HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Here's a firearms comprom...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:53 AM

Here's a firearms compromise I've often thought of (involves a lot of give from both sides)

Somebody who has views that differ significantly from mine recently pointed to the National Firearms Act as gun control that works. I happen to agree with this. So, try this one on for size...there's a lot of compromise involved for EVERYBODY here, seems a good via media.

Bring every firearm in the country under the aegis of the NFA but make the licensing shall-issue for Title I (non-auto/non-short-barreled weapons) while retaining the same background check and safe-storage requirements. Eliminate the transfer tax, it's just a silly anachronism at this point. Reopen the Title II registry; closing it had literally zero effect on crime. Allow for a CCW endorsement with a class and skills test. Subsidize the licensing/registration process heavily...I doubt the subsistence hunters I knew in PA could even think about complying if they had to pay the going prices. And to ice the cake, full Federal preemption of all state firearms laws...this would be the hardest part for sure, but if nothing else take a carrot-and-stick approach as is done with drinking age. No federal law enforcement money for a state that wants to go their own way maybe. There's some piddling details to work out like interstate movement and whether to keep silencers Title II, but that's the basic framework I have in mind.

It's a tough sell to everybody involved - licensing/reg is a huge fail with pro-gunners, CCW and an open machine gun registry are as anathemic to pro-controllers. But, I reluctantly concede the NFA does work and perhaps we should use those proven regulations on a wider scale.

I'll even allow for a magazine limit, even as low as 10 - I carry a 1911, always said if I as a civilian, interested in only my own defense, need more than 8 rounds, my number has come up; and when I'm using my EVIL ASSAULT WEAPON for its purchased purpose of hunting (it's actually a "battle weapon" being a semiauto .308 but I digress), I have a 5-round magazine in it.

So there you go. A compromise offer from a guy who needs to use his toes to count his guns (all of which except 3 are bolt or pump action, and all of which are stored in a safe locked in a storage unit outside of NY where I currently live), and has already admitted to CCWing and hunting with an EBR. I fully expect all of you to hate me, either as a "gun nut" or a "traitor". Cheers!

edit
I am not now nor have I ever been a member of the NRA. When I lived in CT I had to drive over an hour to find a range that didn't require NRA membershit (typo but so perfect I'm leaving it ), which I did in a heartbeat.

58 replies, 2608 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 58 replies Author Time Post
Reply Here's a firearms compromise I've often thought of (involves a lot of give from both sides) (Original post)
sir pball Dec 2012 OP
DanM Dec 2012 #1
sir pball Dec 2012 #3
BainsBane Dec 2012 #18
sir pball Dec 2012 #23
letemrot Dec 2012 #19
Zoeisright Dec 2012 #36
sir pball Dec 2012 #39
snooper2 Dec 2012 #43
Schema Thing Dec 2012 #2
sir pball Dec 2012 #4
Schema Thing Dec 2012 #5
sir pball Dec 2012 #6
clffrdjk Dec 2012 #7
Schema Thing Dec 2012 #8
clffrdjk Dec 2012 #11
99Forever Dec 2012 #47
Bake Dec 2012 #9
Bake Dec 2012 #10
Schema Thing Dec 2012 #12
Bake Dec 2012 #13
NutmegYankee Dec 2012 #54
DanTex Dec 2012 #14
sir pball Dec 2012 #15
Recursion Dec 2012 #20
former-republican Dec 2012 #31
sir pball Dec 2012 #38
former-republican Dec 2012 #42
sir pball Dec 2012 #45
former-republican Dec 2012 #48
sir pball Dec 2012 #16
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #24
Recursion Dec 2012 #17
former-republican Dec 2012 #30
sir pball Dec 2012 #41
yewberry Dec 2012 #21
sir pball Dec 2012 #25
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #22
sir pball Dec 2012 #26
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #28
Hoyt Dec 2012 #27
sir pball Dec 2012 #35
Hoyt Dec 2012 #37
sir pball Dec 2012 #50
Hoyt Dec 2012 #51
sir pball Dec 2012 #52
Hoyt Dec 2012 #53
sir pball Dec 2012 #55
Hoyt Dec 2012 #57
sir pball Dec 2012 #58
former-republican Dec 2012 #29
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #32
former-republican Dec 2012 #33
sir pball Dec 2012 #34
sir pball Dec 2012 #40
former-republican Dec 2012 #44
sir pball Dec 2012 #46
former-republican Dec 2012 #49
jeff47 Dec 2012 #56

Response to sir pball (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:59 AM

1. NRA'ers ideas of "compromise" are not acceptable. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanM (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:28 AM

3. Reading issues?

Gone quite out of my way to avoid the NRA. Spent enough on gas in two range trips to pay for a membership, still not.

Did you even read the body of my post? I'm proposing a 4 month background check for a license, registration of all firearms, and strict access-control measures. Isn't that "reasonable"?

Or is your idea of "compromise" more along the lines of "surrender all your guns (with no restitution of course) and you won't go to jail"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:13 AM

18. Try defining your acronyms

As required in standard English, and lose the gun jargon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #18)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:25 AM

23. The only thing that's "gun jargon"

Is CCW, which I generally assume people on both sides of the debate understand. Carrying a Concealed Weapon.

NFA, National Firearms Act, is best explained by Wikipedia as it's a detailed set of Federal regulations. I should have embedded a link.

Anything else?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:13 AM

19. Your last paragraph

 

Sums up my take away from many here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:41 AM

36. Awwww. Are you scared?

Sure seems like it. Go hump your gun somewhere else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zoeisright (Reply #36)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:48 AM

39. So in other words

Licensing and registration of ALL owners and ALL firearms, plus stringent SECURE-storage (not just locked up, but demonstrably only accessible by the registered owner), isn't acceptable to you?

Pray tell, what is?

FWIW, my guns are currently locked up three ways over a thousand miles away, NYC is hardly a friendly place even for a completely inoffensive deer rifle. The only thing I hump here is my girlfriend (insert tiny-penis joke here, I know you want to).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanM (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:33 AM

43. deep dude real deep...

This is the kind of back-and-forth I expect on the Intertubes!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:10 AM

2. 5.


five rounds.


Slow down reloading by a standard mechanical change on all guns and/or mags.



Track and account-for-yearly every bullet sold.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Schema Thing (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:34 AM

4. Possibly

I don't need a quick change mag in the field and don't carry extra mags with my handgun, how about 7 rounds fixed?

If by "track" you mean flash my license and have the purchase recorded, sure - I can go through 1000s of rounds a year though, have fun with that. Microstamping/"fingerprinting"? No. Expensive, impractical, proven unsuccessful (cf. New York's failed project)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:52 AM

5. deal on the 7 fixed

By "track" I mean that (and you're not gonna like this) bullets should be fairly cheap and plentiful - at licensed heavily monitored gun ranges where a shell casing is inventoried for every bullet sold and every bullet sold is fired there on that range.


Outside of licensed gun-ranges, bullets should be sold to civilians only in limited quantities per year to people who jump through hoops to show civic responsibility in order to purchase them.


And yes, I want literal hoops. And you have to wear a tutu whilst jumping through said hoops.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Schema Thing (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:15 PM

6. Why not just restrict it parallel with the guns?

The NFA requires an exhaustive, 4 to 6-month background check, and more importantly, access-controlled storage - e.g. the ATF is allowed to inspect your storage system, and while there are no specific rules, the weapons must be stored in such a way that only you can get to them. Failure to do so is (I believe) prosecuted as an illegal transfer even if nothing has actually happened. Would the same requirements for storing ammunition be sufficient?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:28 PM

7. The background check is only takes so long

Because of the limited number of ATF agents devoted to doing the checks.

As what many here would and have called a gun-nut I can accept you proposal but I need two more things.

1. The background checks can be more in depth but more resources need to be devoted to the check. 4 months is far too long, one month is pushing it.

2 no magazine restrictions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clffrdjk (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:22 PM

8. If you are serious about saving lives



you'll accept magazine restrictions, and severe ones at that.


Here in Texas, FREEDOM CENTRAL TEXeffingAS, we can only load up 3, count 'em THREE shotgun shells. And it's been that way for a long long time.


We've somehow managed to get by for lo these many years.

If we can protect Ducks from overwhelming firepower, we can protect humans from overwhelming firepower.

And if you aren't serious about saving lives, then stfu and recuse your sorry ass from the national conversation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Schema Thing (Reply #8)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:42 PM

11. Let me sum up your post.

Agree with me or sit the fuck down and shut up.

I am a duck hunter I know all about the federal ban on hunting migratory birds with more than three shells.
Here is my compromise, if you want extream magazine restrictions, because there is no reason to ever need more than 5 rounds, it must apply to everyone the only exemption being deployed military. No exemptions for anyone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clffrdjk (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:41 AM

47. "Agree with me or sit the fuck down and shut up."

That's been the gun freaks stand for decades.

The worm has turned.

Deal with it.

Your reign of terror is coming to an end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Schema Thing (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:32 PM

9. Track every bullet sold? Seriously?

Good luck with that.

Bake

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Schema Thing (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:42 PM

10. Do I need to ask your permission every time I go to the range?

And show you my empty casings?

Bake

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bake (Reply #10)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:53 PM

12. No, why would you ask about my "permission"? But yes of course

you will need to turn in your gun casings.


Don't worry, you'll be fine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Schema Thing (Reply #12)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 02:51 PM

13. You're the one who wants to track all the bullets.

That's not the brightest idea I've seen here ... just sayin'.

Bake

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Schema Thing (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:48 AM

54. Not possible.

Last edited Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:38 PM - Edit history (1)

There are too many designs out there to make a standard change. Some use clips which wouldn't be practical to modify (M1 clip), or magazines with varying dimensions and heights (like handguns). There is also the lever action (like Henry) rifle style of loading - rounds are slid one after another into a tube under the barrel.

It's also not possible to track bullets once fired. The bullet is usually either destroyed beyond recognition on impact or is buried so far in a dirt bank that it cannot be recovered. And that's assuming you could find it. You may have meant track the shells or casings, but the problem is it's easy to reload and reuse them. Bullets are for most target shooting just lead, and easy to cast. Many sport shooters reload their own ammo, often to adjust the powder charge for maximum accuracy (or lower recoil).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 03:32 PM

14. Now we're getting somewhere...

I'd take this deal. Expanding CCW plus re-opening title II in exchange for licensing and registration of all handguns and semi-autos. I don't know how I feel about subsidies -- on the other hand, I don't think that non-semi-auto long guns need to be registered necessarily. They aren't used in many crimes: if we ever get to the point where crimes committed with bolt action rifles are a big problem, that means we will have made enormous amounts of progress from where we are now.

We might disagree about how burdensome the licensing/registration process should be. To me, in addition to stopping things like straw purchases, part of the reason for licensing and registration is to ensure that gun owners take gun ownership seriously, and discourage "casual" or irresponsible gun ownership. Still, we're pretty close.

Another thing, I think cities like NYC have the right to ban CCW. I don't think it's a good idea for people to be carrying concealed on crowded city streets. I'm not sure how you would get consistent national CCW standards while still allowing some cities to opt out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #14)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:02 AM

15. Put them all on a Form 4

The standard NFA form, with a more exhaustive and thorough background check. It's worked so far to weed out the bad eggs, no reason to start distrusting it now.

Bolt-action rifles I can see looser regulations on but shotguns absolutely must be under the same regs as semiautos...the Remington 870 pump is used by half the world's military and police and is arguably deadlier than an M4. IIRC (hard to find stats, on my phone) there are as many or even slightly more shotgun murders than rifles of all types; if we're discussing this in part because of semiauto rifle crimes we should roll shotguns into it. Me, for simplicity and consistency, everything that goes bang goes on a Form 4, sans the current tax and may-issue aspect.

I guess there could be some sort of population-density based metric for CCW, counties or municipalities above x people per square mile are no-carry?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #15)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:14 AM

20. Just allow local governments to apply for CCW waivers with ATF

I don't think we need to set rules, just let the localities work it out with the bureaucrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #15)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 02:02 AM

31. I appreciate the effort but it would never work

 

Not the way BATF is set up now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #31)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:43 AM

38. The structure is there though

Which is why I'm framing it like this. No, the majority of BATFE isn't set up to deal with NFA stuff, but it's a lot easier to just expand processes that are already established in the department than to try and create any new processes (which is what we need - not a rewarming of 1994). It would be a hell of a lot more efficient at any rate - One Law To Rule Them All.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #38)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:27 AM

42. Can you imagine the logistical nightmare everyday though?

 

Think of how many firearms are sold every day through out the country.
Are you proposing that every firearm be on a form 4 with a set of prints every time a weapon is sold?

Or it would be a one time check on prints?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #42)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:36 AM

45. Good question

I am actually proposing Form 5s (tax-exempt) for every sale...of course, from what I'm reading, a lot of the background check time is spent figuring out whether the firearm in question is legal in the jurisdiction in question; uniform Federal-level laws would eliminate that bottleneck. Maybe structure it so the first purchase gets the magnifying glass, and after that the form can be approved based on an NICS-style instant-check system that validates the applicant as still being approved. Like security clearances - you don't need an SSBI every time you access documents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #45)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:41 AM

48. Give me some time to toss this around

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:06 AM

16. Oh, any size magazine you want..

..for any Title II guns you own. Get caught with the mag, prove you own the fully automatic weapon it feeds or else.

Not much point to an MP5 with 7 rounds, just sayin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:25 AM

24. You could rent the longer mag at the range.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:09 AM

17. I'm moving towards universal NFA scheduling too

I think that's the only thing that could work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #17)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:55 AM

30. When the last time you bought one?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #30)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:15 AM

41. If the registry were open,

I'd have picked up something a few years ago when I was flush with cash, but I wasn't $8-18K flush. I actually wish I had the means to make the law apply to me!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:20 AM

21. I know this is lame, but I'm trying to keep up.

I'm not a gun person but I care a lot about this.

Would you please explain your post as though you were responding to a neophyte? (You are.)

"Bring every firearm in the country under the aegis of the NFA but make the licensing shall-issue for Title I (non-auto/non-short-barreled weapons) while retaining the same background check and safe-storage requirements."

Wha?

"Eliminate the transfer tax, it's just a silly anachronism at this point. Reopen the Title II registry; closing it had literally zero effect on crime."

Ditto.

"There's some piddling details to work out like interstate movement and whether to keep silencers Title II, but that's the basic framework I have in mind. "

I guess I just don't speak the language.

And I really, really appreciate your willingness to discuss this issue. As someone who is not involved with guns, my perspective has always been that gun-rights advocates (primarily NRA) have always been unwilling to make any kinds of compromises at all. It's time to talk about this, and I want to understand your perspective. We may not necessarily agree about everything, but I really do welcome your input. You are more educated on this issue than I and I am hoping you and other gun owners will continue to be willing to discuss your concerns and value the perspective of the non-gun owners.

We don't hate you, y'know. We're incredibly sad and angry. Desperate for a solution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yewberry (Reply #21)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:33 AM

25. I'd explain in detail but I'm on my phone..

If you head over to Wikipedia and look up "National Firearms Act", there's a pretty detailed article. I'm basically advocating bringing all guns under it's regulation (with a few modifications) while providing some pretty serious incentives for firearms enthusiasts.

I know I was being somewhat technical; I was floating a trial balloon to see what those invested in the debate, who'd know what I meant, would think. That and complete elaboration would take, well, a Wiki article

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:25 AM

22. Let me add one

Once it becomes very practical, all privately held weapons must be back fitted to smart gun technology.

We can make special allowances for real collectible (Kentucky long, Henry, winchesterbut we should work to even fit a Garand to the technology.

As you said, we are back to bolt action...we made progress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #22)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:36 AM

26. OK, but

Not holding my breath. I'll consider it "very practical" when law enforcement takes it up. Not that I object to the technology but it's gotta be damn near perfect for me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #26)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:49 AM

28. NJ State police has been testing it.

In the field no less.

It's not perfect, but it is getting there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:42 AM

27. I'd prefer limit of two non-semi-autos, little public carrying, regular psychological evaluation,.

private sales must go through FFL, etc.

Since we are just proposing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #27)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:39 AM

35. So propose in your own OP plz kthx

Don't have to hear anything you have to say to know that anything you float is going to be fatally incompatible with anything I float; you've already deemed me a killer-in-the-wings for multiple reasons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #35)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:43 AM

37. Easy to spot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #37)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:51 AM

50. If it helps you sleep at night

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #50)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:56 AM

51. I think that is what society is trying to do with respect to guns, along with preventing massacres,

and further gun abuse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #51)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:32 AM

52. Society maybe, not you

All you seem to like to do is make res ips accusations of latent ultra-violent personality disorders based on the fact that I own one rifle with a pistol grip and detachable magazine; I'm not going to get into why several of my "acceptable" bolt-action rifles would be far more lethal and effective at their purposes than that Evil Rifle.

I will cheerfully say that after fifteen years of clinical neuropsychological exams (don't get too excited, it was for learning disabilities), I'm Professionally Certified(TM) to be quite well-adjusted, if anything overly "empathic and sensitive to the reactions of others."

I guess they're wrong, you're right, and therefore even exhaustive psych testing won't catch us maniacs...so now you can just call for a total ban on everything!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #52)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:42 AM

53. Sorry, man, I just think that is what is best regarding those types of weapons.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #53)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:54 AM

55. It's less that you think it's what's best

And more your self-admitted blanket Catch-22 thinking regarding them and violent behavior. I'd guess you are right that crazies are generally a subset of "assault weapon" owners, but not all (or even the majority of) "assault weapon" owners are crazies.

Course, if you're calling for an in-depth pysch eval, why worry about what firearms the people who pass the bar want? Seems to me that after being cleared as non-violently-psychotic it shouldn't matter what weapons one owns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #55)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:02 PM

57. I disagree. If one wants/needs one of those things, it's evidence they have some issue.


It might not be currently recognized as psychosis, but it is an issue and one society needs to deal with soon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #57)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:24 PM

58. You're telling me I have an unrecognized psychosis

So deeply buried that almost every psychological test in current use can't detect?

Seriously?

I thought you were actually being reasonable for a moment.

I bought my AR-10(T) because it was the best deer-hunting rifle I could get for the price at the time. It's totally incapable of "mowing down children" or "spray firing from the hip" - it's 40 inches long and weighs fifteen pounds. Literally impossible to hit a man-sized target at 25 yards while shooting offhand, between the massive target barrel and relatively heavy recoil of the full-power .308 round. Designed from the start as a precision marksmanship rifle, to be fired off some sort of a rest using a scope. Doesn't even come with iron sights. I can fire it no more rapidly than my later-purchased bolt-action .300 Magnum, while (I've tried this) loading the .300 from a pile of rounds on the bench - I can blow off a thousand at that rate. And the .300 is damn near twice as powerful. I'd be perfectly happy if the AR had wood-laminate furniture, it would keep people from shrieking so loudly.

I'd be fine with a limited magazine size, even a mechanically fastened one ("bullet button" style, a la California). When I hunt I'm legally barred from more than 5, and at the range I never fire more than nine or ten shots in a string. Rattling off a magazine of 20 is going to do nothing more than overheat the thing, I'd rather not spend hundreds on a new barrel.

Anyway, if I were out to rack up a kill count, I'd use a 12-gauge pump-action shotgun. Deadliest CQB weapon ever.

ETA - here's my bolt-action (not mine actually, but the same model outfitted the same). It's BLACK! With a SCOPE! AND BIPOD! Am I also secretly a delusional psychotic sniper-wannabe?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:50 AM

29. You would have to hire another 100,000 BATF clerks or investigators , what ever you want to call

 

them , Right now they are back logged 6 months.

Also there is no more investigation done on a class 3 or AOW transfer than a CCW permit

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 02:06 AM

32. Fine with me except that everybody you want to stop will just ignore it. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #32)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 02:14 AM

33. None of this will stop a criminal but it creates an investigate tool for after the fact

 

Border guards find a shipment of drugs in an empty tunnel.
Makes good pics for the press.

Border guards find a shipment of guns , now they are easy to trace.
Cops find a gun at a shooting now they can trace where it came from.

None of this stops criminals , that's why they are called criminals.

This would be a nightmare for BATF though.
Everything would have to change on how they internally operate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #32)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:37 AM

34. Same goes for anything short of

Simultaneous totally unannounced door-busting forcible confiscation (got to get every one pretty much instantly, before the rebels can spread the word and go to ground), which is literally impossible - ~80mil owners in the country, there aren't enough soldiers (no way the cops could handle it) in the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:12 AM

40. National Firearms Act of 1934 (really really long post)

(Long-ass Wiki dump follows - breaks the 4-paragraph rule but Wiki copyright allows)

The National Firearms Act ("NFA"), 72nd Congress, Sess. 2, ch. 757, 48 Stat. 1236, enacted on June 26, 1934, currently codified as amended as 26 U.S.C. ch. 53, is an Act of Congress in the United States that, in general, imposes a statutory excise tax on the manufacture and transfer of certain firearms and mandates the registration of those firearms. The Act was passed shortly after the repeal of Prohibition. The NFA is also referred to as Title II of the Federal firearms laws. The Gun Control Act of 1968 ("GCA") is Title I.
All transfers of ownership of registered NFA firearms must be done through the federal NFA registry. The NFA also requires that transport of NFA firearms across state lines by the owner must be reported to the ATF.

The National Firearms Act of 1968 (NFA) defines a number of categories of regulated firearms. These weapons are collectively known as NFA firearms and include the following:
Machine guns—this includes any firearm which can fire more than 1 cartridge per trigger pull. Both continuous fully automatic fire and "burst fire" (i.e., firearms with a 3-round burst feature) are considered machine gun features. The weapon's receiver is by itself considered to be a regulated firearm.
Short-barreled rifles (SBRs)—this category includes any firearm with a buttstock and either a rifled barrel under 16" long or an overall length under 26". The overall length is measured with any folding or collapsing stocks in the extended position. The category also includes firearms which came from the factory with a buttstock that was later removed by a third party.
Short barreled shotguns (SBSs)—this category is defined similarly to SBRs, but the barrel must be at least 18" instead of 16", and the barrel must be a smoothbore. The minimum overall length limit remains 26".
Silencers —this includes any portable device designed to muffle or disguise the report of a portable firearm. This category does not include non-portable devices, such as sound traps used by gunsmiths in their shops which are large and usually bolted to the floor.
Destructive Devices (DDs)—there are two broad classes of destructive devices:
Devices such as grenades, bombs, explosive missiles, poison gas weapons, etc.
Any firearm with a bore over 0.50 except for shotguns or shotgun shells which have been found to be generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes. (Many firearms with bores over 0.50", such as 12-gauge shotguns, are exempted from the law because they have been determined to have a "legitimate sporting use".)
Any Other Weapons (AOWs)—this is a broad "catch-all" category used to regulate any number of firearms which the BATFE under the NFA enforces registration and taxation. Examples include, among others:
1) Smooth-bore pistols 2) Pen guns and cane guns 3) A firearm with combinations smooth bore and rifle barrels 12 inches or more but less than 18 inches in length from which only a single shot can be made from either barrel. 4) Disguised firearms 5) Firearms that can be fired from within a wallet holster or a briefcase 6) A short-barreled shotgun which came from the factory with a pistol grip and no buttstock is categorized as an AOW (smooth-bore pistol) rather than a Short Barrel Shotgun (SBS), because the Gun Control Act describes a shotgun as, “…designed or redesigned to be fired from the shoulder…” 7) Handguns with a forward vertical grip.

All NFA items must be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). Private owners wishing to purchase an NFA item must obtain approval from the ATF, obtain a signature from the Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO) who is the county sheriff or city or town chief of police (not necessarily permission), pass an extensive background check to include submitting a photograph and fingerprints, fully register the firearm, receive ATF written permission before moving the firearm across state lines, and pay a tax. The request to transfer ownership of an NFA item is made on an ATF Form 4. Many times law enforcement officers will not sign the NFA documents. There have been several unfavorable lawsuits where plaintiffs have been denied NFA approval for a transfer. These lawsuit include; Lomont v. O'Neill 2002 9th circuit, Westfall v. Miller 1996 5th circuit, and Steele v. National Firearms Branch 1985 11th circuit. In response Tennessee and Alaska have passed state laws which require the CLEO to execute the NFA documents. On October 28, 2010 in response to a writ of mandamus a Tennessee Williamson County Chancellor Robbie Beal found that the sheriff or CLEO is not required to execute NFA documents according to Tenn. Code Ann. 39-17-1361.

The domestic manufacture of new machine guns that civilians could purchase was effectively banned by language in the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 (also known as "McClure-Volkmer"). The language was added in an amendment from William J. Hughes and referred to as the Hughes Amendment. Machine guns legally registered prior to the date of enactment (i.e. May 1986) are still legal for possession by and transfer among civilians where permitted by state law. The static and relatively small number of transferable machine guns has caused their price to rise, often over $10,000, although transferable Mac-10 and Mac-11 submachine guns can still be purchased for around $3,500. Machine guns manufactured after the FOPA's enactment can be sold only to law enforcement and government agencies, exported, or held as inventory or "dealer samples" by licensed manufacturers and dealers. Machine guns made after 1986 for law enforcement but not transferable to civilian registration are usually priced only a few hundred dollars more than their semi-automatic counterparts, whereas a pre-Hughes Amendment registered machine gun that can be legally transferred commands a huge premium.


The law also requires access-controlled storage, safe storage in such a way that only the registered owner has access to the firearm.

Basically, I'm proposing expanding the law to cover ALL firearms, while either removing the Chief Law Enforcement Officer's discretionary requirement or mandating their signature, eliminating the transfer tax, re-allowing the registration of new machine guns, and allowing the licensee to carry a handgun if they pass an extra knowledge and skills test.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #40)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:34 AM

44. re-allowing the registration of new machine guns

 

I just caught that.



That's not going to happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #44)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:38 AM

46. The carrot to the stick

of licensing and registration. It's a feasible argument; not like there was a tide of machine gun crime before the registry was closed. I think 1 of the 3 (AFAIK) NFA crimes was pre-86.

Personally, it's part of what would make me take the deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #46)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:45 AM

49. There's no way they are going to repeal the hughes amendment

 

Not in this climate.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:39 PM

56. I'd recommend adding periodic re-licencing with a psychological requirement

People change over time. The dad of a friend of mine is a gun owner. 10 years ago he was fine. Now he's suicidal and has repeatedly threatened to shoot his wife.

Adding a re-licensing scheme would help ensure that the person is still able to safely keep their weapons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread