[ssmdive]

No, it's not enough that you may have a tax stamp. You must have a tax stamp for it to be legal.

But having an NFA item !=illegal

You are saying that having an NFA item = illegal.... and that is just not true in any way shape or form no matter how many people *think* it is true.

And no one has to prove that you don't have a tax stamp.

So you DO suggest that in regards to NFA that we are in fact guilty till proven innocent? When did we give up Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat?

It's impossible to prove a negative.

BTW, that is not true. Not really important here, but not true.

http://departments.bloomu.edu/philos...eanegative.pdf

That is how the law works. You may not like it, but your not liking it doesn't change it.

The LAW actually say's that I don't have to show it to anyone but the ATF. That is CLEARLY written out in NFA, 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53 § 479.71. Local laws say that I am fine as long as I am following FEDERAL law. What you are stating is not LAW, but practical application or "best practice".

Yes, that is in fact how the law works. Having a Title II weapon in your hand is on its face illegal unless you can show that you have the necessary documentation. That is the legal reality.

Respectfully, the law does not say anyone has to CARRY NFA paperwork and the law does not say having a title II item removes my right of being innocent till proven guilty. So that is not how the law IS, although it might be how it "works".

Please cite the LETTER of the law that says you MUST have the forms with you?

If you can't, then you must admit that what you are claiming is NOT law, but an incorrect application that is widely accepted....

Some things are presumptively, on their face, illegal.

Only because you and others gladly accept they are "presumptively, on their face, illegal". And that's my point. People like you and others just accept that you must have the form, so Johnny Law and Ricky the RO just accept it.

Like I said, please quote FEDERAL law (Like I have) that supports your position that you MUST have the paperwork with you, and that you MUST show it to any Tom, Dick, and Harry that asks for it. I'd really like to know, all I can find is you must register the items and have to show the forms to the ATF.

No one is arguing that it is not a damn good idea to have the forms to avoid the hassle. This is really about people not knowing the law and just incorrectly thinking that a "best practice" is the law thus diluting the actual law.

The case here is Ricky the Range Officer tried to say that unless the paperwork was with the weapon that splashy here was a felon.... and that dog will just not hunt.

Does Ricky the RO have the RIGHT to deny splashy the use of the range? Of course! He can tell anyone to pound sand based on not liking the guys haircut.

Does the local LEO have the right to ask to see the forms? They can always ask, and it would be a damn good idea to produce them. But FEDERAL law says that you only need to produce them to the ATF. Will Johnny law arrest splashy? Most likely, but I have heard of people being arrested even WITH the forms since most LEO's have no clue what a Form 4 is and "knows" that MG are illegal.

Is it easier to just carry a damn copy of the forms to prevent the BS? Of course!

But I am gonna need to you cite law where it shows ownership of NFA removes the individuals right of innocence till proven guilty.

And I am gonna need you to cite LAW where it says that you have to produce the form to anyone that asks.

Maybe you are getting my point that while you are claiming these things are "law", they are in fact just an accepted practice perpetuated by people who don't know the real law, or just are not bothered to really care. That is attitude, not law.

Or, you could cite where I give up my rights when I own title II items, and cite where the laws says I have to have the forms with me.