1934 Group Files Suit Against BATF

[Oatka]

The way I understand it, they're trying to remove the local police from having to sign the BATF forms for Class III firearms. Right now you're at their mercy in some jurisdictions.

It's Waaay Long, so I'm just posting the URL.

http://members.home.net/1934group/suit.htm

 

[Dead]

I would like to see them win in this suit! It would "open the gates" so to speak.


Could a suit be filed challenging NFA34, on the fact that it creates "a centralized database" for firearm registration? Seeing how every NFA firearm is registered with the Feds.

------------------
Dead [Black Ops]

[This message has been edited by Dead (edited August 24, 2000).]

 

[Donny]

I don't think a suit against the NFA '34 would hold in court. Because the original purpose was to squash any more ideas of marches, particularly soldiers marching against Washington.
I've always believed that the NFA '34 was a direct action to disallow another Bonus March.
The potential there was tremendous. If those soldiers had went there armed, there wouldn't have been enough soldiers in the country to stop them from making their message heard.

(Un)Fortunately, American citizens at the time also had a certain amount of respect for our nations leaders. The Depression was in full swing, and most everyone was being offered some piece of hope in some alphabet program, meant to put men to work, and food on the tables. Not to mention Prohi´bition e revenuers still had to have something to do, so...

And that brings us to the IRS, doesn't it? Ever hear of the IRS being sued on such a scale?
I believe that the lawmakers have made it illegal to sue the IRS, and win.

------------------
"To control people you control the food, to control a nation you control the FUEL."

H. Kissenger

[This message has been edited by Donny (edited August 24, 2000).]

 

[Dennis Olson]

You are missing a point here. It is NOT required to have an LEO signature on your app. Only a documented "attempt" is required.

 

[ctdonath]

Dennis-
Yes, you do need the CLEO signature. No signature, no gun. There is no formal way to document an "attempt".

There have been a few cases where forms were accepted without the signature; those are flukes of bureaucratic error.

Only a corporation or Class III FFL can applies for permission to possess an NFA gun without the CLEO signature, and those present other problems comparable to an individual's application.

 

[Jim March]

The 1934 Group is fighting primarily based on equal protection, with arguments very similar to what I'm trying to use in fighting discretionary CCW in Calif.

In both cases, local PD Chiefs are issuing/signing based on cronyism, corruption, race, social standing, etc.

In essence, the 1934 people are trying to make Class3 access "shall-issue" in all of the machine gun states, in one fell swoop attacking BATF.

As a sideshow, they're also attacking BATF on various proceedural, "rule of law" issues but the "main thrust" is equal protection.

Jim