NFA Weapons Requirment, Why?
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 42

Thread: NFA Weapons Requirment, Why?

  1. NFA Weapons Requirment, Why?

    It is a mystery to me why a law passed in 1935 has never been seriously challenged on constitutional grounds. I think is what needs to be done is a call out to the entire community to bring us back to the meaning of the 2nd Amendment with a class action suit consisting of private gun owners, gun shops and all hunting, shooting and firearms manufactures. If enough support could be gathered I could see this law either being revoked or at least rewritten to eliminated or greatly reduce the transfer tax. Think if all NFA items could transfer as AOW or a normal background check instead of the separate classes we have now. Also it could be used to get new automatic weapons into the market making prices drop to a level more people could enjoy the fun of it.

  2.   
  3. Good luck with that. Liberal left has a hard enough time with the guns we can have now let alone giving us more.

  4. #3
    I'd be careful with re-evaluation of that law. They might decide the tax is "behind the times" and just raise it.

  5. #4
    Just curious, what is your rationale for wanting to own full autos? Just because or anything specific? Not meaning to flame you here but they are not very practical for most applications.

  6. The real question is why you wouldn’t want to own them. They are an absolute blast to shoot. I don’t need a reason to want one other then the 2nd entities you to own them. And to give a general answer to all the questions think about this. IF the CCW laws were never challenged how many states would have right to carry today. Washington State where I live is about as liberal as you can get but we just loosened the laws here on using silencers. Either you work toward restoring your rights or you passively wait for them to take more.

  7. #6
    At best I see about 3 or 4 NFA reforms being possible at this time.
    1- Getting rid of the local LE sign off to obtain an NFA item, in favor of a NICS check. Remember that at the time NFA was writen we did not have anything close to NICS.
    2- Reducing the shotgun barrel length requirement to 14". This is a commanly used length from LE agentcies and personal protective teams. This change would reduce the paperwork load for both LE agentcies and for the ATF as well.
    3- Reclassifying Sound supressors as AOW, thus reducing the transfer tax to $5 instead of $200.
    4- Changing the definition of handgun to allow for a .600 Linebaugh or 28ga. revolver. Currently both are defined as a destructive device due to a bore diameter over 1/2 inch.

    These reforms are I admit rather minor, but incrementalism can be an effective strategy. Getting one of these reforms passed would be a victory IMHO.

  8. I like the idea of those reforms with one addition. Allow new full auto weapons to enter the market even if you keep the 200 dollar transfer tax. It would bring the price for them down to affordable levels and allow many of the older and wearing out guns to be retired to historical conversation pieces.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by chuck0255 View Post
    I like the idea of those reforms with one addition. Allow new full auto weapons to enter the market even if you keep the 200 dollar transfer tax. It would bring the price for them down to affordable levels and allow many of the older and wearing out guns to be retired to historical conversation pieces.
    I agree with you in principle. However, any attempt to open the books on full auto will meet opposition from several fronts. First would be all of the anti-gun folk. You think they have issues with "assault rifles" wait until the term REALLY encompasses fully automatic weapons.
    Second we would face opposition from owners of Class III weapons. The moment a law is passed to re-open the books on machine guns the value of their weopons will drop. If I owned an M-2 or an M-60, and saw its value plummet to 1/10 of its previous value, I would be very upset.

    Some Class III dealers would likely oppose the law as well. Currently the market for Full Auto is relatively unknown. It is obvious from the current prices that there is some significant pent up demand, but how much? Would sales volume increase sufficiently to make up for the loss of revenue? Some would be willing to gamble yes, others likely not so much. Class III dealers with significant stocks of pre-'86 machine guns would stand to lose a good deal of capital as well.

    Additionally, you would face significant legislative hurtles. No lawmaker wants to take the risk of opening the books on machine guns. Restricting them is easy. The victims of restriction are largely invisible. The moment some dumb bastard shoots up a school, church, convent, or shopping mall with a belt fed weapon, any lawmaker who signed off on a bill easing restrictions would face a difficult re-election cycle. We want lawmakers in office who would be likely to vote for this type of bill, but actually passing it could be a disaster that has the potential set back firearms rights. 2A fundamentalists may not like this line of reasoning but it is a political necessity.

    Finally, without some significant back up from the courts prohibiting the legistature from passing further restrictions as a result of some potential future incident with automatic weapons, a repeal on restrictions would make no sense and could be very counter productive. The most gun freindly members of the supreme court, Scalia and Thomas are both on record as stating that restrictions on machine guns are a type of "reasonable" gun law that they would support. Until the environment in the courts change, easing these restrictions could be a disaster for gun rights.

    Again I would like to emphasize that I do not like the pollitical reality that surronds this issue. I strongly support 2A rights and believe that it truly is the God given right of every person to be able to defend themselves by the best means available including automatic weapons. I believe the responsibility for criminal acts lies with the criminal and not the tool. I also believe that the govenment over steps its authority when it does such things. The firearms laws in this country are, for the most part , an infringement on the plain reading of the Constitution and those who passed them violated their oaths to support the same. However, I also understand that my views are likely to be in the minority and I must act as such.

  10. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by chuck0255 View Post
    I like the idea of those reforms with one addition. Allow new full auto weapons to enter the market even if you keep the 200 dollar transfer tax. It would bring the price for them down to affordable levels and allow many of the older and wearing out guns to be retired to historical conversation pieces.
    I hear you, but I do not see that as currently workable. Even getting reform #1 I posted about above would be a signifigant victory, and I think that it would be the most doable at this time.

  11. #10
    Doc Mustang, I really think yours is the most concise and accurate assessment of this issue. The political side of 2A is really the issue, the courts are kind of on the back burner. After all, Congress could pass a law repealing all of the 1935 law and the courts couldn't do crap about that. But, like you said, the political backlash from even a single FAW incident would be disastrous for all who voted for it. Not only that, but it would almost certainly invoke a knee-jerk reaction that could pave the way for much worse than the 1935 restrictions and NFA amendments; we'd probably be looking at an all-out ban and confiscation of FAWs. I think some of those revisions mentioned by G50AE would probably be as far as anyone will go in the foreseeable future; but not likely anytime real soon. And, as he/she mentioned, baby steps are important.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast