Repeal NFA???
- Thread starter jack the toad
- Start date
REPEAL THE WHOLE DAMN THING!
It's all unconstitutional. And as to machine guns- anything other than a short burst is worthless anyway. Just another boogieman without data to support any greater inherent danger to the public.
Okay, maybe a little facetious, but I could see moving the Overton Window to the extent it gets repealed.
Comparatively, repealing the Hughes Amendment is a piece of cake. That could be done in the next Administration.
It's all unconstitutional. And as to machine guns- anything other than a short burst is worthless anyway. Just another boogieman without data to support any greater inherent danger to the public.
Okay, maybe a little facetious, but I could see moving the Overton Window to the extent it gets repealed.
Comparatively, repealing the Hughes Amendment is a piece of cake. That could be done in the next Administration.
Last edited:
Route 91 Harvest Festival.
drumminor2nd
Member
This case in question is about a GunTuber selling between 1,200 and 2,000 auto sears to turn semi-auto AR-15s into machine guns.
Wrong.
It's about selling little metal cards with pictures on them.
If someone were to cut out the metal pieces pictured, they could theoretically use them to convert a semi-auto into a full auto. Therefore, the ATF, since they are the thought police, decided these metal cards with pictures on them were "auto sears". Just like they recently said a piece of metal tubing is a silencer, because it could be theoretically made into one.
This is the same rationale as arresting someone for DUI because they have alcohol in their liquor cabinet, and it could be used to get drunk and drive a car.
The prosecution of "thought crimes" and "constructive intent" is a very slippery slope.
Sure, you can say it was dumb of this guy to poke the bear, but last I checked we still have freedom of expression in America, and 'dumb' isn't a felony. Maybe he should have called it "art"... then just about anything goes.
Meh. Semiauto with a bumpstock. Note, they're easy to make.
How much liberty are you willing to give up to chase the chimera of "safety"?
Last edited:
venomballistics
Member
NAH .... Hoffman Tactical FRT.
The 3D genie is out of the bottle. If you ever felt a twinge of guilt over downloading an MP3, a new day has dawned. You can now download an MP5 and rack yourself with raw unbridled guilt.
AR lower .. yup
Standard capacity mags ... check
I have the elusive oldschool A2 handguards in mid length ready to squirt. Looked good in software. I'll be a good boy.
Others ... they are raining glocks out of these things
drumminor2nd
Member
No, it's pretty much the same rationale as charging someone for selling someone a conversion kit to turn a semi-automatic rifle into a machine gun. Because that's literally what this idiot was doing. Just like the guy who got arrested selling "wall hangers" that just "accidentally" be shaped like drop-in auto sears for an AR-15.
It's the same thing as busting someone with 50 kilos of fine Columbian Bam-Bam for dealing. Intent is a very big part of the law, and has been so in the U.S. since colonial times.
Being "dumb" is not a defense for the felonious act of selling conversion kits to turn a semi-automatic rifle into a machine gun. Nor is art.
venomballistics
Member
Perhaps he should have sold a sticker to put on a metal card to pry it a bit farther from the gray area. End user must fashion the parts either way.
Funny thing here.... we can just capture the picture ... scale it a bit and .... giggle gun.
Is that a violation too?
Repeal NFA?
You never know unless you try. Get on with it.
You never know unless you try. Get on with it.
venomballistics
Member
Seem to recall Randy Weaver marked the barrel of the shotgun with a sharpie and gave it back to the ATF agent with a hacksaw ... that wasn't enough. The zealot agent badgered him till he sawed off the shotgun, creating an NFA weapon. a pen mark and a saw wasn't enough of a kit to give us Ruby Ridge ... but a printed card is ...
Wrong again. That's possession... an actual crime has been committed.
Drawing a picture on a piece of metal is not the same as making a machine gun. Not to any rational person, anyway.
drumminor2nd
Member
What rock have you been hiding under to have never heard of "possession with intent to distribute" before?
And you ignored my point -- being a smarmy idiot saying the 10 years in Leavenworth equivalent of "I'm not TOUCHING YOU!" is not an acceptable legal defense. Hence the "Hail Mary" begging the Supreme Court.
venomballistics
Member
the events leading up to Ruby Ridge required a shotgun to be physically altered, thus creating an NFA weapon. the prior interaction where a pen mark on metal and providing tools to complete the work were not enough for a case.
What changed?
How long until an aluminum billet can be called a ghost gun?
What changed?
How long until an aluminum billet can be called a ghost gun?
I didn't ignore your point, it just wasn't on point.
Possession of illegal drugs has nothing to do with what we're talking about.
Just to be clear, you're totally OK with prosecuting someone for a crime you think they might commit in the future?
venomballistics
Member
Meanwhile ... back at the ranch .......
After the SCOTUS kicked NY's puppy, NY wasted no time drafting new legislation to make things worse than before.
Using that as an example, we could expect the same result from an NFA roll over.
As stupid as many of its regs are, that stupidity often works to curb further restrictions as things are already defined and those definitions carry over.
After the SCOTUS kicked NY's puppy, NY wasted no time drafting new legislation to make things worse than before.
Using that as an example, we could expect the same result from an NFA roll over.
As stupid as many of its regs are, that stupidity often works to curb further restrictions as things are already defined and those definitions carry over.
THAT's what West Virginia v. EPA was for. No more policy changing regulations without prior clear statutory authority from Congress.
That was most likely the most important ruling from this session- moreso than Dobbs or Bruen.
As for New York, you know SCOTUS is gonna do some serious butt-kicking if it even makes it up to them.
Last edited:
Can I borrow your crystal ball?
So, the correct answer is to Take It Back. Not wring ones hands over the scraps our betters decide to grant us. (Insert groveling serf meme here)
