AR 15 recent book

[orpington]

I was given this for Christmas:

Amazon.com

I’m only 100 pages into it and, so far, it’s an unbiased account of how it came to be. However, reviews reveal that it later becomes biased and anti 2A.

A few years ago, I thought AR 15s should be banned from private ownership. That led to many thumbs down, because many like to shoot recreationally with them and annihilate anything down range. It’s not how I choose to Target shoot and that’s a personal choice. But it doesn’t mean I’m right. However, you really cannot ban the AR 15 as that’s a slippery slope and those banning it just won’t stop there. They keep on digging in, it’s a very slippery slope.

But, the question is, with the Gun Control Act of 1934, how were machine guns banned without the powers that be then, and in 1968, leading to a ban of semiautomatic weapons, and then more, and more…

 

[troy fairweather]

We should be able to own anything the military/government can own, anything less is an infringement.

 

[orpington]

We should be able to own anything the military/government can own, anything less is an infringement.

I agree! And how would the GCA of 1934 and 1968 not be considered infringement and contrary to the Second Amendment?

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Since when has the political class been constrained by the Constitution? Sometimes its a speedbump, but they always find away around it if it suits their latest fancy.

 

[AlexanderA]

But, the question is, with the Gun Control Act of 1934, how were machine guns banned without the powers that be then, and in 1968, leading to a ban of semiautomatic weapons, and then more, and more…

The National Firearms Act of 1934 did not ban machine guns.

The Gun Control Act of 1968 did not ban semiautomatics.

The period from 1968 - 1986, in fact, was a great time to collect military weapons of all kinds.

 

[orpington]

The National Firearms Act of 1934 did not ban machine guns.

The Gun Control Act of 1968 did not ban semiautomatics.

The period from 1968 - 1986, in fact, was a great time to collect military weapons of all kinds.

You are correct. They weren’t banned but severely restricted.

What happened in 1986 to worsen things?

Some of the most ridiculous things with regards to this is some of this stuff had to have someone pay $200 I believe in 1934 to make it registered, and if it wasn’t, it’s contraband now. Stupidly, why can’t you just pay the $200 now to make something okay to own, as opposed to having it destroyed?

 

[AlexanderA]

What happened in 1986 to worsen things?

The Hughes Amendment to FOPA, which outlawed new machine guns. This, in turn, led to an exponential increase in prices of existing machine guns.

Some of the most ridiculous things with regards to this is some of this stuff had to have someone pay $200 I believe in 1934 to make it registered, and if it wasn’t, it’s contraband now.

In 1934, initial registration was actually free. The $200 tax was for subsequent transfers. $200 started out as significant (it was roughly 100% of the value of a Thompson). But due to inflation, that $200 is insignificant today. The biggest hindrance today, besides the price, to full-automatic ownership is the bureaucratic delay for approval. Nobody likes their money (many thousands of $$$) tied up for up to a year awaiting approval.

Don't forget that there was also free amnesty registration in November 1968. Unfortunately, a lot of people, not trusting the government, didn't take advantage of it.

Stupidly, why can’t you just pay the $200 now to make something okay to own, as opposed to having it destroyed?

That would mean opening the registry (repealing Hughes, or having Hughes declared unconstitutional). Even another amnesty (provided for under the GCA '68) would be blocked by Hughes.

But the reality is that semiautomatic clones of machine guns, available today (including AR-15's), provide 95% of the effectiveness of machine guns. Some say they are more effective than actual machine guns, since they waste less ammunition.

 

[CapnMac]

In the legislative history of NFA 1934, it's brought out that a ban (especially the stated goal of a handgun ban) would have been declared unconstitutional nearly as soon as it was signed. Which is why the notion of applying a Stamp Tax, as sort of permit system, did not ban the arms, either per se nor per le.*

All GCA '68 did was institute the notion that all gun buyers were criminals, unless and until they swore out an affidavit declaring their innocence (e.g. the 4472). Also introduced was the novel notion of "sporting purposes" as well.**

With FOPA '86, the (possibly illegal) Hughes Amendment was meant to be a "poison pill" that was to prevent the enactment of the Bill entire. As a political move, it was a bit of a master stroke in that, if it killed FOPA, the antis got a "win." If it didn't, the antis still got a "win" as it was "one more brick in the wall."

This had an affect on the Title II M-16 and AR-15 (and related firearms) in a major way. A Title II AR or M-18 went from five or six grand to 15 or sixteen in only a year or so. And not just the whole firearm, but the US$2 sheet metal "lightning link" had a retail value closed to what a used car cost.***

None of this much affected the Title I versions of the AR-15, which remained relegated to a rather obscure niche in the gun market. At least until WJC got AWB '94 pushed through. Which likely did more to popularize the AR and related firearms than any possible advertising campaign could even dream of, let alone imagine.
The sunset of the AWD in '04 just blew open the floodgates of pent up purchasing and manufacturing potential the previous decade had built up.

So, this winds up a giant mess, and one far too easy to churn into political capital, either one way or the other.

_______________________________
*There is an excellent argument that a Constitutional Right ought not be "pay to play." Ample precedent exists, particularly in the case of "poll taxes" (which are seen as a violation of the 14th Amendment). No one with deep enough pockets, and the hoary bug-a-bear of "standing" have managed to get this argument in front of SCOTUS. However, this may yet occur, as similar Tax Stamps apply for marijuana sales. The stamps were never funded to be printed at the federal level.

**Of course, "we" can see no mention of "sporting purpose" in the Second Amendment as written, or as applied during the historical time of the Founders through to the 14th Amendment ratification in 1965. Again, no one with deep enough pockets nor standing has been able to get a case in front of a superior enough Court.

***And that absurdity has piled on absurdity. Recently, a fellow who advertised a sheet metal trinket/key chain ornamment, bearing only a graphic of a Lightning Link was sentenced to Federal Prison for "selling machine guns." (ATFE Technical Branch, after many hours of sawing and filing--and needing several tries--converted the tchotchke into something little better than a bent coat hanger, and that established the guilt of Matt Hoover and sent him to prison.)

 

[AlexanderA]

This had an affect on the Title II M-16 and AR-15 (and related firearms) in a major way. A Title II AR or M-18 went from five or six grand to 15 or sixteen in only a year or so. And not just the whole firearm, but the US$2 sheet metal "lightning link" had a retail value closed to what a used car cost.

Prior to FOPA/Hughes, a full auto M16, purchased directly from Colt by an FFL/SOT dealer, cost hardly more than a semi AR-15. Colt, however, played games with the distribution, allocating only one rifle and one carbine to each dealer, to be used for law enforcement sales. To order another one, a dealer had to prove to Colt that the first one was, in fact, sold to law enforcement. So the number of Colts that ended up in private hands was limited. Nevertheless, you (as a non-licensee) could find a genuine Colt M16 for $2,000 or less.

The more common route was to have someone like RIA do a registered conversion of an aftermarket semi lower receiver. Those were going for around $1,000.

After Hughes, prices rose slowly at first. Remember, there was about a month gap between the time FOPA was passed, and when it was signed by Reagan. In that time everybody was papering as many machine guns as they could, leading to a temporary glut on the market. It was a good 10 years before M16 prices reached the $15,000 range. Those that had bought before the Hughes ban (and at the time, people that were at all interested in machine guns fit into that category) were highly resistant to inflated prices. It took a new generation of collectors to come of age, before prices really began to take off.