|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Actually FOPA was a REPLY to a more draconian attack on NFA weapons.
H.R. 3155 Racketeer Weapons and Violent Crime Control Act...
Now you are correct that people had been attempting to pass certain reforms to the 1968 Gun Control Act ever since it was enacted, especially due to abuses all through the 1970s by ATF who had a law that let them net all kinds of people for very minor things.
But it's not really a case of we tried to get a little and instead got a machine gun ban. They were already going after the MG ban, so FOPA really was more of a defensive move. Keep in mind they already had one machine gun ban in place, the '68 GCA banned all foreign machine gun imports as far as civilians were concerned.
It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.
Chuck, we miss ya man.
كافر
Well intentioned people may end up doing damage they never intended to.
I don't remember what year the $200 tax stamp went into effect. I am guessing it went in effect about the time cost of the weapon that required that $200 stamp probably was less than the stamp. Can you imagine if we disturb the hornet's nest enough to bring suppressors, and SBR's to their attention just enough for some bureaucrat to suggest the stamp has been $200 for umpteen years and it no longer serves the purpose to discourage the citizens from owning such items. They don't need the Congress or anyone else to vote on changing the fees ATF charges for licensing. Government does that on a routine basis.
Adjusted for inflation the cost of new tax stamp is now $2850.00 (or whatever). How would we like that THEN?
Yep. At this point we don't want to screw around with the NFA. You open it up for discussion and anything can happen from adjusting the NFA tax for inflation since 1934 to abolishing the act once and for all. And if we actually abolished the NFA everything would become a Title I firearm and subject to the "sporter clause" and guess what? Machine guns, SBRs, SBSs, suppressors and AOWs would all fail to meet the criteria of the "sporter clause."
You really have to do the damage in order of precedence or you can screw up everything. I wish all the letter writers and petition starters actually knew what the "sporter clause" is. Everyone wants to get rid of FOPA 86 and in the process get rid of all the protections we gained while leaving the sporter clause intact which is all the basis they need for a replacement domestic machine gun ban WITHOUT FOPA.
If you get rid of the "sporter clause" you remove the tool that lets ATF decide what is and is not an acceptable firearm for importation or domestic production.
It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.
Chuck, we miss ya man.
كافر
Do you have any stamps?
I'd think anybody that has even looked into the world of NFA would know it's the National Firearms Act of 1934.
One of the articles I read said average monthly income was $117 at that time...and the stamp was $200. Definitely a different picture than today.
Yes I do have couple of stamps. As a matter of fact one arrived in the middle of the night yesterday. See post #2044
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...Thread/page103
My pdf file image of the stamps barely look like stamps as they are. I wouldn't have known to look for a date on the stamps. Besides, even if I could eek out 1934 as the date of "National Firearms Act", I wouldn't have known if it started out at $200 or $20 and crept up to $200 in the later years.
The point is, if they levied a $200 stamp on people earning $117 a month then, obviously they meant for it to be not affordable and prohibitive. Nothing to stop the current anti-gun lawmakers to take a similar attitude and effectively (forgive the pun) stamp out SBR's, SBS's, Suppressors. Who in here is willing to pay $3000-$4000 for a stamp so we can have a rifle that is 15" instead of 16".
That's kind of the point. It's never been adjusted. A $200 tax added to a can/SBR/etc these days is not near the limiting factor it used to be. Granted, I don't like paying it...and don't think it should be required...but I'd rather pay it than not have the option to own NFA items.
All the attention given NFA in the current political climate is doing more damage than help, IMO.
This dog is playin' possum. He was bred to destroy. He may close his eyes but his trainers are working 24/7. In the past I would have said simmer down and let things get back to normal. Now, with these people I feel more like, do nothing - have nothing. They are like rabid termites.
I am not well versed in the events that led to the FOPA/MG "ban", and am interested in the narrative.
Maybe my thoughts on the matter will change following detail, however, given the past history of NFA, I believe that the largest issue is that action has not coming from a large/funded/well reasoned and legally backed argument.
The failure of a poorly planned/poorly executed offense does not mean that forward motion is impossible or that the enemy position is invincible.
Bookmarks