ChiefThunderstick
Member
Make it 3 with lifetime financing and you got a deal.
Do You Think Machineguns Should be legal with a Background Check Only?
- Thread starter mordechaianiliewicz
- Start date
- Status
Sam Adams
Member
I loath the very idea of the '34 NFA. It violates the 2nd Amendment and our most basic, pre-existing rights. Why can't we buy what our grandfathers and great gf's could have, theoretically, walked into a hardware store to buy?
While I don't have any particularly burning desire to own a FA (well, OK, I'd really like to have a real Tommy Gun), the idea that I basically cannot own such without mortgaging my house and my kids' educations is infuriating.
It is, however, unlikely to be stricken by the USSC, or repealed. Given that, I think that practically speaking it can be modified - such that any law-abiding citizen over age 18 or 21 can buy a full auto after a background check, with NO LEO veto power. Of course, for this to mean anything, the '86 (new) machine gun ban HAS to be repealed. Frankly, if that happened you'd have so many new FAs flood the market in such a short time that their price would plummet to not much more than semi-autos. Anyone who can't buy one because of their local LEO could easily form a corporation to buy the weapon. Oh, and the price of ammo would skyrocket, until lots more was produced and/or imported (imagine what 100,000 or 500,000 people with truly fun new toys will do to ammo supplies).
Speaking of which, I was once told that full autos are the most efficient mechanism ever devised to turn cold, hard cash into noise.
There's no reason for short-barreled shotties or suppressors to be regulated, IMHO (even if Constitutional, which it isn't). The hypocracy of people complaining about the noise of a firing range, while simultaneously resisting any change in the law about suppressors is incredible.
Regarding C&R full autos - I think that the '86 ban should at least be modified to allow them. We're already at the point where all of the WW2 and Korean War full autos (crew-served or hand-held) are (by definition) C&R, as are a whole host of non-war FAs (like real AK-47s). This would expand the supply considerably, and make it impractical to have limits on more modern guns - so the whole thing would disappear.
Of course, anyone who thinks any big positive changes are coming anytime soon is smoking or snorting something that is also illegal.
While I don't have any particularly burning desire to own a FA (well, OK, I'd really like to have a real Tommy Gun), the idea that I basically cannot own such without mortgaging my house and my kids' educations is infuriating.
It is, however, unlikely to be stricken by the USSC, or repealed. Given that, I think that practically speaking it can be modified - such that any law-abiding citizen over age 18 or 21 can buy a full auto after a background check, with NO LEO veto power. Of course, for this to mean anything, the '86 (new) machine gun ban HAS to be repealed. Frankly, if that happened you'd have so many new FAs flood the market in such a short time that their price would plummet to not much more than semi-autos. Anyone who can't buy one because of their local LEO could easily form a corporation to buy the weapon. Oh, and the price of ammo would skyrocket, until lots more was produced and/or imported (imagine what 100,000 or 500,000 people with truly fun new toys will do to ammo supplies).
Speaking of which, I was once told that full autos are the most efficient mechanism ever devised to turn cold, hard cash into noise.
There's no reason for short-barreled shotties or suppressors to be regulated, IMHO (even if Constitutional, which it isn't). The hypocracy of people complaining about the noise of a firing range, while simultaneously resisting any change in the law about suppressors is incredible.
Regarding C&R full autos - I think that the '86 ban should at least be modified to allow them. We're already at the point where all of the WW2 and Korean War full autos (crew-served or hand-held) are (by definition) C&R, as are a whole host of non-war FAs (like real AK-47s). This would expand the supply considerably, and make it impractical to have limits on more modern guns - so the whole thing would disappear.
Of course, anyone who thinks any big positive changes are coming anytime soon is smoking or snorting something that is also illegal.
I think all automatic weapons should be legal. Period. The point of the Second Amendment is for civilians to be able to be armed to a similar degree as the military is. There's absolutely no reason they should be illegal. The entire premise of banning things because of the potential that they might be used for inflicting harm is ludicrous. It's bordering on Minority Report where people are convicted and thrown in jail for crimes they have yet to commit. It shifts the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing to "assumed guilty immediately and viewed as a potential criminal".
ConstitutionCowboy
member
Correia said:
Why wait the five days? That gives me a four day advantage to shell your pos before you can fight back!
Woody
It is way past time we in this country got back to arming ourselves the way our Founding Fathers so wisely saw fit to insure us the impunity to do so in the Constitution. B.E.Wood
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
