Posted on 05/07/2005 12:40:33 PM PDT by Richard-SIA
Darksheare, your position on this issue screams how little you actually know.
THIS IS AN *A M N E S T Y* allowing people who are in posession of machineguns that are already illegal to register them in accordance with the NFA.
You haven't made a single compelling argument yet.
All you do is scream the sky is falling with your "It Will Be Reinterpreted" nonsense when you don't understand what it means.
Tell ya what.
Explain to me how this bill might be somehow used against gun owners.
Explain to me- using the details of the law and the existing amnesty- how this might be...
You won't, because you can't. Because you don't understand this law, and instead of admiting that you were incorrect when you first commented on it (due to your own poor comprehension skills) you are carrying on, saying that this bill which is a GOOD THING isn't.
I own rifles, I own shotguns, I own pistols and revolvers, I own fully-automatic weapons that most people on this board wouldn't even believe are legal, even if I showed them my paperwork.
I am as pro-gun as they come, and I support this bill because I *understand* this bill, which you are apparently too stupid to do.
Thanks!
So what if the NFA weapon they are trying to register is actually property of the US government?
That depends on a couple of things.
The VHFA "amnesty" only applies to weapons obtained before Dec. 1968.
The weapon being registered had to have been obtained in overseas service.
So if it's an M-16 brought back from 'Nam in early 1968 or before the U.S. Property marking is irrelevant.
If its something from after 1968, like a gun from Desert Storm, it will not be eligible for registration, and will have to be surrendered.
Correction, Oct. 1968.
Not sure why Oct. is the cut-off, the '68 amnesty was in Dec.
I would have expected a Dec. cut-off, for consistency.
Doesn't matter.
They can paint it, and call it a horse, and it'll still be what we DO NOT need more of: Gun laws.
If there are laws that need to be 'reformed', then perhaps those laws should be dumped.
Yes, I read this, and your tone needs to cool it newbie.
Any time you register YOUR firearms with teh government, you're telling them what you have an dwhere you have it.
What happens when some bored beauracrat gets it in his head to dislike the guns that supposedly have amnesty?
Hmm?
If you actually read the bill, it would be raising hairs on your neck.
Especially if you've read word for word what the 2nd Amendment says.
"You clearly still do not understand the CONTEXT "
Ah, context and nuance, right?
John Kerry said no-one understood the context of what he said.
Funny, everyone was spot on about him.
This is a dog, an ugly dog.
If laws need to be 'reformed', start by dumping the laws tis is supposed to reform.
I agree whole-heartedly with NFA and Richard-SIA. Darksheare, with respect you don't seem to understand the issue.
There's no new registry proposed, just an attempt to let WWII vets, their wives and their kids make use of property that was brought back from overseas, and to not have these same people go to jail over a very complex (and unjust, and unconstitutional) law.
The benefit to everyone else is that there will probably be tens of thousands of machine guns added to the list of those that can be legally purchased. The registry might go from 200,000 to 250K or 300K, perhaps even more. That means more MGs in the hands of citizens, and perhaps lower prices so that those of us who can't hope to own one now may be able to buy a piece of (very enjoyable) history.
Do I agree with licensing them, or with getting permission to buy them from your local PD? HELL NO! But the reality is that gun control was passed one salami slice at a time, and that's the only way that it'll be eliminated.
I don't own any machine guns (or other NFA weapons), nor do I deal in them. I am simply a citizen who can read the law, and who can understand the implication of this bill. To me, it is about more than prices, or even about helping our vets and their families. To me, the great benefit is to be able to say to the gun-fearing wussies of the world that "these X number of guns have been in civilian hands AND UNREGISTERED for 37+ years, WITHOUT incident. Further, now there are some 250K (or 300K or whatever number) of legal machine guns out there in civilian hands, and only ONCE since 1934 has any such gun been used in a crime (and that by a police officer)".
Darksheare, I sympathize and agree with your view that we shouldn't register guns - except in this case. Here you are quite simply wrong.
I understand teh issue well.
What I don't like is the registering of guns and amnesty that in a few years at the whim of some beauracrat may turn out to NOT be amnesty.
Do I trust any politician to protect my rights?
No.
No matter their 'intent' or the 'context'.
They can nuance it to death and I don't care.
If they really want to use this to reform laws, they should show real reform and dump the laws this is supposed to reform FIRST.
If they did that, some of the language of the bill that gun grabbers could use would be less worrisome.
Such as the words "ANY" gun.. in there.
That would include an old Stevens .22 cal.
The only thing that ancient thing would be useful for would be plinking purple martins.
But under this bill it would have to be registered as people would generally inherit them.
And I can see the gun grabbers seing inherited guns like M-1 Garands and going "look at all the assault weapons!", then use the registry list as a one stop shopping list of people to persecute.
Gun Grabbers in NY have been salivating for just such a thing.
The Fed.gov, as bad as it is, has never gone back on a gun registration amnesty to my knowledge. If anyone has ever come forward during such an amnesty period and jumped through all of the hoops, they weren't - and to date HAVEN'T BEEN - prosecuted in any way.
Do I trust the gov't, at any level - NO.
But where are these people (the WW2 vets and their surviving families) now? Right now, they hold guns that are considered illegal by the fed.gov. IF the fed.gov knew about these guns, a big truck full are heavily armed BATFE agents would show up, kick down the door, kill all nearby animals, terrorize kids & old ladies, and shoot or beat most of the adult males. The amnesty would change that. The amnesty would allow these people to sleep better at night by legalizing the guns (again, according to the gov't, because I think that they are quite legal without the $200 tax stamp, etc.). The owners of some 200,000 legal machine guns now on the registry don't lose sleep at night worrying about a BATF raid, because they are legal.
I agree that the best thing would be to repeal the '34 NFA, so that we could all go to Wallyworld or Home Despot and buy MGs over the counter with no wait, no tax stamp and no letter from our nannies, errr, local police chiefs. HOWEVER, you are living in a dream world if you think that any such thing will happen any time soon. Again, we lost rights one slice at a time, and that's the only way that we'll ever get them back.
As to the language about "any gun," you have to look at what a "gun" (or, more accurately, "firearm") is under the statutes in question. It is NOT literally any firearm. It IS all of those firearms covered under the '34 NFA - i.e. any full auto gun, short barreled guns and destructive devices. THIS is where you simply DO NOT understand the law, or the proposed legislation.
FYI, Garands and the like won't be taken away. Too many people have "ordinary" semi-autos. That stuff may fly in NJ or CA, but it won't work in TX and the many like-minded states in between. Instead of guns, the feds would much more likely be collecting the bodies of their fellow agents, and I'd bet on a few state funerals for more prominent public employees.
I understand and sympathize with your feelings on this issue. I, too, despise gun control and those in government who have absconded with our liberties. However, you are simply mistaken. PLEASE read the proposed legislation and the relevant portions of the '34 NFA. No one here is so immature as to say "told 'ya, told 'ya, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah." We'll simply celebrate your newfound knowledge, and hopefully proceed from their to help get this bill passed - as the first step toward getting the NFA repealed at some point in the future.
I will reiterate: If they want to reform laws, dump the ones this is supposed to reform.
Here, BTW, is the relevant text from the proposed statute:
"g) Definitions- For purposes of this section:
(1) AMNESTY PERIOD- The term `amnesty period' means the 90-day period beginning on the date that is 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) FIREARM- The term `firearm' has the meaning given such term in section 5845 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986"
And here
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00005845----000-.html
is the definition of "firearm" to which it SPECIFICALLY refers:
§ 5845. Definitions
For the purpose of this chapter—
(a) Firearm The term “firearm” means
(1) a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;
(2) a weapon made from a shotgun if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;
(3) a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;
(4) a weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;
(5) any other weapon, as defined in subsection (e);
(6) a machinegun;
(7) any silencer (as defined in section 921 of title 18, United States Code); and
(8) a destructive device. The term “firearm” shall not include an antique firearm or any device (other than a machinegun or destructive device) which, although designed as a weapon, the Secretary finds by reason of the date of its manufacture, value, design, and other characteristics is primarily a collector’s item and is not likely to be used as a weapon.
SEE, the bill in question is NOT talking about anything other than those guns already regulated under the '34 NFA - machine guns, short-barreled rifles and shotguns, destructive devices and "silencers" (i.e. sound suppressors, the proper and more accurate term).
Why do you think that the Schumers and the Feinsteins aren't proposing or co-sponsoring this bill? They'll be opposing it, since it'll admit many tens of thousands of NFA weapons to the registry. Guns now illegal will be made legal and enter the marketplace - and these REALLY ARE machine guns, unlike the semi-autos that were (somewhat and sort of) banned between '94 and last year).
Again:I will reiterate: If they want to reform laws, dump the ones this is supposed to reform.
Schumer and Feinswine should not be in office anywhere regardless of what the office is.
I will reiterate: It ain't gonna happen anytime soon. Better half a loaf (on the way to a whole loaf) than nothing. They destroyed the 2nd Amendment bit-by-bit, and we can only take it back the same way.
No one in politics gets everything that they want - you take what you can get, then try again and again and again to get a little bit more each time. The anti-gun freaks have done this with outstanding success - why don't we imitate that, just in reverse? Your all-or-nothing position would result in us getting nothing - EVER.
" It ain't gonna happen anytime soon. "
That's my point.
"Reform" of gun laws usually isn't regardless of how 'good' the intention or context is.
If they wanted to truly reform it, they should first dump the laws this is meant to 'reform.'
Your fear is groundless and unrealistic.
You appear to be deliberately misunderstanding this bill.
FACT. The NFRTR registration goes all the way back to 1934. Except for ATFE's losses of records, and book keeping errors, there have been virtually no confirmed instances of the NFRTR being used to prosecute the innocent, particularly for political purposes.
The NFRTR has NEVER been the basis for ANY large scale confiscation scheme!
What you are panicking over has only been done by individual states and cities, with no relation to the NFRTR.
FACT. A similar amnesty was held for thirty days in Dec. of 1968.
That amnesty was open to EVERYONE, not just veterans and their heirs.
The doom you claim to fear has not happened in the thirty-seven years since!
ATFE is currently engaged in institutional perjury via their continued claim's at trial's that the NFRTR is 100% accurate.
This bill would allow an opportunity to make corrections to the inaccurate NFRTR, as well as aiding our veterans and heirs who may own "unregistered" NFA items.
It just might also eventually lead to a legitimately run "general amnesty" for everyone, which is the only way that the errors in the NFRTR can ever be fully corrected.
Once the amnesties are done, and there is no resulting increase in NFA related crime we MIGHT be able to dump 922.(o), thus restoring a significant portion of our RKBA!
I would agree, but that is irrelevant. They ARE in office, and they ARE quite powerful anti-gun Senators. One can discern a lot of information based on what they actually DO (vs. the stream of lies that comes from their mouths).
Please stick to the topic and, more to the point, try working in an effective way to reverse gun control. Railing against current law and dismissing actual US Senators (no matter how awful either of these things are) does about as much good as pi$$ing into the wind. Face facts and deal with them as they are, not as you'd wish them to be - you can't be successful any other way.
"They ARE in office, and they ARE quite powerful anti-gun Senators. "
Hopefully not for much longer.
I have worked to reverse gun control.
Making a registry, no matter the intent, is not a good idea.
The ones that already exist have been used in ways other than their initial intent.
Lists of Class 3 license holders have been snooped over, and people have been harassed.
That is somethig to keep in mind when mulling this over.
There's a road that is paved with good intentions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.