[Combat-wombat]

Are there any movements to repeal it? It wouldn't do much good to me in Kalifornia, but there's always the chance I'll move and then I'll at least want to make an effort to help repeal it.

[CleverNickname]

Most of the FOPA is good law (less restriction on ammo sales, the safe passage provision, etc.) If you mean the MG ban, no there's nobody that I know that's currently working seriously on trying to repeal it.

[willyjixx]

whats the FOPA???

[Mark Tyson]

Firearm Owners Protection Act

It did away with some of the more eggregious parts of GCA 68. An amendment slipped in at the last minute gave the ATF power to refuse to issue new machine gun tax stamps. That is why you will not find a civilian machine gun made after 1986.

Except in criminal hands, of course.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Yes, the whole story on FOPA is actually pretty interesting. The authors had submitted the bill seven times previously and the Democratic controlled Congress had killed it in the House every year. So Eugene Volkmer submitted it yet again in 1986... the Dems controlled the House and were so overconfident that they didn't even bother to take the usual precaution of drawing up a heavily amended version of Volkmer's bill to report out of committee if things got tight.

So Volkmer organized all his votes on the sly and then filed a "Motion to Discharge" (Basically if you get a majority of the House to sign this petition, you force the controlling committee to discharge the bill for an immediate vote). He managed to get the petition through so fast the Democrats were caught flatfooted and didn't have time to write the normal full fledged attack of poison pills into the bill. Instead there was an amendment proposed in the last four minutes of debate - the machinegun ban amendment was passed on a contentious voice vote (basically the chairman said "Sounds like the amendment passed to me") and when the pro-gun crowd asked for a formal roll-call vote (recording who voted yes or no to verify the chairman's assumption), the Democrats nixed the roll call vote. Since they controlled the House, they also controlled the Rules committee that looks at these matters.

So the bill went to the barely Republican Senate with the machinegun ban attached and the Senate had two choices - pass a bill with a lot of good gun legislation and a machinegun ban or send it to a joint conference committee that the Democratic House would control and face the very likely chance that the entire bill would die. They decided to pass it as-is rather than take the risk.

[Mark Tyson]

If "they" sneaked it in at the last minute, couldn't our side sneak an amendment repealing it into some piece of legislation at the last minute as well? Why not? Now would be the best time, I would think.

[HankB]

...couldn't our side sneak an amendment repealing it into some piece of legislation at the last minute as well? Why not? This assumes two things - first, that the Republicans are really our friends, and second, that members of The Stupid Party have the smarts to do this.

Remember The Stupid Party leadership in the Senate is letting the democRATS run all over them with a "filibuster" of judicial nominations . . . and is too stupid or spineless to force the democRATS to stand there talking 24/7. (When I was in school, that's what I was taught a filibuster was - you stood there and talked continuously, without even so much as a bathroom break. And when you stopped, the filibuster was over.)

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Been seeing a lot of discussion of the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act lately that doesn't seem to have a good grasp on what the law did FOR gun owners instead of TO them. So I thought I would bump this back up along with this very informative link on the subject:

http://www.hardylaw.net/FOPA.html

[Omega_7]

Is Gun Owners of America: http://www.gunowners.org

The Stupid Party. I like that term but not the inherent truth contained therein.

A fillibuster can be a tag team thing, and if you have enough busterers :rolleyes: you can keep it up for quite a while. It's no big deal to me since Bush is in no way nominating pro BORs judges. Why would be nominate those who would overturn the evil he has promulgated with the Patriot act and the other socialism he has foisted on us? Why would he nominate a judge who would overturn the 1934/68 NFAs ? He won't :scrutiny:

[TheOtherOne]

As much as I would like it to go away, the machine gun ban will NEVER EVER be repealed. Anti-gun people won't allow it and most gun owners won't allow it -- especially those that have bought and own legal machine guns. If they are one of the lucky few that got an uzi for 5 grand they definitely don't want to see everyone else picking one up for a measly $700 or so.

We are having a hard enough time keeping guns that just look like machine guns legal. Let me say it again, there is NO WAY that the machine gun ban will EVER be repealed. We are stuck with it for as long as the United States of America lasts.

[answerguy]

We'll get the machine gun ban lifted right after we are allowed to carry concealed on airplanes.

[BTR]

I think we may have a chance if the composition of the Supreme Court changed significantly... they could easily eliminate it. I'm not saying I expect this, but don't think it at all impossible.

[Mark Tyson]

Wasn't the provision banning the manufacture of new machine gun recievers struck down as an unconstitutional last year in the 9th circuit? Unless it's reversed at the supreme court, that part of the law is dead within the jurisdiction of that circuit(CA, WA, Oregon, Nevada, Alaska, etc.)

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Wasn't the provision banning the manufacture of new machine gun recievers struck down as an unconstitutional last year in the 9th circuit? Unless it's reversed at the supreme court, that part of the law is dead within the jurisdiction of that circuit(CA, WA, Oregon, Nevada, Alaska, etc.)

The manufacture of machineguns for personal use (http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:xKfKEjo4X98J:caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0210318p.pdf+Ninth+Circuit+Machinegun&hl=en&ie=UTF-8) (not for commerce) was ruled to be outside the NFA of 1934 by the 9th Circuit. However, I believe all of the states you listed also have state laws prohibiting their manufacture and possession outside of NFA constraints and the 9th Circuit ruling only affects federal law.

I was unable to find if the United States attorney had appealed the case to an en banc review. It isn't yet scheduled on the Ninth Circuit's calendar if he did; but I'll be surprised if the decision isn't appealed and killed there.

[greyhound]

I'm with TheOtherOne on this deal. Sneak in a repeal and a leftist Democrat would be drafting a new ban in 5 seconds.

And hard as it is for me to admit, I would bet the public would not be in favor of any citizen just buying a machine gun.

Heck, lots of people think the 1994 AWB is about machine guns.

Make sure the AWB gets sunset first, then go after machine guns if someone likes tilting at windmills.

[Mark Tyson]

Wait a minute, Bartholomew Roberts. Are you saying that if the law has been ruled unconstitutional by the appeals court it can be appealed to the same court for an en banc ruling?