While common sense, history, and principle are firmly on Savage’s side, a technicality and guile might lean toward the proven manipulative, vindictive, and duplicitous ATF.This is the best summary I've seen. Do yourself a favor--go read it and then share it.
Len, has one problem that I can see and that is the hearing is going to be an ATF hearing that is totally controlled by them to have whatever outcome they want it to have.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure Len knows all of this so it will be of interest how he handles this at a hearing.
He may need to handle it like the hero in Atlas Shrugged handled his "trial".
ReplyDelete"[The] bureau is standing by the decision and has threatened Savage with forfeiture of his property if he does not immediately register it as a machinegun. Savage has refused and invited the forfeiture hearing in hopes that it will allow common sense to prevail."
ReplyDeleteThis is because the hearing is the lesser of evils. He'd be in much more trouble if he implied it was a complete firearm and a machinegun by paying the tax. Poor Len. All he was doing was attempting to defend the rights and liberties of a Citizen--a duty that used to be the responsibility of the federal government.
There's no "technicality", either. NFA 34 §5845 (b) is broad, and doesn't make any restrictions based on practicality. Anything can "restore" a semi-automatic to a machinegun, including a human finger.
Once this next Heller case is heard, and 'shall not be infringed' is defined, all these laws will be null and void. They are ALREADY unconstitutional.
ReplyDeleteThe ATF can then become the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Ferris wheels and Explosives. Slapping together such diverse industries and putting them under one agency is a dead give-away that the purpose of said agency is to harrass, itimidate and oppress.
Can you imagine ANYONE looking out their front door and saying,"Oh good! The ATF is here!"? Every time an ATF agent is hired, freedom dies a little bit.
I'm sure they will continue under the "reasonable restrictions" clause in the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteWhat, you've never heard of that? The Supreme Court invented it recently.
My Senator, my Congressman, my President, all have nothing to say when I ask them how we can fix the problem of ATF abuse.
Oh, there's a law they're working on. A law to require law enforcers to obey the law. Then we'll need a law to require them to obey the law saying they need to obey the law.
If they don't allow themselves to be restricted and guided by the Constitution, it's all just pretty flashing lights and soothing music.
There are no "rogue" law enforcement agencies. They are carrying out their assigned duties with the approval, explicit or tacit, of our elected Only Ones.
15 years after Waco, 17 years after Ruby Ridge.
Obviously the next president approves. It keeps the rabble quiet and obedient.