News last night, a bit about weapons made in TN?

[lowbud]

I heard on the news last night about a bill on it's way through that would block guns mfg and sold in TN from being fed regulated. Huh? So if this passes a TN mfg can build a full auto for me?

Anyone know the details on this...

[Guest jos2f]

Full auto Sabre Arms M4's? Yes please.

I actually can't contribute anything of value to this discussion as I did not see anything about that

[G27]

It looks as if a bill has been proposed that is similar to the one Montana recently made into law and is passing through the Texas legislature now. Yes, it could allow full-auto, but the state of TN would have to pass the bill into law and without that provision. Montana, for example, passed their Firearms Act into law but it precludes automatic weapons, even if they are manufactured and sold within the state's borders.

I sincerely doubt our legislators would pass this into law without that provision. Heck, I have my doubts that our legislators have the balls to pass it with that provision, but I hope they will. It's about time the state-level politicians realized that they have MORE power than their federal counterparts...

[Smith]

If it is like Montana and some other states pushing for it, it mainly only pertains to silencers, SBR, and stuff like that. full auto's are still prohibited under the state governance.

[musicman]

So wait... no $200 stamp on cans, $5 AOW stamp, etc for anything Sabre (SBRs, etc) or whoever else here might make?

I just want to make sure I understand this correctly. That could be pretty stinkin' cool. It would knock the price of the sweet little suppressed P22 jobs down to where just about everybody would probably get one. Sweet!

[poak]

So, if this passes will Joe be cranking out TN manufactured "Hero Guns" branded SBRs?!?!

[Fallguy]

See HB1769/SB1610

It is similar to one already passed in Montana.

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/political-issues/20751-if-just-wasnt-so-cold-montana.html

It would not apply to..

(1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one (1) person;

(2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than one and one half (1 ½) inches and that uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;

(3) Ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or

(4) A firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of the trigger or other firing device.

[musicman]

Hm... a 1.5 inch bore.... that sounds like fun! I can see it now... the James & Wesson 1500 revolver... 3 round cylinder, 25,000 lb/ft of energy! Man card included.

[G27]

Mac card wouldn't be necessary with that one, musicman!

[GLOCKMEISTER]

you guys really think ATF and the feds will let this happen?

[G27]

you guys really think ATF and the feds will let this happen?

They may fight it, but I have a hard time believing the SCOTUS would support the ATF if they fight it...

[willis68]

you guys really think ATF and the feds will let this happen?

Montana has it passed, no Fully automatic but SBR's, suppressors,

We will see in October when it is active........

[willis68]

So, if this passes will Joe be cranking out TN manufactured "Hero Guns" branded SBRs?!?!

If he is smart he will be.... it has to pass first, long shot to say the least

[Guest jos2f]

If this passes, would it mean we could buy a TN manufactured silencer without paying the $200 stamp? Would we still have to register it?

[Jasongar8]

Guys IMHO all this stuff about making cans and SBR's and SBS's without the tax and going through ATF is just a dream. Ive been studying the NFA for quite a while and there is no way that ATF is going to let laws that have been in affect since 1934 to be skirted around like this. Trust me there is NO ONE who wishes that NFA stuff was cheaper and easier to get then me but I cant see this happening. Flame on....

-Jason G

[G27]

No need to flame, but the 10A has been a non-issue since 1865. They've made some crazy decisions over the years, but I don't see how the SCOTUS could side with the feds regulating intrastate commerce...

[poak]

Guys IMHO all this stuff about making cans and SBR's and SBS's without the tax and going through ATF is just a dream. Ive been studying the NFA for quite a while and there is no way that ATF is going to let laws that have been in affect since 1934 to be skirted around like this. Trust me there is NO ONE who wishes that NFA stuff was cheaper and easier to get then me but I cant see this happening. Flame on....

-Jason G

I can't say I've studied the NFA enough to agree or disagree, but I think we will see a very important precedent set (be it one way or the other) in MT in the coming months.

[bteague2]

I would like to think the fact that nothing would cross state lines gives us a chance.

[Paletiger13]

you guys really think ATF and the feds will let this happen?

Yeah, it would be Tennessee's choice. Correct me if I'm wrong please.

[Guest bkelm18]

you guys really think ATF and the feds will let this happen?

Jesus man, do you have anything else to say besides something negative about current legislation?

[Guest abailey362]

i'll be the first in line at hero gear if this goes through.

i bet this would draw at least 1 or 2 manufacturers to move or open new locations in states that have unregulated sales...i can just see th new YHM factory now

[Guest crotalus01]

Lets not forget about the law that passed in Alaska...just like the Montana law but it allows manufacture of full autos AND requires the Alaska DA to defend anyone the feds come after free of charge.

Will br interesting to see the test case (I wouldnt want to be the one though).

[Guest DaG]

I think it's more of an Interstate Commerce issue. If I understood the Montana bill, if it stays in the states borders you're good to go.

DaG

[Guest GUNSFORHIRE]

For those interested here is the text of the law as it stands currently..

http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/106/Bill/HB1796.pdf

I believe with the current USSC as it stands..a 6-3 vote is predicted in

favor of the State's Rights against federal regulation of intrastate commerce..

The only case that has given the Federal Government the weight to regulate was about a woman who harvested wheat to make bread for her own family..The Government said no-no because it would be too detrimental to interstate commerce (read TAXATION)

Supposedly there are many in the legislative arena who are and have been

against this but have been waiting for years and years for a case to challenge correctly.

Good Luck for us!...We are living in interesting times!

[G27]

Well, the one thing we have to think about is exactly who will be manufacturing / selling the products. I highly doubt the ATF will allow one to keep a dealer or manufacturer FFL if they start doing this in the local level. To use Hero Gear as an example, do you think Joe would be willing to risk his FFL, meaning he could no longer sell anything not manufactured in the state of TN, just to sell some extra suppressors? Do you think a manufacturer would be willing to manufacture products only sold in TN (as I doubt the ATF would let their FFL stay active to sell outside of the state)?

I think that when / if this passes there will be a rough period watching things shake down. The ATF won't allow this to go quietly, regardless of the legality of their actions.