Will we ever get full autos back?

What arguments would come up against repealing the laws?

Click to expand...

That there is no perceived need, unless the US was invaded and then the government would be happy to issue you a M-16 for your personal use. (LOL)

Jim

"imho, NO, not without losing something else first!"

Click to expand...

Well, that would suggest that there's someone (anyone!) on the other side of the issue looking to make a trade or compromise. So far that's not happened ever. "Compromise" generally means, "we want to take everything you've got, but we'll settle for only taking 80% and call it a compromise." That's a long, LONG way from offering to let average Joe next door have machine guns. For such a thing to take place, the whole nature of the debate would have to change fundamentally.

As for good times, I think our NY members would strongly disagree; forget the full-autos, they'd be happy to just get back to last year.

Click to expand...

Sure. And CO, CT, and MD too. There have been a few small snags but we came through the fight largely untouched, especially on the federal level. And in CO, MD, NY, CT, we've only been through the first round. Those extreme situations will cost some legislators dearly and the ship will right itself as time passes, elections come and go, court cases are fought and won, etc.

I'd like to see the moritorum on production and sale of newly manufactured full autos to private citizens curtained. That would certainly be a game changer! I don't think the registry and requiements will ever disappear. Many believe that full autos are already illegal for private citizens. I think the government wants to keep it that way. I suspect they believe the registry and requirements eliminated the violence associated with them. But like Sandy Hook and the restrictions that many wanted passed into law, I think the original act was a reaction to the mob days.

in case nobody has noticed the White Christian gun toting male is being shall we say marginalized thru non white immigration, and as the numbers get smaller and immigrant numbers get bigger gun rights will erode along with them.

Actually you may see entirely new designs that make it quite useful. Current restrictions keep innovation limited.

Click to expand...

I am interested in what deregulation of suppressors would do to the market. I understand that they are precision machined, but I wonder if they were sold at Academy, Bass Pro, even Wal-Mart, would the potential market size create an opportunity for an economy of scale to drive down costs? I could imagine a suppressor in a plastic package, hanging on the wall at the local sporting goods store next to the scopes, rings, magazines, AR parts, etc. I figure threaded barrels would start showing up along side the suppressors, and a lot more manufacturers would ship with a threaded barrel as a standard feature.

Think of suppressors like optics. The market has high dollar offerings, like Ziess and Leuopold, as well as many mid-tier offerings, like Nikon and Burris. Then the market would be awash with many low tier, Chinese offerings like BSA. Technology for suppression and manufacturing would improve rapidly, and we would have better, cheaper products available to everyone. It would be a fascinating study in economics.

^

Study New Zealand.

That's exactly how they are sold there. And they are so cheap there that it's remarkable.


Willie

.

I really hate the "do we really need it/it serves no purpose" responses to threads concerning opening the machine gun registry. Yes, full autos have a purpose. Yes, you can control rate of fire. You can also shoot them semi-auto, which is what most people would do after the novelty of dumping a magazine wore off.

More importantly, the government can have them, brand new, and we can't. The spirit of the second amendment is that citizens are on equal armed terms with their government. Without access to full autos, we don't have that.

Dropping the NFA? That's a source of tax. There's no way the people in charge of that would ever drop it.

Click to expand...

The $200 transfer tax doesn't come anywhere close to even breaking even for the NFA registry, but that's mostly because the vast majority of the transfers are tax free transfers (form 5,3,and 2). I'm sure the tax helps, but the government doesn't make a profit off of it.

I am interested in what deregulation of suppressors would do to the market. I understand that they are precision machined, but I wonder if they were sold at Academy, Bass Pro, even Wal-Mart, would the potential market size create an opportunity for an economy of scale to drive down costs?

Click to expand...

I'm of the opinion that you'll see two groups buying suppressors. The first would be the group that's already buying suppressors, even with the NFA hurdles, who will want a high quality can that will be very quiet while standing up to years of use. But the other side of the market will be more of the opportunistic group who see a suppressor in a store and buy it on a whim. For that group, I would expect to see a larger number of the older/cheaper/easier to produce designs, like those incorporating wipes.

I would love to see the machine gun registry opened, but I don't think it's likely in the short term. Even though current MG owners will lose their "investment", the majority of those guys are shooters and will jump at the opportunity to purchase brand new machine guns for slightly more than the cost of a semi-auto.

Is becoming a FFL the only other way to get machine guns?

If suppressors were easy and inexpensive to obtain, I'd have a few. But I don't have any because of the cost and hassle involved. I expect there are a lot of people in that boat.

Would love to see the machine-gun registry reopened, even if ammo costs would probably limit me to something in .22LR, but I doubt it'll ever happen.

Is becoming a FFL the only other way to get machine guns?

Click to expand...

Currently in the US any legal gun owner (who lives in a state that doesn't prohibit them entirely) can fill out the paperwork and send in $200, and buy an automatic weapon as long as that specific weapon was produced before May of 1986. But that means there's a limited supply (maybe 400,000 - 500,000 legal machine guns) spread between everyone who wants one, so prices stay very high. One registered, legal, M-16 might run $15,000-$20,000.

Otherwise, only federally licensed firearms dealers who pay the additional "Special Occupational Tax" class 3, or federally licensed firearms manufacturers who pay the additional "Special Occupational Tax" class 2, can get or make newer automatic weapons.

And the FFL SOT 3 dealers only can have them with a letter from a law enforcement agency that says the dealer is getting that gun or guns as a test and demo gun for the department.

The SOT 2 manufacturers can make new ones all they want for their own testing and research purposes, but they can only then sell them to other dealers, manufacturers, or to government agencies.

“Could this become a States Rights vs. the overreaching power of the Federal Government?

For example can the Federal Government ban the manufacture / regulate ownership of full auto weapons made within a state's borders and where manufacture and ownership by it's citizens are allowed by that state's laws?

Since the guns would not legally leave that state's borders the Interstate Commerce clause would not apply.”

“That is not the test. See Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942) and Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005).”

I agree as this is a Intrastate issue. In 2008 Kansas the Kansas legislature voted to allow civilians to own NFA weapons (machine guns, silencers, short barreled rifles/shotguns) as long as the owners comply with federal law.

http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=2062.0;wap2

Kansas recently passed a law making firearms manufactured in the state immune from Federal laws. It appears this means the NFA is not legal in the state.

http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.co...endment-protection-act-into-law/#.Uef_uiQo5jo

However since the Supreme Court has upheld that “reasonable” gun restrictions are legal this sets the stage for States rights vs. Federal law.

From a personal viewpoint I have no interest in owning a full auto firearm as I can't afford to feed it. But I do have a interest in a SBR and was seriously considering applying for a tax stamp a couple of years ago before the economy in my area crashed.

And NO I am not interested in being a test case. A $200 tax stamp is much cheaper than a lawyer and jail.

Hmmm... I might write a letter to the State Attorney General for his opinion (after my application for concealed carry permit is approved...)

Prince Yamato said:

I really hate the "do we really need it/it serves no purpose" responses to threads concerning opening the machine gun registry. Yes, full autos have a purpose. Yes, you can control rate of fire. You can also shoot them semi-auto, which is what most people would do after the novelty of dumping a magazine wore off.

More importantly, the government can have them, brand new, and we can't. The spirit of the second amendment is that citizens are on equal armed terms with their government. Without access to full autos, we don't have that.

Click to expand...

beautiful post and up to first world war citizens had better guns (first repeaters) then the govt

Sam1911 said:

Currently in the US any legal gun owner (who lives in a state that doesn't prohibit them entirely) can fill out the paperwork and send in $200, and buy an automatic weapon as long as that specific weapon was produced before May of 1986. But that means there's a limited supply (maybe 400,000 - 500,000 legal machine guns) spread between everyone who wants one, so prices stay very high. One registered, legal, M-16 might run $15,000-$20,000.

Otherwise, only federally licensed firearms dealers who pay the additional "Special Occupational Tax" class 3, or federally licensed firearms manufacturers who pay the additional "Special Occupational Tax" class 2, can get or make newer automatic weapons.

And the FFL SOT 3 dealers only can have them with a letter from a law enforcement agency that says the dealer is getting that gun or guns as a test and demo gun for the department.

The SOT 2 manufacturers can make new ones all they want for their own testing and research purposes, but they can only then sell them to other dealers, manufacturers, or to government agencies.

Click to expand...

putting that date on the full autos is a defacto ban anyway fighting for crumbs from the table at super high prices by design

I've always thought that if the political climate won't accept deregulated full autos, an opening of the registry coupled with an increase of the NFA tax on new full autos being increased to (approximately correct inflation) $2500-$3000 would be nice "compromise.". They get their "guns off the streets," and we get ARs for 4-5k instead of 20-30k.

For very little money, you can get a special nut that attaches to your barrel. The nut is round, and is threaded on the outside to fit an oil filter. With very little work, any common oil filter becomes a very effective suppressor. So, absent regulations, you could suppress a rifle for well under $20.

But since there are regulation, for $20.00 you could spend 10 years in a federal prison, pay a $10,000 fine and lose your gun rights for the rest of your life

Click to expand...

Indeed. That's why it's a bad idea.

All I'm saying is that suppressors are inexpensive to produce.

Sandy Hook is a CRUTCH used by low life polititions to gain gun control,all the new laws here in CT suck, and will have no impact on what a killer will use for mass murder. We have to register any mag over 10 rds,how are they going to enforce that no ser. no on mags, they just want the quantity,unbelievable what these MORONS come up with! They call it the COMMON SENSE approach, they should never use words they dont understand like common sense, none of them have any or have a clue of what it is. sorry for the rant!:banghead::banghead:

I would not want to be hanging while I waited for full autos to be available again to the general public ... and SAM1911, if you think the failure of new laws to pass after Sandy Hook was the last gasp of the anti-gun movement, you must know more than I do ... they may have lost this round, but just wait for the next lunatic with an AR to kill a few people and the hounds will be loose again ... If Dems take the House -- or Obama gets a chance to fill a Supreme Court vacancy -- we'll all be looking for someplace to hide our weapons so when the police come knocking, we're not left with bats and kitchen knives for SD ... I'm very pessimistic about the survival of the 2nd Amendment as we enjoy it today; it may take a while, but every crack gives anti-gunners something new to grab ... look at Holder and his indignation at SYG in the Zimmerman case; it doesn't even apply there and yet he's ready to end it in every state where it exists ...

Honestly, has a crime ever been committed with a suppressor

Click to expand...

When has this argument ever had any validity to to a gun grabber? Even though nearly 300,000 people in this country currently own machine guns, only one murder has been attributed to a FA in the last 80 years, and that was a policemen silencing an informant with a FA scorpion. They are targeting .50's as well, and I do not believe a crime has ever been committed with one.

Having radio talk show hosts like Howe Carr claiming every "hit" in Boston was made with a "machine gun" doesn't help the cause, and I hae tried to
correct him, but "non-gunners" are really susceptible to SCARY GUN TERMINOLOGY.

Federal court already ruled against the total machine gun ban in the 7th district, but it never went to the Supreme Court, so it's only valid in IL, Indiana, etc.

http://www.constitution.org/2ll/court/fed/us_v_rock_island.htm

In sum, since enactment of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o), the Secretary has refused to accept any tax payments to make or transfer a machinegun made after May 19, 1986, to approve any such making or transfer, or to register any such machinegun. As applied to machineguns made and possessed after May 19, 1986, the registration and other requirements of the National Firearms Act, Chapter 53 of the Internal Revenue Code, no longer serve any revenue purpose, and are impliedly repealed or are unconstitutional. Accordingly, Counts 1(a) and (b), 2, and 3 of the superseding indictment are DISMISSED.

Click to expand...

Is it just me, or do a number of these cases seem to be ruled in our favor, precisely until they could have a substantive impact, at which time they are dropped or stymied? I had no idea a ruling that "you can't use tax authority to deny a right" came out of our court system; my faith is somewhat restored .

But that was over 20 years ago and we're still stuck paying tax stamps AND can't register new machine guns; may faith is returned to previous levels

TCB

Honestly, I would settle for an occasional limited re-opening and addition to the registry, something like, 5,000 serial numbers every five years, something to that effect.