With "talks" right now about banning certain firearms, I wondered how exactly this was received by gun owners back in 1986. Did the NRA fight hard to oppose such sanctions, and just in general how this went over.

The NRA didn't get the "no compromise" picture until they angered a lot of gun owners for not doing enough to fight the AWB of 1994.

When the NRA made their "no more gun control compromise" statement a few days after Sandy Hook, that's when they won a lot of gun owners back over to their side.

Don't know where 1986 came from
Wonder what kind of difference could have been made if they fought it a little harder.

Probably from the "Firearm Owners' Protection Act of 1986 (FOPA)"

See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firear...Protection_Act

Yep that's it. Was reading up on it earlier and just wondered how the gun community felt at the time. Always find personal stories and opinions more interesting.

The NRA didn't do or say a thing to protect this area of gun ownership rights. I perceived, this at the time as an attitude of indifference. I still feel that way also! I believe they were totally unprepared for such a massive attack on the 2nd amendment and stood by in silence as an entire area fell into this spiraling inflation of price. The DoD has since continually tried to take the property of the citizens of the United States and destroy it, Like the 1911 controversy we just went through. Well the mountain of full auto and select fire weapons is huge compared to the 10,000 or so 1911's. In 1986 a M1A1 Thompson Sub-Machine Gun retailed for $800 or less, Now these same guns are in the $10,000.00 area. There never was any evidence, that legally owned Class III firearms were any threat to the safety of America. To the contrary the few European Nations that allow privet ownership of these type of weapons have some of the lowest crime rates in the world (Finland and Switzerland come to mind) and nations that ban all privet firearm ownership some of the worst (Think of most Third world hell Holes). Sorry about the rant, but the NRA didn't stand up to the totalitarian move of registration in the National Firearms Acts of 1934 and 1938, They didn't raise a finger to the ban of legally manufactured full and select fire weapons and I don't see them doing anything that would infringe on their being invited to coctail parties if the future.

I'm Ivan and I've been pissed off since 1986!

The FOPA of 1986 under Ronald Regan is the only compromise gun law that I am aware of. The definition of a compromise is that both sides get part of what they want. A compromise is not one side getting some of they want today expecting more tomorrow while the other side gets nothing. Other than the principle of banning manufacture of one type of firearm not allowing additional legal full autos affected only a tiny number of gun owners. Allowing importation of military surplus firearms for the first time since 1968 provided the rest of us millions of inexpensive Mausers, SMLEs, Mosin Nagats, M-1 Carbines, SKSs, P-38s etc. The compromise made in 1986 was a good one for me.

The point here is when your anti-gun acquaintances say all they want is a reasonable compromise ask what gun law they are offering to repeal.

Thompsons, depending on model range from $15,000 - $25,000 & more.
Full auto M-16's & HK MP5's $20,000 +

Want to know more about NFA? Go to Subguns DOT COM They are the most knowledgeable in the NFA game.

Ned

__________________
Devil's afraid I'll take over.

The problem then was the same as it is now. WE spend too much time saying the THEY should do something. WRONG, a thousand times WRONG! It's WE that need to do something. As long as we expect others to do the fighting for us we will continue to get the same results; bupkus!

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

Charlie Rangel tacked the full auto ban onto the GCA of 1986 at the last minute and there is a great deal of evidence that it was illegally adopted.
The NRA didn't object and Reagan signed it into law. Yes a whole segment of the gun collecting community go shafted on this.
Jim