Are you in favor of repealing the NFA and Hughe's Amendment?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Heck, LE pricing on new MP5's is less than many people pay for semi-auto handguns.


Yes and H&K knows people will drop 1K on a handgun, so why would they drop the price to say that of a Hi-Point? The big AR manufactures know that people will give 10-20 thousand for a M16, even if the Hughes was repealed they would not start selling M16's overnight for 599.99, they would start out as high as the market would bear to pay, who knows what that would be, it might be 6 thousand dollars, or it might be 1500.00.

In 2004, H&K was awarded a major handgun contract for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, worth a potential $26.2 million for up to 65,000 pistols. This contract ranks as the single largest handgun procurement contract in US law enforcement history. That brakes down to around 407.08 per gun. But if you were to order 20,000 pistols I am sure they would cut you a deal too.

Not all guns are "cheaper" to produce in full auto either, yes you can make a 10/22 full auto in literally seconds, but its not safe or controllable. You can make one select fire and that cost around 800.00.

Hard to say what the factory may do (if it became legal to sell their products here...they are in the business of selling things, but of course we suck and they hate us),

No not really, H&K has a very carefully worded contract that states what they will and will not sell inside the United States. Why do you think there are no semi-auto only mp5's or H&K factory SBR's?
 
Yes and H&K knows people will drop 1K on a handgun, so why would they drop the price to say that of a Hi-Point? The big AR manufactures know that people will give 10-20 thousand for a M16, even if the Hughes was repealed they would not start selling M16's overnight for 599.99, they would start out as high as the market would bear to pay, who knows what that would be, it might be 6 thousand dollars, or it might be 1500.00.

Not all guns are "cheaper" to produce in full auto either, yes you can make a 10/22 full auto in literally seconds, but its not safe or controllable. You can make one select fire and that cost around 800.00.

No not really, H&K has a very carefully worded contract that states what they will and will not sell inside the United States. Why do you think there are no semi-auto only mp5's or H&K factory SBR's?

I'm not sure you have a firm understanding of economics... :scrutiny: Demand would stay very low at current prices. It wouldn't take long for a very competitive market to develop to meet the demand for lower cost FA's. An M16 has no reason to be a $20k item. And if unlawful restrictions were removed on these items, they would no longer suffer from such incredibly inflated prices.

And when I said cheaper and easier to make, I mean from an engineering/manufacturing standpoint.

H&K can go rot for all I, and a lot of other people, care. I used the MP5 as an example of a more contemporary SMG that is relatively inexpensive to make.



But this is all running in circles around the topic of repealing the NFA et al. They are unconstitutional regulations. Period. Any others issues and considerations are secondary to that.

So other than "It won't help", "It may make things worse if we bring it up", and "OMG! Machineguns!", what reason do you have to oppose the repeal of these infringements?
 
The big AR manufactures know that people will give 10-20 thousand for a M16, even if the Hughes was repealed they would not start selling M16's overnight for 599.99, they would start out as high as the market would bear to pay, who knows what that would be, it might be 6 thousand dollars, or it might be 1500.00.
The only reason anyone will pay $10-20K for an M16 is because the have to, because of Hughes. Repeal Hughes, and every AR manufacturer out there will be selling LLs, DIASs, full-auto drop-in trigger packs, and registered lowers within the month.

Absent an enormous conspiracy among all the makers to artificially inflate prices, competition for full-auto guns would be just as fierce as for semis. If Colt can't command more than $1,600 (or whatever it is this month) for a semi-auto 6920 because of competition from other top end manufacturers, then they won't command much more for one with the happy switch for the same reason.

Even if they did price the full-autos up at $3,000+, within the month Bushmaster, DPMS, Spikes, Del-Ton, etc., etc., etc, would be scratching to sell at the lowest dollar they could (with LMT and Noveske, etc. within $1,000 of that mark) -- just like with semis, and Colt would be slumped in the trough of the wave of excited new buyers. No company (or group of companies) will hold their prices higher than market forces "just because."

With no artificial reason in place for the price hike, the prices would rapidly stabilize at whatever the minimum is for which each company can make a profit, just like with semis.
 
YES! I would love to be able to own.....anything, we law abiding citizens should be allowed to, trouble makers and others who have lost their second amendment rights, no.

What, if anything, could be done by people like us to start repealing or weakening these laws?
 
What, if anything, could be done by people like us to start repealing or weakening these laws?

Well way back in October of 2011 there was an initiative to increase funding for the examiners at the ATF's NFA branch, I think the petition needed 5000 people to sign it so it would be considered, the last time I seen it there were around 3000 people who signed up.

The only want to change any laws pertaining to NFA is to get involved, go to the range with your toys, let other people run a few mags through your SBR, suppressors and machine guns. You might get them hooked into the NFA World, right now there is only a small segment of Americans that have any idea what NFA even is.

When I go to public ranges one of the first things I get asked, is either "aren't those illegal," or the famous "are you a hit-man?"

If you can get the general public and the mainstream gun community more exposure to NFA and some of the laws then launch a nationwide initiative to change the law so politicians will take notice when they receive 20,000 letters from their district instead of one here, two there and 20 next months because there was one post on a forum that made a few people write letters.
 
Yes, But I think they should still be more regulated than regular firearms, like maybe just registering them with the police with finger print cards ect. And private sales of them have to be done with switching the finger print cards and paper work at the police station
 
Yes, But I think they should still be more regulated than regular firearms, like maybe just registering them with the police with finger print cards etc. And private sales of them have to be done with switching the finger print cards and paper work at the police station

What would be the point? Would this prevent misuse any more than the present system of NICS checks for Title 1 firearms? (The semiautomatic clones of MGs are just as deadly as MGs, for all practical purposes.) The only purpose of tracking is to facilitate confiscation.
 
It doesn't matter if the additional regulations prevent misuse. Infringed is infringed, and it's not acceptable.

It is my unfounded, unscientific, based-on-no-facts-whatsoever, opinion, that if NFA items were no longer restricted, their use in some crimes would increase. If one could buy full auto the same as semi, do you not think those engaged in drug/gang related violence would upgrade their weaponry? It is unfortunate, but I think it would happen.

That said, I still think the NFA should be found unconstitutional and overturned. If that means some of those guns will be used in crimes, well, then that is the price of freedom.

It is not that I find the criminal use of such firearms to be acceptable, but that the infringement of rights is more unacceptable.

Brockak47 said:
Yes, But I think they should still be more regulated than regular firearms
That depends on what is meant by "should". *Should* as in, that is what is Constitutional, or *should* as in that is what you think is best for your own reasons?

"Shall not be infringed" is pretty clear. Anyone wanting to have any kind of gun control, done legally, should have to get a Constitutional amendment to do it.
 
I agree with crazy-mp in regards to educating the public about NFA class weapons.

I've never even fired an NFA class weapon. The closest I came was back in 2009 when I was at a public range in Missouri and found an owner's copy of his M-16 tax stamp and form he left on the bench.
 
I agree with crazy-mp in regards to educating the public about NFA class weapons.

I'm of two minds about this.

On the one hand, if more people became aware that machine guns are legal (without learning more about the machine guns themselves), it might cause a hue and cry to outlaw them. Therefore, it might be wise for machine gun owners to keep a low profile.

On the other hand, if people really learn more about the actual capabilities of machine guns, and maybe get some hands-on experience with them, the mystique (fear) might be lessened. They would realize that machine guns, in practical use, are not much more deadly than their semiautomatic clones. (Of course, for some people, this realization might lead to a hue and cry against the semiautomatic clones, but that's another story.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top