Wanna repeal '86 MG ban?

[Dmack_901]

I, and I bet many of you would like it if that '86 machine gun ban thing was repealed, but I've got a few questions. Would the "pro-gun" community be able to pull together on this? I know that there are a lot of Class III dealers who would lose a ton of money if it were to happen. Those $15,000 mp5s they bought would then be worth $1,500, and they wouldn't like that. It would also be a very hard(well impossible) sell to the public. The Antis would have alot of ammo(although be it blanks) about how terrorists would buy them and go on rampages(like they couldn't allready).

Anyway, if we could, would you want to?

[beerslurpy]

Every NFA collector I talked to (and the local guys have hundreds of thousands invested in their collections, subguns, M2s, m16s, etc etc) said that they didnt care if it devalued their collection, they would love to have the ban repealed. They said they would borrow money to fill out their collection if it goes away.

And I wholeheartedly support it. I would go to the range a lot more if I had a couple of submachineguns. I would love a full auto krink, mini-uzi and maybe something belt fed as well. I have pretty much every other type of gun I want already.

[PMDW]

I just paid $5200 for a registered MG. Having it be worth $1,700 would be a small price to pay for being able to get an MG42 for $2,000 or a Thompson for $1200. $200 MACs would be nice, too.

[beerslurpy]

Exactly. There are so many awesome guns that are just plain not on the market at all right now or are priced so high that its impossible to get them.

Lets see:
FN P90
MP5 and all its cousins
Glock 18
M60, MG42, Vickers, M1919, etc (new manufacture is the only thing that will ever make these mostly sheetmetal (but rare) guns affordable again)
FN M249
M4 (tho I guess you could just combine an M4 upper with a funswitch lower)
Probably a billion others I forgot about.

Not to mention the relatively "affordable" uzi, mac and sten series of guns would go from multiple thousands down to a few hundred per gun. The transfer tax would be most of the cost of the gun actually.

Plus, NFA dealers will love the ban being lifted since it will actually let them sell more than half a dozen guns a year. Would you rather make 10 percent profit on a super expensive machine gun or 20 percent profit on a cheap one that you can sell 1000 of in a year?

[Zundfolge]

Only downside is that we would likely have to repeal the ENTIRE law ... and the main thrust of the law was to make it illegal for the fed.gov to maintain a list or "registry" of gun owners ... thats why the law was called the Firearms Owners Protection Act.

So we could end up with cheaper machine guns, but national gun registration ... in which case we'd be closer to having to use those machine guns

[Deavis]

MP5 and all its cousins
Glock 18

I believe we'd have to roll back the '68 GCA to get those babies. It was, someone correct me if I'm wrong, made illegal to import foreign machineguns for civillian use in 1968. That's why the only "real" MP-5s that you can get as a civilian (not sear conversions) are dealer samples. Of course you have to become a dealer to get a dealer sample and then drop it (assuming it is a pre-86 DS).

[beerslurpy]

No, the only import ban I am aware of is 89 which banned non-sporting importation. There were plenty of FALs coming into the country before 86. Not a lot (because no one saw the ban coming) but they were getting in.

I suspect sporting purposes will have to fall before 86 MG ban gets lifted. If the MG ban falls first, it will require local manufacture to get most of the cool guns. We especially wouldnt be able to get military surplus from other countries through that route.

Not to mention, sporting purposes is a much easier part of the law to get rid of politically. If most people agree guns are for self defense (40 out of 50 state legislatures cant be wrong), then obviously a "legal purposes other than self defense" test is bogus. The justifications for lifting the MG ban are more difficult to justify to a non-gun person. There are many angles of attack though, including attacking NFA directly, or by posing it as a revenue generation measure.

[AF_INT1N0]

Just trying to catch up here. So the 86' gunowners protection act kept the fed from creating a national registry, so where does the ban come into play? Was this an add on or what?

Any help for the slow guy??

[PMDW]

No, the only import ban I am aware of is 89 which banned non-sporting importation. There were plenty of FALs coming into the country before 86. Not a lot (because no one saw the ban coming) but they were getting in.

Nope. Gun Control Act of 1968 made all automatic weapons imported after 1968 dealer samples (that's why we have pre-may dealer samples, those were all imported after 1968). Any transferable FALs that were imported after that were semi-auto when imported, and converted later.

Just trying to catch up here. So the 86' gunowners protection act kept the fed from creating a national registry, so where does the ban come into play? Was this an add on or what?

Yes, it was jammed into the bill by an anti. Same way Feinstein killed the firearm manufacturer protection bill with the AWB renewal part.

[DMF]

Only downside is that we would likely have to repeal the ENTIRE law . . .

Not true. Congress could easily pass new legislation amending that portion of the US Code, rather than repeal the whole law. Stuff like that happens all the time.

[Standing Wolf]

Anyway, if we could, would you want to?

Sure, although I doubt I'd buy a fully automatic firearm even if the prices suddenly became reasonable: I enjoy loading my own, but not that much.

[bogie]

Dear Mr. Bush,

Amending the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986 to once again allow civilian manufacture and ownership of Class III weapons manufactured since the date of the act's enactment will encourate American ingenuity in arms development, and help us more strongly fight the war on terror. Criminals and terrorists don't jump through all these hoops - give us more ammunition to fight with!

Sincerely,

Bogie

[Zundfolge]

Not true. Congress could easily pass new legislation amending that portion of the US Code, rather than repeal the whole law. Stuff like that happens all the time.

You are correct ... I just worded that poorly. I was trying to say that the only way to get political support to repeal it would probably require making a "deal with the devil" (one of those anti devils like Feinstein) and getting rid of the "good parts" of the '86 FOPA as well as the bad.

[morganm01]

Yes.




DO it.

[jefnvk]

I, as an 18 yr old, would rather be able to go down to Wal-Mart and buy 9mm and .45, than to still have to wait another 3 years to even think about an NFA weapon.

But, yes, although it is not on the top of my list.

[River Wraith]

I think we should repeal both the 86 ban AND especially the 68 ban.

[Zundfolge]

I think we should repeal both the 86 ban AND especially the 68 ban.

AND the '34 NFA

[Wildalaska]

Sure, although I doubt I'd buy a fully automatic firearm even if the prices suddenly became reasonable: I enjoy loading my own, but not that much.

Something to be said for hitting something with one shot

WildzenAlaska

[Gifted]

Sure, although I doubt I'd buy a fully automatic firearm even if the prices suddenly became reasonable: I enjoy loading my own, but not that much.

I'd get a "fun gun" in .22(cheap to feed), and a SHTF gun, in a reasonable caliber. That inspires a thread.

[Kharn]

Zundfolge:

Only downside is that we would likely have to repeal the ENTIRE law ... and the main thrust of the law was to make it illegal for the fed.gov to maintain a list or "registry" of gun owners ... thats why the law was called the Firearms Owners Protection Act.

So we could end up with cheaper machine guns, but national gun registration ... in which case we'd be closer to having to use those machine guns

Incorrect, the prohibition on national registration of owners was a seperate clause of the FOPA from the MG prohibition. The NFA is not a registration list, its a list of tax compliance, SBSs and SBRs must still be registered.
922(o) is the section we're looking at:

(o)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful
for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun.
(2) This subsection does not apply with respect to -
(A) a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the
authority of, the United States or any department or agency
thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political
subdivision thereof; or
(B) any lawful transfer or lawful possession of a machinegun
that was lawfully possessed before the date this subsection takes
effect.

The law outlawed the possession of all MGs, except for pre-86 ones.
All Congress and President Bush have to do is pass a law that says "Title 10, Section 922(o) is repealed." and we get cheap MGs (under the 1934/1968 rules), but the rest of the FOPA remains intact.

Kharn

[rdbrowning]

Wildalaska wrote "Something to be said for hitting something with one shot" and I totally agree. However, when I hear something go "bump in the night" I would love to be able to grab a H&K MP5SD and go check it out.

[Henry Bowman]

It's all in the spin. The current law prevents registration of MGs. When unregistered LEO MGs get stolen, evil things happen. The anti's love gun registration. Form a pro-rights group with an anti-rights sounding name (something like Machine Gun Safety Registration Committee) and work to pass a law REQUIRING registration of new machine guns.

[Zundfolge]

Kharn, both you and DMF have missed my point (which is frankly my fault as I worded it quite poorly).

I'm not talking about how the law works or is written, I'm talking about political viability.

In order to get rid of the machine gun ban that exists within the '86 FOPA, the antis and liberals would require a bit of quid pro quo ... they would only support the repeal of the entire '86 FOPA in order to get the machine gun ban overturned.

Of course if we can get the machinegun ban part of the '86 FOPA overturned without having to give up something else, then I say go for it ... I just don't see that happening (just look at what the libs did to the bill to prevent frivolous law suits against the gun industry...we'd either end up losing our protection against registration, or we'd get another AWB or some other bit of anti gun legislation)

[bogie]

I think we're far more likely to see something if it's done in terms of "homeland defense." Get something shoehorned into one of the megabills that gets passed...

Just repeal the nasties in '86... I don't mind paying the manufacturing tax - I wanna make my own Sten!

I just _love_ reading SGN or gunlist in the cafeteria at work... Folks will ask me if I can "just order a gun through the mail" with a horrified look on their face. That's when I get to explain to 'em that "yes, I can do that..." but that I also have to have it sent to a licensed dealer, and jump through all the other hoops... And that life's been this way since 1968...

[Kharn]

Zundfolge:
Why would the antis get quid pro quo? We control Congress and the White House, there's no need for compromise. We just need to get those that lean pro-gun to stand up for their beliefs, just like how the FOPA was originally passed.

Kharn