CleverNickname
Member
Min, check your PM.
IIRC, back in '86, the NRA supported the machinegun ban. The ban was part of the "1986 Firearm Owner's Protection Act" and NRA negotiations allowed the ban to go forward so they could get the Act signed into law. The sporting/hunting side of the NRA leadership managed to beat the anti- gun control side. The gun grabbers strategy of divide and conquer worked perfectly. They don't mind allowing bans on firearms they don't care about.Maybe the NRA can start fighting the '86 ban
IIRC, back in '86, the NRA supported the machinegun ban. The ban was part of the "1986 Firearm Owner's Protection Act" and NRA negotiations allowed the ban to go forward so they could get the Act signed into law. The sporting/hunting side of the NRA leadership managed to beat the anti- gun control side. The gun grabbers strategy of divide and conquer worked perfectly. They don't mind allowing bans on firearms they don't care about. HKmp5sd
That means there are probably less than 125,000 machine guns even available to legally transfer today? And, if they are anything like me with my guns, I'm sure most of the owners are not in the selling mood. Dang! No wonder an M-16 would cost me $14,000. I haven't even seen Mac-11's for $1,500 anymore either.The NRA apparently decided that the good parts of the bill which affected millions of gun owners outweighed the bad that affected 125,000 registered machine gun owners of the time.
The ban was added by a New Jersey Senator at the very last moment. There were no negotiations prior to passage. President Reagan reportedly offered the NRA a veto of the bill after it was passed with the amendment.
Not a blanket fact for all machineguns.Full Auto = Ballistic Masterbation
Paying $5 would be about right.