[theqbn]

This could be a HUGE case.. some of you may have seen this on KYLOMG or other gun forums, but here's the link:
http://www.esnips.com/web/HamblenvsUnitedStates

To summarize, this man was convicted of violating the NFA and GCA for purchasing demilled machine guns and converting them to work again - for the TN State Guard, which has a very limited number of machine guns. If this case gets attention, I believe it could be huge. One can hope!

 

[Rhodes]

No joke that could be huge, over turn the NFA and Omnibus possible, lets hope. Jury never should of convicted him and Im shocked they found enough sheep to get the job done. Thanks

 

[Silicon Wolverine]

they've been talking about in on gunsnet for a while now. the thing that will hang hamblen is he had knowedge of the law regardling MG manufacture beforehand. he had applied for an SOT license but didnt wait for it to be approved and arrived before he built the guns. so yes he broke the law as it is written. the only way he gets out of this is if the SCOTUS (where this will eventually end up) decides that the 86 GCA is unconstituational (unlikely), which would rule the whole case moot. interesting test case but im betting he goes down for it.

SW

 

[unreconstructed1]

best case scenario, the guy fights in front of SCOTUS on the grounds that NFA 32 and GCA 68 are unconstitutional, and Kennedy suprises everyone with a swing decision again. right now we have the possibility since Sotamayor only replaced another liberal justice.

worst case scenario, this gets dragged out long enough for NoBama to have appointed another justice to replace one of the more conservative judges, and using some of that liberal legalese, tehy "interpet" 2A as being tied to militia service (yes, I know that Heller already ruled on that, but there was a lot of speculation that had teh Heller case been expanded that the Miller decision would have been overturned, so although "the court" will not rule against itself, there is the possibility that they could "reinterpet" old cases...

 

[adam]

The bottom line being the 2nd amendment is intended to protect the people from government. It says shall not be infringed for a reason, wouldn't let a bad guy tell ya what kind of gun to use would ya? (not a question for anyone here just a statement)

 

[theqbn]

Somebody should have thought of that back in 1932...

 

[Rhodes]

They did, it was by no means entirely popular but there was of course a crisis going on and people were distracted. Notice any thing familiar?

See United States v. Miller for more on this if you are up to some heavy irony.