SBR or Handgun? Which should have been NFA-exempt

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SBR or Handgun? Which should have been NFA-exempt

Posted: 2/13/2006 6:35:05 PM EDT

Poll coming.

In 1933-34 the att general's office was pushing for a gun ban. Congress rejected this and instead went the taxation route like we have today.

Originally all handguns would have been on the NFA along with any self loading firearm firing more than 12 rounds and shotguns w/ barrells under 16".

The bill was then majorly overhauled with advice from the NRA and others (particularly those who wanted pistols exempted)

So 'SBR' rifles (under 18") were added and handguns removed.

Posted: 2/13/2006 6:36:25 PM EDT

[#1]

Well......call me crazy.....but according to this thing called the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment....both should be NFA-exempt.

In fact, there shouldn't even be an NFA!

Posted: 2/13/2006 6:36:39 PM EDT

[#2]

Neither should be NFA-restricted.

Posted: 2/13/2006 6:41:30 PM EDT

[#3]

I totally agree but back when what is now the NFA was proposed it was different in it's defintions than it is now.

The AG's office demanded handguns be subject to the NFA but that never happened so they included what is now called a 'short barrelled rifle' instead.

Basically from what I gather the AG at the time, Homer Cummings, was REALLY pizzed handguns were not on the NFA and lobbied hard to get them added.

Good thing he failed.

Basically the Roosevelt administration wanted total bans on machineguns and handguns for civilians but never could get them.

Posted: 2/13/2006 6:44:11 PM EDT

[#4]

Well from a common sense stand point.....both should be NFA or both should be exempt. Why would making a rifle or a shotgun pistol sized be bad if you can have a pistol? I could see the idea if pistols where banned or regulated...and people where making rifles and shotguns that could be carried like a handgun.

Posted: 2/13/2006 6:46:04 PM EDT

[#5]

Actually smoothbore pistols were added to the NFA as 'any other weapons'.

It was rifled bore pistols that people wanted exempted like 1911s.

Posted: 2/13/2006 6:46:44 PM EDT

[#6]

Cummings was a cocksucker.

Posted: 2/13/2006 6:53:23 PM EDT

[#7]

I voted handguns...but now that I think about it, it really is a tough call.

I agree that no firearms should be restricted...but for the sake of argument I'll play along.

Even if a rifle is an SBR, it is still impracticle for most personal defense outside of your home. For inside your home it is perfect, but SBR's are still too big, heavy and cumbersome for someone to tote around all day at the shopping mall.

Handguns are easily concealed, lightweight and still highly effective for stopping attacks. If we didn't have handguns then we also would not have concealed carry.

Therefore, I think that it is better to have handguns widely available than to have SBR's widely available IF you can only have 1 of the 2. Obviously it would be best to have both completely unrestricted.

Posted: 2/13/2006 6:58:15 PM EDT

[#8]

No argument.

I merely posted what was fact and history.

The tyrant Cummings was mad that too many lawmakers wanted handguns exempt ('standard' handguns mind you not pen guns)

Originally he proposed a compromise exempt .22 LR pistols but not others.

No go.

So we got the NFA we have today as amended by the GCA of 1968

Posted: 2/13/2006 7:11:35 PM EDT

[#9]

Always good reading on how federal gun laws have come into effect: Click here for a lot of info on fed gun laws

From the link:

The late 1920s and early 1930s brought, however, a growing perception of crime both as a major problem and as a national one.24 Public officials did much to support the perception; Attorney General Homer Cummings, for instance, publicly estimated that America was being terrorized by half a million armed thugs, a force larger than the contemporary United States Army.25 The mobility of the automobile enabled criminals, in those pre-police radio days, to move between jurisdictions before police units could generally be alerted; such criminal gangs found the submachinegun (a fully automatic, shoulder-fired weapon utilizing automatic pistol cartridges) and sawed-off shotgun deadly for close-range fighting. The resulting quest for law enforcement solutions approached the incredible. At one 1933 hearing, for instance, a Senate subcommittee heard, with no recorded skepticism, calls for a ban on felons riding in automobiles, universal fingerprinting of all citizens, mandatory "papers" for interstate travel, and enactment of national vagrancy laws authorizing warrantless search and arrest of anyone "reputed" to "habitually violate" the laws (with law enforcement officials to testify as to the arrestee's reputation).26 On a more practical plane, [Page 591] the Department of Justice proposed what became the National Firearms Act of 1934. The constitutional basis for federal intervention, very much an issue in 1934,27 was resolved by patterning the firearm legislation after the Narcotic Drug Act of 1914.28 The Narcotic Drug Act used the taxing power to support distributor licensing, requirements that sales be accompanied by a "written order" preserved by the seller and subject to inspection, and a ban on interstate shipment by unlicensed persons. As the Narcotic Drug Act had survived legal challenge, albeit narrowly,29 it was consciously employed as a model for the new firearm legislation.30

What became the National Firearms Act was introduced as H.R. 9066.31 H.R. 9066 would have applied to any "firearm," [Page 592] a term defined to mean "a pistol, revolver, shotgun having a barrel less than sixteen inches in length, or any other firearm capable of being concealed on the person, a muffler or silencer therefor, or a machine gun."32 "Machine gun" was in turn defined as any weapon capable of firing twelve or more shots without manual reloading.33 All persons engaged in the business of selling such "firearms" were to register with the Collector of Internal Revenue; all sales were subject to a special tax and were to be made pursuant to a written order form. Absent payment of the tax, a firearm could not be shipped in interstate commerce; moreover, knowing possession of a firearm transferred in violation of these requirements was itself a crime.

During committee consideration, a substitute bill was prepared by the Justice Department. The substitute sought to fill a major gap in the original bill, which (consistent with its excise theme) would have applied only to firearms sold after its enactment.34 The substitute required existing "firearm" owners to register their arms within sixty days, except "with respect to any firearm acquired after the effective date of, and in conformity with the provisions of, this Act."35 This would still be premised on the taxing power: "it is important to be able to identify arms to see which possessors have paid taxes and which firearms have been taxed and which have not."36 The substitute also refined the definition of "firearm" to exclude .22 caliber pistols and to include rifles and shotguns alike if their barrels were under eighteen inches.

When ultimately reported out as H.R. 9741, the substitute embodied two additional and significant changes to the definition [Page 593] of "firearm."37 First, pistols and revolvers were omitted, so that the bill applied to machineguns, sawed-off shotguns and rifles, silencers, and concealable firearms other than pistols and revolvers.38 Second, the definition of "machinegun" was changed to cover firearms that fired more than once for each pull of the trigger, regardless of how many shots they might fire before reloading was necessary. The transfer tax on machineguns was fixed at $200, then about a 100% excise tax.39 While the Attorney General described the amended bill as little more than "a Federal Machine-gun act,"40 it had little difficulty securing enactment as the National Firearms Act of 1934.41

The National Firearms Act delayed, rather than defused, the drive for federal regulation of ordinary firearms and ammunition.

Posted: 2/13/2006 7:14:44 PM EDT

[#10]

That was a truely dark time in American History. People fail to realize how close to a Socialist State we came to back then.

Fuck Cummings, I hope his soul is rotting in hell.

Posted: 2/13/2006 7:17:00 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
That was a truely dark time in American History. People fail to realize how close to a Socialist State we came to back then.

Fuck Cummings, I hope his soul is rotting in hell.

+1

Fuck FDR too.

Posted: 2/13/2006 7:19:49 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Quoted:
That was a truely dark time in American History. People fail to realize how close to a Socialist State we came to back then.

Fuck Cummings, I hope his soul is rotting in hell.

+1

Fuck FDR too.

What is really messed up about the whole damn deal is how they pump FDR to be the saving grace of the USA back then. When in reality he is nothing but the founding father of big government and the welfare state.

Posted: 2/13/2006 7:21:04 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That was a truely dark time in American History. People fail to realize how close to a Socialist State we came to back then.

Fuck Cummings, I hope his soul is rotting in hell.

+1

Fuck FDR too.

What is really messed up about the whole damn deal is how they pump FDR to be the saving grace of the USA back then. When in reality he is nothing but the founding father of big government and the welfare state.

Don't tell that to old people. They still love FDR. At least my late grandma did.

Posted: 2/13/2006 7:24:07 PM EDT

[#14]

We've had Safety-Nazi's since the first whiteboys hit these shores.

Times and toys may change but their agenda stays the same. One self anointed class feels it is their God given duty to control everyone else...

Posted: 2/13/2006 7:30:01 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
We've had Safety-Nazi's since the first whiteboys hit these shores.

Times and toys may change but their agenda stays the same. One self anointed class feels it is their God given duty to control everyone else...

FDR, H Cummings, and the rest of his ilk were about control, not safety. They are socialists, they are everything the USA is not supposed to be.

There is a reason god gave FDR polio.

Posted: 2/13/2006 7:30:08 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Well from a common sense stand point.....both should be NFA or both should be exempt. Why would making a rifle or a shotgun pistol sized be bad if you can have a pistol? I could see the idea if pistols where banned or regulated...and people where making rifles and shotguns that could be carried like a handgun.

I've always found this retarded as well: "Well what if they try to hide the rifle with a short barrel?". That logic only works if you can't have pistols. Me---

---idiot Cummings

Posted: 2/13/2006 7:32:45 PM EDT

[#17]

FDR, wilson, johnson, and clinton - these 4 presidents are at the root of most of what is wrong with the US GOV today.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SBR or Handgun? Which should have been NFA-exempt

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us