Source: https://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2010/04/former_presiden.php
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 22:53:21+00:00

Document:
If it is a political pay back prepare for several years. check out US v. Theunick, Garnett, McKinnon from the Eastern District Michigan, now at the Sixth Circuit.
Straw purchase? Giuliani must be pissed!!! Who's responsible for this mess? Uh... sheriff's office and gov't contractor? Oh. Never mind.
Interestingly, nobody from the Sheriff's office is charged. While I am not an expert on NFA issues, my understanding is that this prosecution is based upon one of those infamous BATFE rulings that they issue from time to time instead of regulations. We'll see how well that holds up in court.
The charges are based on 18 USC §922 (o) - which is pretty clear. Regardless of whether we consider the Hughes Amendment to the 1986 FOPA good law or not, its the law. Using a LE agency to circumvent it is illegal.
BW, to circumvent 922 (o), went to the Camden County Sheriff and (or an underling) and gave them money to ostensibly purchase MGs for the department, which were then placed under BW control, secured in BW's armory at Moyock, and used by BW employees and students. The Sheriff's Office couldn't use them without asking BW's permission. Snort!
This is not a ruling. This is law. It is illegal for anyone other than a government agency to possess post May 19, 1986 machine guns.
SOT 03s (NFA dealers) may only possess them (under a ruling) to facilitate sales to those same government agencies (and the further ruling says one, maybe two post-samples of any type).
SOT 01s (manufacturers of NFA items) may make as many as they want, but can only transfer samples to SOT 03s after ATF approval or sell to a government agency. Realistically, the ATF frowns on manufacturers that build scads of MGs but never sell any - plus its a lousy business model.
And they gave the King of Jordan and his retinue five (5) pistols. The King and his retinue not being resident aliens or an aliens legally in the US with a hunting license (or any other exemption in the GCA of 1968, that's fice (5) violations of the GCA 1968. Probably didn't do any 4473s either.
Lastly, with the pistols they violated NC GS § 14 402: "Sale of certain weapons without permit forbidden.
(a) It is unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation in this State to sell, give away, or transfer, or to purchase or receive, at any place within this State from any other place within or without the State any pistol or crossbow unless: (i) a license or permit is first obtained under this Article by the purchaser or receiver from the sheriff of the county in which the purchaser or receiver resides; or (ii) a valid North Carolina concealed handgun permit is held under Article 54B of this Chapter by the purchaser or receiver who must be a resident of the State at the time of the purchase"
NC also requires MG owners to have a permit from their county sheriff, which may not matter since BW's claim was that the MGs belonged to the sheriff.
Play stupid games with the law, win stupid legal prizes.
I was under the impression the charges were based upon the post-St. Louis "you can't possess more than two posties" rule. But that could be wrong. I haven't looked real closely at this prosecution. I had also "heard" that BW was a C7/SOT, but apparently that was incorrect. With their money, I don't know why they didn't go that route.
This just points up the insularity and foolishness of Federal firearms laws and regulations. Leaving aside whether Blackwater was a "white hat" organization, Federal statutes and regulations make it pretty much impossible for people with legitimate reasons (and, let's assume, legal rights) to possess NFA arms abroad to lawfully move them from, to, or through the USA. Blackwater should have kept all its NFA arms overseas, and should have purchased any guns it wished to give as "gifts" to foreigners overseas as well.
Play stupid games with stupid laws, win stupid legal prizes.
Regardless if whether we believe that 18 USC §922 (o)is good law or bad law or stupid law, it is the law.
One has two choices. Obey the law or purposely break it (become an outlaw AKA a criminal).
Choosing to be a outlaw / criminal / lawbreaker has consequences.
As another wise man said "don't do the crime if you can't do the time".
They did the crime. And they knew they were crimes.
Major Mike - an unConstitutional statute is not a law, even if it has the form of a law. It is unConstitutional from the day it is passed, not from the date it is ruled unConstitutional.
And once again TRUTH rears its ugly head. The federal government has NO AUTHORITY to punish these actions. The feds are limited to the explicit punishment of counterfeiting securities and current coin, piracies and felonies on the high seas, offenses against the law of nations, and treason. These specific authorities were spelled out in the Constitution. The Framers KNEW it was necessary to explicitly grant punishment authorities and this fact prtovides unequivocal proof that the feds have NO OTHER punishment powers under the Constitution.
The "necessary and proper" clause DOES NOT imply other authorities except to persons unable to comprehend the Constitution. Reading the N&P clause in that wrong manner implies the Framers were ignorant since the Framers saw the need to include explicit punishment powers in the same section of the Constitution as the N&P restriction.
When the feds act under one of these unconstitutional punishment laws, they are commiting tyrannical attacks on the people of the United States.
On the one hand, this smells a little like prosecuting Al Capone for tax evasion: the Feds had decided that they were going to get Blackwater for political and career reasons, and this is what they came up with that they could actually make stick.
On the other hand, it's pretty obvious some people at Blackwater were playing fast and loose with the rules and doing so in fairly stupid ways. "Getting the job done" is one thing... giving your enemies an open invitation to prosecute you is another. At a dead minimum Blackwater should've had a dedicated NFA lawyer on staff.
You can argue that all day long. Unfortunately, unless the judge agrees with you, you will probably be convicted and go shouting all the way to the gray bar hotel about how "unjust" it is.
What's your basis that 922 (o) is "unconstitutional" other than your opinion (which I actually agree with)? It meets the Supreme Court's criteria under Heller v. DC as it does not "ban" a class of firearms (machine guns) as they are still (in an increasingly more limited amount) available.
We are a representative republic based on law. Individual citizens don't get to decide what laws they will follow and which they won't (at least for very long). Unless you are one of the "gold-fringe" freeman / sovereign types, in which case you're a simple anarchist (in my opinion).
There are legal methods for challenging the constitutionality of laws. Those involve the soap box, the ballot box, and the jury box. When those fail, we have the innate right to use the cartridge box, but failure = treason.
922 (o) may be found unconstitutional. It may be one of those laws "repugnant to the Constitution" ala Marbury v. Madison. But until it is so found by the Supreme Court, if you deliberately violate it then you will pay the price.
All the bluster in the world means nothing unless you are willing to put your life, your wealth, your family and your sacred honor on the line.
The National Firearms Act was passed under Congress' taxation powers, however taxes that specifically target exercise of a Constitutional right are generally prohibited. Further, as reflected in US v. Rock Island Armory, refusing to collect the tax nullifies the prohibitions against possessing an item without proof of having paid the tax.
Sadly, the Supreme Court has repeatedly demonstrated that it isn't really interested in upholding the Constitution as it is written, but instead is interested in twisting the document to match their personal beliefs, as exemplified by the comments in _Heller_.

References: v. 
 §922
 § 14
 §922
 v. 
 v. 
 v.