Would you be OK with ending NFA?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • In favor of ending NFA or not?

    • Yes, end NFA

      Votes: 148 92.5%
    • No, keep NFA

      Votes: 12 7.5%

    • Total voters
      160

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,877
    As a matter of Conservative/ Libertarian theory , absolutely get rid of ir.

    As matter of realpolitik , we need to think it through, and be subtle .

    A flatout abolishing of NFA would trigger massive legislative backlash . You would quickly see Banning ( of at least FA, up to copying of currenr C III definitions ) at the state level, in most states .

    The under the radar version to get us a buncha improvement :

    Eliminate , or at least have major exceptions to Hughes .

    Speed up Stamp process.

    Eliminate Form 20

    Tweak the Regs to eliminate all the bs technical triggering of NFA status .
     

    jrumann59

    DILLIGAF
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 17, 2011
    14,024
    I am all for making NFA go bye-bye. If it had to stay for somethings, the whole ban on new "MG" would have to go. Also if it had to stay, the length of the background check would need to come down, and you should get a 50 state recognized federal CCW license out of it. The only thing that takes longer to investigate are security clearances.
     

    Mike OTDP

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 12, 2008
    3,318
    You know before the Obama runs on guns and suppressors, the average wait was about 3 months in the pre 2010 days.

    No, it wasn't. I did my first NFA transfer in 1998, have done nine since then with two in the pipeline right now. It's run 8-11 months consistently. There was a brief interval in the 2000s where it got down to 4-6, but that was an aberration.
     

    Mike OTDP

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 12, 2008
    3,318
    As a matter of Conservative/ Libertarian theory , absolutely get rid of ir.

    As matter of realpolitik , we need to think it through, and be subtle .

    A flatout abolishing of NFA would trigger massive legislative backlash . You would quickly see Banning ( of at least FA, up to copying of currenr C III definitions ) at the state level, in most states .

    The under the radar version to get us a buncha improvement :

    Eliminate , or at least have major exceptions to Hughes .

    Speed up Stamp process.

    Eliminate Form 20

    Tweak the Regs to eliminate all the bs technical triggering of NFA status .

    Agree 100%. Also, any discussion of NFA items needs to start pulling apart MGs, suppressors, and SBR/SBS.

    SBR/SBS has become a moot point. The whole arm brace business has knocked the definition into a cocked hat.

    Suppressors have become mainstream. Twenty years ago, getting a threaded barrel was a PITA involving custom machine work. Today, the only question is whether or not the factory offers it as a standard option...and they usually do.

    MGs...those are the sticking point.

    What I'd do were I running ATF:

    1. Accept that the NFA transfer times are a ticking legal time bomb. There's too much capital tied up, the Government is vulnerable to a 5th Amendment Takings Clause suit. Therefore we stop running all NFA transfers through the full mill. The laws require that the transferee provide fingerprints, they do not require us to run them. So we prioritize...MG>DD>AOW>Suppressor>SBS>SBR, and First time buyer>hasn't bought in a while>has done this recently. Probably have a point system, perhaps with cost as a third factor (Cheap>costly, because people with $25K for a Thompson don't rob banks...they own them). Whatever we can't run in a timely manner goes over to NICS. Get transfer times under 60 days...before the courts order us to get it below 30.

    2. Press Congress to adjust the definitions...using NICS as a major rationale. The NFA '34 transfer background check works, you can count the number of crimes committed with a legally owned NFA item on the fingers of one hand. NICS should be as accurate...and if it isn't, that needs to be addressed separately. The political cost of making sure NICS gets fed all the data is nil. Ideally, move suppressors and SBS/SBR to a NICS check as standard. Point out that a "silencer" isn't...it's a "less loud-ener". Which makes a firearm significantly harder to conceal.

    3. Press for a Machinegun Market Destruction Act. Repeal 922(o), replace it with a MG manufacturing tax of $3,000...entailed for the establishment of safe MG shooting facilities. You sell this to the anti-gun people by pointing out that you're killing MGs as an investment...and taking the market back to the pre-1986 days when only a handful of hobbyists were interested.
     

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,877
    And the vertical foregrip thing, and the certain styles of pocket holster thing , and everything retroactively declared AOW .
     

    IMBLITZVT

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 20, 2009
    3,799
    Catonsville, MD
    I am going to be flat out unpopular for saying this, but NFA should stand. Hughs amendment done away with and everything on the NFA except machine guns and destructive devices should be removed from the NFA.

    That’s about the only thing to to me makes sense to have more controls over them than a regular pistol or rifle. I have no issues with someone owning a rocket launcher or machine gun. Yes, I think there should be a bit more of a hoop to jump through, more waiting, etc.

    If MGs and destructive devices really were over the counter purchases they would start being used in crimes and they would cause a lot more havoc then a regular gun would. NFA controls and they aren’t or are very rarely.

    I appreciate the honestly. Please tell me the largest mass shooting pre NFA.... Saint Valentines massacre? 6 Dead... Seriously I don't know of more, do you?

    Modern US times. The shootout in CA that caused the 94 AWB. Those two guys with multiple MGs killed no one.

    The Virginia Tech shooting killed 32, with a 9mm and 22LR pistol.

    We can move to lots of examples... however you are left with this in the end. Bad guys will get bad guns. We see this from the AK47s used in France at Charlie Hebdo where 12 where killed. You can't stop this. Machine guns are most effective in wounding mass of people, not necessarily killing them. Yes its true, more of anything will end with more in use in crime. This is the same logic behind a total gun ban.

    That all said, what is the cost of removing the point of 2A. The point is to have Civilians able to stand with or against Government forces. You can't do this without MGs. So how much is 2A worth to you? Yes, there is a cost to freedom, there is no doubt. However if you believe in 2A, then you should see that it protect the M16 above every other gun currently made including the AR15. Places like Switzerland don't see an issue with lots of MGs in the house holds.

    We could probably drop the death rate of car accidents to less than a quarter of what it is now by reducing all speed limits to 25MPH or less. It would save hundreds of thousands of lives... would we be for it? Is the cost of driving a snails pace worth it?

    No, it wasn't. I did my first NFA transfer in 1998, have done nine since then with two in the pipeline right now. It's run 8-11 months consistently. There was a brief interval in the 2000s where it got down to 4-6, but that was an aberration.

    That 3-4 Month aberration was several years long... so its not that it can't be done.

    Agree 100%. Also, any discussion of NFA items needs to start pulling apart MGs, suppressors, and SBR/SBS.

    Why? If we are going to have stupid gun laws, why do some get off the hook? Surely I agree but seriously once we deem some "worse" than others... well it we start making the others sides point for them.

    If it were not for the NFA, MGs would be main stream. All AR15 would be M16s and FA. This would be no big deal. This idea that FA and semi auto are that much different is quickly dying. You can already see that in the anti-gunners message. Divide and conquer is all it is.

    Those against us don't understand or care about the difference between a M16, AR15, Garand, Mauser...etc. They try and pick one at a time off but don't be fooled, there only goal is to get them all!
     

    gtodave

    Member
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 14, 2007
    14,159
    Mt Airy
    The reason I brought this up (as I hinted towards earlier), is a thought I've had for a while. While I understand what "Shall not be infringed" means, the reality is that we are being battered with new restrictions, red tape, and threats like never before, and as much as I hate to say it, Red Flag laws are coming, and Universal background checks are coming. But we all know that NONE of these will prevent anything bad from happening. So, in the spirit of ACTUAL compromise (vs one side giving more and more as we have been for ~80 years), my solution to attempting to stop bad people from getting guns, while offering something to the other side, would be to submit to a more comprehensive, thorough background check/gun owners qualification license. This would be for a first-time buyer, and subsequent purchases would be more like the NICS we know now. Without getting in to the minutia of this trade off (for fear of going down the rabbit hole); as I mentioned before, what we would gain is the removal of Haynes, GCA 68, and NFA 34. MG's, and silencers, SBRs would be over the counter transactions like any other. Also, there would be no registry or record of sale nation-wide.

    But, as mentioned, it is pretty much a pipe dream. I was just curious if the NFA aspect would even have the support of gun owners, and from this small subset, it looks like it might. Thanks for indulging me :thumbsup:
     

    randomuser

    Ultimate Member
    Nov 12, 2018
    5,774
    Baltimore County
    The reason I brought this up (as I hinted towards earlier), is a thought I've had for a while. While I understand what "Shall not be infringed" means, the reality is that we are being battered with new restrictions, red tape, and threats like never before, and as much as I hate to say it, Red Flag laws are coming, and Universal background checks are coming. But we all know that NONE of these will prevent anything bad from happening. So, in the spirit of ACTUAL compromise (vs one side giving more and more as we have been for ~80 years), my solution to attempting to stop bad people from getting guns, while offering something to the other side, would be to submit to a more comprehensive, thorough background check/gun owners qualification license. This would be for a first-time buyer, and subsequent purchases would be more like the NICS we know now. Without getting in to the minutia of this trade off (for fear of going down the rabbit hole); as I mentioned before, what we would gain is the removal of Haynes, GCA 68, and NFA 34. MG's, and silencers, SBRs would be over the counter transactions like any other. Also, there would be no registry or record of sale nation-wide.

    But, as mentioned, it is pretty much a pipe dream. I was just curious if the NFA aspect would even have the support of gun owners, and from this small subset, it looks like it might. Thanks for indulging me :thumbsup:


    Every time there is a compromise and it doesn't work (it never will cause criminals) they say that it's not enough, so they have to do more when the inevitable criminal does what criminals do. The end result is what this guy says>>>

    This guy might be more vocal than most, but there are plenty who are not vocal would agree with him. Remember, he did get elected.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taNM4n7e1a0
     

    teratos

    My hair is amazing
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 22, 2009
    59,775
    Bel Air
    Make gun control really tight, and you will see more homemade machine guns. With many designs full auto is much easier than semi. The law of unintended consequences.
     

    randomuser

    Ultimate Member
    Nov 12, 2018
    5,774
    Baltimore County
    Let's also not forget, the people in charge of the gun control law making and enforcement are the same group who protected epstein and ran the mueller investigation.....I could go on.

    Let's limit what they are allowed to screw up if anything, not give them more rope.
     

    IMBLITZVT

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 20, 2009
    3,799
    Catonsville, MD
    .... So, in the spirit of ACTUAL compromise (vs one side giving more and more as we have been for ~80 years), my solution to attempting to stop bad people from getting guns, while offering something to the other side, would be to submit to a more comprehensive, thorough background check/gun owners qualification license. This would be for a first-time buyer, and subsequent purchases would be more like the NICS we know now. Without getting in to the minutia of this trade off (for fear of going down the rabbit hole); as I mentioned before, what we would gain is the removal of Haynes, GCA 68, and NFA 34. MG's, and silencers, SBRs would be over the counter transactions like any other. Also, there would be no registry or record of sale nation-wide.

    But, as mentioned, it is pretty much a pipe dream. I was just curious if the NFA aspect would even have the support of gun owners, and from this small subset, it looks like it might. Thanks for indulging me :thumbsup:

    Well I don't think many of us are truly black and white on an issue. For example, I think the one place the US Government not only can but has a duty to get involved with guns is importation of Firearms into the US. Dumping cheap AKs into the US would kill the AR market...etc. I think imports of non-historic (say 50 years or older) should face a very stiff import tariff. I feel the same with ammo. We should make sure that the US market in these vital pieces of American freedom does not get undercut and exported to China. In the next war we are going to have to import guns and bullets from China to shoot Chinese Soldier with.... how is that going to work out for us.

    Back to what you are saying, I am sure most of us would support "less" infringement in an effort to actually help stop bad people from getting guns easy. Note the easy part of this as they will still get them. That said a License can't be part of it. You can not license a freedom. However I do have less of an objection to some verification that you are a Citizen and legally able to buy a gun.

    So I would propose this. Decide what level of proof you need to vote. You now have your gun check. Same system. Less criminals voting and buying guns. Less straw purchases and less dead people voting. I think the right to vote is no less important than voting, however I will accept the same level of scrutiny. I will accept this same level of scrutiny every time I buy a gun and every time I vote... I really do feel this is a fair offer and helps underline the importance of keeping bad people away from owning guns or voting for our leaders!
     

    chrisflhtc

    Active Member
    Jan 28, 2010
    980
    Hagerstown
    :thumbsup:Yes
    from IMBLITZVT "So I would propose this. Decide what level of proof you need to vote. You now have your gun check. Same system. Less criminals voting and buying guns. Less straw purchases and less dead people voting. I think the right to vote is no less important than voting, however I will accept the same level of scrutiny. I will accept this same level of scrutiny every time I buy a gun and every time I vote... I really do feel this is a fair offer and helps underline the importance of keeping bad people away from owning guns or voting for our leaders!"
     

    randomuser

    Ultimate Member
    Nov 12, 2018
    5,774
    Baltimore County
    :thumbsup:Yes
    from IMBLITZVT "So I would propose this. Decide what level of proof you need to vote. You now have your gun check. Same system. Less criminals voting and buying guns. Less straw purchases and less dead people voting. I think the right to vote is no less important than voting, however I will accept the same level of scrutiny. I will accept this same level of scrutiny every time I buy a gun and every time I vote... I really do feel this is a fair offer and helps underline the importance of keeping bad people away from owning guns or voting for our leaders!"

    This is legit.
    This is fair.
    This in their mind is not a compromise.
    This would in their mind be them giving in and they dont do that.
    Their side won't give up an infringement.
    Only our side gives up rights.
    I dont like it at all (that's why I'm a fan of people building as many 80% as they can. I don't have hql because I refuse)
    But its the way it is.
     

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,877
    And we can just as vigorously put foreward that kow towing to them lets them win, and encourages them to esculate against us .

    When I was exercising my Pre- October strategy in '13 , ( at panic pricing) no FFL refused my $$ , and I have purchased a fair amount of C&R from dlrs since
     

    Shamr0ck

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 6, 2011
    2,505
    Frederick
    While I understand why you may not... is that not letting them other side win. After all, the idea was not to get your fingerprints... it was to get you to stop buying pistols...



    while I don’t have my HQL, I spend quite a bit with my dealers of choice on accessories, components, ammo, rifles and optics. I don’t think they mind the shift of margin dollars from one Product to another.

    Plus, since I’ve little self control, not having an hql has saved me plenty as those STIs BBP keeps posting are my kryptonite.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     

    huesmann

    n00b
    Mar 23, 2012
    1,927
    Silver Spring, MD
    The NFA established a registry and tax for certain items, to include MG's.

    The Hughes Amendment closed the registry for new civilian legal MG's.
    This. It's the Hughes Amendment of FOPA that's jacked up the prices on civilian owned machine guns to the thousands of dollars range, by restricting the supply. NFA is just a $200 tax. I'd be OK keeping NFA in place if Hughes/FOPA went away.
     

    solarpower44

    Active Member
    Feb 2, 2016
    220
    Glenelg MD
    Ending NFA for MGs is not going to happen. So don't waste your time there.
    But why not start something easier to achieve that is ending NFA for suppressors!
    How the hell did suppressors became NFA items are beyond my comprehension.
     

    IMBLITZVT

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 20, 2009
    3,799
    Catonsville, MD
    Ending NFA for MGs is not going to happen. So don't waste your time there.
    But why not start something easier to achieve that is ending NFA for suppressors!
    How the hell did suppressors became NFA items are beyond my comprehension.

    Why does the item you want deserve special consideration and not the item I want.

    My MG is protected by 2A as something that the government has no right to infringe. Its surely the ARM in the right to keep and bear Arms. However it does not say your quiet Arm. So I think MGs should come out and Suppressors should stay in. After all, why would you ever want a muffled gun? Just like Cars, the only reason to make them quiet is if you are an assassin or hitman and you want to drive a quiet car to shoot your quiet gun and kill innocent people by the hundreds and thousands! :rolleyes: :sad20:

    I am all for removing everything and anything from the NFA for average citizens. Less infringements of our rights is always better. I think we saw the movement to get suppressors removed from the NFA, end the day of the Vegas shooting. Its dead for now... I think they would be more of a chance of getting another amnesty for all WWII MGs... then suppressors right now and I don't see that happening either. Political advantage is not on our side right at the moment, now is time to work the courts... if we can get SCOTUS to take a case or two...
     

    Melnic

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 27, 2012
    15,278
    HoCo
    Supply and demand, you are talking about increasing supply as well as demand. its a toss up if prices go down or up.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,917
    Messages
    7,258,612
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom