What led to the enactment of the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986?

Status
Not open for further replies.
There was a case on the East Coast were potentially terrorists were thinking of a gun attack and didn't carry it out as they couldn't buy full autos at the store. If the guns were easily available, then some nut would use them

I don’t consider complying with NFA as “easily available.” Or are you referring to a scenario where NFA is repealed and full auto is completely unregulated?
 
If they were unregulated, these terrorists would have used them. I think it would be very hard to justify their open purchase to the general public in today's world.
 
Open the registry and a bad incident takes down everything auto and semi auto.
This statement is troubling.

So you are OK with banning one class of weapons, because a misuse of an example of that class might lead to the banning of other classes? So then we should ban semiautos, because the misuse of a semiauto might lead to a ban of bolt action rifles? This makes no sense.

If the guns were easily available, then some nut would use them.
I wouldn't say that machine guns were "easily available" pre-FOPA. I remember when buying my first FA, a Thonpson, in 1975, having to sit down with the Chief of Police (the head honcho) and explain to him why I "needed" such a weapon. Of course he did his own background check and assured himself that I had a squeaky-clean record. Then after I got his OK, there were the fingerprints, the photographs, the $200 tax, the FBI check, and the long wait.

Opening the registry would not deregulate machine guns. It would just restore matters to the way they were prior to FOPA. The main effect would be that prices would again be somewhat reasonable.

I don't understand the defeatist attitude on this board regarding machine guns.

This is like saying,"If guns (any kind of guns) were easily available, then some nut would use them." Sure. This is a classic antigun meme. But we all know that society can never be 100% risk-free.
 
..... There was a case on the East Coast were potentially terrorists were thinking of a gun attack and didn't carry it out as they couldn't buy full autos at the store. If the guns were easily available, then some nut would use them. Imagine the fallout if the Las Vegas guy had a legit SAW machine. The moral panic would seize them and I'd bet a contagion effect that would, this time, ban the semis also........

While I would not wish to seem to encourage terrorists, or terrorism, IMHO, those rerrorists were stupid. They could pull off a effective attack with most any cheapie Mforgery available, or many other similar arms.
I'm not doubting the story, but I would like to know what, if anything, became of that plot. Did the F. B. I. intervene and stop it? Did they choose another means to pull off the attack?
 
IIRC, the FBI caught them trying to make bombs and they mentioned the full auto plan that fell through. They weren’t the smartest around.
 
I am just being practical about the prospects of loosening regulation on full autos and in today’s world of moral panic what would happen with misuse.
 
So you are OK with banning one class of weapons, because a misuse of an example of that class might lead to the banning of other classes? So then we should ban semiautos, because the misuse of a semiauto might lead to a ban of bolt action rifles? This makes no sense.
You're right, it doesn't and I don't see how you got that summation out of the comment you quoted as responding to. Nowhere in the quote, nor in this thread did GEM state that he was OK with banning any classes of weapons. What he did was point out that there are potential dangers in reopening the registry--more accurately characterized as "unbanning" a class of weapons. Not that anyone really needs to be overly concerned about those dangers because in our current state of affairs there is effectively zero chance of the registry being reopened.
Opening the registry would not deregulate machine guns. It would just restore matters to the way they were prior to FOPA. The main effect would be that prices would again be somewhat reasonable.
Correct. The antis are not so stupid that they would fail to understand the main effect; and it is an effect that they would obviously be 100% against. Which is why the idea that antis could be convinced that reopening the registry is in their interest is unrealistic in the extreme.
I don't understand the defeatist attitude on this board regarding machine guns.
There's defeatism and there's realism. Defeatism says there's no point in doing anything--all is lost. Realism correctly notes that resources are not unlimited and points out that it doesn't make sense to waste them try to achieve what is effectively impossible in the current climate. There may be a time when it makes sense to make a concerted effort towards reopening the registry--one way we will know that we are getting close to that time will be the passage of a bill similar to the HPA.
 
I am just being practical about the prospects of loosening regulation on full autos and in today’s world of moral panic what would happen with misuse.

I'm not sure that simply reopening the registry would do that--after all $200 tax stamp, background checks,laws against transporting them across state lines without permission, etc. If you zapped the NFA in its entirety, then maybe or is your argument that cheaper full autos would be more likely to be used because the price will drop. We haven't seen terrorists using suppressors, SBR's, nor AOW's despite no registry. In a similar fashion, numerous select fire AR's can be obtained in Mexico via drug dealers--complements of Uncle Sam's military assistance package and deserters from the Mexican police and army. Some parts kits available with no restrictions whatsoever can be assembled fairly easily to FA with minor mechanical knowledge and tools and parts. I'm sure by reading tech manuals, guides, etc. there are other workarounds. In some cases, it is harder to make them function in semi than the original full auto or select fire.

Terrorists with the proper clean record right now could get AOW's, explosives, even full auto, etc. Heck, you can even buy a cannon and black powder enough to shell Ft. Sumpter again with money and the proper permits. There are multiple ways to commit mass mayhem that does not need to be discussed on a forum. Heck, two snipers in a car scared a whole region a few years back even with semi-auto.

The truth is that full auto is marginally useful outside of military type applications such as suppressive fire. A high rate of cycling does not really improve accuracy above semi-auto and wastes a lot of ammo. For the hobbyists, it doesn't treat the brass kindly and unless someone else is paying for it, it is expensive fireworks.
 
The truth is that full auto is marginally useful outside of military type applications such as suppressive fire. A high rate of cycling does not really improve accuracy above semi-auto and wastes a lot of ammo. For the hobbyists, it doesn't treat the brass kindly and unless someone else is paying for it, it is expensive fireworks.
And this is exactly what the general public does not realize. Someone bent on mass murder would be as well served by a modern semiautomatic as by a machine gun. It doesn't make sense to carve out a niche for banning and tight regulation, based on the number of rounds fired per trigger pull. In a rational world, the entire NFA would be re-examined. It's a relic of 1934.
 
The general public does not care about gun choir arguments. Folks are so embedded in the choir that they have no conceptualization of what would be a convincing argument.

A person who is favor of gun control will read that a semi is as good as a full auto. Thus, will they choose then to free up the full autos or ban both?

Watch a carbine competition and see how fast semis shoot, that will not reassure fearful people that they should be replaced by even faster guns.

If you haven't noticed state bans against higher capacity guns are winning and not losing in several places and the courts. That's a hint and take the blinders off looking at pragmatic issues.

The best step is to negate the state bans - the best chance for that was SCOTUS and that flopped (thanks Anthony). Another is having Congress stop state bans, there was such legislation proposed. Look what happened to the HPA and reciprocity. The cowards of the GOP folded (yes, there were good reasons OR they didn't really support it - guess).

Now, why don't terrorists use SBRs and suppressors - they don't need them to do what they want. Those have no real impact. A couple of full autos in a Las Vegas like venue and watch the bans. You think Donald is going to save you. Guess again.
 
A person who is favor of gun control will read that a semi is as good as a full auto. Thus, will they choose then to free up the full autos or ban both?
That's really the crux of the whole issue. Conceptually, they should be treated the same.

But, for practical reasons, a complete ban is off the table. There are just too many semiautomatics to ban. I don't care what laws are passed, they're never going to get rid of them. At most, they'll drive them underground. And, there's this: if they ban semiautomatics, people might as well turn them into full automatics, since the penalty would be the same either way. Make no mistake -- there would be millions of new lawbreakers. The NFA would become a laughable asterisk.

Even if they brought semiautomatics under the NFA, instead of completely banning them, it wouldn't be administrable, unless they expanded the ATF by at least a factor of ten. Again, that isn't going to happen. (Sen. Feinstein proposed such a scheme in the wake of Sandy Hook, and was quickly disabused of the notion.)

The antis have to come to the realization that their "gun problem" is intractable. Once they do so, then we can talk seriously with them.

Pre-FOPA, the NFA was an important safety valve. People that really wanted a machine gun had a legal avenue to obtain one. That's still true, but only for people with a lot of disposable money. I'll bet that many more illegal machine guns have been created post-FOPA than before. Of course this is hard to quantify because it's all underground.
 
Last edited:
But, for practical reasons, a complete ban is off the table. There are just too many semiautomatics to ban. I don't care what laws are passed, they're never going to get rid of them.

Question; How do you eat an elephant?

Answer; One bite at a time.


At most, they'll drive them underground.

As a anti-gun person that is ok with me. Driving them underground will cause owners to stop shooting them and teaching their children about them.

Since I control the school system I will continue to preach my anti-gun agenda. Since children generally trust adults and are honest it will not be very hard to learn from them whose parents own guns.

I will have the police conduct highly publicized raids on homeowners seizing huge arsenals of guns and ammunition. I will be sure the media is there to broadcast the homeowners being led out in handcuffs.

Since it will not be possible to legally shoot these guns and to discuss them openly for fear of being overheard the gun passing guns down to the next generation will end. After the owner dies his children can turn the guns and ammo over to the authorities for destruction.

It will take a generation or so to get rid of them but I am patient and know changing attitudes and values take time.


And, there's this: if they ban semiautomatics, people might as well turn them into full automatics, since the penalty would be the same either way. Make no mistake -- there would be millions of new lawbreakers.

Interesting theory. Since I don't know how to convert my firearms to full-auto or which guns it can even be done on I would have to have someone do the work for me. So what you are proposing is a underground, black market, gunsmithing business.

But the real problem with your statement is what advantage does owning a full-auto firearm over a semi-automatic one? Even the Army does not teach full-auto shooting anymore and my active duty Army Son tells me all of their qualification is done semi-auto.


The antis have to come to the realization that their "gun problem" is intractable. Once they do so, then we can talk seriously with them.

Get back with us when you figure out how to do that.
 
Last edited:
Politics is always a compromise.

My question, and fear, is what would we have to give up in order to repeal Hughes?

Would repealing Hughes benefit enough shooters to justify whast we gave up?

Remember, we gained a helluva lot more in FOPA than we lost. I would not be willing to give up all that we gained in FOPA just to get Hughes repealed.
 
My question, and fear, is what would we have to give up in order to repeal Hughes?
Take a page from the antigunners' playbook. Propose a whole raft of pro-gun things, including nationwide concealed carry, deregulating suppressors and SBR's, and repealing Hughes. Then, your "compromise" is settling for less than 100% of what you want. For example, have a 10-year open "window" for the MG registry, after which it would close again. (Sort of a reverse "sunset" clause.) Negotiating tactics are only limited by your imagination.
 
Take a page from the antigunners' playbook. Propose a whole raft of pro-gun things, including nationwide concealed carry, deregulating suppressors and SBR's, and repealing Hughes. Then, your "compromise" is settling for less than 100% of what you want. For example, have a 10-year open "window" for the MG registry, after which it would close again. (Sort of a reverse "sunset" clause.) Negotiating tactics are only limited by your imagination.

The antidote for the poison pill.
 
As a anti-gun person that is ok with me. Driving them underground will cause owners to stop shooting them and teaching their children about them.

Since I control the school system I will continue to preach my anti-gun agenda. Since children generally trust adults and are honest it will not be very hard to learn from them whose parents own guns.

I will have the police conduct highly publicized raids on homeowners seizing huge arsenals of guns and ammunition. I will be sure the media is there to broadcast the homeowners being led out in handcuffs.

Since it will not be possible to legal shoot these guns and to discuss them openly for fear of being overheard the gun passing guns down to the next generation will end. After the owner dies his children can turn the guns and ammo over to the authorities for destruction.

It will take a generation or so to get rid of them but I am patient and know changing attitudes and values take time.
Whenever I see this line of reasoning, I think of the counterexample of the island of Crete. The Cretans have always had a traditional gun culture, in some ways comparable to that in the U.S. There are plenty of guns there that were left over from WW2, and more that have arrived more recently. Now, bear in mind that Greece as a whole has some rather draconian gun laws. Only shotguns are allowed for hunting, pistol permits are extremely hard to get, and rifles and machine guns are banned completely. The Cretans ignore these laws with impunity. Even the local police turn a blind eye to violations. Recently, the government deputy minister of health, a Cretan, was videotaped openly firing his unlicensed pistol into the air during a holiday celebration. He made no apology, nor was one expected.

You can't fight the ingrained culture, and the U.S. certainly has an ingrained gun culture. It's the antis who are being unrealistic if they think they can negate this. And of course we have the great example of alcohol Prohibition. Not only was it a failure as a social experiment, but it had collateral effects, such as the rise of organized crime, that we are still feeling today. A gun ban would be even worse than Prohibition regarding these collateral effects.
 
Whenever I see this line of reasoning, I think of the counterexample of the island of Crete. The Cretans have always had a traditional gun culture, in some ways comparable to that in the U.S. There are plenty of guns there that were left over from WW2, and more that have arrived more recently. Now, bear in mind that Greece as a whole has some rather draconian gun laws. Only shotguns are allowed for hunting, pistol permits are extremely hard to get, and rifles and machine guns are banned completely. The Cretans ignore these laws with impunity. Even the local police turn a blind eye to violations. Recently, the government deputy minister of health, a Cretan, was videotaped openly firing his unlicensed pistol into the air during a holiday celebration. He made no apology, nor was one expected.

You can't fight the ingrained culture, and the U.S. certainly has an ingrained gun culture. It's the antis who are being unrealistic if they think they can negate this. And of course we have the great example of alcohol Prohibition. Not only was it a failure as a social experiment, but it had collateral effects, such as the rise of organized crime, that we are still feeling today. A gun ban would be even worse than Prohibition regarding these collateral effects.

Realistic or not, I like the way you think.
 
If you drive them underground, they are useless except for the 'revolution'. You can't compete with them, you can't hunt with them, you can't use them for self-defense. You will have risk in your house or land, if for example you have a fire, your child babbles to some other child, your spouse goes after you in a divorce.

The greatest threat is the creeping state bans at the moment. Bans make them useless except for hiding them and then what. You going to be an illicit dealer?

If you don't think that rampages cannot generate a culture change - check out this:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...s-call-for-tougher-firearm-laws-idUSKCN1LZ18Z

A strategy to make owning the higher cap weapons socially inappropriate will be like the social disapproval of smoking. So you think you are Zorba the Greek, good for you. Useless weapons in a vinyl tube.

A cultural message for the ownership of the higher cap weapons is something needed. What is it?

Make the self-defense case? Well, how many forum types babble that 5 is enough and mock someone who carries an extra mag as a nut? You fall into the trap of supporting Double Barrel Joe Biden. Don't need a full auto for that?

Perhaps, defense against tyranny? Heller focused on self-defense. Folks mock the possibility of defense against tyranny or don't really understand where tyranny would come from in the USA (I'll pass on that).

I'm sorry - I have not seen an argument that would sway the legislatures or most of the public to allow easy access to fully auto guns.
 
I'm sorry - I have not seen an argument that would sway the legislatures or most of the public to allow easy access to fully auto guns.

That's because there isn't one. That's what makes the Hughes amendment so sad, because it will never be repealed. One battle permanently lost for the 2nd Amendment.
 
Negotiating tactics are only limited by your imagination.
That's true, as long as you don't mind if people stop taking you seriously. If you want to be taken seriously, you have to make reasonable proposals.

Next time you're at a gun show, try the "only limit is your imagination" approach to negotiating prices and see how far it gets you. :D
That's because there isn't one. That's what makes the Hughes amendment so sad, because it will never be repealed. One battle permanently lost for the 2nd Amendment.
I am more optimistic than that. I think that someday, there may come a time when the Hughes amendment can be repealed. But not the way things currently are.
 
That's true, as long as you don't mind if people stop taking you seriously. If you want to be taken seriously, you have to make reasonable proposals.

These are the tactics the antis use and it seems to be pretty effective at least in the crazy states. The question is, should the pro-gun community use those same type of tactics to counteract the antis or is there a better way?
 
What trades do you propose?

Ok, I propose a federal law mandating background checks on all sales including private. In return, all states must recognize carry permits from any state, even if you don’t live in that state.

I propose that all these sales be kept recorded at the Federal level. In return, the registry is opened up.

I propose that all state laws on AR features be voided (pistol grips, flash suppressors, the thing that goes up) along with any laws that outright ban such semi rifles. In return, no mag can hold more than twelve rounds, no grandfathered mags.

These are hypothetical compromises.
Would you take them?

How about a complete lifting of all bans in exchange for Medicare for all?
 
... I think that someday, there may come a time when the Hughes amendment can be repealed. But not the way things currently are.
I agree.
Sadly, both parties have little interest in meeting in the middle on anything. Crossover votes by a member are seen as treasonous by his party and few are willing to stick their neck out.

The best hope for Second Amendment rights lies with the judiciary. While a Senator or Representative may be terrified to vote to repeal the NFA/GCA/Hughes/etc...he'll have no problem with a strict originalist judicial nominee.
 
I have a feeling that the majority of machine gun owners wouldn’t want the Hughes Amendment repealed. No one wants to see their investments tank.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top