Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« More on the DC challenge to ban on interstate sales | Main | Robbery goes awry »

More on the DC challenge to ban on interstate sales

Posted by David Hardy · 12 May 2011 01:49 PM

Josh Blackman has details, including a link to the complaint.

I'd think it marks a tactical transition. Up to Chicago, things had to be a bit cautious. Heller and McDonald were by no means risk-free, but they were carefully focused and calculated, since a loss would have been very damaging. Now, the pro-2A side is free to roll the dice, since it's on the offensive and moving on many fronts. If this, or another challenge, does not succeed, it's not a major loss, and likely there will be a breaththru elsewhere.

One complicating feature will be that the real reason for the ban on interstate sales to non-FFLs was a bit of history that its proponents couldn't afford to admit. It originated as a move by domestic gun manufacturers to eliminate their major rivals, the mail order houses. Pre-1968, a firearm was like most goods, something you could by locally, or by mail from out of State. Big mail order houses, mostly based in Chicago, were importing and selling military bolt action rifles that could be converted into good deer rifles. Mauser 98s went for about $25, Springfield '03s for about $40. Buyers would shorten the stock, improve the sights, and have a nice hunting arm for half what a factory rifle cost (then $100-150).

GCA 68 originated in a gun manufacturers' bill that would (1) outlaw interstate sales, (2) require the buyer to purchase in person from a licensed dealer and (3) ban surplus imports (the last was somewhat relaxed about twenty years ago). The combination killed off the mail order houses and channeled new sales thru the manufacturers' networks.

· Chicago aftermath

2 Comments | Leave a comment

Letalis Maximus, Esq. | May 12, 2011 2:55 PM | Reply

I'm waiting for the challenge to the $200 transfer/making tax in the NFA because it is a tax on a fundamental constitutional right.

elmo iscariot | May 12, 2011 8:28 PM | Reply

I was under the impression the DC challenge was about the prohibition on interstate purchases of handguns. What does that have to do with the prohibition on shipping rifles to non-FFLs?

Leave a comment