G&R Tactical
Page 1 of 16 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 152

Thread: Do NFA rules apply for SHTF?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,496
    Feedback Score
    12 (93%)

    Do NFA rules apply for SHTF?

    I know laws are laws..... and I know most of us desire to be upright and law abiding citizens.

    Hypothetically, if something really bad happened, even a possible global event, I would assume our "leadership" would be in bunkers a mile below the earths surface with years of provisions while you and I had to live through it, that is, until the dust settled and they came out to assume there previous roles. During times of extreme natural disasters like Wildfires, Hurricane Katrina/Harvey/Maria/Rita etc., the 2016 blizzard in the North East, the 2004 Indonesian tsunami, and even the 2011 Japanese tsunami, it can take weeks for a first responder/law enforcement QRF to assemble, it could be days before most people are able to be treated or even see a doctor. Most I would assume would die waiting for help.

    During these times of struggle, lets say a full scale natural disaster that effected most of the lower 48 that caused byproducts like economic troubles, fuel shortages, food shortages, mass looting, would you worry about NFA laws or would you disregard all non-moral based laws all together? Basically, just stick to the 10 commandments.

    I have been dwelling on this for some time, a few years to be exact. Is it necessary to consider building a non serialized (80%) F/A MK18 ghost just for a SHTF scenario? Or possibly a 10.3"-11.5" upper that can be switched more easily? Is a "solvent trap" a realistic alternative to a suppressor?

    Is a M4/AR15 good enough to be the only gun you need?
    Last edited by elephant; 09-07-18 at 03:06.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    6,657
    Feedback Score
    82 (100%)
    Risk vs reward. I see next to no benefit for something like that, but a lot of risk depending how its done and employed.
    Sic semper tyrannis.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Twin Cities
    Posts
    927
    Feedback Score
    88 (100%)
    “Is a M4/AR15 good enough to be the only gun you need?”

    The more guns you have, the more people on your side you can arm. If things get that bad there won’t be any general law enforcement. Cops have families to protect too. Forming a large enough group to fend off mobs and marauding gangs would be your best bet to survive.
    “Madness is rare in individuals – but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule.” – Friedrich Nietzsche

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,391
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    You’ve been dwelling on this for some length of time? Seems like a pretty easy question to answer.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Atlanta area
    Posts
    371
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by uffdaphil View Post
    The more guns you have, the more people on your side you can arm...
    I've always thought that this wasn't the best idea. I mean, with the exception of a close family member, if you don't already have the sense to be armed, there is a very dubious advantage in arming you. Do you really want to arm people that didn't have the sense to arm themselves, AND learn how to become proficient with their weapons, before the SHTF? Do you really want these people armed, and on YOUR side?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    683
    Feedback Score
    18 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by georgeib View Post
    I've always thought that this wasn't the best idea. I mean, with the exception of a close family member, if you don't already have the sense to be armed, there is a very dubious advantage in arming you. Do you really want to arm people that didn't have the sense to arm themselves, AND learn how to become proficient with their weapons, before the SHTF? Do you really want these people armed, and on YOUR side?
    I've spent some time thinking about this and I pretty much agree. Armed neighbors are fine as long as they are friendly, proficient, and not complete idiots. In my case everyone who meets those criteria has already armed themselves.

    The idea of arming someone while also trying to teach them how to responsibly and proficiently use a firearm in an emergency situation reeks of fantasy, at least within the context of likely disaster scenarios here in the US.

    Quote Originally Posted by elephant View Post
    ...SHTF...SHTF...

    Is a M4/AR15 good enough to be the only gun you need?
    As for the OPs question, choosing to circumvent laws is pretty much always a risk vs reward proposition. In your case you seem to be trying to decide if the possibility that some potential SHTF situation that might happen someday is justification enough to completely ignore the NFA in the present, to the extent of maybe even building unregistered and illegal items (e.g. your reference to "solvent traps").

    That question is easy for me to answer for myself - I absolutely will not be building off the books NFA items, period. It seems unnecessary and ill advised to me, especially when, between AR Pistols and actual NFA items, there are plenty of ways to check that box if you see fit.

    But again, the question seems to be based more in fantasy than reality.
    Last edited by Tx_Aggie; 09-07-18 at 07:50. Reason: edited to remove silly meme

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,163
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    I think you should take the DOJ/FBI/HRC as an example and stick to the rule of law just as much as they do.
    “The Trump Doctrine is ‘We’re America, Bitch.’ That’s the Trump Doctrine.”

    "He is free to evade reality, he is free to unfocus his mind and stumble blindly down any road he pleases, but not free to avoid the abyss he refuses to see."

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    suburbs of Philly Pa
    Posts
    3,660
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by georgeib View Post
    I've always thought that this wasn't the best idea. I mean, with the exception of a close family member, if you don't already have the sense to be armed, there is a very dubious advantage in arming you. Do you really want to arm people that didn't have the sense to arm themselves, AND learn how to become proficient with their weapons, before the SHTF? Do you really want these people armed, and on YOUR side?
    Are your avg armed people really much better? Owning a gun simply implies ownership not proficiency. I've got relatives who had the "sense to arm themselves" but don't consider practice important. One range trip every few years. Neither owns more than a box of ammo.

    I'm on another forum where one current topic is adjustable sights for carry guns where half the guys think that without they you'd be a fool to carry and the other half thinks sights are useless because their Keltec 380 doesn't have them and at home you're better off with bird shot and a 6in barrel 357.

    When I suggested that fixed sights are fine and that practicing drills is better than trying to punch out the X I was told I'm some kind of a wanna be commando.

    Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Arik; 09-07-18 at 08:18.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,247
    Feedback Score
    0
    With the advent of braced pistols, I think this isn't even a question any more.

    Why SBR a AR type rifle when you can get the same function with a braced pistol. I was not fast to jump on the braced pistol band wagon. But the braces have evolved big time.

    I have a mini Uzi pistol that is braced with a buffer tube and a Tailhook brace. It is ugly, but it's function is so much better than the original folding stock on the mini and micro uzi.

    So why risk problems, if we are going through a bad time. Why take a risk at making your life worse than it already is?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Atlanta area
    Posts
    371
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Arik View Post
    Are your avg armed people really much better? Owning a gun simply implies ownership not proficiency. I've got relatives who had the "sense to arm themselves" but don't consider practice important. One range trip every few years. Neither owns more than a box of ammo.

    I'm on another forum where one current topic is adjustable sights for carry guns where half the guys think that without they you'd be a fool to carry and the other half thinks sights are useless because their Keltec 380 doesn't have them and at home you're better off with bird shot and a 6in barrel 357.

    When I suggested that fixed sights are fine and that practicing drills is better than trying to punch out the X I was told I'm some kind of a wanna be commando.
    I can't disagree with you. Ideally, you would surround yourself with people who are wholly proficient. However, we both know that having a gun and being mentally prepared to use it, is better than not having a gun at all. That said, I still wouldn't arm a bunch of people who didn't have the foresight and sense to have already armed themselves.

    In such an unlikely scenario, I'd rather take my chances AWAY from the group, than throw my lot in with a bunch of ill prepared sheep that I would be responsible for. After all, it wasn't the people holed up in the Alamo that survived, even though they had strength in numbers, but it was the people a mile away that made it unscathed. Sometimes, all that the "group" does for you is make you a target. The ONLY fight you are guaranteed to survive, is the one you don't fight.

Page 1 of 16 12311 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •