SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  Suppressed Weapons    So if Trump gets sworn in ... NFA poll
Page 1 2 3 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
So if Trump gets sworn in ... NFA poll Login/Join 
Member
posted Hide Post
I voted 0-20 .All those tranfers times $200.00. That's a lot of revenue. No way.
 
Posts: 269 | Location: Central Nebraska | Registered: April 28, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
I have not yet begun
to procrastinate
Picture of KMitch200
posted Hide Post
0-20 on both.

Those pigfuckers in DC couldn't care less what the gun totin', mouth breathing unwashed masses want.


--------
After the game, the King and the pawn go into the same box.
 
Posts: 1970 | Location: AZ - West side of the valley | Registered: October 26, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
They're after my Lucky Charms!
Picture of IrishWind
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by bwarner:
I voted 0-20 .All those tranfers times $200.00. That's a lot of revenue. No way.


Maybe that is the compromise. You pay the $200 and the item still goes on the NFA registry. But pass the NICS check and you walk out with it that day. ATF/.gov gets their money, the can is still registered for NFA purposes, and the libs can't complain since the only thing that changed is it is faster to buy one.


Lord, your ocean is so very large and my divos are so very f****d-up
Dirt Sailors Unite!
 
Posts: 24302 | Location: NoVa | Registered: May 06, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Thank you
Very little
Picture of HRK
posted Hide Post
While the government doesn't seem to care about what it costs to get that $200 it's not pure excess, there is a cost to the process, and I'd bet its probably $100 to $200 per tax stamp greater than the revenue.



"My rule of life prescribed as an absolutely sacred rite smoking cigars and also the drinking of alcohol before, after and if need be during all meals and in the intervals between them." Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 9983 | Location: Mouseville, FL | Registered: November 07, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Music's over turn
out the lights
Picture of David W
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by HRK:
While the government doesn't seem to care about what it costs to get that $200 it's not pure excess, there is a cost to the process, and I'd bet its probably $100 to $200 per tax stamp greater than the revenue.


Bingo, that would be our gov't at work. Take a surplus and some how lose money, go figure.


David W.

Rather fail with honor than succeed by fraud. -Sophocles
 
Posts: 2488 | Location: Winston-Salem, N.C. | Registered: May 30, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Administrator
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by IrishWind:
Maybe that is the compromise. You pay the $200 and the item still goes on the NFA registry. But pass the NICS check and you walk out with it that day. ATF/.gov gets their money, the can is still registered for NFA purposes, and the libs can't complain since the only thing that changed is it is faster to buy one.


This is the most realistic possibility, but even this is a "downgrade" from the current check.

I talked to BATFE about this at SHOT 2016. The NFA check includes immigration status and a couple other more in-depth examinations that aren't just NICS stuff.
 
Posts: 16766 | Registered: August 12, 2000Reply With QuoteReport This Post
They're after my Lucky Charms!
Picture of IrishWind
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by LDD:
quote:
Originally posted by IrishWind:
Maybe that is the compromise. You pay the $200 and the item still goes on the NFA registry. But pass the NICS check and you walk out with it that day. ATF/.gov gets their money, the can is still registered for NFA purposes, and the libs can't complain since the only thing that changed is it is faster to buy one.


This is the most realistic possibility, but even this is a "downgrade" from the current check.

I talked to BATFE about this at SHOT 2016. The NFA check includes immigration status and a couple other more in-depth examinations that aren't just NICS stuff.


OK, and the ATF does the check later. I think the big reason for the bill in Congress is to get rid of the inconsistent time delays. Boom. More compromise!


Lord, your ocean is so very large and my divos are so very f****d-up
Dirt Sailors Unite!
 
Posts: 24302 | Location: NoVa | Registered: May 06, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by LDD: The NFA check includes immigration status and a couple other more in-depth examinations that aren't just NICS stuff.


If OTC is too scary, how about those who have CBP Global Entry or other security clearances? We've gone through application, extensive background checks and sat for an interview. Fingerprint scans are on file.

I'd like to hear someone in government articulate why I shouldn't be able to present that card and walk out with a suppressor. Why all the redundant checks and systems?
 
Posts: 5728 | Location: The Red part of Minnesota | Registered: October 06, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Yew got a spider
on yo head
Picture of DoctorSolo
posted Hide Post
Our best bet is to have him dismantle the ATF in the name of marginally reducing the hypocrisy and capricious nature of vice prohibition in a country that espouses personal liberty above all others.

The HPA will complicate things due to the retarded way certain weapons can be made legal via affirmative defense. No NFA, no white letter loophole for NFA that falls within otherwise illegal weapon categories...
 
Posts: 3870 | Location: Colorado Springs | Registered: April 12, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of tha1000
posted Hide Post
The interesting slant on this to me would be, assuming the HPA passed, would we start seeing more intregally suppressed SBR's to meet the 16" minimum length? Similar to the pinned and welded hiders we currently see on 14.7" m4 uppers.. So instead of having a two stamp suppressed SBR, you have an integrally suppressed 16" gun with zero stamps. I could get on board with that.


_________________________________________
I'm all jacked up on Mountain Dew...
 
Posts: 4552 | Location: MS | Registered: June 09, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Thank you
Very little
Picture of HRK
posted Hide Post
I don't see why we can't get at least an NFA item approval number, why should we submit for review the same material every time for every NFA item.

Once you are cleared through all the checks it should be similar to a CWP here in FL, no delay, just a background check to confirm your status is good.

That would eliminate all the extra busy work for doing the same thing over and over in the process of a sale. Heck I'd give the $200 fee, although I think it's absurd, the stamp should be on me or my NFA permit not each item.



"My rule of life prescribed as an absolutely sacred rite smoking cigars and also the drinking of alcohol before, after and if need be during all meals and in the intervals between them." Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 9983 | Location: Mouseville, FL | Registered: November 07, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Now is the time to go on the offensive. The first order of business is to remove the "sporting clause" and ban on imported title-2 firearms from the 68 GCA. That opens up a ton of options and takes away a great deal from the statist gun banners. Next, after packing the SCOTUS with conservative judges, bring a suit over 922(o) artificially inflating the cost/availability of MGs to the common man...equal protection under the law and all that. Get 922(o) struck down at a judicial level, because I just don't see congress legalizing MGs.

SBRs, SBSs, suppressors, and AOWs should not be under the purview of the NFA.


---------------------------------------------
"AND YEA THOUGH THE HINDUS SPEAK OF KARMA, I IMPLORE YOU...GIVE HER A BREAK, LORD". - Clark W. Griswald
 
Posts: 1770 | Location: The South | Registered: September 12, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of kimberkid
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by JoshNC:
Now is the time to go on the offensive. The first order of business is to remove the "sporting clause" and ban on imported title-2 firearms from the 68 GCA. That opens up a ton of options and takes away a great deal from the statist gun banners. Next, after packing the SCOTUS with conservative judges, bring a suit over 922(o) artificially inflating the cost/availability of MGs to the common man...equal protection under the law and all that. Get 922(o) struck down at a judicial level, because I just don't see congress legalizing MGs.

SBRs, SBSs, suppressors, and AOWs should not be under the purview of the NFA.

I'd say JoshNC for President ... but your probably too smart for that!


If you really want something you'll find a way ...
... if you don't you'll find an excuse.

I'm really not a "kid" anymore ... but I haven't grown up yet either Wink
 
Posts: 3935 | Registered: January 11, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
The guy behind the guy
Picture of esdunbar
posted Hide Post
I voted 0-20%. In a normal world, I'd say it would be 80-100%, but congresscritters aren't normal and things don't work as linearly as we would think.

In the first two years I expect there will be a lot of horse trading and back scratching for votes on bigger ticket items.

My guess is the HPA/NFA won't be high on the priority list for republicans. I'd expect they'll be looking to get dems to vote on replacing obama care, tax reform, laws affecting trade deficits, cleaning up the VA, Pentagon waste, etc...larger issues affecting the entire country.

Getting dems to vote for such things will require markers being called and quid pro quo. I don't expect they'll be using their capital for NFA type items.

The only way I see it getting done, is if there are enough dems from shooting states that want it done too. If there are about 10 Dems in the senate who want it done, I think it will be passed.


E.S. Dunbar
________________________________
I'm confused...wait, maybe I'm not.
 
Posts: 5585 | Location: Toledo, Ohio | Registered: April 19, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
is circumspective
Picture of vinnybass
posted Hide Post
The Duncan-Carter Hearing Protection Act, H.R. 367 introduced in the House yesterday.

https://www.nraila.org/article...rotection-act-hr-367
 
Posts: 3716 | Location: Las Vegas, NV. | Registered: May 30, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Honky Lips
Picture of FenderBender
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by kimberkid:
quote:
Originally posted by SigM4:

<snip>

Heck while we're at it let's dream about repealing the Hughes Amendment.

The likelyhood of getting an Ammendment repealed is nearly impossible ... IIRC, majority of house and senate and 38 states have to approve it ... The same reason the gun-grabbing democrats haven't been able to repeal the 2nd Ammendment.

But we can always dream!


the Hughes amendment was an amendment to a law; not the constitution.




The philosophy of protectionism is a philosophy of war. - Ludwig von Mises
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DhagKyvDck

 
Posts: 6771 | Location: Live from the high desert and the great American southwest! | Registered: July 24, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Here is my non popular take on the suppressor act.
Lets say it passes. Then everyone, and I mean everyone who can buy a pistol can now buy a can. There will be more cans on the street. This means some gun crimes would be committed with cans on the end of them. When the media gets wind of the cans being used in Illegal activities, there are going to have a field day with it. Eventually suppressors will have such a bad wrap they will make them illegal to own period.

People who normally would not have a can, now do. This has its own set of issues. Those of us who have to wait sooo long to get one now, would not do anything stupid to jeopardize our rights to own firearms, cans, etc. the guy that just turned 21 and bought his first pistol with a can on the end and knows nothing about it, could. He might shoot it in his backyard in a crowed suburban area, before he could not do this, but now he can, because he's stupid and he's impressing his friends. I think people will shoot guns in areas were they normally would not have because they had no can.

My issue is the tax stamp and the wait time, I think they should lower the tax stamp cost and wait times. My goodness, you can get a passport in a month, but you have to wait 8-12 months to get a can.

I don't think they should make buying a can like buying a pistol. I would not be the talk around the fire pit anymore, because everyone would have a can, not just me
 
Posts: 141 | Location: Marietta,GA | Registered: January 28, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of kimberkid
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by FenderBender:
the Hughes amendment was an amendment to a law; not the constitution.

Thanks ... I got that on the first page from nhracecraft


If you really want something you'll find a way ...
... if you don't you'll find an excuse.

I'm really not a "kid" anymore ... but I haven't grown up yet either Wink
 
Posts: 3935 | Registered: January 11, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of kimberkid
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by workky:
Here is my non popular take on the suppressor act.
Lets say it passes. Then everyone, and I mean everyone who can buy a pistol can now buy a can.

Sounds like the business opportunity of the year would be making threaded barrels!


If you really want something you'll find a way ...
... if you don't you'll find an excuse.

I'm really not a "kid" anymore ... but I haven't grown up yet either Wink
 
Posts: 3935 | Registered: January 11, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Delusions of Adequacy
Picture of zoom6zoom
posted Hide Post
quote:
Do you think it can get past the Chuck Schumer filibuster in the Senate?

Perhaps we can have HIM equipped with a suppressor.




I have my own style of humor. I call it Snarkasm.
 
Posts: 15412 | Location: Virginia | Registered: June 02, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  Suppressed Weapons    So if Trump gets sworn in ... NFA poll

© SIGforum 2017