“According to confidential information,” he continued, “forces linked with the administration suggest the government classify semiautomatic firearms and multiple capacity ammunition feeding devices as Title 2 National Firearms Act items under the Gun Control Act of 1968.
“Under this scenario, semiautomatics and high capacity magazines could be acquired only with great difficulty and at great expense by America’s estimated 100 million law-abiding firearms owners.”
“The Obama gang probably realizes it would have a possibly insurmountable difficulty getting a semi auto ban, such as that considered by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and others, through Congress,” Snyder noted. “Congressional Second Amendment supporters already are preparing for such a battle. During the Clinton years, Congress enacted a partial, temporary semiauto ban but allowed it to sunset after 10 years because of its lack of significant negative impact on crime. The Obama administration now may order the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to take the classification step. Some gun-grabbers view the designation of Street Sweeper shotguns as Title 2 firearms during the Clinton administration as precedent for such a move.
It’s a very interesting theory, and not entirely without merit.
We’ve already seen OSHA try to regulate ammo and gun shops into non-existence, we’ve seen the EPA attempts to ban lead ammo as well as other types, which would make shooting sports prohibitively expensive, the new reporting requirements along the border that were created because of Obama and Holder’s ATF’s murderous Fast and Furious program.
What’s stopping them? Eh, not really that much. Congress doesn’t seem to have the stomach to deal with much in the way of executive regulation.
All it takes is a regulatory classification change and suddenly the Glock 17 on your nightstand is an evil assault weapon that you have to pay a $200 tax stamp to own and go through all the titling hassles and dealing with your chief local law enforcement officer (who can refuse your “right” that’s turned into a priviledge).
Also, there are plenty of regulatory changes that can be had to screw with the industry – namely import restrictions. Consider what happened with Saiga-12 shotguns. They’re sporting guns heavily favored by 3-gun shooters, and just as suited to any other application you’d use a shotgun for, but they happen to look scary and evil. Because they have magazines and can take modern grips. And they’re black (because gun-banners are racist, really they are, that’s only halfway a joke).
Watch out, it can turn more evil before your eyes!
Though it does almost exactly the same thing as any other semi-auto shotgun, like the Browning Auto 5, for example:
The ATF could arbitrarily change classifications for the Saiga and thus stop their importation. No more Saigas. Just like that, with the change of a regulation.
Similarly, changing of regulations could make semi autos, both the scary, evil, demonic devil-worshipping Saiga above and the wholesome loves mom and loves apple pie, grouse hunting Browning Auto-5 into a different legal title of firearm requiring a $200 tax stamp, licensing from local law enforcement, and a host of other obnoxious regulations.
Not only is this a big deal, but it’s a big deal for the future of citizens’ rights.
Consider that the DC v Heller left the Second Amendment an individual right, but still subject to restrictions. That the Supreme Court is not allowed to interpret the Constitution, but simply measure new laws against the Constitution and uphold them or turn them down is a whole other issue, but I digress. Consider this:
(f) None of the Court’s precedents forecloses the Court’s interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542 , nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252 , refutes the individual-rights interpretation. United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174 , does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes. Pp. 47–54.
Common use by the time of Miller (1939), the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) had already been in place for 5 years. The NFA instituted the $200 tax stamp on certain classes of firearms, and banned many others, or subjected them to onerous restrictions. $200 in 1934 is $3452 in 2012. That $200 tax stamp meant that some categories of firearms, like full-autos, would never become popular, and would never be in common use… even if they did have their utility, and were even advertised for it:
But with one law that banned one class of firearm, they suddenly could never be “common”, and within a short period of time, only those “commonly allowed” would be permitted… as in the remainder that weren’t already banned. Hardly “shall not be infringed”.
To give one example from Miller, the “short-barreled shotgun” was considered not useful for any purpose, whether militia or sporting or anything else. Yet the IRS needs 14-inch barreled shotguns that you and I need special permission to own. Even US Border Patrol, which is arguably the closest thing to a paramilitary force the US has, carries 14″ shotguns and 14.5″ rifles, both of which require special paperwork for John Q. Public to own (shotgun info here).
All it takes is regulations to circumvent the law and the Constitution.