So, think we will ever get rid of the 1968 GCA?

[husbandofaromanian]

What about TN's Firearm Freedom Act.

What about TN's & Montana's Firearm Freedom Acts. Aren't they a direct challenge to any Federal Regulation? Heller + McDonald + TN Firearm Freedom Act could = Big problems for Federal regulation in my opinion.

 

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

How about we ram it down their throats--the repeal of the 68 GCA along with Obamacare repeal---just like the Dems did---Where's the Nancy Pelosi of the right?

 

[chaplain tom]

The BATFE will eventually be eliminated once another Waco or Ruby Ridge type incident occurs. Between the internet and the level of frustration that has built up in this country any repeat of those two incidents would likely result in the complete legislative destruction of the agency.

I'm not so sure about that. I think congress would simply do what it always does when one of the Fed. bureaucratic agencies gets into trouble. They will first make indignent speeches about how pi**ed off they are that such a thing could happen. Then they will order an investigation into the matter. And lastly they will revamp the whole thing claiming they have "fixed" the problem. Trouble is that it will be worse than before they got involved.

 

[mgkdrgn]

Can you think of ANY federal regulation, bureau, agency, department, yadda yadda yadda .. that we have EVER gotten rid of?

I mean, we still maintain a "strategic helium reserve" for godsake to keep our Zeppelins afloat in times of war.

 

[Spec ops Grunt]

Seriously?

 

[Armed012002]

Can you think of ANY federal regulation, bureau, agency, department, yadda yadda yadda .. that we have EVER gotten rid of?

Alcohol prohibition.

Um... War Department

 

[whalerman]

Nope. Once you lose freedoms you rarely get them back. This won't be an exception.

As far as a War Dept, you don't think we still have all those positions filled under different job titles?

And all we did about prohibition is tax it all. Instead of a few good families making the money, now the government rakes in all the bucks. The flow of booze never changed one way or the other.

 

[Zoogster]

Can you think of ANY federal regulation, bureau, agency, department, yadda yadda yadda .. that we have EVER gotten rid of?

Alcohol prohibition.

Actually it is funny you say that, because that is exactly where the ATF came from.

The "revenuers" tasked with enforcement of alcohol prohibition needed a new job when prohibition ended, and they were given one.


While I hate citing wiki, they seem to have it pretty well condensed in this portion:

The history of ATF can be subsequently traced to the time of the revenuers or "revenoors"[5] and the Bureau of Prohibition, which was formed as a unit of the Bureau of Internal Revenue in 1920, was made an independent agency within the Treasury Department in 1927, was transferred to the Justice Department in 1930, and became, briefly, a division of the FBI in 1933.

When the Volstead Act was repealed in December 1933, the Unit was transferred from the Department of Justice back to the Department of the Treasury where it became the Alcohol Tax Unit of the Bureau of Internal Revenue. Special Agent Eliot Ness and several members of The "Untouchables", who had worked for the Prohibition Bureau while the Volstead Act was still in force, were transferred to the ATU. In 1942, responsibility for enforcing federal firearms laws was given to the ATU.

In the early 1950s, the Bureau of Internal Revenue was renamed "Internal Revenue Service" (IRS),[6] and the ATU was given the additional responsibility of enforcing federal tobacco tax laws. At this time, the name of the ATU was changed to the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division (ATTD).

In 1968, with the passage of the Gun Control Act, the agency changed its name again, this time to the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Division of the IRS and first began to be referred to by the initials "ATF."

The alcohol prohibition enforcers, such as "The Untouchables" became the ATF.

 

[danprkr]

We just don't know how far the Supreme Court will extend the right.

We just don't know how far the Supreme Court will PROTECT the right.


There fixed it for you

Seriously it's not their right to extend or retract. It's their duty to protect it. Now they and a lot of folks don't see it that way, but that doesn't change the facts.

 

[mgkdrgn]

Seriously?

yes, seriously. And don't call me Shirley

http://www.blm.gov/nm/st/en/prog/energy/helium/federal_helium_program.html

 

[Caliper_Mi]

The premise for the underlying authority of the '34 NFA is even *more* vulnerable.

I agree. Especially when most of the weapons our modern military uses are NFA items. Sounds to me like a good way to overturn it on the "militia" clause.

For short term goals - I would be happy just with re-opening the MG registry... I want three round burst for under $1K! Work in reverse chronological order from there...

 

[Sevenfaces]

I agree, I would love to own a M1928 Thompson, without having to pay the price of a Lexus. I'd even buy a modern day "Replica"

I do confess however, that I would be concerned that if automatic weapons were once again freely offered for sale, their use in crime would increase. I am aware that none of the currently registered automatics have been linked to a crime, but there are numerous unregistered ones that have been.