Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

justanidea

(291 posts)
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:00 AM Dec 2012

Why not just make assault weapons NFA? [View all]

Everybody that wants tighter control on assault weapons always proposes an all out ban on them.

Why not just have them put under Class 3 like full autos, short barrel shotguns/rifles, and silencers are? To buy that stuff you need to submit special paperwork and wait about 3-6 months for the FBI to conduct a very complex background check. Then if you get approved the gun is registered solely to you. That law has been in effect since 1934 and in all those years only two legal full autos have been used in a crime.

Clearly the NFA seems to work. Why not move assault weapons under there? It would be a ton easier to get passed and you could even get gun owners on board by offering to update the system. (E.g. instead of a 3-6 month background check and fee of $200 on every item you buy, make it a one time license which is renewed every so often.)

Seems it would work and be a good compromise??

21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
shameless bump justanidea Dec 2012 #1
Probably because there is no such thing COLGATE4 Dec 2012 #2
Well, technically you are wrong. nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #7
We had the ban on mags for 10 years former-republican Dec 2012 #8
And we should go back to those bans at the federal level nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #11
The Bushmaster used where? former-republican Dec 2012 #14
The shooting yesterday. There was a bushmaster nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #16
She owned it in CT it was legal former-republican Dec 2012 #17
Not according to multiple news sources nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #18
I'm okay with common sense gun laws but don't believe the multiple news sources former-republican Dec 2012 #19
I think you misunderstood the point I was COLGATE4 Dec 2012 #9
I am just being technically correct nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #13
Your example isn't a good one. MineralMan Dec 2012 #15
You're right. I was thinking Garand when I mentioned COLGATE4 Dec 2012 #20
"There's no such thing as an assault weapon" is an NRA lie. baldguy Dec 2012 #21
Assuming you use the same 1994 definition, you'd get the same result.. X_Digger Dec 2012 #3
Assault rifles already are ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #4
You know the back ground check is the same as applying for a handgun permit former-republican Dec 2012 #5
Idea or you shintao Dec 2012 #6
why not just do the fuck away with them. spanone Dec 2012 #10
Interesting idea. I'll just point out that the present NFA registry is a mess. slackmaster Dec 2012 #12
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why not just make assault...