Do You Think Machineguns Should be legal with a Background Check Only?

[Vern Humphrey]

I see that some of us are under the impression that the Brady Bill and all the firearms transfer red tape actually works.

Many people have been inconvenienced and even prevented from exercising their rights under this law (I have a friend with the same name as a wanted criminal -- it takes him a week to get clearance.) But how many felons have actually been prosecuted under this law?

 

[Autolycus]

Originally Posted by Glockfan.45:

OMG . When I see so many people in this circle willing to give rights to violent criminals to purchase fireams I really start to worry about the future of the 2nd ammendment. We "gun nuts" are as much of a minority as hardcore antis. The majority of people in America are on the fence about the issue. When supposed advocates of gun owners rights start tossing about wild statements like "I think felons and kids should be allowed to buy guns" you make arguments from Rosie O sound logical to the average American. Tell your fence setting friend you think a guy just released from prison for rape/murder should be able to buy a gun, and see if your taken seriously afterwards, you probably just made an anti.

How about we dont let those rapists and murders back onto the streets? I would be willing to bet that the majority of "gun nuts" would also agree with that sentiment.

 

[gpr]

any thing to do to get the prices down. so that i could afford one, would be great.....gpr

 

[motoman]

No regulations on MG's or any other guns for that matter. Its not the guns!!!!

 

[Sistema1927]

If not then why would you sell a 12 y/o a gun?

I owned guns at age 12, and I was a heck of a lot more responsible than many people who were older. I was also driving, on private property.

Face it, either you are for gun control or you aren't. There is no middle ground.

Gun control laws do nothing to keep criminals from obtaining weapons, they only hinder honest people from exercising their rights.

If someone is too violent to be walking loose in public, then they should be locked up or executed.

 

[Ilovemyglock]

Yes !!

Why pay a tax and all the bullcrap paperwork,when the FFL can call it in to the FBI like they do during regular gun transactions....The full autos are expencive enough already...full auto ar-15's are going for 15k around here.

 

[Wesson Smith]

Personally, I don't have any problem whatsoever taking three minutes to fill out a form, grabbing a cup of joe and a smoke, and returning five minutes later to collect my firearm purchase. Not much of an "incovenience", as far as I'm concerned. I have nothing to hide. The gub'mnt already knows who I am, where I live and who my family and friends are, and probably even when I brush my teeth in the morning. On the other hand, they also know what my weapons inventory is. I'm guessing that if martial law were ever declared in my state (see Katrina scenario) I'd be one of the first to be visited. I dunno...I guess this debate has always represented the million dollar question for gun owners, eh?

 

[Exposure]

1911Tuner-

No disrespect intended but you are spreading some stuff here that just isn't true.

1. Your life does not become an "open book" at all when you purchase a transferable MG. You do have to have an FBI fingerprint card done, and get your local CLEO to sign off on your Form 4's, but that is about the only difference between buying a "regular" firearm and a firearm subject to NFA regulations. Other than that you are only waiting for the folks at BATFE to approve your forms for transfer. If your past is clear then you are good to go.

2. As a non-dealer there are no "inspections" for MG owners. Owning a machine gun, suppressor, SBR, etc. is no different than any other firearm. Just because you are in posession of said item does not open your home up to warrantless searches.

3. Burning out barrels is solely at the discretion of the operator. Run belt after belt through your gun and eventually you will have trouble. Use the firearm as it was designed to be used and pretty much ALL transferables will give many years of reliable service.

4. Getting old and boring is purely in the eye of the beholder. I own but a single transferable, however, that one firearm has put me in touch with many, many other fine people in the NFA community. While we don't always get together and burn up tons of ammunition we do enjoy each others company and everyone has something that someone else wants to get some trigger time on.

In response to the original question. I think the NFA of 1934 is fine and works great. The $200 tax on transfers should be dropped in my opinion. However, the track record of crimes comitted with NFA weapons that are actually registered speaks for itself.

For anyone wanting to plunge into the world of machine gun ownership, do it now. They aren't getting any cheaper and just by virtue of owning a transferable machine gun you will end up meeting some of the nicest and most interesting people you can imagine. The "hassle" is definitely worth it!

 

[rugerdude]

Personally, I don't see what the big deal about the background check is. It takes 5 minutes, all the while I'm happily fondling my new piece. I do however, see an inconvinience in mistaken identities and things like your driver's liscence being 2 days out of date (happened to my dad).

Anyway, I think MG's should be in league with everything else. Handgun ownership age should be lowered to 18 (The Marines can issue me a pistol to kill with, but I can't have one for target practice in the "free" U.S.A.? Same thing with full-autos) SBR's should not exist (Hmm, let's see. I can buy an AR-15 pistol....but I can't put a light stock on a ruger 22/45?).

New manufacture MG's should definitely be legal, that's just common sense. Hmm... maybe no criminals will ever get full-auto guns if we stop production of new ones....yeah, that idea has had almost 40 years to work and has it? Nope, just ask anyone who was in the north hollywood area a few years ago.

silencers should be alright too, hell even encouraged because of noise reduction (could end the whole: "Some people moved in and started complaining about my shooting and now I can't shoot anymore" situation) Besides, it's not like some G-unit thug can go around killing anyone unnoticed because he's got a can on the end of his gun. The only people that have the skills to do that have better things to do with their time.

Just my thoughts

 

[1911Tuner]

Kids and Guns

Sistema wrote:

>I owned guns at age 12, and I was a heck of a lot more responsible than many people who were older.<
**********************

I, too remember the days when a 12 year-old boy could walk down a public road with a rifle or shotgun in the crook of his arm...and nobody gave it a second thought. Those were great years, but they're gone.

It was a much different time then. You and I got in on the tail end of America as a "Nation of Riflemen" and had the advantage of growing up in a gun family...often with a deeply ingrained hunting ethic. But more than that, we were taught to respect laws and other people with the same regard that we had for ourselves, if not more. Our word became our bond. Our fathers were strict, but fair. Punishment and reward were delat out accordingly and swiftly. They taught us to be honorable in all things, and our mothers backed them up whenever a point of contention arose.

Those days are gone...and the ability of a kid to take to the field unsupervised with a loaded gun are gone along with'em. So, here's to America, before the great demise. I miss her, and I fear that she'll never return to her former glory. Hysterical fears have taken the place of reason and logic...and nobody is held responsible for their actions until their actions
become so horrific that prison is the only resort. Kids are allowed to explore their ideals unfettered...even if it costs somebody else their property or their lives...and nobody wants to regain control of the situation because it'll hamper their development or damage their fragile self-esteems.

 

[Glockfan.45]

Face it, either you are for gun control or you aren't. There is no middle ground.

Yes just as much logic in that statement as Bush saying "your either with us or with the terrorist". Am I for magazine capacity restrictions, minimum barrel length laws, full auto restrictions, and the rest of that nonsense? No. Am I for saying that people like Charles Manson shouldnt be allowed to buy guns if they are released yes. So what does that make me systema1927? Am I an anti or not? Is it still so black and white? Common sense, When you are talking about a tool designed with the intent to take lives certian issues will arise that need to be dealt with. The issue of ex-cons will be one of them. If I had my way people convicted of murder, rape, and other such atrocities would be drug into a swamp and feed to the gators. However its not up to me and you and not likely to happen anytime soon. People such as this are being released back to the streets and need to be dealt with. The best way I see to do that is for law abiding citizens to arm themselves, and for society to say that the criminals may not be armed. Why is that so hard to understand?

 

[up_onus]

I agree with the earlier posters who stated that it falls under the category of militia. If our government did go "wrong", how would we protect ourselves??? hungtin rifles and handguns???

 

[Wesson Smith]

1911Tuner speaks much truth. Thank you.

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

Machineguns, and all firearms should be legal, without a background check. We don't need permission to pray to God, why is the Second Amendment any different?


Background checks are a form of guncontrol. Supporting that concept makes you a gun controller.

 

[benelli12]

i dunno.............
some people aren't very responsible...
but what do i know.....

 

[Standing Wolf]

I've never seen anything about 4473s in the Second Amendment. Do I have to go back and read the whole thing all over again? That could take hours, you know.

 

[SoCalShooter]

Fully legal no damn taxes!! NFA34 needs to be repealed.

 

[Fly320s]

i dunno.............
some people aren't very responsible...

Most people are irresponsible at one time or another. Maybe we should prevent everyone from owning a gun because of what they might do.

Or, we could default to individual liberty. Anyone who wants a gun can get one. If a person acts irresponsibly, he is punished. Seems like common sense to me.

 

[doubleg]

I think you should have to take a class on responsible gun ownership to get full auto's.

 

[Green Lantern]

Our justice system is broken when murders, rapist, drug dealers, and armed robbers find their way back on the streets after a conviction.

A very valid point.

In an IDEAL world, there would be no need for background checks or even CCW permits, because anyone too violent or crazy to be trusted with a firearm would be locked up somewhere...

Not saying that bad guys don't ALREADY circumvent the current "rules" - just that our "catch and release" criminal justice system means that they have to do SOMEthing to make it a little harder for criminals to get guns.

 

[taliv]

the question though wrt 1911tuner's observations is cause and effect.

do we need all the safeguards because we've lost America?
or was it the safeguards themselves that caused us to lose America?

 

[Prince Yamato]

I take a middle ground. I say we take baby steps in repealing the NFA laws. First the 1986 no new MGs law. Then the 1968 no import. Then eventually the whole deal. Though, I believe there should be a safe storage requirement for Destructive Devices (or the ordinance at least- I don't care if your empty bazooka is sitting on your couch). I know I'll take heat for that. But come on, would you like to live in a high-rise and one of your neighbors stockpiles RPG-7 projectiles sitting in a corner. That'd be great when the fire from the lit cigarette in 12A creeps up to 13A, then KABOOM!

You also have to keep in mind that an immediate repeal of the laws would be a BIG media event. Now we look at the responsible angle to it, but remember, there'll probably be a bunch of newbie A-holes in NYC who've never touched a gun in their lives, decide to have a "machinegun" party as advertized in New York Life Magazine, end up shooting up half of their party goers, then... TADA more gun control. Baby steps, is all I'm saying.

Edit: BTW, I want an RPG-7 like it's nobody's business

 

[chas_martel]

1911Turner said;
>you have to jump through all sorts of government-mandated hoops and
>literally make your life an open book...and
>you're subject to an "inspection" at whim.

Respectfully, your spreading misinformation. Your life is not an open book
and there is no such thing as "inspection" at whim.

 

[Glockfan.45]

Destructive devices are in a whole other catagory IMO, a catagory I am somewhat on the fence about. Dont get me wrong the idea of being able to go down to the local gun shop with a reasonable amount of cash in hand and buying a brand new Colt M4, and a M203 to hang under it turns me on in ways it probably shouldnt . However the idea of the Bubba down the road touching off a mortar in his backyard and having it hit my home scares the crap out of me. As Prince Yamato said also storage of high explosives in residential areas is another problem. I think a readily obtainable permit for such devices should be required. At least to prove you have safe storage facilities, and only to be fired at a range deemed safe for such activities ( meaning far away from civilization).

 

[rangerruck]

all firearms should be available to all, period.