No Surprise There

3 thoughts on “No Surprise There”

1. “the federal government Monday said the Second Amendment doesn’t allow citizens to own machine guns.”

   Funny… that’s precisely the opposite of what US AG Homer Cummings maintained when he explained the proposed NFA ’34:

   Congressman Knutson then asked why, under this bill, should congress permit the sale of machine guns to anyone but the government. Congressman Sumners then suggested, “this is a revenue measure and you have to make it possible at least in theory for these things to move in order to get internal revenue.” Or, the whole thing would be a deception—which it is.

   Attorney General Cummins was then asked how the peoples’ protection under the 2nd Amendment was escaped. Cummins then replied, “Oh, we do not attempt to escape it. We are dealing with another power (taxation and interstate commerce). You see, if we made a statute absolutely forbidding any human being to have a machine gun, you might say there is some constitutional question involved.”

   “But when you say, ‘We will tax the machine gun, and when you say that the absence of a license showing payment of the tax has been made indicates that a crime has been perpetrated,” you are easily within the law.”

   Congressman Lewis asked “In other words, it does not amount to prohibition but allows of regulation. To which Mr. Cummins replied, “That is the idea. We have studied that very carefully.”

   Thus, Cummins concluded that Congress has no power to prohibit possession of machine guns. In committee, the NFA bill was altered to eliminate the commerce provisions. The 1934 NFA was not passed based on commerce, only on a taxing authority.

   —Tennessee Law Review, Spring 1995

   1. Thanks– I may use this for an article.

2. 12 days to denial. Fedzilla hops like a bunny rabbit when it wishes to see

Comments are closed.