Regulation or Relic? Why Federal Officials Still Stand Behind the National Firearms Act

There is an old saying that there are only two truths in life, death & taxes.  This week I would add a third constant, government defending governmental power.  With the recent brief filed by the Department of Justice under Pam Bondi in Gun Owners of America’s (GOA) lawsuit to remove items form the National Firearms Act.  The DOJ and the Trump Administration as signaled that they are, at least in part, in favor of some gun control in the United States. 

This comes on the heels of this same DOJ, filling a brief on gun owners’ behalf and declaring for the first time that magazine bans are unconstitutional.  Why does this DOJ continue to step on rakes with gun owners?  It honestly is one of the most infuriating things we here at 2 If By Sea Tactical have witnessed.  Besides that, though one must ask is the NFA even relevant or doing anything to “restrict certain types of firearms” anymore?

When we take a deep dive into the National Firearms Act, its purported purpose, and mechanisms to achieve them, we see serious flaws.  Established in 1934, the NFA was designed to restrict via pricing out of normal life large categories of firearms.  This was done by establishing a burdensome registry, and a $200 federal tax to be paid on each item after they were purchased.

One of the biggest flaws in the bill is that $200 Tax Stamp requirement.  Congress did not put in the bill an inflation adjuster.  The sting of forking over $200 to the government to purchase one of these items has been taken out due to extreme inflation and lack of fiscal responsibility.  The other flaw in the NFA is not about the bill itself, but the rapid advancement of firearm design and manufacturing have undermined the law.

The NFA had very strict rules on what constituted certain categories of firearms.  This was done correctly as designs have meanings and should be well defined.  The flaw with this though is there is often more than one way to build or design something.  It is impossible for laws to anticipate and fully encapsulate everything in designs.  With the advent of Forced Reset Triggers and other devices such as pistol braces, most of the firearms on the NFA can be simulated or mimicked outside of the NFA’s framework.

This brings us to the central question, why defend it if this is the case?  There are several reasons we here at 2 If By Sea Tactical think that Bondi and this Justice Department are defending this law and all are flawed thinking.  This is the sad state of firearm rights in the United States.  This is the friendliest Justice Department we may have ever had, and they are still only a C+ at best on firearm rights.

The first reason, which unfortunately is the case for most things, is a governmental default to defend and dig in on everything they have and do. Government is always in defensive mode and wants to keep every bit of regulation, power, and control they have.  Our forefathers foresaw this issue, which is why they made it hard to pass laws.  They created a system where they thought that due to the hard nature of passing laws, lawmakers would take time to think through laws before passing them.

The great irony is that, while the Founding Fathers were governing the United States, congress and the Presidency was made up of the intellectually best of us.  Today, however, it was made up of individuals out for themselves, and often not the brightest among us.  This has caused us to pass laws that either contradict themselves, do nothing but burden law abiding citizens, and enrich those in power while leaving the average person destitute.

The second reason the government is defending the NFA is pure ignorance.  The reality is most people in power actually think that passing things on paper makes things happen.  While laws certainly have societal weight to them, for the criminal element they do almost nothing.  Especially in an age of light judicial sentencing and prosecutors that refuse to punish the criminal element but will go after John and Martha Taxpayer with extreme prejudice.            

This is perhaps the most frustrating part about firearm law in the U.S.  It is that politicians actually think they make a difference to the criminal that they “banned” certain types of firearms.  In the age of the internet and advancements such as desktop CNC machines, it has never been easier to be an at home gunsmith.  Home gunsmithing has a rich history in the U.S. John Dillinger famously had a converted 1911 into a machine gun by famed gunsmith Hyman Lebman.              

This shows where there is a will, there is a way.  It is the arrogance of those in power to think that criminals will follow laws.  By their very nature, the criminal will break whatever law you put on the books.  The only recourse is to even the playing field for those of us law-abiding citizens and harsh penalties for those that break the law.

Perhaps America will have an awaking to these facts like we did in the 1980’s and 1990’s, but it seems like we are a long way off from those moments.  When it comes to the National Firearms Act, we here at 2 If by Sea Tactical urge the Trump Administration to reverse their stance and support us law-abiding citizens by restoring our rights.  Be the government of the people, by the people, and for the people, that our Founding Fathers envisioned.  If they do this, they will go down as one of the greatest administrations in American history.