The repeal of the 1934 NFA and the 1968 GC Act must be well on the cards after the recent 2A supporting Supreme Court rulings. Both are blatantly infringments upon that which shall not be infringed.
This is a commendable effort, even if more for the principles at stake than any practical need. The ban on post-1986 full-auto weapons is already moot, since devices like the bumpfire buttstocks are perfectly legal and allow for what is essentially FA fire. Besides, full-auto fire from a rifle like an AR or AK is generally a waste of ammo. You can still shoot several rounds per second on semi if needed, and with much better accuracy.
I certainly wouldn't object to a renewed availability of FA weapons for private citizens, especially those of the belt-fed variety. But I think it's much more important for citizens to gain access to armor-piercing ammo. The ban on AP ammo for handguns is blatantly unconstitutional. AP ammo for rifles is legal, but it's rare (except for .50 BMG). That scarcity NEEDS to change if our rifles are to be worth anything in the future.
It doesn't have the chance of a snowball in hell. All SCOTUS has to do is nothing. If by some unimaginable quirk of fate a lower court actually DOES strike down that part of the NFA, a higher court will certainly reverse that decision and all SCOTUS has to do is refuse to grant cert for the matter to be settled. If the justices REALLY want to get nasty they can hear the case and then uphold the NFA which would establish precident to prohibit any testing of this for the foreseeable future.
Folks, the republic is well and truly FUBAR. Ain't no fixin' it now.
This is hilarious. Why don't you all contribute to this attorney's crowd-sourcing efforts. Gotta commend his novel lawyering-to-the-bank skills.
Let's also go after the outlawing of personal artillery, ground to air missles, or of home-made bomb making. Reminder to self: Start crowdsourcing efforts...
What's sad is: the people who are going to be the most fierce opponents to the repeal of the 1934 NFA will be those who are wealthy enough to have collections of NFA type automatic weapons, their investments will plummet in value if suddenly the floodgates are opened to the other masses of people who want to purchase or import new NFA weapons. Supply and demand rules apply. They may fight this effort harder than even ATF would.
even if this was a success, watch how fast states that never believe in the 10th amendment (like NY,CT, CA) suddenly use "states rights" to deny it's inhabitants of owning such weaponry.
It is more important to remove suppressors from the law. That would give an immediate rise in new business and would do much to help home defense plans where ear protection is currently a bit issue. With ear protectors you have an extra step and possible miss the ability to communicate with the suspect and talk the problem away. Electronic ear protection is only a partial solution. Full auto should be an option, but not one that very many people would benefit from.
"Let's also go after the outlawing of personal artillery, ground to air missles, or of home-made bomb making. Reminder to self: Start crowdsourcing efforts..."
Ah yes, the "where do you draw the line?" argument. Well, I'll tell you: people have the natural right to own any weapon except those that are inherently indiscriminate in their effects. That means stuff like biological weapons, nerve gas, and nukes. Some weapons are only suitable for use in international warfare (e.g., ballistic missiles). And some weapons shouldn't be used by anyone but might need to be kept as a deterrent (e.g., nukes). Weapons like these wouldn't be of much use for Second Amendment purposes in any case, since the Second Amendment pertains mainly to civil conflict against a tyrannical government.
All other weapons (yes, including smaller amounts of explosives) most definitely should be legal for personal ownership. At the very least, private citizens should be able to legally own anything that police departments can own. Police are there to serve the population, not keep it in subjugation. If the population is the master and government is the servant, then how can government be allowed to have the population totally outgunned?
A concept that statist authoritarians just can't seem to grasp is that people who are hired by government to carry weapons are NOT inherently more trustworthy, honorable, intelligent, or otherwise qualified than people who aren't employed by government. History shows that more often than not the reverse is true. History also makes clear what frequently happens when soldiers, police, and other government agents are able to gain a monopoly on effective weapons.
Anonymous at 12:12 AM said- At the very least, private citizens should be able to legally own anything that police departments can own.
I'll 2nd that !! And it should include grenade and tear gas launchers, ballistic armor and armored vehicles like the government is 'giving away' to the police departments. Hell. We taxpayers pad for t all, but we aren't 'eligible' to get anything from the government give away. That's bull shit ! Discrimination too.
I recall flyers posted at a lot of gun clubs prior to the passage of the 1968 gun control act. They were the A, B, C's of The Communist Doctrine. As best I can recall, A- was to cause a decline in morality through the use of drugs and sex. B- Was to cause the loss of faith and trust in our elected officials. C- Was to cause the registration of all firearms so as to provide for easy confiscation.
Well, we've seen the decline in morality and sexual mores, and the use of drugs. Now legal in some instances for 'recreation'.
We've seen the loss of faith and trust in our elected officials, by their own traitorous actions, lying and thievery. They did that mostly by themselves because they have no redeeming values or personal integrity. Most of them are lawyers or bean counters and rank somewhere just below whale shit.
They haven't been able to cause the registration of all firearms yet, and in some states, like CT and NY, I'm waiting to see how many cops and politicians get killed when they try confiscations. Every one of the politicians that voted for the stupid laws against the people's ownership of various weapons, and every cop that eager to 'kick in people's doors', needs their name and home address, work address, year, make and model of car, posted on line !!
Let's see how bad they think they are then, when they're potentially in the crosshairs any time and any place.
Anonymous said- AP ammo for rifles is legal, but it's rare (except for .50 BMG).
FYI- If you want to pay the price for it, it's available. And there's also incendiary and tracer available. .30-06, .308, .30 Carbine and maybe a few others. Check out www.AmmoGarand.com and call Rob.
Thanks for mentioning www.AmmoGarand.com. I have bought from him before and can second your recommendation. He's known for good products and fast service.
WWII-surplus .30-06 AP rounds can be used as-is, but a lot of the surplus is corrosive, so it's probably best to pull them and reload them for either .30-06 or some other rifle cartridge that takes the same size bullet. BrassFetcher has a YouTube video showing great results from these bullets loaded into a .300 WSM.
I can't emphasize enough how important it is for anyone who doesn't already own some true AP ammo to buy some. With all the funding Big Brother is pouring into body armor research, it might not be long before anyone who lacks AP ammo for his rifle is essentially unarmed. Such people will be sitting ducks for the TWAT teams when the latter get the go-ahead to start mass gun confiscation.
12 comments:
The repeal of the 1934 NFA and the 1968 GC Act must be well on the cards after the recent 2A supporting Supreme Court rulings.
Both are blatantly infringments upon that which shall not be infringed.
The best defence is attack!
III
This is a commendable effort, even if more for the principles at stake than any practical need. The ban on post-1986 full-auto weapons is already moot, since devices like the bumpfire buttstocks are perfectly legal and allow for what is essentially FA fire. Besides, full-auto fire from a rifle like an AR or AK is generally a waste of ammo. You can still shoot several rounds per second on semi if needed, and with much better accuracy.
I certainly wouldn't object to a renewed availability of FA weapons for private citizens, especially those of the belt-fed variety. But I think it's much more important for citizens to gain access to armor-piercing ammo. The ban on AP ammo for handguns is blatantly unconstitutional. AP ammo for rifles is legal, but it's rare (except for .50 BMG). That scarcity NEEDS to change if our rifles are to be worth anything in the future.
It doesn't have the chance of a snowball in hell. All SCOTUS has to do is nothing. If by some unimaginable quirk of fate a lower court actually DOES strike down that part of the NFA, a higher court will certainly reverse that decision and all SCOTUS has to do is refuse to grant cert for the matter to be settled. If the justices REALLY want to get nasty they can hear the case and then uphold the NFA which would establish precident to prohibit any testing of this for the foreseeable future.
Folks, the republic is well and truly FUBAR. Ain't no fixin' it now.
This is hilarious. Why don't you all contribute to this attorney's crowd-sourcing efforts. Gotta commend his novel lawyering-to-the-bank skills.
Let's also go after the outlawing of personal artillery, ground to air missles, or of home-made bomb making. Reminder to self: Start crowdsourcing efforts...
What's sad is: the people who are going to be the most fierce opponents to the repeal of the 1934 NFA will be those who are wealthy enough to have collections of NFA type automatic weapons, their investments will plummet in value if suddenly the floodgates are opened to the other masses of people who want to purchase or import new NFA weapons. Supply and demand rules apply. They may fight this effort harder than even ATF would.
even if this was a success, watch how fast states that never believe in the 10th amendment (like NY,CT, CA) suddenly use "states rights" to deny it's inhabitants of owning such weaponry.
It is more important to remove suppressors from the law. That would give an immediate rise in new business and would do much to help home defense plans where ear protection is currently a bit issue. With ear protectors you have an extra step and possible miss the ability to communicate with the suspect and talk the problem away. Electronic ear protection is only a partial solution.
Full auto should be an option, but not one that very many people would benefit from.
The feds will legalize heroin vending machines in high schools before they lift the ban on machine guns.
Anonymous at 12:12 AM said:
"Let's also go after the outlawing of personal artillery, ground to air missles, or of home-made bomb making. Reminder to self: Start crowdsourcing efforts..."
Ah yes, the "where do you draw the line?" argument. Well, I'll tell you: people have the natural right to own any weapon except those that are inherently indiscriminate in their effects. That means stuff like biological weapons, nerve gas, and nukes. Some weapons are only suitable for use in international warfare (e.g., ballistic missiles). And some weapons shouldn't be used by anyone but might need to be kept as a deterrent (e.g., nukes). Weapons like these wouldn't be of much use for Second Amendment purposes in any case, since the Second Amendment pertains mainly to civil conflict against a tyrannical government.
All other weapons (yes, including smaller amounts of explosives) most definitely should be legal for personal ownership. At the very least, private citizens should be able to legally own anything that police departments can own. Police are there to serve the population, not keep it in subjugation. If the population is the master and government is the servant, then how can government be allowed to have the population totally outgunned?
A concept that statist authoritarians just can't seem to grasp is that people who are hired by government to carry weapons are NOT inherently more trustworthy, honorable, intelligent, or otherwise qualified than people who aren't employed by government. History shows that more often than not the reverse is true. History also makes clear what frequently happens when soldiers, police, and other government agents are able to gain a monopoly on effective weapons.
Anonymous at 12:12 AM said-
At the very least, private citizens should be able to legally own anything that police departments can own.
I'll 2nd that !! And it should include grenade and tear gas launchers, ballistic armor and armored vehicles like the government is 'giving away' to the police departments. Hell. We taxpayers pad for t all, but we aren't 'eligible' to get anything from the government give away. That's bull shit ! Discrimination too.
I recall flyers posted at a lot of gun clubs prior to the passage of the 1968 gun control act. They were the A, B, C's of The Communist Doctrine. As best I can recall, A- was to cause a decline in morality through the use of drugs and sex. B- Was to cause the loss of faith and trust in our elected officials. C- Was to cause the registration of all firearms so as to provide for easy confiscation.
Well, we've seen the decline in morality and sexual mores, and the use of drugs. Now legal in some instances for 'recreation'.
We've seen the loss of faith and trust in our elected officials, by their own traitorous actions,
lying and thievery. They did that mostly by themselves because they have no redeeming values or personal integrity. Most of them are lawyers or bean counters and rank somewhere just below whale shit.
They haven't been able to cause the registration of all firearms yet, and in some states, like CT and NY, I'm waiting to see how many cops and politicians get killed when they try confiscations. Every one of the politicians that voted for the stupid laws against the people's ownership of various weapons, and every cop that eager to 'kick in people's doors', needs their name and home address, work address, year, make and model of car, posted on line !!
Let's see how bad they think they are then, when they're potentially in the crosshairs any time and any place.
Just saying.....
Anonymous said-
AP ammo for rifles is legal, but it's rare (except for .50 BMG).
FYI- If you want to pay the price for it, it's available. And there's also incendiary and tracer available. .30-06, .308, .30 Carbine and maybe a few others.
Check out www.AmmoGarand.com and call Rob.
Informed42,
Thanks for mentioning www.AmmoGarand.com. I have bought from him before and can second your recommendation. He's known for good products and fast service.
WWII-surplus .30-06 AP rounds can be used as-is, but a lot of the surplus is corrosive, so it's probably best to pull them and reload them for either .30-06 or some other rifle cartridge that takes the same size bullet. BrassFetcher has a YouTube video showing great results from these bullets loaded into a .300 WSM.
I can't emphasize enough how important it is for anyone who doesn't already own some true AP ammo to buy some. With all the funding Big Brother is pouring into body armor research, it might not be long before anyone who lacks AP ammo for his rifle is essentially unarmed. Such people will be sitting ducks for the TWAT teams when the latter get the go-ahead to start mass gun confiscation.
Post a Comment