I had seen on this board that United Airlines was tagging checked baggage which contained firearms with a string of letters like this FFFFFFFFFF on the baggage tag. This would be in violation of GCA '68 as amended by the Brady Crime crap act of 1994 and is Sec 922 (e). I had not had this problem on United flights until I left Austin, Tx to return to Indianapolis, In over the Independence Day weekend. Granted that the bag was a rifle hard case so even without the FFFFFFFFF's it was obvious what was in the bag so it really wasn't that big a deal. I decided to do my civic duty and report this GCA violation to the BATF office in Indy. The first guy I got ahold of was a total bozo. He denied that was the law and that each airline had their own procedures. I did not have 922 (e) in front of me so I looked it up and called back. This time I actually got ahold of an agent with some intelligence. He knew the law, knew the section, and admitted that I was right. However, they choose not to enforce that section so long as the tagging was not obvious, as it was in the days of the external international orange 'steal me' tag. Selective enforcement at its finest. I tried to agree with him and noticed that 922 (e) only required notification if the firearm was travelling in interstate commerce. I mentioned the fact that I was only bringing them up here for my personal use and they were not for sale, therefore they were not passing in interstate commerce so the tagging was not illegal. He then told me that it did not matter if I was going to sell the firearms or not, the fact that I took them across a state line meant that they were travelling in interstate commerce. So LawDog and you other JD's and LLB's out there, how about it. Would you please explain what interstate commerce is? Also, since I live in Texas, if I ship a firearm to another city in Texas (lets assume the common carrier does not take it out of state) must the firearm still be declared since it is intrastate? Didn't the 5th Circuit judges mention this recently in the Emerson case?
I had an interesting conversation with the local BATF this morning.
- Thread starter Jeff OTMG
- Start date
- Status
On a related subject: I recently got a written clarification from the Firearms Technology Branch at ATF Hq on declaration of a firearm when shipping interstate. If you are shipping to an FFL holder, you DO NOT have to declare that the package contains a firearm as far as the BATF is concerned. You do have to declare if you are shipping to a non-licensee. This does not apply if you are shipping a firearm as checked baggage on a commercial airline. BATF stated however, that individual shippers might have their own policies.
Well, according to the DOJ arguing the Emerson case, One of the Appellate judges asked if the Shotgun in his closet was in "interstate commerce" and was told "YES" by the DOJ zero arguing the case. This is the justification the DOJ is using for it's right to regulate firearms with no recognition of the Second Amendment.
Fascinating
Fascinating
This gets sticky and damned complicated.
According to the Fan Belt Inspectors and other Fed types, a firearm is treated under the Interstate Commerce Clause if it's ever been across state lines.
That means if it was shipped across a state line to a dealer who sold it to John Doe, who gave it to his Brother-in-Law, who sold it at a garage sale, etc., etc. until you got it, with the firearm never leaving the State of Texas--well, because of that one trip it made across a state line fifty years ago--the Interstate Commerce Clause applies.
Don't look at me, I told the ATF dudette that that was a patently stupid idea when she explained it to me.
As far as shipping a firearm inside the State of Texas, (or just over the border in New Mexico, or Oklahoma for that matter) I just put the weapon in my truck, drive to whomever is going to receive it and place it in their warm little paws.
Saves a whole lot of palaver that way.
LawDog
According to the Fan Belt Inspectors and other Fed types, a firearm is treated under the Interstate Commerce Clause if it's ever been across state lines.
That means if it was shipped across a state line to a dealer who sold it to John Doe, who gave it to his Brother-in-Law, who sold it at a garage sale, etc., etc. until you got it, with the firearm never leaving the State of Texas--well, because of that one trip it made across a state line fifty years ago--the Interstate Commerce Clause applies.
Don't look at me, I told the ATF dudette that that was a patently stupid idea when she explained it to me.
As far as shipping a firearm inside the State of Texas, (or just over the border in New Mexico, or Oklahoma for that matter) I just put the weapon in my truck, drive to whomever is going to receive it and place it in their warm little paws.
Saves a whole lot of palaver that way.
LawDog
ellsworthtoohey
New member
The Intserstate Commerce Clause means whatever the particular federal agency applying it wants it to mean in a particular situation. It is truly the 'elastic clause.' It can be stretched to justify any intervention, any increase in federal power.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff OTMG:
So if I bought an American Arms or Bond Arms Derringer in Texas, since it is made there, and it never crossed a state line, no gun control laws would apply after the purchase.[/quote]
Only if you used cash that was printed in Texas (as if the cash crossed a state border, ever, the it can be considered interstate commerce.)
------------------
~USP
"[Even if there would be] few tears shed if and when the Second Amendment is held to guarantee nothing more than the state National Guard, this would simply show that the Founders were right when they feared that some future generation might wish to abandon liberties that they considered essential, and so sought to protect those liberties in a Bill of Rights. We may tolerate the abridgement of property rights and the elimination of a right to bear arms; but we should not pretend that these are not reductions of rights." -- Justice Scalia 1998
So if I bought an American Arms or Bond Arms Derringer in Texas, since it is made there, and it never crossed a state line, no gun control laws would apply after the purchase.[/quote]
Only if you used cash that was printed in Texas (as if the cash crossed a state border, ever, the it can be considered interstate commerce.)
------------------
~USP
"[Even if there would be] few tears shed if and when the Second Amendment is held to guarantee nothing more than the state National Guard, this would simply show that the Founders were right when they feared that some future generation might wish to abandon liberties that they considered essential, and so sought to protect those liberties in a Bill of Rights. We may tolerate the abridgement of property rights and the elimination of a right to bear arms; but we should not pretend that these are not reductions of rights." -- Justice Scalia 1998
Brett Bellmore
New member
Jeff: You wish; The standard "interpretation" allows regulation of items which MIGHT, someday, travel in interstate commerce, or cases where you've influenced interstate commerce by your decision NOT to buy across interstate lines. The S.C. has stopped just barely short of declaring EVERYTHING to be interstate commerce... And the fact that they wouldn't take that last tiny step has a lot of leftists pissed off.
------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!
------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!
- Status