Are you in favor of repealing the NFA and Hughe's Amendment?

Yes

I'll play. To follow the true intent and spirit of the Second Amendment, we should have the same access to the same personal weapons used by the military and police. And, far from losing value or "elite status," repeal of NFA would put more of them on the market, bringing the price down so people of more modest means could afford them. Somehow, I don't think this would result in the streets running with blood.

I'd like to see a reworking them both, and of course, a permanent moratorium of all AWB or mag cap legislation. I'd like for there to be some sort of framework for observing and registering MG's simply because of the fact that they pose a risk. I'm very strongly pro gun and think that anything under the sun save for WMD's should be civilian legal, but with the mayhem one MG can unleash, there ought to at least be some sort of control network for them.

Maybe I'm not the last word on this subject, since I just own 1 SBR, but of course I'm in favor. I'd probably chop the barrels on almost every rifle I own, and throw a few suppressors on them too. All without the hassle and cost of the NFA stamp process.

I'd venture to say that the few people who have a ridiculous amount of money invested in machine guns and might lose out on their "investments" probably also have a lot of money tied up in other things as well.

Even the guy who just paid $3k for his first M11 in full auto would probably not complain too much, since he could just turn around and get a full auto M16 lower as well. And that's probably what he was lusting after in the first place until he saw the $10k+ entry fee.

Aaron

One guy posted in a thread like this about he would lose his investments in some Machine Guns he had. He would rather the registry to never reopen till he could make a profit.

YES! I didn't realize I had any elite status anyway.

I'm all for repealing the NFA. Then I could have a lot more machine guns!

There was a poll about this exact question a couple months ago on the White House website. Couldn't even get the 5000 signatures to advance it to the next step. That's pretty sad.

Doesn't mean people are for or against it, a public poll is a horrible way to manage social change, let alone legislative. I've been an SOT for many years and most of my clients that purchase transferable machine guns aren't the type to sign petitions, take polls, or spend much time on the Internet.

Yes.

I see where someone mentioned "the guy who just paid 3G+ for his 1st M11". I know he meant it figuratively, but I AM that guy and yes, I would be all for the repeal of it.

Furthermore, I have spent several years as a police officer, i have seen the effect gun laws have on criminals and law abiding citizens alike, and the ONLY gun law I would ever even consider being in favor of (consider, not even sold on it yet) would be - if you were convicted of using a gun in a violent felony against another person, no more guns for you. That's the only possible gun law I can think of that isn't a blatant violation of the 2A as I interpret it. I support the repeal of EVERY other gun law regardless of how bad it devalues my new M11

This question has been discussed before, recently. Check out this thread: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=7626098

Assuredly there must be some machine-gun owners so heavily invested that they're complicit in maintaining grossly anti-2nd Amendment legislation in order to protect their investment. But that's certainly not the majority of MG owners. (In fact, there are some here who will chew you a new ejection port for insulting their ethics by suggesting that.)

Click to expand...

Yes! I would have a problem affording ammo for full auto, forget it when you consider the price for acquisition. Also, wouldn't it be nice to shoot with a suppressor and avoid "ear protection" regardless of the type of gun.

Yes,and anyone who isnt is an enemey of the Second Amendment.

Yes, but it's a moot point. The real question is how to sell repeal to the public. Even most gun owners probably wouldn't be in favor of repeal of the NFA. Good luck getting politicians to spend political capital on this. They wouldn't touch the issue with a proverbial 10-foot pole. The only way to get repeal (of the Hughes amendment or the NFA itself) would be to sneak it through Congress on some other bill, the way the Hughes amendment was added in the first place.

Of course not. A $200 tax and a prohibitively large price tag keeps machine guns out of the hands of the poors, just like the Founding Fathers intended. Maybe you should spend your time working harder so you can afford one, instead of whining about it on the internet.

I have quite a bit tied up in machine guns and I would be thrilled to have their value go to "zero" if it meant the NFA would go away. No matter how much I paid, I got them for shooting fun not an investment.

The Hughes Amendment was a last minute attempt to poison pill the Firearms Owners Protection Act. It was useless and unnecessary--registered NFA items are simply not a crime problem; but, it does prove that given a "reasonable regulation", the antis will always propose one step further toward prohibition. It's their nature and we should not forget it and not get conned.

CleverNickname - please tell me that was a sarcastic way of saying these law makers have poo-poo'd all over what noble men fought, killed, and died to build for us because the lack of smileys made it a wee bit difficult to tell

Carl N. Brown wrote:

The Hughes Amendment was a last minute attempt to poison pill the Firearms Owners Protection Act.

Click to expand...

Yes, exactly. But once Hughes had been added, it was a great mistake to go forward with FOPA. The tradeoff wasn't worth it -- the improvements regarding Title I firearms were marginal at best. And FOPA could have been re-introduced, and would have passed later. The NRA could have asked its supporters in Congress to pull the bill, or Reagan to veto it. This has to go down as a great strategic mistake on the part of the NRA. But I suppose the NRA was institutionally invested in FOPA, and inertia prevented them from reversing course at the last minute. Now, when are they going to try to undo the damage of Hughes?

zignal_zero said:

CleverNickname - please tell me that was a sarcastic way of saying these law makers have poo-poo'd all over what noble men fought, killed, and died to build for us because the lack of smileys made it a wee bit difficult to tell

Click to expand...

I'm hoping so, as well.

But maybe there's something there for the USSC. A government-enforced 200$ prohibition from poor people owning cool things. Why do anti-gun politicians hate the poor so much?

FadingSwordsman,

Why do anti-gun politicians hate the poor so much?

Click to expand...

Change will start with the people who feel they are being oppressed the most. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer!

CleverNickname - please tell me that was a sarcastic way of saying these law makers have poo-poo'd all over what noble men fought, killed, and died to build for us because the lack of smileys made it a wee bit difficult to tell

Click to expand...

The best type of sarcasm is when the reader can't tell if it's sarcasm or not.

The shortest answers are sometimes the best.

Are you in favor of repealing the NFA and Hughes Amendment?

Yes.