Help Overturn 18 USC 922(o) & NFA

[JohnC]

Came across this on AR15,com... Donate, guys!
 
NEW DONATION LINK HERE!: https://hellerfoundation.org/product/donation-2-2/ 
 
Help Overturn 18 USC 922(o) & NFA

http://www.gofundme.com/fmxlnk
 

My name is Stephen Stamboulieh.  I am an attorney in Mississippi that has tirelessly worked to further our 2nd Amendment rights.  

Now, my sights are set on 18 USC sec 922(o).  This is known as the machinegun ban.  I don't believe this is constitutional in light of the Second Amendment to the Constitution.    Likewise, the National Firearms Act ("NFA"), which taxes the making and transferring of Title II weapons (machineguns, suppressors, short barrel rifles, short barrel shotguns, etc) is ripe to be attacked on Second Amendment grounds.  

We have the avenue to attack both the machinegun ban and the NFA with the BATFE's recent approval of a number of Form 1s.  I have a number of clients that I will be filing a lawsuit on behalf of to seek to overturn the ban and the NFA in different states.

This will be expensive.  I am in the process of collecting donations to offset the legal fees in this case.  If you are interested in assisting, please donate.  No donation is too small.  These lawsuits will be funded strictly off donations.  Unlike the government, we do not have an unlimited war chest to fund this.  That is where the grass roots come into play.  We can do this, but we need your help!

All donations will be held in my lawyer trust account.  As we work on the cases and "bill" time to the case, the trust account will be debited.  If we get $10,000 in donations, and my fees/expenses total $50,000, then I will only be paid the $10,000.  If we get $100,000 in donations, and my fees/expenses are $50,000, we will hold the funds in trust until such time as the appeals are exhausted (if necessary) or the remainder is donated to a Second Amendment right group.  It is important to know that I WILL NOT KEEP ANY UNEARNED DONATED FUNDS!  Period.  I doubt that will be an issue due to the breadth and number of cases, but I want to be upfront.

If you cannot donate, please keep us in your thoughts and prayers that we are successful in overturning the ban and the NFA, and that "the right to keep and bear arms" can continue to be restored through the courts.

Thank you,

Stephen Stamboulieh, Esq.

Disclaimer -  Your donation does not create an attorney-client relationship with me or any other attorney I associate on these cases.  You are donating to the lawsuits and not paying for legal advice.  You should not consider information on this page to be an invitation for any attorney-client relationship.  The content of this page does not convey legal, accounting, tax, career or other professional advice of any kind. You should not rely on the information as legal advice for any purpose as it may not reflect current legal developments. No person viewing this page should act or refrain from acting on the basis of information included on this page, and this page should not be relied upon or used as a substitute for consultation with professional advisors.

My website is:  http://www.sdslaw.us/

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1624460_NOW_ACCEPTING_DONATIONS__ATF_approved_post_86_machine_guns_for_NFA_trusts__updated_10_10_14.html&page=83#i49791552
 
NEW THREAD HERE: http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1681489_Hollis_v__Holder___Lawsuit_over_922_o___NFA_and_various_other_items.html
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I completely left this out earlier. For anyone that wants to donate via check/MO, send it here:

Stamboulieh Law, PLLC
P.O.. Box 4008
Madison, MS 39130

Please write "NFA cases" on the check/MO.

If you would write your screen name on a separate piece of paper so I can thank you, that would be appreciated!

__________________________________________

How these Second Amendment rights were stolen from us in 1986.

This is the circus that caused us to lose those rights:

It was supposed to be the Firearms Owners Protection Act (FOPA) but the Anti-Second Amendment politicians added an amendment that basically was like saying, if you want these protections, you're going to have to give up a major right (full auto's) and this unconstitutional amendment was allowed and unjustly passed when there were actually more NO votes than YEA's.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6Mx2UcSEvQ

If you notice, the voice vote was clearly not for the Hughes amendment, and when they called for an electronic vote because Charles Wrangle lied and said the Yeas had it, the electronic vote clearly showed the Amendment did not pass, but under his authority, he claimed the voice vote had it with Yeas and ignored the electronic vote and passed the 1986 Machine Gun Ban in committee. So, the Amendment to the bill should have never passed the committee, and would have not even been a part of the FOPA had he not screwed us. But, not one person there stood up and challenged him on the voice and electronic vote. If they had, it wouldn't have made it to the house and senate for a vote.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 3, 2017 by JohnC

[TMF]

Ha, I read through this whole thing and was like, "he'd raise more money if he used a site like GoFundMe to gather donations." Then I see it at the top of the post.... DOH!

Thanks for sharing this. It's up to 10k right now with only 67 donors on the first day. While this might be a pipe dream, I think it is always productive to challenge the system when it's jacked up, win or lose.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnC]

Agree. It's a long-shot, but it's worth it to let them know we're ready and willing to fight to restore our rights. :up:

Gun owners are standing up to the system like never before seen in my lifetime, and shockingly, making small progressive wins everywhere! :w00t:

[Dolomite_supafly]

He is a good guy. I have talked to him in the past and he has always been honest with me.

 

He was the one who is suing on behalf of those who were approved to make a MG but later had the permission retracted.

 

Personally ownership of inanimate objects should not be regulated at all. What should be regulated is the person owning the item. That is if I can legally own a single shot 22 I should be able to legally own a 50 BMG machine gun in the same manner. If I want to own a tank, hand grenades or a fighter jet I should be able to if I can own a 22 and if I can afford it.

[Lowpower]

As long as he's not from Nigeria, asking for my money to give me money it might be worthwhile but isn't this why we all belong to the NRA?

They bug the heck outa me almost daily and they called again this morning. Persdonally, I think they spend more time asking me for money than actually fighting for our rights. 

Or as they say it, picking their fights. 

[TMF]

As long as he's not from Nigeria, asking for my money to give me money it might be worthwhile but isn't this why we all belong to the NRA?
They bug the heck outa me almost daily and they called again this morning. Persdonally, I think they spend more time asking me for money than actually fighting for our rights.
Or as they say it, picking their fights.

The NRA has zero interest in having the NFA repealed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dolomite_supafly]

The NRA has zero interest in having the NFA repealed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

+1

 

Also, there are a lot of people who make a lot of money buying, selling, trading NFA items and if this gets overturned they will loose a lot of money. Those same people would fight tooth and nail to keep it from being overturned even though their livelihood is made buying and selling those same items they would want to keep banned from manufacture.

[btq96r]

I think he would have a better chance getting the NFA pecked away at with SBR's and suppressors first by challenging with them as specific items.  With the widespread use and sale of those two items, along with states that have no state level precondition to ownership, you could argue that the federal government has no legitimate need to regulate them as an NFA item, that it should be a states issue and the 10th Amendment applies.  The current Supreme Court tends to like those kinds of limited rulings that aren't too overreaching and dramatic.

 

We're probably a long ways away from having anything automatic being legal, even with this gun friendly Supreme Court.

Edited October 11, 2014 by btq96r

[JohnC]

Well, just like any group that fights for their rights, when they're relentless in that fight and never give up, they eventually start making progress in small victories.

Just look at where we are today with gun and knife rights and laws versus past years.

Anything is possible if your willing to work and fight for it, and I believe this fight is worth it. :up: Edited October 11, 2014 by JohnC

[Oh Shoot]

I think he would have a better chance getting the NFA pecked away at with SBR's and suppressors first by challenging with them as specific items.  ..

 

Agree, machine guns are the absolutely scariest guns. Like switchblades quadrupled. Will be the highest hanging fruit always.

 

You can call it copping out if you like, but I'd jump at an option to nuke all federal firearm restrictions save the MG one. Matter of fact, if someone can point at the best movements to zap SBR and/or cans, I'll put some money where my mouth is.

 

- OS

Edited October 11, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[JohnC]

Agree, machine guns are the absolutely scariest guns. Like switchblades quadrupled.

You can call it copping out if you like, but if there were an option to nuke all federal firearm restrictions save the MG one, I'd be on that bandwagon.


- OS

No one is saying anyone is a cop-out, but I believe when we have any opportunity, such as this unique opportunity presents us, we should all collectively join and fight together.

Why? Because these things take a lot of time, work and money, so if we're going to show up to the fight, we should give them the biggest and best fight we can to let them know we're serious and we mean business.

If we lose, they haven't seen the last of us because we will be back!

It's what the left does when that want "change". :up:

/soap box

[Oh Shoot]

No one is saying anyone is a cop-out, but I believe when we have any opportunity, such as this unique opportunity presents us, we should all collectively join and fight together.

Why? Because these things take a lot of time, work and money, so if we're going to show up to the fight, we should give them the biggest and best fight we can to let them know we're serious and we mean business.

If we lose, they haven't seen the last of us because we will be back!

It's what the left does when that want "change". :up:

/soap box

 

I just don't get the logic and viability of going after the highest and most difficult to reach fruit on the tree first.

 

- OS

Edited October 12, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[Dolomite_supafly]

Because right now we have an "IN". They did approve some newly manufactured machine guns then revoked the approval. The lawyer in the OP is the one that is representing all those who have applied and been denied.

 

Right now the law states it is illegal for a PERSON to manufacture, or buy, a newly registered machine gun but the ATF has rules that entities, such as trusts and corporations, are NOT persons.

[Oh Shoot]

Because right now we have an "IN". They did approve some newly manufactured machine guns then revoked the approval. The lawyer in the OP is the one that is representing all those who have applied and been denied.

 

Right now the law states it is illegal for a PERSON to manufacture, or buy, a newly registered machine gun but the ATF has rules that entities, such as trusts and corporations, are NOT persons.

 

My take: if it causes any legislative change, it will be to amend 18USC 922 to make it clear that trusts and corporations are also banned.

 

I doubt there are 25 Republicans in the House or 10 in the Senate that would vote against that. Maybe if it includes raising the NFA permit to $5K or something instead of 200 clams, but I'd doubt even that having a chance.

 

Or just another "interpretive" Executive Order as stop gap measure at the least.

 

Hell, we haven't even been able to get federal switchblade law overturned - think they're gonna let everybody and his brother have an inexpensive tommy gun?

 

- OS

Edited October 12, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[JohnC]

Oh Shoot, we get the point. Folks like you don't believe it is a worthwhile or winnable fight.

But you could have said that about any past anti-rights laws and regulations of past years that have since been fought against and won back.

I feel there should a be constant battle until all gun rights are won back and restored to the law abiding using all legal means and avenues possible.

At least we can keep them busy fighting against our pro-freedom battles and winning small victories along the way rather than us defending against their anti-freedom battles and them winning the small victories along the way.

Furthermore, let's be more supportive of causes like this. The alternative is just sit and accept whatever the Govt and BATFE imposes on us. Edited October 12, 2014 by JohnC

[Oh Shoot]

Oh Shoot, we get the point. Folks like you don't believe it is a worthwhile or winnable fight.

But you could have said that about any past anti-rights laws and regulations of past years that have since been fought against and won back.

 

Name one federal firearm law. The only thing remotely "won back" were a few clarifications to our benefit within FOPA, which of course also included the opposite, the restrictions on pre '86 machine guns under discussion here in the first place, so quite the mixed bag there. If you mean Heller or MacDonald, again that did not change any laws. We were simply fortunate enough to get a very narrow interpretative victory over some basic principles. And these did not come from ground swell activist movement.

 

As far as regs, I can only think of the Thompson Decision 20 years ago which made constructive possession and making a firearm from a rifle much less stringent and clarified  Which of course didn't come from any activism at all either, but rather from a lawsuit with a commercial entity, so that SCOTUS had to explain to the government the actual meaning of the words as written in its own law.

 

That all said, I do believe for various reasons there's a reasonable chance to get both silencers and SBRs (probably not SBSs though) out from under the NFA in the foreseeable future if folks with oomph like Stamboulieh et al would focus on it.

 

- OS

[Dolomite_supafly]

And imagine the innovation that will come when anyone can experiment with silencer designs. We are using technology that hasn't changed in over 100 years.

[JohnC]

News is starting to pick this up!

http://www.examiner.com/article/attorney-seeks-to-overturn-federal-machine-gun-ban-on-constitutional-grounds

[JohnC]

Oh Shoot,

If you could buy a full auto, would you do it?

If yes, support this fight. :up:

If no, enjoy your semi-auto's. :) Edited October 12, 2014 by JohnC

[Dolomite_supafly]

Even if you do not donate spread the word to any other forums or social media you belong to.

[JohnC]

Even if you do not donate spread the word to any other forums or social media you belong to.

I've spreead it to:

http://forum.snipershide.com/bear-pit/274022-help-overturn-18-usc-922-o-nfa.html

http://fnforum.net/forums/sbr-suppressors-nfa-items/63043-help-overturn-18-usc-922-o-nfa.html

http://sigtalk.com/madhouse/28509-help-overturn-18-usc-922-o-nfa.html

This one hasn't approved the post yet, so not showing up yet: http://www.fivesevenforum.com/index.php

And some car forums that allow gun stuff....

[btq96r]

Oh Shoot, we get the point. Folks like you don't believe it is a worthwhile or winnable fight.

But you could have said that about any past anti-rights laws and regulations of past years that have since been fought against and won back.

I feel there should a be constant battle until all gun rights are won back and restored to the law abiding using all legal means and avenues possible.

At least we can keep them busy fighting against our pro-freedom battles and winning small victories along the way rather than us defending against their anti-freedom battles and them winning the small victories along the way.

Furthermore, let's be more supportive of causes like this. The alternative is just sit and accept whatever the Govt and BATFE imposes on us.

 

The guerrilla fights a patient war.  Picking and choosing your fights is a lot more efficient than spreading resources thin with an across the board campaign.

 

When I give my money to a pro2A org or individual, I want to make sure it's being put towards achieving an result both in sight and obtainable.  The government has unlimited resources to wage court battles, our side doesn't.  Targeted action has gotten us some of the recent wins.

 

I get why this guy is taking on the MG battle, even if I don't think much of his chances for success.  The legal ambiguity this specific case brought is the kind of issue that you can make a case from.  But fighting every battle just to fight it would make me rethink where my money goes.

Edited October 13, 2014 by btq96r

[Oh Shoot]

Oh Shoot,

If you could buy a full auto, would you do it?

 

If still under NFA with the tax, probably not, even if gun itself didn't cost much/any more than semi version. Three shot burst AR, maybe, more tempting.

 

- OS

Edited October 12, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[JohnC]

The fund me just passed $20k in barely 3 days! :w00t:

[JohnC]

I'm impressed at the support this is getting. It's at $27,185 as of right now. :up: