« Law school suspends student for owning guns | Main | Cert petition, NY State R&P v. New York City »
ATF requires submission of samples before ruling on effect of an accessory
Adam Kraut discusses it on the Prince Law blog. The importance here is ATF might rule that a certain accessory attached to a certain gun makes it an NFA firearm, which means it could be returned if the person submitting it had an SOT, and also means that he committed a bunch of felonies in making it and shipping it to the agency....
4 Comments | Leave a comment
If you are going to submit an exemplar that may be classified as a SBR or SBS, submit it attached to a registered and properly marked SBR or SBS.
If you are prototyping/submitting anything more exotic that that, then you should probably have a FFL/SOT to stay out of trouble in general.
This is not rocket science. Most know when they are pushing the boundaries.
If you don't know the required barrel length and OAL of Title I/II firearms and the minimum length for an AOW then put away your hacksaw and buy your guns from a dealer.
If only that were true...it's not. Because the Constitution gives Congress the authority to
And To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.
To Flight-ER-DOC:
The N&P clause RESTRICTS Congress to laws that are both necessary and proper. It does not extend any of the granted powers to nonenumerated powers except for people who dont understand English. Thus the Constitution specifically put Congress in charge of ALL LEGISLATIVE POWERS and it is NOT PROPER for Congress to delegate any legislative powers to anyone, violating the clause that you referenced.
The legal maxim is:
Delegata potestas non potest delegari - That which is delegated cannot be further delegated. All authority is endowed by the Creator on the individual. Individuals came together forming a society in which the individuals delegated certain powers to specific entities in government. If your position is correct, then Congress can exercise executive powers should they so desire.
Article I of the Constitution grants to CONGRESS ALL LEGISLATIVE POWER. No power to delegate is granted. Rules and regulations are legislative acts. All regulations/rules promulgated by any entity other than Congress are unconstitutional. But the ejits that have been chosen to run our courts, after stealing ungranted powers for themselves, see fit to allow thee agencies to "legislate" illegally and unconstitutionally. Congress can grant no powers since all powers NOT granted are retained by the States and People (Amdmt 10).
The federal government has absolutely no powers without the Constitution. With the Constitution, the federal government has only those powers which we the People through our States ALLOW them to have. The courts have screwed this idea up beyond recognition and in doing so have stolen powers far beyond the limited, exact, granted powers of the Constitution.
Until those in the government understand and follow OUR constitution, We the People will be subject to illicit actions by the government We the People created to do OUR bidding.