1986 FOPA Hughes amendment vote footage located

[AJAX22]

Hello,

I haven't had an excuse to join here untill just recently, but I would like to share some info with you that I've been working on. (I mostly hang out over at calguns)

Essentially, there may be video/audio evidence that the 86 machine gun ban (Hughes amendment) was never actually passed, but simply recorded as having been passed.

The congressional record indicates that the recorded vote (taken before the vote which 'passed' it) was defeated 298 to 124with 12 not voting


Here is a PDF of the relevant section of April 10th

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B4xHVurgr6T4NmRkYjJmZTYtM2MzNS00ODk2LWJjODYtYWY4ZDAzY2Q0NjEz&sort=name&layout=list&num=50

Here is a TXT file of the relevant section of April 10th

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B4xHVurgr6T4NDMwM2YyZWYtNmFlNS00MDRkLWJhZDYtNmY3Y2Q4NjU0ODcw&hl=en

Here is a PDF of the full section of April 10th

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B4xHVurgr6T4NDU5NjhhNGEtYjRlMy00YTQxLWE5MTUtMzhjMGNlNDA0ODk2&sort=name&layout=list&num=50



There are no available video archives of the 1986 house vote, as the C-span tapes were all destroyed, and I haven't been able to find a copy of any aired footage in any of the available video archives or footage companies.

However, the Library of congress DOES have a copy

using the time data from the congressional record it is clear that the tapes we need is:

Contents: 09:57-11:29 (VTA 0236)
11:26-13:00 (VTA 0237)
http://lccn.loc.gov/91796859>Library of Congress Web Site unavailable (Library of Congress)



I've submitted a price quote request, and should have a copy of the DVD here in a month or two, at which time I'll put the relevant sections on Youtube. as well as the total unedited raw footage.

So we may have this whole fiasco on video, possibly including the falsifying the congressional record, and thereby eliminating the creation of transferable machine guns.

At minimum we can dispel some of the rumors surrounding the whole issue.

For instance, It looks like despite popular legend the stuff that went down on the evening of april 9th was procedural and not the BIG screw up, April 10th seems to be when everything went screwy...



Some Parts of the transcript to note:


AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. HUGHES TO THE
AMENDMENT, AS AMENDED, OFFERED BY MR.
VOLKMER AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE JUDICI-
ARY COMMITTEE AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE
OF A SUBSTITUTE, AS AMENDED
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I offer
an amendment to the amendment of-
fered as a substitute for the committee
amendment in the nature of a substi-
tute.
PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, I
have a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state it.
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman,
before the amendment is read, I would
like to know if the amendment was
one of those printed in the RECORD
prior to today.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will so
inquire of the gentleman from New
Jersey whether his amendment has
been printed in the RECoRD?
Mr. HUGHES. It has been printed in
the RECoaR, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will
read.
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, has
it been printed in the RECORD by Mr.
HUOHES?
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, it
is not required that the sponsor of the
amendment have it printed in the
REcoRD.
The Clerk will report the amend-
ment.
The Clerk read as follows:


Mr. HUGHES (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the amendment be consid-
ered as read and printed in the
RECORD.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I
object.
The CHAIRMAN. Objection is
heard.
The Clerk continued the reading of
the amendment.
Mr. HUGHES (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I renew my request
that the amendment be considered as
read and printed in the RECORD. I ask
my colleagues, in all fairness and ra-
tionality-we only have 3 minutes
left-to give me an opportunity to ex-
plain why machineguns should be
banned.
Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, regu-
lar order and reserving the right to
object-
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will
read.
The Clerk continued the reading of
the amendment.
Mr. HUGHES (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I renew my request for
a waiver of the reading of the amend-
ment.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair-
man, I object.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will
read.
The Clerk continued the reading of
the amendment.
Mr. HUGHES (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I renew my request for


)NGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE


a waiver of the reading of the amend-
ment, I do not know why anyone
would object to the banning of ma-
chineguns.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair-
man, I object.
The CHAIRMAN. Objection is
heard.
The Clerk concluded the reading of
the amendment.
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I
move that the Committee do now rise.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair-
man, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Is it the Chair's
understanding that the gentleman
from New Jersey moves that the Com-
mittee do now rise?
Mr. HUGHES. That is my motion,
Mr. Chairman. I move that the Com-
mittee do now rise.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the motion offered by the gentleman
from New Jersey .
The question was taken; and the
Chairman announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
RECORDED VOTE
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair-
man, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were-ayes 124, noes
298, not voting 12, as follows:
(Roll No. 73]


0 1130
The CHAIRMAN. All time has ex-
pired for consideration of the Hughes
amendment to the Volkmer substitute.
For what purpose does the gentle-
man from New Jersey
rise?
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I have
a unanimous-consent request.
Mr. Chairman, I made the motion to
rise so that I could get additional time
for the Rules Committee to finish
debate on a number of amendments
that were noticed, have not been
reached and will not be heard, and
that is unfortunate. It is an important
matter.
My unanimous-consent request is
that I have 5 minutes to explain this
vote.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. A point of
order. Mr. Chairman, that is not a
proper Inquiry.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, a
point of order. Regular order.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state his unanimous-consent re-
quest.
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, my
unanimous request is that I have 5
minutes to explain this vote on ma-
chinegun bans.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
Mr. McCOLLUM. Reserving the
right to object, Mr. Chairman, would
the gentleman explain why he wants
that 5 minutes?
Mr. HUGHES. So we can explain
what is pending before the House.
Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I
withdraw my reservation of objection.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey ?
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair-
man, I object.
The CHAIRMAN. Objection is
heard.
The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from New
Jersey to the amend-
ment, as amended, offered by the gen-
tleman from Missouri
as a substitute for the Judiciary Com-
mittee amendment in the nature of a
substitute, as amended.
The amendment to the amendment,
as amended, offered as a substitute for
the Judiciary Committee amendment
in the nature of a substitute, as
amended, was agreed to.



Now one possible interpretation it is possible that this next vote is actually a vote on whether or not the amendment had ALREADY been agreed to, i.e. its a vote on the verdict of the last vote.... to put in lay terms "Do we all agree that that we voted on this with finality in the last vote?"

It is also possible that this is a just another vote on the same amendment (which doesn't make a lot of sense, particularly in the context of the following vote results)





The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment, as amended, offered
by the gentleman from Missouri VOLKMER], as a substitute for the Judi-
ciary Committee amendment in the
nature of a substitute, as amended.
The question was taken; and the
Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.


April 10, 1986


RECORDED VOTE
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, I
demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were-ayes 286, noes
136, not voting 12, as follows:


So the vote count is recorded as being almost exactly opposite as it was literally 5 minutes earlier? and VOLKMER is the one who tries to have it questioned?... that explanation doesn't add up...

Particularly when you compare the individual votes.

I've made up a spreadsheet that can be found here :

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AoxHVurgr6T4dG0xWmpJcTN3LXVlQy01dWNPZkRxdVE&hl=en





As you can plainly see, (although i haven't finished yet) almost 100% of the people who voted aye on role 73, voted noe on role 74... AND almost 100% of the people who voted noe on role 73 voted aye on role 74...

So either all of congress changed their minds in 5 minutes, or the results of the vote were not taken into account when the bill was later engrossed.

[jazzhound]

1. Welcome, AJAX22 -- your discipline is laudable!!

[TheWraith]

2. Huh. I find that kind of hard to believe that they'd make such a major mistake.

As well as that congresscritters wouldn't notice that their vote was recorded as being the opposite of what it actually was.

But nevertheless, keep at this, and please keep us informed.

[spin]

3. "Congresscritters" pass bills without reading them ...

why would they pay attention to their vote?

[one-eyed fat man]

4. Done in a late night session

Rep. Charlie Rangel was acting as speaker of the House when the dirty trick was played back in 1986. By suddenly shutting off debate on the Hughes Amendment and passing it by an unrecorded voice vote it was his retribution for the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986

One of the law's provisions was that persons traveling from one place to another cannot be hassled if the traveler is just passing through.

An example of this would be that someone driving from Virginia to a competition in Vermont with a locked hard case containing an unloaded handgun and a box of ammunition in the trunk could not be prosecuted in New Jersey or New York City for illegal possession of a handgun provided that they did not stop in New Jersey or New York for an extended period of time.

At the time the Port Authority cops in New York New Jersey and Boston's Logan airport would routinely hassle travelers with firearms in their airline checked baggage passing through their respective airport. Change planes in New York or Newark and wind up with a $1000 fine.

It was a cash cow for the sleazy bastards. Easy money as all firearms are declared baggage and on the manifest. All the transit cops need to do was check inbounds for passengers traveling with guns and roust them.

[AJAX22]

5. The late night session was a myth

According to all the documentation, the vote occurred at 11:30 am, the debate on various other amendments did occur the night before (April 9th) but the MG portion we are concerned with did not get discussed until the following morning.

I'm not sure exactly why or how the story of the midnight session got started, perhaps Hughes had the MG portion drawn up over night? He did work rather hard at preventing everyone from having it read... check out page 12-15 of the pdf I posted and you'll see the time stamps throughout the doccument.

[one-eyed fat man]

6. Thanks for the info

I was overseas when the skullduggery went down. I was always under the impression the Hughes Amendment was intended as a "poison pill" to scuttle the entire bill. Many, and I among them, felt the NRA sold out NFA owners when McClure-Volkmer passed the U.S. Senate by huge margin only to get hijacked in the House by Hughes and Rangel.

[AJAX22]

7. Here is a slightly better break down of the transcript

Parts to note:


Hughes introduces his Machine gun banning amendment and attempts to have it NOT read, which is sneaky, since he's the only one who knows its in there (as illustrated by the little surprised comments from Volkmer).


AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. HUGHES TO THE
AMENDMENT, AS AMENDED, OFFERED BY MR.
VOLKMER AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE JUDICI-
ARY COMMITTEE AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE
OF A SUBSTITUTE, AS AMENDED
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I offer
an amendment to the amendment of-
fered as a substitute for the committee
amendment in the nature of a substi-
tute.
PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, I
have a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state it.
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman,
before the amendment is read, I would
like to know if the amendment was
one of those printed in the RECORD
prior to today.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will so
inquire of the gentleman from New
Jersey whether his amendment has
been printed in the RECoRD?
Mr. HUGHES. It has been printed in
the RECoaR, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will
read.
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, has
it been printed in the RECORD by Mr.
HUOHES?
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, it
is not required that the sponsor of the
amendment have it printed in the
REcoRD.
The Clerk will report the amend-
ment.
The Clerk read as follows:



Mr. HUGHES (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the amendment be consid-
ered as read and printed in the
RECORD.

Hughes tries to avoid having it read the first time... remember, no one was expecting this, it wasn't up for a vote the night before, hughes had it entered in sometime between when the april 9th session ended and the early april 10th session began.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I
object.
The CHAIRMAN. Objection is
heard.
The Clerk continued the reading of
the amendment.
Mr. HUGHES (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I renew my request
that the amendment be considered as
read and printed in the RECORD. I ask
my colleagues, in all fairness and ra-
tionality-we only have 3 minutes
left-to give me an opportunity to ex-
plain why machineguns should be
banned.

With 3 minutes left, Huges tries a SECOND time to avoid having the bill read

Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, regu-
lar order and reserving the right to
object-
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will
read.
The Clerk continued the reading of
the amendment.
Mr. HUGHES (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I renew my request for
a waiver of the reading of the amend-
ment.

Hughes tries a THIRD time to avoid having his amendment read

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair-
man, I object.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will
read.
The Clerk continued the reading of
the amendment.
Mr. HUGHES (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I renew my request for


)NGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE


a waiver of the reading of the amend-
ment, I do not know why anyone
would object to the banning of ma-
chineguns.

Hughes tries a FOURTH time to avoid having his amendment read (remember, he's interrupting it being read each and every time he does this)

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair-
man, I object.
The CHAIRMAN. Objection is
heard.
The Clerk concluded the reading of
the amendment.


Hughes, with 140 seconds or so left to debate his bill, has everyone rise to vote, (we don't know if they actually get all the way through reading it... they may be voting on something they haven't even read) it gets slapped down hard


Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I
move that the Committee do now rise.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair-
man, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Is it the Chair's
understanding that the gentleman
from New Jersey moves that the Com-
mittee do now rise?
Mr. HUGHES. That is my motion,
Mr. Chairman. I move that the Com-
mittee do now rise.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the motion offered by the gentleman
from New Jersey .
The question was taken;

NOTE: Mr Chairman (Good Ol, Charlie Rangel, AGAIN can't seem to tell that 298 is bigger than 124, and what a coincidence, he's one of the 124)


and the
Chairman announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
RECORDED VOTE
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair-
man, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were-ayes 124, noes
298, not voting 12, as follows:
(Roll No. 73]


So... The electronic vote tally's everything up, and the motion/amendment has been soundly defeated... or has it?

Some guy named Weiss, uses up the last of the time going on a TOTALLY unrelated diatribe about martin luther king and random stuff totally un related to machine guns..


0 1130
The CHAIRMAN. All time has ex-
pired for consideration of the Hughes
amendment to the Volkmer substitute.
For what purpose does the gentle-
man from New Jersey
rise?

Time has run out, Hughes, desperately tries to get some more time to explain why machine guns are bad

Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I have
a unanimous-consent request.
Mr. Chairman, I made the motion to
rise so that I could get additional time
for the Rules Committee to finish
debate on a number of amendments
that were noticed, have not been
reached and will not be heard, and
that is unfortunate. It is an important
matter.
My unanimous-consent request is
that I have 5 minutes to explain this
vote.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. A point of
order. Mr. Chairman, that is not a
proper Inquiry.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, a
point of order. Regular order.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state his unanimous-consent re-
quest.
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, my
unanimous request is that I have 5
minutes to explain this vote on ma-
chinegun bans.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
Mr. McCOLLUM. Reserving the
right to object, Mr. Chairman, would
the gentleman explain why he wants
that 5 minutes?
Mr. HUGHES. So we can explain
what is pending before the House.
Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I
withdraw my reservation of objection.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey ?
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair-
man, I object.
The CHAIRMAN. Objection is
heard.

Because he framed it as a unanimous consent, a simple objection overrules the request by Hughes for more time


The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from New
Jersey to the amend-
ment, as amended, offered by the gen-
tleman from Missouri
as a substitute for the Judiciary Com-
mittee amendment in the nature of a
substitute, as amended.

This is where the voice vote is supposed to have occurred

The amendment to the amendment,
as amended, offered as a substitute for
the Judiciary Committee amendment
in the nature of a substitute, as
amended, was agreed to.



So, no record of the vote is made, no objections are made to the declaration (BY Charlie Rangel) that it passed... kind of strange, considering he's been 100% wrong all day in calling these things...

Everyone apparently is getting ready for the ultimate vote on the bill which is up next.





The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment, as amended, offered
by the gentleman from Missouri VOLKMER], as a substitute for the Judi-
ciary Committee amendment in the
nature of a substitute, as amended.
The question was taken; and the
Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.

Well, wouldn't you know it Charlie Rangel calls it for his team AGAIN...


April 10, 1986


RECORDED VOTE
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, I
demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were-ayes 286, noes
136, not voting 12, as follows:


Once again, Rangel is wrong, 286 apparently is bigger than 136 and the FOPA passes.



And thats how it happened.

[derby378]

8. Dude, this is awesome

I salute your eforts! :applause:

[AJAX22]

9. The Price Quote from the Library of Congress is here

391.25 and it should take 4-9 weeks to arrive.

Currently raising funds over at calguns.net, ar15.com, and Thehighroad.org, and with a little luck we'll have it ordered here very shortly.

Just keeping everyone updated.

[AJAX22]

10. Funds fully raised.

The price quote showed up today, and we've already raised the $391.25 to cover the cost.

The 2A community is amazing.

All the checks/paypal funds etc. are being gathered togeather and I'm prepping the order form... this is really happening.

Just keeping everyone updated

[X_Digger]

11. Thanks for the update. n/t

[AJAX22]

12. A Pro 2A organization is helping out to get this hosted

A bit of good news, it looks like we will be able to upload this through a premium Vimeo account... So it won't be 18 ten min film clips, but rather 3 one hour blocks.... Which makes my life a lot easier.

Very cool stuff

[jtb33]

13. Are you actually trying to get new MACHINEGUNS allowed

...into the hands of normal citizens?!

[Glassunion]

14. And?

I would rather have them in the hands of "normal" citizens, than the "abnormal" ones that have them now.

[PavePusher]

15. Why not?

What would be your beef with lawful Citizens owning legal machineguns?

[ManiacJoe]

16. Since lots of normal citizens already own machine guns,

what is wrong with the number getting bigger?

[57_TomCat]

17. I hope so...

I want another one without the premium price I would have to pay for those grandfathered in the registry.

[Hoopla Phil]

18. I sure HOPE SO!!!!!

Oh how I long for the day when an AR-15 was on the rack for $700.00 and an M-16 was right next to it for $800.00.

[Katya Mullethov]

19. And suppressors and short barreled shotguns

Then we will set to work on the patchwork of vindictive and capricious REGULATION that IS the heavy hand of the kitten stomping ,dog shooting ,glory hole gougin ,' booger eatin little brothers of the treasury refered to in polite company as "The ATF" .

[GMBshootingclubM60]

20. Any bets the LOC video footage will come up missing?

It's funny that the nra doesn't have any video of the 1986 gun control legislation being voted on.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

22. NRA doesn't actively fight for NFA rights. They pick and choose thier battles.

They know most people (regardless of being a gun owner) support hunting, self defense, and collecting firearms. But there is certainly a rift in support for NFA items among people supporting these items. The NRA might be able to win a case in this arena, but choose to not partake in a divisive action. The more supporters they get and the fewer enemies they make then the more powerful they become.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

21. 1986 FOPA does nothing to ban silencers and SBS/SBR/AOW...

It only bans new machineguns. The rest of the fun stuff stayed regulated the same as it was in the NFA.

[AJAX22]

23. They e-mailed me my reciept

looks like they processed the order.

So the wait continues...

[AJAX22]

24. VIDEO IS HERE, UPLOADING asap

IT IS HERE!!!!

WATCHING IT NOW!!!

WooooooO!!!!

I'm uploading as soon as i can

[AJAX22]

25. Here is the footage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6Mx2UcSEvQ

[jeepnstein]

26. What a circus.

All they needed was a confetti cannon and a squirting lapel flower.

[Katya Mullethov]

30. Cant control his classroom

Rangel sure sounds just like Mojo Nixon

[Hoopla Phil]

27. I applaud your effort in this but have a serious question.

To what end do you see this going? Do you want to parley this into a congressional effort to repeal this amendment or do you see this as giving you standing to challenge it at SCOTUS?

[Shooters_Journal]

28. Site launched to track the progress of this effort

I'm in the process of organizing a website for all of the information on this issue to be housed: Legal Machineguns

I'm doing all I can to get this information disseminated to as many people as I can possibly get it in front of.

If any of you would like to add to the information on the site, or write an article detailing the impacts that this video may or may not have on existing law, feel free to register on the site and submit your writing. I'm watching it closely and will be responsible for editing and posting just about everything that hits the site - I share that ability with AJAX22 and one other, but I'm trying to keep them doing what they do best.

[lawodevolution]

29. Where do I throw my money to get new full autos legal again

The news already claim you can get a machine gun at any gun shop, we may as well make it true