Is anyone else concerned with the focus and resources that our advocacy groups have invested into litigation that is based on the premise that various NFA provisions are contingent on the tax levied by the legislation establishing it, and unenforceable after the tax was eliminated? I know that some of those efforts have been successful, and likely more will be once those remaining points get a full hearing by SCOTUS, if not before. My concern is based on th assumption that if those decisions are based on zeroing the tax, while allowing the NFA to remain in effect, any subsequent Democratic majority in Congress would only need to put a tax (of any amount) back on those activities to put us right back where we were. Personally, I would rather have seen those resources go toward obtaining a decision that the entire NFA regime is an unconstitutional 2A violation, even if that would have not produced favorable outcomes as quickly. Caveat: IANAL.
A post was merged into an existing topic: Roberts v. BATF - FPC Lawsuit Challenging NFA In Absence of Taxation