope & Young
 
tvc184's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Golden Triangle
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by camoclad View Post
So your saying state law has adopted the NFA in state statutory law?

If that's true, didnt the new state law essentially exempt what NFA requires, in state statutory law?
It is dual sovereignty. The state can have its laws and the federal government can have its laws.

If Texas wants to remove an NFA item from its prohibited Weapons list, it can. Let’s forget NFA for now. As examples the state removed switchblades from prohibited weapons and then removed any length blade or daggers from an illegally carried weapons. A state absolutely has that right and Texas has done so.
I don’t think that has ever been debated by me or anyone else. Texas can do as it wishes.

The question that gets brought up in several different threads is, if Texas removes an NFA item from its prohibited laws, does that prevent the federal government from enforcing its law? In my opinion I think the answer is clearly no.

The federal law-enforcement can file charges on you for possession of an NFA item without paying the federal tax.

The Texas legislature can make machine guns legal in Texas if they wish. That means a Texas police officer cannot arrest you or a district attorney cannot file charges on you under state law for having a machine gun. The United States attorney absolutely has the authority to file charges on you for possessive that same machine gun that is legal in Texas.

…… unless you can get a federal appeals court to overturn that sovereignty of the United States government and the Constitution. It could happen. The attorney general has already stated his opinion and I believe they will prosecute. Someone needs to step up, be convicted of the felony, probably go to prison and then see if they can get the case to the Supreme Court to overturn it.
tvc184 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1999-2012, TexasBowhunter.com