Modest proposed changes to the NFA- what do you think of my proposal?

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

LAR-15

Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2004
Messages
3,385
Proposed Amendments


Purpose: To remove certain sporting and hunting rifles from the restrictions of the National Firearms Act and to change the transfer tax on certain firearms.

1.) Definition (8 ) in section 921 Chapter 44 Title 18 US Code is amended by:

replacing ’sixteen inches’ with ’fourteen and half inches’.

2) Definition (3) in Section 5845 Chapter 53 Title 26 US Code is amended by:

replacing ‘16 inches’ with ‘14.5 inches’.

3.) Definition (4) in Section 5845 Chapter 53 Title 26 US Code is amended by:

replacing ‘16 inches’ with ‘14.5 inches’.


4.) Title 26 Chapter 53 Section 5811 is amended by:

Inserting ‘or a silencer as defined in section 921 title 18 US Code’ between ‘(e)’ and ‘shall’.
 
He has actually but nothing strictly pro gun, just some minor amendments.
 
Can you eat a whole large Domino's pizza in one bite?

Do you have a 20 pro gun majority in the Senate?

Wait you barely have three?
 
That sounds great! See if you can get them to up the national speed limit from 70 to 71 while you are at it!


:rolleyes:
 
The national speed limit is 55.

I was thinking this could be tacked onto HR 800 on the House floor.
 
The national speed limit is 55.
Click to expand...

I guess I got confused by all those signs that say 70 around where I live.....

Either way, take a look at what sort of political capital it will take to make changes - any changes - to the NFA, then ask yourself if you are willing to do that so everyone can have a nifty cool m4 clone with the proper barrel length. Besides, if you want to think incremental, you are doing it backwards.

Ok, here is an example - pretend you are that evil Brady woman and you want to pass some gun control legislation. What do you do? You come out and demand that every assault rifle be banned and confiscated! Then you compromise down to just banning some of them. Its negotiation. You never start with your final offer. What you do is demand that SBS's and SBR's be removed from the NFA, along with suppressors (get OSHA to side with you on this one). Then you can negotiate to your final position ---- m4geries without the tax!

Start big, scare your opponent, then back off to a position that looks good by comparison.
 
I guess they did change the speed limits from 55 to 75.

What poltical capital are we talking about?

There is none.

The Repubs dominate the House.


Good night.
 
Why can't we just add a rider bill to some completely unrelated bill that is sure to pass. It's what the anti's do. Why can't we. We could repeal it and the courts would find nothing illegal about it. :)
 
What poltical capital are we talking about?
Click to expand...

Repubs have controlled congress & white house for a few years now. Have they bothered to try to repeal any provision of GCA or NFA? If political capital were not required, why hasn't anything been done yet? E-mail the NRA and ask them about HR 1703 (I think thats what it is this time around) and ask them to support it. They will tell you it will not make it out of committee, and it would take too much political capital to do anything with it. Seriously, write them a letter. They won't touch NFA or GCA because it would cost too much..... even with our great leader and wonderous pro-gun congress, they can't get even ONE word changed in 1968 GCA (change the word SPORTING to the word LAWFUL).....
 
I don't understand why people still cling to the notion that the republicans are the great defenders of our second amendment rights. King George II has done NOTHING to protect firearm rights, and he even vowed to resign the AWB if it came to him. His useless father signed FAR worse anti-gun legislation than the demonized Clinton and it was the saintly Reagan who passed the 86 ban.

The Republicans have an overwhelming majority yet they have done nothing for one reason - they have people BELIEVING the will protect 2nd Amendment rights, and because believe believe it, they could care less about actually doing anything to protect firearm rights or repealling foolish gun control laws.
 
he even vowed to resign the AWB if it came to him.

He just said that to get the Anti's off his butt. He said he would IF it got to his desk. Everyone knew that it would never get that far except the Anti's. Quite a smart move on his part. He stalled their panic PR campaign until it was too late to do anything except claim that the streets will run with the blood of a million cute babies. :rolleyes:
 
Your NFA changes are fine, but they seem somewhat useles to me, with the exception of AR owners who want true M4 clones. I think the energy would be of more use getting rid of the CLEO sign off and the $200 fee.
 
Is it really worth the money and effort that it would take to amend the NFA just so you could have a 14.5" barrelled M4gery? What a waste of resources.
 
What I dont understand is, why are pro-gun groups so weak? I've never heard of any pro-gun groupd in recent times attempting to repeal some federal laws and such. What gives?
 
I'd go down to 10 inches at minimum. If we were going to amend the NFA, I would change a lot more than that. I would rather try to push for removal of silencers from NFA jurisdiction on the grounds that they are simply safety devices. Cars and trucks are mandated to have them, why not firearms? OSHA regulations would require them if possible. For all the effort to get something like this through, you would be better off trying to repeal the portion of the gun owners protection act of 1986 that banned manufacture of machineguns for civilians. To try to push this through simply to have an M4 clone in semi-auto in which you can screw off the flash hider is a waste. Make it a machinegun and you can put any size barrel on it and have the real deal.
 
The Republicans have an overwhelming majority yet they have done nothing for one reason - they have people BELIEVING the will protect 2nd Amendment rights, and because believe believe it, they could care less about actually doing anything to protect firearm rights or repealling foolish gun control laws.
Click to expand...

Yep. I've gone back to voting Libertarian: probably the same net result, but at least I can look the man in the mirror in the eye.
 
If you don't like my proposals then call your rep and oppose them.

I may not even get a chance to submit them.

If I can't attend my rep's meeting I won't bother with them.
 
Where in the law is the CLEO signoff required?

If somone can point out where that law is I do think it should be repealed.

Thanks
 
I would rather try to push for removal of silencers from NFA jurisdiction on the grounds that they are simply safety devices. Cars and trucks are mandated to have them, why not firearms? OSHA regulations would require them if possible.
Click to expand...

I think that is a great suggestion. The OSHA angle is a good one as well. Making it a health issue could help push it through


Also the idea of droping the barrel length restrictions is anoth idea who's time has come. It's such a stupid idea that because it has a stock that it requires a $200 transfer tax. There is no difference between a pistol and a rifle. I'd love to know why they came up with that provision in the NFA
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
Antique firearms proposal
2
Replies
43
Views
1K
LAR-15
L
L
  • Locked
Exempting muzzle loaders from the NFA
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
LAR-15
L
L
  • Locked
Are you a gun collector? Send this proposal to your reps
Replies
13
Views
576
hifi
H
L
  • Locked
Proposal to lower US silencer taxes
2
Replies
44
Views
2K
Limeyfellow
L
L
  • Locked
Antique firearms proposal
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
LAR-15
L
Back
Top