Repeal of NFA


PDA






LAR-15
March 5, 2004, 09:53 PM
Since most anti gunners think "semi automatic assault weapons" are "automatic machine guns" what is to stop us from repealing the 1934 NFA?

Why would the antis care when they are hellbent on believing full auto UZIS can be bought ovet the counter?

If you enjoyed reading about "Repeal of NFA" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Hkmp5sd
March 5, 2004, 10:20 PM
You're overlooking the strategy of the antis. They don't care that semi-automatics, while looking like machineguns, are not actually full auto. They merely wish to convince the public they are extremely dangerous and need to be banned.

The goal of the antis is to ban all firearms. They cannot do it instantly, with a complete ban, so they have settled on dividing guns into seperate classifications and getting rid of each group in turn. It started with the NFA taxing certain firearms. Then came the '68 CGA which added the "sporting" clause. That banned the importation of any firearm the government deemed not sporting. Then came the '86 machinegun ban which halted all new machineguns, followed by the '94 AW ban. These were the first actual bans on domestic firearms. Add to that states like California, that allowed the people to register and keep their "pre-ban" assault rifles before their state ban became effective. Once the owner dies, the gun is history. It cannot be sold or inherited.

Several states have adopted "approved" lists of guns for that state in an effort to do away with "Saturday Night Specials" and any other gun they currently find undesirable. They are also trying to implement internal locks and "smart gun" technology. Anything to put more restrictions on firearms to keep the citizens from having access to them.

mrapathy2000
March 5, 2004, 10:50 PM
I think we should push harder to get rid of some gun controll, maintaining some is good its better than complete gun controll.

the anti think they won with S1805 in senate. they are pushing harder to get a renewal and more restrictions. http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=69184

the anti gunners thing they won and some pro gunners think they won. more of a draw.

kennedy spoke on 30-30 ammo and banning it and other rifle ammo cause they are armor piercing sniper rifle or assault weapon ammo. those people that rifle hunt and think they wont get theyre hunting rifles banned need to be reminded of what kennedy said. the truth is no one will ban theyre hunting rifle. they will call it a sniper rifle first.

need to keep up the fight for our rights.

Cortland
March 5, 2004, 11:07 PM
The NFA is a necessary evil. Look back at machine guns prior to 1934. They were being sold to criminals. Did manufacturers know this? Obviously they did. Did they care? Maybe. This was untenable.

In retrospect, the NFA is pure and utter pragmatism. Nowadays the antis just want to ban *everything*, and if criminals had easy access to machine guns, there would be tremendous public support for that. Keep in mind that under the NFA, before new machinegun sales to non-LE civilians were banned in 1986, there was 1 (ONE) murder committed with a legally registered machine gun. That's what makes the 1986 machine gun ban so egregious -- it was completely unwarranted and totally tyrannical.

Repeal of the NFA would set gun rights WAY back, I believe. The NFA, and even some portions of the GCA are, to some extent, necessary in this day and age. Without them, I think you'd see much more public support for the antis. What needs to be gotten rid of, and what I think is unconstitutional, are the BANS -- the 86 MG ban, the 94 AW ban, the 89 AW import ban, the "non-sporting" import ban provisions of the GCA, etc.

Hkmp5sd
March 5, 2004, 11:58 PM
The NFA is a necessary evil.
I disagree. The gangsters had machineguns before the NFA and they had them after the NFA. Even 60+ years later, the NFA had no effect on 2 BGs with unregistered machineguns having a shootout with LAPD on national TV. The purpose of the NFA was to prevent the average civilian from buying one by adding a $200 tax on the firearm. That essentially doubled the price of the popular Thompson submachinegun, putting it out of reach for most Americans.

The reason for the decrease in crimes committed with machineguns is simply because as the 20th Century evolved, the criminals became less interested in shootouts on Main Street with the police and more interested in getting in and out of town quietly. Add to that the fact it takes a fair amount of practice to become and remain proficient with a machinegun, which takes both time and effort to achieve, something the average criminal isn't willing to invest. They preferred concealable firearms so they would attract less attention than they did walking into a bank with a Tommy gun.

Even today, where you can buy virtually any firearm made anywhere in the world on the black market, crimes with machineguns are rare.

c_yeager
March 6, 2004, 01:37 AM
You know, by proposing a SERIOUS effort to repeal the NFA we would be forcing the antis to make a destinction between what they call "assault weapons" and the real deal. Suddenly they will say "but, this allowes AUTOMATIC weapons on the streets!" I guarantee more than a few people would wonder why the AWB sunset (IF it happens) didnt already do that. It would be nice to see the anti's struggling to define a machine gun when they have such a long history of lieing to their followers. I guarantee at least a few people would take a step back and notice something was up.

Fly320s
March 6, 2004, 06:43 AM
The NFA is a necessary evil.

Any law that restricts what I can own before I prove myself unworthy is a violation of my rights. Not to mention that that manner of thinking is screwed-up.

Why should anyone be told what he can buy/own/use if there is no reason to believe that the item will be used in an illegal or dangerous manner?

If the argument is that the easy access to the item will make criminal use of the item easier then there should be no automobile sold that can exceed 65mph. There should be no computers or internet because that would make fraud much easier to accomplish. There should be no sharp-pointy things sold because those items are used to hurt people.

Here's a novel idea for the government... butt out. Until I break the law, stop trying to punish me.

braindead0
March 6, 2004, 07:08 AM
If the argument is that the easy access to the item will make criminal use of the item easier then there should be no automobile sold that can exceed 65mph. There should be no computers or internet because that would make fraud much easier to accomplish. There should be no sharp-pointy things sold because those items are used to hurt people.
And each car must have a civilian capacity gas tank of 1 gallon or less, so that they can't lead the police on extremely long chases.. only LEO's need high capacity assault vehicles.

standingbear
March 6, 2004, 09:25 AM
Here's a novel idea for the government... butt out. exactly!!!

kingfisher
March 6, 2004, 10:08 AM
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence. From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference—they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."--George Washington January 7, 1790

The Founding Fathers always said it best.

Zedicus
March 6, 2004, 12:49 PM
I don't know about the rest of you guys, but Personaly I would think that now the AWB is 99% certan to sunset, that it would be better to go after the Imports ban and the 86 mg ban before even messing with the 34 NFA...

the import ban and 86 mg ban in my vews is far more important than the NFA, as the import & 86 bans are Outright bans on Ownership of Certan Firearms, the NFA is Mearly a Tax and not a ban, therfore should be lower on the prority list...

Dave Markowitz
March 6, 2004, 12:53 PM
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence. From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference—they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."--George Washington January 7, 1790

The Founding Fathers always said it best.

Except when they didn't. This quote is bogus. See http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndbog.html.

ReadyontheRight
March 6, 2004, 01:17 PM
The NFA is a necessary evil. Look back at machine guns prior to 1934. They were being sold to criminals. Did manufacturers know this? Obviously they did. Did they care? Maybe. This was untenable.


The NFA didn't stop gang warfare. The NFA just showed the federal government the way to infringe the rights of states and keep effective weapons out of the hands of the law-abiding.

http://www.webleyweb.com/tle/le970315-03.html

"...The "weapon of choice" for creatures like Al Capone was hardly the Ithaca and Auto Burglar, or even the infamous Thompson Submachinegun, it was the lives of countless revolver-carrying cannon-fodder thugs, and the influence of crooked politicians...."

Government regulations on liquor CREATED gang warfare in the 1920s. Repealing the Volstead Act eliminated the risk/reward of violence to support liquor trafficking, but not after the $$$$ established some pretty strong liquor criminals and their families into our business and political systems.

http://www.ytedk.com/tedneck.jpg

Brett Bellmore
March 6, 2004, 02:44 PM
Since most anti gunners think "semi automatic assault weapons" are "automatic machine guns" what is to stop us from repealing the 1934 NFA?

Lack of political clout. We will (probably!) be just barely able to stop the '94 ban from being renewed. Repealing an existing law would be significantly harder.

Anyway, you take Normandy beach before you take Berlin. The NFA will be the last federal gun control law we kill off, not the first. I'd say that the first to go should actually be those executive orders Bush's daddy signed.

I'm still pissed off at Bush 1.0 about that HK 93 I was about to buy when he issued that order. :cuss:

LAR-15
March 6, 2004, 02:46 PM
Brett,

I agree. I just figured the GCA of 1968 and NFA of 1934 are so intertwined we repeal em and no more import BS.

gunsmith
March 6, 2004, 03:24 PM
I don't see it happening,the media would freak out and the sheeple would follow.
Something needs to be done.
Lots of money is generated by the current status quo i.e
you've got to live in NV,AZ or some such place and have an extra
10 to 30 grand to buy a class 3 gun

Publicola
March 6, 2004, 03:47 PM
Actually if we look to the courts the NFA would be the easiest federal gun control law to repeal.

Aside from the imposition on the 2nd amendment, it is a taxing measure designed for regulatory purposes. & coupled with the Hughes Amendment to the FOPA it is impossibly burdensome in certain cases.

The problem will be finding a judge &/or jury who is objective enough to examine the facts w/o misinterpretting Miller.

As far as legislation goes it'd be trickier w/o seriously increasing the public's knowledge. Hell, even people who post on a pro-gun forum are arguing that the NFA is a good thing. We've got a long way to go.

But our best chance with the NFA lies with the courts. A circuit court already struck the thing down once (in 1939) & the SCOTUS decision that ovetturned that striking of the NFA could itself be used to overturn it again. Add to that the taxing clause cases where the taxation of a Right & the use of a tax as a regulatory measure are no-no's & by far the NFA would be the easiest federal gun contorl law to overturn - well, if we had objective & intellectually honest judges.

Hkmp5sd
March 6, 2004, 04:33 PM
I'd like to see the pro-gunners take the offensive and go after repealing every gun restriction on the books. Instead of wasting our time and money in defeating the same proposed gun ban laws year after year, lets take the offensive and make VPC/Brady Bunch/Hollyweird spend their time and money stopping our efforts. It's been 20 years since some brain surgeon invented the phrase, "cop killer bullets" and we are still defending common ammunition. Let the other side defend for a while.

Zundfolge
March 6, 2004, 08:01 PM
As far as the NFA I don't expect we'll get rid of it any time soon via legislature ... if the courts find a way to declare the NFA unconstitutional we might be rid of it ... I think we'd have a better chance knocking the $200 tax down to $50.

If you enjoyed reading about "Repeal of NFA" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!