This.  Thank you Matt.  Spread the word to every website you can.  Contact your elected officials on every level and demand answers.  Make copies of the video and distribute them as far and as wide as you can.  

Also, when you contact your elected officials, demand that enforcement of the Hughes Amendment cease immediately and demand consecutive amnesties of the NFA until this matter is settled.  Raise a shitstorm of the likes not even God has seen and we'll win this.  

Do not let up... this is going to take a lot of effort but we can win this.

Don't thank me... thank Ajax.  He's the guy that has made this all possible.

Dropping this around at a few forums...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2662949/posts

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=302044&Disp=0

http://alarmandmuster.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=6527

See if it goes anywhere...

Can someone send me a copy via email?

dolomite1(at)msn(dot)com

LOL... I already hit freerepublic... but hell, do it anyways!

Also, for you guys on facebook, find your congresscritters and senators and post the link with an explanation to their wall.  SPREAD THE WORD!!!

Holy Shit.

Tagged.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

I downloaded.

So suppose the House agreed to strike the Hughes amendment...  Wouldn't the Senate have to agree too?

I haven't read all 14 pages but has anyone here contacted any of their elected officials in the house?

So we should do nothing?  attempt nothing?

That defeatist attitude is not what made America great,  but no worries,  there are others that are willing to carry your load and shout it from the rooftops.

This video was the find of the century for the gun culture.

THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 Ok now, that said....can one of our Resident Attorneys break this down.. Does this footage REALLY open the door to a challenge of the Validity of 922(0)??  or are we all just jerking off in anticipation of nothing..

Not necessarily.  Given that it it failed the roll call vote, there is an avenue to have it struck from law without a full repeal.  There are a couple of Congressmen working on researching this right now.

I've spoken with two this morning.  I intend on continuing discussion with them and opening discussions with others.  Please, do the same.

Political will means nothing here.  They are in a very bad spot with how this was passed.  It must be addressed.

Sigh.

I can't even begin to explain the absurdity of this statement. I'd have to use a picture of a million facepalms just to scratch the surface.

He could be caught in bed with a live boy and six dead horses and his constituents would still vote for him. He's in until he either dies or gets imprisoned for tax fraud. Since the latter clearly isn't happening, he's in for life.

Is the Hughes Amendment severable?  That is, can we get just the Hughes Amendment repealed without the clowns in power declaring ALL of FOPA invalid?

I hit up Thefirearmblog.com and thetruthaboutguns.com

Does anyone have a form letter with the appropriate wording that would be good to send congresscriters?

Scary isnt it?????

Hi guys,

I'm sorry I did't get the full unedited video posted up last night... after all the technical problems I had ripping the DVD's I passed out while they were uploading (sometime around 4:45am)

I have another six hours or so of uploading to do but will post the vimeo link to the files as soon as I'm done.

I'm going to run to the store and pick up some blank DVD's to burn copies, and then I'lll get these out to the people who have offered to duplicate.

I can definitely use some help with regard to putting together a more polished product for mass consumption.... this is really not my area of expertise.

Thanks,

Marc

x2



I would crap myself if I could buy a brand new Glock 18.



 

What was your threat title? I'll either link mine to yours or have the Mods pull it. Was going to see if Joe could fire up his Bang_list.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=1141038

This would be nice.

 

IN

If someone gets a form letter written I will help distribute it.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2662947/posts

No sweat.  I've replied on mine and yours... as long as it gets out and goes viral, I don't care.   Good job!

I was gonna say it but i was trying to be nice...



 

People have been trying to get this record for YEARS, and it's just now become available..  24 years ago, you just didnt HAVE the access to records we do now.  I liken it to our records process in the PD.  if you needd a report from the last 3 years, you will have it in 2 minutes..just as long as it takes to print out.  if you need a report from 3-10 years ago..it'll take about 10-25 min since the hard copy has to be pulled and photocopied..anything older than that, figure a week or so because it's in storage, and has to be found.

This clip needs to be stopped in several places and the following identified:
1.  who is who
2. who is saying what
3.  what is the actual meaning/substance
4. what is correct procedure for this committee meeting
5. what the implications are

Hard_Rock, did any of the congressmen you talked to give you any indication of what they thought the likelihood of congress or the speaker addressing this?

The Kicker of the whole thing is that even in 1986, under NJ Law, it was virtually IMPOSSIBLE in NJ to possess a Machinegun.  Hughes pushed through this abortion that had no root in anything to do with his constituency.  While Nj law statutorily allows MG's on a tecnical level, on an actual level with the restrictions in place it is an effective, if not stautory ban.

Has this been put up on any other gunboards?

Given the importance of this issue, would I be out of line asking for a tack of this thread by the mods?  

Also, could we get links to some of the NFA and legal related parts of arfcom to this thread for input by those who normally don't come to general discussion?  

You should get whatever you are asking for. Kudos for the legwork. Ajax, too.

No indication but the ones I spoke with are deeply concerned.  It has nothing to do with what the law is but how it was handled and passed.  The passage of the Hughes Amendment has undermined the legitimacy of all Congressional processes.  Based on that, I suspect it will be addressed somehow.

Do you suspect they would "remedy" the issue by just passing a legal version of the ban?

Not to be a Debbie Downer, but I just don't have much faith in congress.

Thanks for your work though, I admire your enthusiasm. I really hope this works out for us!

I've posted this on a few boards, but I really haven't had the time to go through and update everything, I would appreciate any help you can offer on that front, as It will be a while before I get a chance to do it properly.

Given the current climate in the country (Tucson and now all the LEO shootings), I doubt this will go anywhere right away.

While the Congress critters may talk a good game, they will test the winds before they do ANYTHING; and I just see this a being too easy for the Democrats to use against the Republicans at this time.

Somehow,this needs to hit mainstream media.

Anybody try to get Drudge to link to it? Perhaps he'd be up for showing some Rangel jackassery.

 Maybe it'll make him cry but even have Beck show the lack of democracy...not even make a big deal out of guns themselves,just the entirely undemocratic nature of the beast.

I have sent it along w response from a few gun blogs. I also have a case# from breitbart

I'm going to try to work up some kind of form letter. I'll post it for review when I'm done.

Okay, let's assume that they remedy it by passing a ban now...  Guess what?  Every machine gun out there as of this moment is now transferable should that happen.  That makes the pool of transferable MG's that much larger with a broader technology base.  AND, that remedy would open up other possibillites for us that they don't want to contemplate.  Thank you Mr. Dick Heller and Mr. Otis McDonald.

But if they pass a new ban now there still will not have been any new imports tho. Or would any MG's manufactured before the new ban like POF rifles be legal?

I agree this should be tacked.

ETA: 1986 Machine Gun Ban Was a Parliamentary Scam

Probably in a heartbeat. As much as I'd love for MGs to be legal everywhere, this congress would never do it.
There should be "some" time in between striking it down and passing a new law, during which MGs would be legal under Federal Law, but state law will still stop people in most state from obtaining them during that time...I think.

Not to say this shouldn't be pursued vehemently, I think it does because it's a load of a giant pile of steaming BS.

How can one not tag this?

tag

Tag.

I'm in and will help however I can!

Yeah, I'm keeping up with this now.

First draft.  Feel free to edit as necessary:

Dear Rep. XXXXX,

    What would you do if you discovered that a law passed by Congress and signed by the President included an amendment that had actually been rejected by the House of Representatives? What would you do if the Congressional Record and the enacted law reflected the exact opposite of the archived video of Congressional debate and vote?  Would you try to rectify the situation even if it is a law that you may like?  As discussed below, there is such a law that includes an amendment that was specifically rejected by the House of Representatives.  Although the amendment was flatly rejected, said amendment was still included in the final legislation.  I want to know what you plan to do about this injustice.

    On April 10, 1986, the House of Representatives voted to pass the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act (FOPA) Pub.L. 99-308, 100 Stat. 449, enacted May 19, 1986, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 921 et seq.  

    During debate, Rep. William Hughes presented an amendment that is now commonly known as the Hughes Amendment.  The House voted down this amendment as seen in this archived video that has been posted to the internet: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6Mx2UcSEvQ.  Despite the fact that the House rejected this amendment, Rep. Charles Rangel claimed that it passed and included the amendment in the final version of the bill.

    Below, I quote from the Congressional Record:
8. H.AMDT.777 to H.R.4332 An amendment to make it unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun except in the case of a machinegun that was lawfully possessed before the date of enactment.
Sponsor: Rep Hughes, William J. [NJ-2] (introduced 4/10/1986) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 4/10/1986 House amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment Passed in Committee of the Whole by Voice Vote.  (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d099:HR04332:).

    As you can see, the Congressional Record, the enacted law, and the archived video do not agree.  The Hughes Amendment was rejected. Do you think this is the type of representation that your constituents deserve?

    Please contact me at your earliest convenience and inform me what you plan to do to correct this travesty.  Your reputation and the reputations of your fellow Congress members are at stake.

Respectfully,

Pissed off constiuent