Theoretical Resistance from MG owners to repeal 1986

[gezzer]

I'd wager that more than one SOT is sitting on piles of tubes for STENs, Suomis, etc., that are all ready to mill really quick and be registered for sale to civilians in case that happens.

So what, they are 10ft lengths of exhaust pipe. The tubes milled will be worth all of 50 bucks each.

Why do you think NFA dealers are sticking it to every one get real?

And again for you non-owners who think someone who owns 100K worth of mg care if they drop in value. Having 100K shows the guy already has money for toys that is all and I'll bet they will love to have them devalued if they can buy more guns.

All you folks who just think of the money do not really want NFA'S in the first place.

 

[Correia]

I agree with geezer. I think many of you don't know jack about the NFA community.

And I'm an NFA dealer.

Most of us would LOVE for our collections to plummet in value. We would take it in a heartbeat for the ability to get new MGs.

 

[crunker]

Some may lose some money, but I think that most will see the light and work to repeal the MG clause of the FOPA. I mean, we all want $300 MACs!

We should get to work on an inter-state petition. An actual piece of paper. Like we can get THR members from different parts of the country to get signatures from wherever they live, and then mail all of the seperate petitions to a trusted member and then to Washington.

 

[jlbraun]

" Some may lose some money, but I think that most will see the light and work to repeal the MG clause of the FOPA. I mean, we all want $300 MACs! "

Screw that! One FN SCAR-H, please! (drools)

 

[Third_Rail]

gezzer - I was pointing out that they're ready and willing to manufacture new MGs for civilians, that they're not the problem at all. I don't know why you got exactly the opposite of what I meant, though.

 

[mpmarty]

Maybe we're going about this all wrong. Perhaps we should be shouting that the Gays and Lesbians need full auto weapons to protect themselves.

 

[DoubleTapDrew]

I've never heard an NFA owner saying they'd be opposed to repealing the '86 ban even though a lot of them stand to lose a lot of money because I think the VAST majority are in it for the fun.
MG's aren't a very safe investment anyway even though their value has gone up. A swipe of a pen could make their value plummet, make them worthless (no transfers whatsoever), or a kB could destroy your $15k receiver. There was a discussion about it on ARFcom once and they said if you want a safe smart investment, get into real estate. If you want to play and just have fun, get MGs.
I'd love to be able to buy 10 NFA toys for $10K.

 

[Kenneth Lew]

I agree with geezer. I think many of you don't know jack about the NFA community.

And I'm an NFA dealer.

Most of us would LOVE for our collections to plummet in value. We would take it in a heartbeat for the ability to get new MGs.

I would have to disagree with you on that. A majority of the NFA people, I've met are not the types that are in it for fun, they are in it for the bragging rights that they are better than you and for the money.

Some examples:
I have yet to see the local guy with a collection of about 30 machineguns ever fire any. In a matter of fact, I've don't think any have been fired. Does he care about opening the registry? Nope.

A local old school Class 2 has tons of transferable sears, registered recievers in inventory that he made before the 86 ban, that he sells out little at a time. Does he care about the registry being opened up? Heck yeah, he will lost the built up equity in those little trinkets.

 

[kd7nqb]

Here is how I view it, if you purchased the gun before the ban so you payed a reasonable price and now you have an investment piece that looses theoretical value you might be very happy that you can now add to your collection without raiding the kids college fund. BUT if you just paid 15k for a gun and then it becomes a 1k gun you just LOST serious cash. So then you might be upset.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

Most of us would LOVE for our collections to plummet in value. We would take it in a heartbeat for the ability to get new MGs.

x2!

And while we are at it, let's kill the "sporting clause" of the '68 GCA so we can import some of those nice, cheap European MGs.

 

[gezzer]

gezzer - I was pointing out that they're ready and willing to manufacture new MGs for civilians, that they're not the problem at all. I don't know why you got exactly the opposite of what I meant, though.

Third rail sorry, I took it as a negative post against dealers as if they were trying to screw the buyers. My mistake.


For the others who don't see NFA shot much , if you are not an NFA owner you will not be invited to many NFA shoots. sorry we take enough crap at the clubs we shoot at, when a big shoot is organized it's lot's of time word of mouth months in advance.


For the others who come up with all scenarios of someone buying NFA at high prices wanting them to stay that high priced UNLESS you personally bought one you know nothing and your post easily show it. Don't think for the NFA shooter/collector you are not one, you may be one of the investment jerks who are never invited anywhere.

 

[ctdonath]

Can you see current MG owners fighting this bill in order to protect the value of their investments?

No. The question is frequently posed on MG boards. The vast majority of MG owners would be ecstatic to see 922(o) disappear.

Yes there are some in it for the money or for bragging rights. They are few.

Methinks the value would not drop as much as most would suspect, as 20 years' passage is moving many/most them from expensive tools/toys firmly into historical artifacts anyway. Example: The currently limited number of HK MP5s would remain limited, as (IIRC) HK has stopped making 'em.

 

[DoubleTapDrew]

The currently limited number of HK MP5s would remain limited, as (IIRC) HK has stopped making 'em.

Yeah but how many thousands were made between 1986 and now? SWAT teams seem to have plenty and are going to M4 weapons so those could be up for sale
I was reading at some site (I think it was fas.org) that the M249 SAWs cost about $7000. Spendy for a MG, but better than the $50k or so for the last transferrable one I saw for sale.

 

[arthurcw]

I've only had one experience with an NFA owner. He was at a range I frequent and couldn't wait to let people shoot his Tommy Gun.

The Tommy Gun owner shared some old stories about NFA guns. His friend told me about how he felt the greatest irony that he owned several German WW2 weapons. He's Jewish and he was proud to own guns originally designed to help wipe him from the face of the Earth.

After I went back to my lane, the owner of the Tommy came to me and said, "Hey, If you you'd like to shoot it, you can go up to the counter and buy some ammo. Would you like to try?"

The only thing I could think was, "Bear? Woods? Do the math! HELL YEAH!"

The one thing I came away from that meeting with (ok, besides a deep desire to own a Tommy Gun!) was that these guys were in this for the sheer fun of the sport and the more people they could get into it, the better.

So aside from a few people who judge their p#ckers by the worth of their collections, I think 99.99% of the owners will be throwing parties if new guns are allowed into the registry.

 

[wacki]

Even Bush said he would reauthorize the '94 ban if put on his desk.

um...... didn't he let it expire?

 

[Autolycus]

No it expired on its own.

 

[Keith Wheeler]

I believe that the number would be small. Very small.

And they would probably be visited by other collectors...

Honestly, I think only a few people would make such noise. The guys I know with $40,000+ MG42s would give anything to be able to build up one of the Yugo copy parts kit as a registered MG, and then blast away on it and save the rare one. Just because new ones will be made doesn't mean anyone's going to make new WWII MG42s, or original Thompsons, or....the true collectors pieces will still be that.

The cheap stuff? MACs, Stens, Uzis, M16s (well, cheaper)...the guys who buy those things would go nuts. I know personally I'd file a Form 1 on every semi I've got, even if I didn't convert it over.

On top of the correct wording "allowing law enforcement appropriate control of fully automatic weapons" or whatever PC bogousity is necessary....remember:

Show 'em the money.

If today the '86 ban was gone, just how insanely wonderful would the ATF's revenue look like? I mean I'd file upwards to 10 form 1s right away....and I'm just a poor old Arkansas hillbilly. We're talking an instant "win the lottery" for those guys, with one stroke of the legislative pen.

While politicos hate a mean old pro-gun sound bite, don't matter if it's a "tax and spend" demo or a "don't tax and spend more" repub, the $mell of dollar$ wake$ 'em up every time.

We want the '86 ban to go away? Show 'em the money.


On another note:

He's Jewish and he was proud to own guns originally designed to help wipe him from the face of the Earth.

I own a semi auto MG42. One thing about them Nazis. They're just like Egyptians, Canaanites, (ancient) Greeks, Romans....they're all gone. We're still here.

 

[Cacique500]

I'm a SMG owner and I'd love to see it go away. The value of my SMG would plummet overnight...but that would be a price I'd be willing to pay (and lose). As others have said, if you're buying MG's for investment you're in it for the wrong reason.

I think the number of guys that have major $$$$$ sunk into MG's is fairly small and I would think that most of them could soak up the loss. Mike Dillon comes to mind...

 

[ctdonath]

Just because new ones will be made doesn't mean anyone's going to make new WWII MG42s, or original Thompsons, or....the true collectors pieces will still be that.

That's what I was getting at.

Sure HK made MP5s after '86 ... but nowhere near as many as they would have if not for 922(o).

I might be able to buy a new M4 finally ... but nobody is making Vietnam-era in-box "with original wad still in chamber" (or whatever the line is) M16s.

50-year-old Tommyguns are still 50-year-old Tommyguns. Nobody can make more.

Methinks much of the value of MGs is now more in the historical/collectible realm than in the "yes I'd pay $15,000 for a real M16 for self/home/homeland defense" category.

 

[Glockfan.45]

Would I lose 50k equity in my home if I could buy another for 1k? You bet I would. If that were to happen put me down for a AKS74U, a Glock 18, and the new M60 E4 . Oh and if Uncle Sam is extra nice this year on me tax refund I think a call to Dillon (minigun) would be in order.

 

[Chipperman]

I have never met any NFA owners that would not love to have the ban repealed. That includes myself.

I'd gladly have my MP5 worth only $1k if it meant I could afford to get others. I never intend to sell my machine guns anyway, so the "value" is really meaningless to me anyway.