Where does one find???

Smitty of the North

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
9,202
Reaction score
272
Location
SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points
I guess, I'm lookin for a Website that lists all the Federal firearms laws.

I would like to view them, and consider them, and maybe even oppose some of them, as I've gotten the impression that MANY of them are antiquated and serve no useful purpose, but cause nothing but problems and inconvenience for most people.

I'm talking about the restrictions on barrel length, for rifles, shotguns, can't make a pistol out of a rifle, or put a stock on a pistol, shipping, and the almost total ignorance of what is legal and illegal, etc. This gun is too small, or two cheap, or whatever.

I just wanna educate myself as to what we've been putting up with all these many years.

Thanks
Smitty of the North
 

ADfields

New member
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Messages
6,416
Reaction score
206
Location
Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
Every FFL gets a complete copy, every so many years.
Steve
No it’s a handbook we get not the laws, it has some of the legal wording in it but mostly its layman’s wording explanations along with where to find the actual law. It’s like a driver licenses handbook down at the DMV, it’s the agency’s interpretation of the laws not the actual laws and by no means does it include all the applicable laws.
It’s called the “FFL Reference Guide” and it can be found here.
http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5300-4.pdf
It is the fastest way to start getting your head around what they did to us.


The laws most relevant to Smitty’s line of thinking is the NFA of 1934 (National Firearms Act of 1934) as it defines and classifies guns and defines “Title-II” (taxable) weapons (SBR, SBS, AOW, suppressor, machine gun, destructive device) and by not fitting any of these definitions of the NFA it’s a “Title-I” weapon.
Now you find this in the IRS tax law because “shall not be infringed” don’t mean it ain’t taxable!
Title-26 here.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/subtitle-E/chapter-53
And weapons defined here.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/5845


The other big one is the GCA of 1968 (Gun Control Act of 1968) but it’s more about what people can’t do with guns, who can have them and what they can do with them. This is where stuff like you can’t sell over state lines without an FFL, age restrictions, mailing restrictions . . . all the FFL red tape and record keeping we hate.
Title-18 firearms law.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-44
 

Steve8261948

New member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
773
Reaction score
12
Location
Central Illinois
No it’s a handbook we get not the laws, it has some of the legal wording in it but mostly its layman’s wording explanations along with where to find the actual law. It’s like a driver licenses handbook down at the DMV, it’s the agency’s interpretation of the laws not the actual laws and by no means does it include all the applicable laws.
It’s called the “FFL Reference Guide” and it can be found here.
http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5300-4.pdf
It is the fastest way to start getting your head around what they did to us.


The laws most relevant to Smitty’s line of thinking is the NFA of 1934 (National Firearms Act of 1934) as it defines and classifies guns and defines “Title-II” (taxable) weapons (SBR, SBS, AOW, suppressor, machine gun, destructive device) and by not fitting any of these definitions of the NFA it’s a “Title-I” weapon.
Now you find this in the IRS tax law because “shall not be infringed” don’t mean it ain’t taxable!
Title-26 here.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/subtitle-E/chapter-53
And weapons defined here.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/5845


The other big one is the GCA of 1968 (Gun Control Act of 1968) but it’s more about what people can’t do with guns, who can have them and what they can do with them. This is where stuff like you can’t sell over state lines without an FFL, age restrictions, mailing restrictions . . . all the FFL red tape and record keeping we hate.
Title-18 firearms law.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-44
I think I've got word and letter of the laws, every few years?
Steve
 

iofthetaiga

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
9,202
Reaction score
780
Location
Tanana Valley AK
...they change the rules whenever it suits them.
I heard they were getting out of the rules business and turning it over to them anyway. I don't know if that really will suit them, but they seemed pretty sure that turning it over to them was the right thing to do. At least that's what they said. Apparently no one has heard much from them on the subject. Then again, maybe they're just doing it to piss them off (as if they didn't have enough to do already!). You would think that they would ask them about making such a change before simply handing everything over to them, wouldn't you? Or maybe it really is all about them, and they are just bit players in the whole thing anyway. Of course maybe that's not the case and maybe they haven't considered all the implications of how this will affect them. Someone should ask them what they think. Of course, if it's true that they change the rules whenever it suits them, presumably they wouldn't hear any complaints from them....Don't ya THINK? :confused:
 

mike h

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
701
Reaction score
29
Location
Palmer, AK
Yeah, and the enforce them the way it suits them too.

There are so many laws, that they can pick and choose whichever one that accomplishes their ends.

Smitty of the North

From the Wall Street Journal:

Many Failed Efforts to Count Nation's Federal Criminal Laws

WASHINGTON—For decades, the task of counting the total number of federal criminal laws has bedeviled lawyers, academics and government officials.
"You will have died and resurrected three times," and still be trying to figure out the answer, said Ronald Gainer, a retired Justice Department official.
...
None of these studies broached the separate—and equally complex—question of crimes that stem from federal regulations, such as, for example, the rules written by a federal agency to enforce a given act of Congress. These rules can carry the force of federal criminal law. Estimates of the number of regulations range from 10,000 to 300,000. None of the legal groups who have studied the code have a firm number.
"There is no one in the United States over the age of 18 who cannot be indicted for some federal crime," said John Baker, a retired Louisiana State University law professor who has also tried counting the number of new federal crimes created in recent years. "That is not an exaggeration."

http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304319804576389601079728920?mobile=y
 

Steve8261948

New member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
773
Reaction score
12
Location
Central Illinois
You will all now receive a free audit from the IRS.

Bull Hockey, this is still America, go back to your roots and vote like your life depends on it! A lot of this on forums but, how many actually vote or are registered to vote(I mean every election, schools, county, state, etc.)? We're giving our liberties away! I'm an elections judge and see just how many "anti O'Bama's" vote, not many. Talk the talk but, don't walk the walk.
Steve
 

CTobias

New member
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
263
Reaction score
13
Location
Here and there.....
Bull Hockey, this is still America, go back to your roots and vote like your life depends on it! A lot of this on forums but, how many actually vote or are registered to vote(I mean every election, schools, county, state, etc.)? We're giving our liberties away! I'm an elections judge and see just how many "anti O'Bama's" vote, not many. Talk the talk but, don't walk the walk.
Steve

You don't vote for the IRS.
 

Steve8261948

New member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
773
Reaction score
12
Location
Central Illinois
Pretty lame excuses, boys. And way off the context of my post. Both of you talk like liberals? But, to each his own.
Steve
 

mike h

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
701
Reaction score
29
Location
Palmer, AK
My point wasn't not to vote, just that it increasingly seems like the govt survives pretty much every election intact.

In AK, you vote in a new gov and he appoints a new attorney general. The attorney general takes over the Department of Law, and essentially inherits all of the preexisting D o L employees. All of those employees as a whole contribute to the "institutional memory." So sure there's new policies and new focuses or whatever, but you've still got essentially the same institution.

And the same goes for all of the federal departments and agencies: BLM, DOD, NSA.

The point is, you don't elect all of those employees and middle an upper management, and the govt is a machine that endlessly perpetuates itself.
 

Smitty of the North

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
9,202
Reaction score
272
Location
SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points
Pretty lame excuses, boys. And way off the context of my post. Both of you talk like liberals? But, to each his own.
Steve

How's that?

Is it Liberal to suggest that voting is NOT the answer, because voting is often futile?

I'll submit voting is a good place to start, but what if More people did vote, and they voted WRONG? (According to you and me)

Then "Voting" would be the problem, (to you and me)

You can vote for anything, and even get it passed, and the Courts overturn it.

Frankly, voting just doesn't seem to work anymore. This is such a problem, that folks are tryin other things.

Smitty of the North
 
Top