Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 1/20/2002 11:20:24 AM EDT
It appears that the House and Senate have a reconciled bill (H.R. 3182 and S505) that will make all 50 BMG rifles into NFA weapons. I am not hearing any resistance to this yet. I would normally get mailers from the NRA and Gun Owners of America when something like this is moving through the system. If they succeed in demonizing the 50, don't you think that AR types weapons will be next?
Link Posted: 1/20/2002 11:23:36 AM EDT
Originally Posted By gun_nut2: It appears that the House and Senate have a reconciled bill (H.R. 3182 and S505) that will make all 50 BMG rifles into NFA weapons. I am not hearing any resistance to this yet. I would normally get mailers from the NRA and Gun Owners of America when something like this is moving through the system. If they succeed in demonizing the 50, don't you think that AR types weapons will be next?
View Quote
I thought they had already, in 1994. Preban-postban?
Link Posted: 1/20/2002 11:26:55 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SF: I thought they had already, in 1994. Preban-postban?
View Quote
I am no expert on the topic, but I don't believe that even the pre-ban AR-15's are NFA weapons. I think that true full auto weapons are NFA weapons. The House version of the bill seems to be the final version, and grandfathers in 50 BMG rifles owned before the "ban", but does not allow the manufacture of new 50's.
Link Posted: 1/20/2002 11:31:07 AM EDT
Another intersting point of the proposed legislation is that it does not ban the rifle based upon it's features. (Ban meaning making the rifle into an NFA weapon, and not allowing any new rifles to be manufactures for civilians). It bans all rifles that fire a certain caliber.
Link Posted: 1/20/2002 11:32:16 AM EDT
I'm sooooo glad, every day i have fear of being shot by a .50 in a robbery or something.
Link Posted: 1/20/2002 11:34:09 AM EDT
I have always wondered since the SPAS, USAS, etc... were banned. If you are under 21, you can legally buy these longguns. But, what if they are made NFA weapons. You have to be 21 to register an NFA Weapon. So, do you just get screwed. I could see a nice lawsuit in it. I am 20, so if they plan on doing it to ARs they will have to at least have a 1 year period to register. But, here is the trick on .50BMGs. Who actually believes that .50BMG manufacturers won't simply retool their lines to produce a new round in say .48, .49, or simply use the current Cheyennes which are just as powerfull as .50BMGs. Banning ARs will be harder as their are so many clones. Features is their best bet. But, this would require them to choose some post-ban feature to make them NFA Guns. This would reclassify most current Semi-Autos. as NFA and would cause a shitstorm. Best bet is to alter the current AW Ban and make it a new category of NFA Weapons. But, that would actually be better than the current system. At least I'd be able to pay a $5 or $200 tax on an AR and add whatever "evil" features I want. My bet would be that they make "Semi-Automatic Assault Weapons" a new category of NFA Guns. Then, we'd be able to have all the nasty stuff we want by simply paying a tax. Actually this would be preferable to the current outright ban.
Link Posted: 1/20/2002 11:46:40 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/20/2002 11:47:53 AM EDT by gun_nut2]
Originally Posted By cc48510: Actually this would be preferable to the current outright ban.
View Quote
Who here owns NFA weapons? Is it a hassle owning the weapon? What about States that don't allow private ownership of NFA weapons. Those guys will be screwed. What about the extra tax? It is something like $200. What will keep the government from going to $2,000 or $20,000? Also, aren't your fingerprints required for registration of an NFA weapon? They don't have my fingerprints yet, and I don't want to give them up. The text also disallows "a rifle capable of firing a center-fire cartridge in 50 caliber, .50 BMG caliber, any other variant of 50 caliber, or any metric equivalent of such calibers." You could argue that .48 to .52 (or greater range) is a variant of the 50. And, it still bans manufacture of new weapons. It seems to me that we get all the bad side effects of the '94 AWB and NFA registration to boot. What if they decide that 5.56 mm and variants should be NFA weapons? That is the point of my original post. Why will they stop there? Seems like this might be the next logical step in legislation when the '94 AWB sunsets.
Link Posted: 1/20/2002 12:07:44 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SKSBoy: I'm sooooo glad, every day i have fear of being shot by a .50 in a robbery or something.
View Quote
I know what you mean, but the point is that the anti's will use whatever means necessary to chip away at our gun rights. This is some text from the proposed legislation: "SEC. 2. FINDINGS. The Congress finds that-- (1) certain firearms originally designed and built for use as long-range 50 caliber military sniper weapons are increasingly sold in the domestic civilian market, and there are fewer legal restrictions on their possession or transfer than there are on handguns; (2) the intended use of these long-range firearms, and an increasing number of models derived directly from them, is the taking of human life and the destruction of materiel, including armored vehicles and such components of the national critical infrastructure as radars and microwave transmission devices; (3) these firearms are neither designed nor used in any significant number for legitimate sporting or hunting purposes and are clearly distinguishable from rifles intended for sporting and hunting use; (4) extraordinarily destructive ammunition for these weapons, including armor-piercing and armor-piercing incendiary ammunition, is freely sold in interstate commerce; and (5) the virtually unrestricted availability of these firearms and ammunition, given the uses intended in their design and manufacture, present a serious and substantial threat to the national security." Most of these findings could be construed to apply to many other types of rifle. The AR is a military type weapon. And AP type ammo is available, isn't it?
Link Posted: 1/20/2002 12:12:09 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cc48510 You have to be 21 to register an NFA Weapon. So, do you just get screwed. I could see a nice lawsuit in it. I am 20, so if they plan on doing it to ARs they will have to at least have a 1 year period to register.
View Quote
You don't have to be 21 to register during the new registration period for weapons reclassified as NFA. If your possession was legal before the NFA determination, ATF has to register the reclassified firearm to you, free of charge, and without a CLEO signoff. However, if the item reclassified as NFA is not legal in your state, you've got to get rid of it. So if you were an 18 year old resident of the state of Texas with a SPAS 12, the ATF would have registered the newly-classified destructive device to you. If you were a resident of a state where destructive devices are not allowed, it wouldn't have mattered if you were 18 or 80 - it would have to be moved out of state.
Link Posted: 1/20/2002 12:12:20 PM EDT
What I was saying is that being allowed to make SAWs under the NFA would be preferable to not being able to make them at all. BTW, no state bans NFA Guns. They ban specific guns. If your state bans MGs, SBRs, etc...then it is said to not allow NFA. But, no state has a law saying "No NFA." So, unless your state has an AW Ban in which case you already can't own. I'm not saying they should regulate them. I would like to see the 94 Ban die. But, if it became permanent, I would prefer to still be able to make them even if it is under the NFA. Currently, "Assault Weapons" are 100% illegal. You can no longer make them and even Pre-Bans are questionable. Under the NFA, we'd be allowed to make them (which we can't now) and follow the NFA. I hope this law dies before its passed. But, like I said NFA is preferable to an outright ban. But, no regulation is preferable to all of them.
Link Posted: 1/20/2002 12:15:16 PM EDT
OMG, Scarecrow at least change your sig line if you are going to do this. Anybody want to bet on how long before Lord gets booted and the pics removed.
Link Posted: 1/20/2002 12:17:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/20/2002 3:09:58 PM EDT by gun_nut2]
Originally Posted By cc48510: Under the NFA, we'd be allowed to make them (which we can't now) and follow the NFA. I hope this law dies before its passed. But, like I said NFA is preferable to an outright ban. But, no regulation is preferable to all of them.
View Quote
The legislation that I referenced does both things we are talking about. It makes "pre-ban" 50's into NFA weapons, and it bans the manufacture of new 50's for civilians. The '94 AWB only banned the manufacture of new weapons that meet the evil specifications. The only way that the legislation will die before passed is if a large group of people protest it before it comes up. It will probably come up in the dark of night on the last day of a session, and it will get passed before anybody knows what happened. Both the House and Senate versions have the same wording.
Link Posted: 1/20/2002 7:43:00 PM EDT
It seems to me that this is one of those instances where a small portion of the gun rights/gun enthusiasts crowd is being attacked, and needs the help of the whole group to fight it. Without the help of the group, the 50 BMG firing weapons will become NFA weapons, and will also become extremely costly due to the new ban. This is how the anit-gun folks win. Little by little they segment us and strip our guns. With both the House and Senate having the same wording in their bills (reconciled) it appears that the anti-gun anti-50BMG people are just waiting for the right moment to advance the bills. It could happen soon. Does anybody care? Are you worried that it could be one of the guns you love that is next on the agenda?
Top Top