survivalshop Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 It seems the GOA is going after the 1986 Machine Gun ban , I have to renew my GOA membership . Gun Owners of America Challenging Federal Machine Gun BanNot a GOA member yet? You can join Gun Owners of America today for only $20!Dear michael, On November 2, Gun Owners of America (and its foundation) joined forces with Dick Heller -- the very one who beat DC’s gun ban before the Supreme Court in 2008.Working in tandem, Gun Owners filed a brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in support of a challenge to the federal machine gun ban, which was stuck on at the last minute to an otherwise pro-gun bill in 1986.First and foremost, Gun Owners argues that the “arms” protected by the Second Amendment include fully automatic weapons, and that Supreme Court opinions have bolstered this view.Our brief explains that the Second Amendment is not about hunting or target shooting, but about the preservation of liberty. You can read an analysis of the GOA brief in Hollis v. Lynch -- or view the GOA brief in its entirety here.Go here to financially help support the GOA brief in this case.Since its founding, Gun Owners of America has built its reputation as the “no compromise” gun lobby.We want to repeal any restriction that violates the “shall not be infringed” language of the Second Amendment -- going all the way back to 1934.So GOA is not only working on the above machine gun case. We also want to file another brief supporting this same proposition -- that a machine gun ban is inconsistent with the protections afforded in the Bill of Rights.But we need your help to file it.We have always taken the position that the “arms” mentioned in the Second Amendment are the type of weapons that an infantryman in current military service would be issued. These are, in the words of an old Supreme Court case, “part of ordinary military equipment.”One Court of Appeals judge has explained that the Second Amendment protects the “lineal descendants” of the arms brought to muster on the village green in revolutionary times. Second Amendment helps erect a bulwark against tyrannyIf the purpose of the Second Amendment is to preserve a “free State,” then the people comprising the militia need to have the same type of “arms” that are available to the military. We think you will like the arguments we made in our first brief to explain this important principle to the court.Among other things, we quote Justice Joseph Story’s explanation regarding the true purpose of the Second Amendment: The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic, since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers, and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them. [Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, Volume III, p. 646.]If the arms owned by the people are profoundly inferior to those of their “rulers,” the ability of the people “to resist” will be diminished, and the “strong moral check” on those rulers will be lost. Of course, that is what Diane Feinstein and her ilk want.GOA is unique among pro-gun groupsSadly, other pro-gun groups have run the other way when fully automatic weapons are mentioned. In fact, a lawyer for one of these other “pro-gun” groups took the position before the U.S. Supreme Court that it was completely reasonable for the federal government to prohibit private ownership of fully automatic weapons.But when David Olofson's AR-15 malfunctioned and he was charged with owning a machinegun, it was GOA that came to his aid -- not any other gun group. No one thinks that the First Amendment should be limited to pamphlets produced one at a time, as in revolutionary days. No one disputes that the First Amendment also protects radio and TV stations and the Internet. Likewise, no one should think that the Second Amendment should be limited to Brown Bess muzzle-loading smoothbore muskets and Pennsylvania rifles. At all times, the Second Amendment was designed to protect the infantry “arms” of the times.Help GOA win these machine gun casesIf you agree with me about fully automatic weapons, we could certainly use your help. By making a special contribution to Gun Owners of America, you will help fund the Hollis brief we just filed, and to make possible the next brief that we would like to file, if we raise enough support.The second case is U.S. v. Watson in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (in Pennsylvania). GOA plans to make similar arguments to those we made in Hollis -- and by bringing several cases in multiple districts, we hope to force the Supreme Court to decide this issue in favor of Second Amendment rights.Again, please consider making a contribution of $10, $20, $50 or more to help support these two cases.Thank you for your defense of liberty!Erich PrattDirector of CommunicationsGun Owners of America Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue109 Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 Boss up! Although I'd really love to see suppressors and length requirements go away as a top priority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shepp Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 Boss up! Although I'd really love to see suppressors and length requirements go away as a top priority.yeah I wouldn't be sad if the "settled" for that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtallen83 Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 I would be sad if we stop short of anything but the repeal of the NFA.The letter reads fine they have essentially made the argument to repeal the NFA they just don't say it?????? Much like this war on radical islam if we don't call out the enemy by name we can't win the war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 I've learned over the years in my limited dealings with the government, go for broke... no holding back, ask for it all and then you have bargaining power on your side... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shepp Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 I've learned over the years in my limited dealings with the government, go for broke... no holding back, ask for it all and then you have bargaining power on your side...exactly!! They're going to low ball you, you gotta high ball them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted November 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 Maybe we should be patient & take it all back a piece at a time , just like it was taken ! Asking for everything you want , could also reward you with nothing & we have been there too many times already , through the years . The repeal of the illegal 1986 law/Ban , would be a great start ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planeflyer21 Posted November 22, 2015 Report Share Posted November 22, 2015 Boss up! Although I'd really love to see suppressors and length requirements go away as a top priority.Do away with the restrictions on pistols having shoulder stocks while you're at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rsquared Posted November 23, 2015 Report Share Posted November 23, 2015 Yeah, I saw this. It'll be interesting to see what comes from it. I won't hold my breath too much though. It seems that these days, gun rights are tougher to get back than they are to be taken from us. Like SS said. A piece at a time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.