ATF Shotgun Study - Here it is!

[Tr1gg3rF1sh 1]

Yeah, and it failed to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals just like it does know. People like you just. don't. get. it.

 

GUNS DON'T CAUSE CRIME. They are "things". We have to deal with the bad PEOPLE, not things. The government uses gun control as a bullshit line to feed ignorant sheep so they'll think our representatives are trying to do something about crime.

 

No, I'm afraid you don't get it.

 

Laws aren't for "dealing with bad people" - criminals don't abide by law. No threat of law will influence them. They refuse to consent to law, or be governed.

 

Law is for responsible citizens. As a responsible citizen, I don't whine like a child because I can't get my NFA cookie right NOW NOW NOW. I am content knowing that I am a free citizen and have the right to, and will get it after DUE PROCESS OF LAW has found that I am in fact a responsible citizen.

 

You are contradicting yourself! If criminals don't obey laws and ONLY law abiding citizens obey laws then why pass them on us? We are not the problem. It's idiotic posturing and feel good legislation implemented by politicians. Most of whom aren't worth a shit.

These feel good policies have inflated the current stock of NFA weapons by several thousand percent!!! That's right.. I said several thousand. take, for example, an registered HK F/A sear. It used to cost about 400.00 for one. Now 15yrs later they are 12,000.00 a piece!!! WTF?

look at the Saiga! it's a cheap stamped russian made weapon. not worth much and sells for 400-500bucks (usually) Now in a matter of weeks these have increased to 600-700! That's crazy.

 

We have god given rights and for you to argue that there is an acceptable compromise.....is pure idiocy. You don't ever let the camel get his nose under the tent. If you do the whole camel will be in the tent before long. We've been letting our politicians usurp way to much power from the individual states. We need to make this back into a republic with strong individual nation states. I for one do not want a single governing body and I do not want a bunch of wack jobs in NY,IL,CA,OR, D.C., and some other ultra liberal ghey states to have a word in dictating my rights in TX? They don't know me and from what I've met of them through business travels I sure as hell don't have much in common with them.

 

One more thing....Our country is based upon the premise that we are innocent and responsible citizens until proven guilty..........so why the hell should we have to prove that innocence to our overbloated gov't just to own something that was our right to own in the first place!

you probably were that kid that would raise your hand in class to use the restroom and if the teacher said no then you would squirm and hold it....maybe even pee yourself a little bit!

Me I was the kid that politely raised his hand asked to use the restroom.....and if my teacher tried to tell me to hold it I would get up and walk to the door. If my teacher was bold enough to try to stop me or berate me then I would tell them to go fuck themselves and that my bodily functions weren't going to adhere to their schedule.

 

that's probably the difference between you and I.

[Bridis 319]

Lets see if we can make it 15 pages of speculation and misinformation.

[lbsrdi 1,078]

Lets see if we can make it 15 pages of speculation and misinformation.

 

Come on guys, you can do it.

[Bridis 319]

There is surely enough hot air and conspiracy theories to fill another 5 or 6 more pages. I can't wait to read all of the posts to come from people who really have no more of an idea of what's going to happen than the next guy.

[Mephis 82]

You know, I was just thinking.. While I'm having trouble finding it now, I'm pretty sure the NFA definitions for a DD shotgun specify a smoothbore.

 

Could we get around this by getting a rifled barrel group buy going for our S12s? I'd LOVE a rifled barrel S12 anyhow!

 

Edit: found the regs on ATF's site. Nope, DD definition does not include a smoothbore requirement.

 

But, a rifled barrel S12 should be able to be legally cut down to 16" - because it would now be considered a rifle, from what I can tell.

 

 

A rifled barreled saiga 12 would be the most terrifyingly destructive thing imaginable lol.

 

20 round drum fed semi-auto capable of 250+ yard accuracy, with the power of a large caliber rifle. God what a beautiful idea.

 

Imagine what a drum full of rem. buckhammers would do, or the dixie DGS.

Edited March 5, 2011 by Tombs

[mikegraffam 11]

 

Laws are for responsible citizens? Do you live in a world that uses logic? Responsible citizens wouldn't and don't need laws. I don't run around killing people. I don't drive recklessly. I don't engage in armed robberies. And it's certianly not due to the fact that there is a law telling me not to. And if you know people that would engage in said activities, but are only stopped by said laws, then 1. they are, by your definition, criminals, and 2. not responsible citizens.

 

Look at Katrina. Law broke down there. There were people there that didn't loot and kill. People don't need laws to tell them how to act. YOU govern how you act. Your statement is one of the most idiotic, ass backwards things I've read on this forum.

 

And obviously criminals don't abide by the law, but that IS, in FACT, what politicians tell us when they try to pass them. And NO, you're not being a responsible citizen. At least not in the eyes of the men who founded this country. You are taking up the ass by our very own "representatives" in regards to ALL aspect of life, not just our gun rights.

 

I see. So, since "people don't need laws" there is really no reason to have laws at all then, right? I mean, laws are just those stupid rules that we don't need set up by the cursed "them" who rule use with an iron fist. No law. No government. Anarchy. Revolution. Gotcha. Yes, thats it.. because when the founders created the Supreme Court, and the Legislative branches of government, they did so - clearly - with contempt for the concept of law. They realized that free men needed no law. All they needed was a six gun and a case of beer, right? Sure they did.

 

I think I get it now. You're insane. Sweet. Carry on.

[Bridis 319]

Common sense is mother f 'ing this thread.

 

Keep um commin guys.

[mikegraffam 11]

 

You are contradicting yourself! If criminals don't obey laws and ONLY law abiding citizens obey laws then why pass them on us? We are not the problem.

 

See, the problem here is that folks are thinking of the "the law" only as a set of restrictions.. it is not that, it is also a set of ordinances of things one must do; it is a set of policies and procedures to be followed for the good of society. Thats not to say that we don't have bad, unjust, or ridiculous laws - of course we do. And we have a set of legal practices and procedures that citizens can take to get those things rectified. Some of those avenues are more advertised than others, but we do have several.

 

We need laws, and good people to follow them, for precisely the reason that bad people don't. So, for example - we need a law - a procedure - for gun dealers to follow so that criminals don't get guns from legitimate businesses. Sure, they'll get them elsewhere so we need border enforcement, and police raids on organized crime too. So what?

The LAW prevents the flow of guns to criminals through legitimate business (who would have no way to verify who is, or is not, a criminal without the laws and legal process). The POLICE (try) to stop the flow of guns to criminals through black markets. These are two complimentary ways of addressing the same problem.

 

A third complimentary way, which is NOT embraced, but I believe should be - is to arm the general public, both by making it easier for citizens to obtain guns and also obtain training. I think I'd cry with joy if high school students had mandatory firearms/militia training the way some other countries do. An armed public makes it very hard for criminals to prey on citizens.

 

I believe it is important to pursue as many ways as possible to disarm criminals. The legislative way is one, important way. It happens to inconvenience me. I'm OK with that.. I'm not familiar with anything in this country's founding documents to say that it was going to be easy and convenient to be an American citizen. Quite the contrary, actually. I'm NOT OK with the rights of citizens being taken away. But waiting and doing some paperwork is not an infringement on freedom. Not in the sense that the founders meant the concept, I would think. But in these days of fast food, fast cars, instant downloads and 10000 TV channels, I guess not having instant access to machine guns is a terrible tyranny.

 

The radicalized idiots who say things like "we don't need laws" are usually the first to cry "where are the cops" when shit goes sour.

 

I'm done with this thread.

[mikegraffam 11]

 

Me I was the kid that politely raised his hand asked to use the restroom.....and if my teacher tried to tell me to hold it I would get up and walk to the door. If my teacher was bold enough to try to stop me or berate me then I would tell them to go fuck themselves and that my bodily functions weren't going to adhere to their schedule.

 

that's probably the difference between you and I.

 

Thats funny. No, actually I was that kid. I never did my homework, but passed my tests, and just skated by. The principle got my parent's permission to hold me back (I passed, and he needed permission). They told me to get all 80's or above for the first two months of my repeat year of 5th grade and they'd let me move on. I did so.. I skated by, barely getting 80's. That wasn't good enough they said.. because I still wasn't 'applying myself' .. so I asked the principle, point blank "So this isn't about me getting good grades and doing well for myself, you just want me to obey?" .. he hummed and hawed, and I realized it was true. They held me back the full year, and I promptly stopped listening to anything anyone ever told me. In 7th grade I got sent to the principle's office more than anyone in the school. After 8th grade I got a $25 check for "Most Improved Discipline" at the graduation ceremony that I skipped. But guess what? I STILL got in more trouble than anyone else in 8th grade. THAT'S how much of a hellraiser I was in 7th. High school was a disaster.. I had teachers that threatened to quit if I wasn't removed from their class.

 

In my 20's I was out and about on the streets drunk one night. A cop gave me static and asked my name. My response? My name is "Bill" (pause, just a moment to let him start writing the citation) .. "Bill of Rights.. you've got no fucken reason to ask me my name man, who the hell do you..." thats about when I was thrown in the back of the car.

 

War stories. Yeah .. they are great. I grew up about 20 years ago. Made any plans in that regard?

 

No, that doesn't appear to be the difference between you and I. I would say the difference is that I'm much more willing to compromise. I'm willing to respect other people's opinions, and to try and come up with solutions which we, as a group, can live with. I believe in democracy, and I try to do my part in that process. I like to own guns, and not bolt action hunting rifles either.. I like military grade weapons. Some folks obviously disagree. I'm willing to compromise to find a solution both sides can live with. What I don't like to see is a rabid desire for no gun laws at all from one side, or no guns at all from the other. Extremism doesn't sit well with me, from either side... because it requires, implicitly that our fellow citizen's viewpoints be discarded. I don't want to live in a country where someone else's viewpoint is discarded just because it isn't mine. What the hell happens to me when I choose wrong?

 

See how that works? Democracy. Compromise. Jefferson really was a genius. Not only was the concept ahead of his time. 2011 isn't even ready for it.

[bigmegina 3]

our founding fathers came up with common law,which ment at the time common sense.read thomas pains book,common sence.what we live in today is nothing like what the founding fathers fought and died for for over 8 years to give us our freedom.there are over 25000! gun laws alone.what we live in is a empire that masquardes as a republic.obey the law?,i bet everyone commits a felony every day without even knowing it.ever drive by a school with your gun?,FELON.ever go to the post office and buy a stamp carring your pistol,FELON.these are only 2 examples of probally 100s if not thousands of laws we break every day.we have become a society of lazy, liberal,decetent,tolerant,of every abomination that our rulers put on us,and we deserve it.we are cowards who talk about freedon and rule of law and do nothing but complain as our enimies in the district of crimnals steal out freedom and our money every day.if we had any balls like the people in the middle east,who instead of sitting on their computers calling each other names and bitching,are DOING SOMETHING to secure their freedom from tyrants.they are MEN like our forfathers were and are FIGHTING for there freedom."THE BEST SLAVE IS ONE WHO DOESN"T KNOW HE IS A SLAVE"."IT IS HARD TO BREAK A SLAVES CHAINES THAT HE ADORES"

[mikegraffam 11]

our founding fathers came up with common law,which ment at the time common sense.read thomas pains book,common sence.what we live in today is nothing like what the founding fathers fought and died for for over 8 years to give us our freedom.there are over 25000! gun laws alone.what we live in is a empire that masquardes as a republic.obey the law?,i bet everyone commits a felony every day without even knowing it.ever drive by a school with your gun?,FELON.ever go to the post office and buy a stamp carring your pistol,FELON.these are only 2 examples of probally 100s if not thousands of laws we break every day.we have become a society of lazy, liberal,decetent,tolerant,of every abomination that our rulers put on us,and we deserve it.we are cowards who talk about freedon and rule of law and do nothing but complain as our enimies in the district of crimnals steal out freedom and our money every day.if we had any balls like the people in the middle east,who instead of sitting on their computers calling each other names and bitching,are DOING SOMETHING to secure their freedom from tyrants.they are MEN like our forfathers were and are FIGHTING for there freedom."THE BEST SLAVE IS ONE WHO DOESN"T KNOW HE IS A SLAVE"."IT IS HARD TO BREAK A SLAVES CHAINES THAT HE ADORES"

 

Damn it. I feel like Al Pacino from the Godfather. "Every time I try to get out, they pull me back in!" ..

 

It is clear that YOU feel like a slave. It is indeed hard to break those chains, isn't it? It is terrifying to think that we are actually free - isn't it? This is what it is when there are millions of people, each free, with a different opinion who don't know how to use spell check. Yes, there are thousands and thousands of laws on the books. Some created by bureaucratic nonsense, some created to appease an opinion that is different from yours, or mine. Some created to appease us, and piss off someone else.

 

Welcome to democracy.

 

You act like the founding fathers all held the same opinion.. that they were "MEN" of a unified, homogeneous character. Nothing could be further from the truth. Their opinions varied, greatly - and in the beginning there were several, not just two, important political parties. They argued and bitched, more or less just like now. They attacked each other - sometimes viciously with political slogans and cartoons. Sound familiar? And each was sure the others were going to destroy the country - yay! We've reformed the system and made it just like 1802!

 

The main difference between our great Founding Forefathers and us, isn't that they were more manly, or independent .. its not that we are now slaves but they were mystically free men .. the main difference, really.. is that they didn't need spell check, and every letter they wrote to one another was a masterpiece.

 

U mite tri reding them somtim. (j/k)

Edited March 5, 2011 by Michael Graffam

[Tr1gg3rF1sh 1]

Laws are for responsible citizens? Do you live in a world that uses logic? Responsible citizens wouldn't and don't need laws. I don't run around killing people. I don't drive recklessly. I don't engage in armed robberies. And it's certianly not due to the fact that there is a law telling me not to. And if you know people that would engage in said activities, but are only stopped by said laws, then 1. they are, by your definition, criminals, and 2. not responsible citizens.

 

Look at Katrina. Law broke down there. There were people there that didn't loot and kill. People don't need laws to tell them how to act. YOU govern how you act. Your statement is one of the most idiotic, ass backwards things I've read on this forum.

 

And obviously criminals don't abide by the law, but that IS, in FACT, what politicians tell us when they try to pass them. And NO, you're not being a responsible citizen. At least not in the eyes of the men who founded this country. You are taking up the ass by our very own "representatives" in regards to ALL aspect of life, not just our gun rights.

 

I see. So, since "people don't need laws" there is really no reason to have laws at all then, right? I mean, laws are just those stupid rules that we don't need set up by the cursed "them" who rule use with an iron fist. No law. No government. Anarchy. Revolution. Gotcha. Yes, thats it.. because when the founders created the Supreme Court, and the Legislative branches of government, they did so - clearly - with contempt for the concept of law. They realized that free men needed no law. All they needed was a six gun and a case of beer, right? Sure they did.

 

I think I get it now. You're insane. Sweet. Carry on.

 

Wow....you get an F on interpretation.....go to the back of the class!

 

Nobody is advocating anarchy,murder,rape,or any other illegals acts......that's just .....stupid.

Just like your advocation of laws to limit the rights of others just on the off chance that those unregulated liberties "MAY" cause them to break the law! Wow my head hurt just typing that last part.......are you sure that's the arguement you want to stick to on a firearms forum? One of the most regulated industries in the world......there are more gun control laws then you can shake a stick at and the majority of them are shit. I mean what is the difference between having an 18inch barrel and a 17inch barrel? Why can't you put VFG on a pistol to make it more controlable...or for that matter if you want a shorter weapon.....for boating, home defense, your personal vehicle. Why can't you put a buttstock on it as well? Who came up with the formula that states a 16inch barrel on a rifle is more safe to use than a 14 or 10inch barrel? I don't see them being more concealable. It's all arbitrary crap. There's no mathimatical formula that states the probability of harming someone goes way down if they regulate barrel lenght!

Why are automatice weapons regulated? If someone is going to try to do me harm and shoot at me from afar.....I would rather they do it with an 8inch barrel on full auto rather than a 16inch semi auto. ask anyone with military or leo experience.....when do they use F/A? Most of the times they are taking rapid well aimed shots in semi.....because that's the best way to hit what you're shooting at. look at the untrained masses who have access to full autos....they spray and pray.....inshallah.inshallah.....if it's gods will they'll hit their target. OK....I'm good with that. I'd rather have them running around instead of a bunch of guys with DMRs settling down and squezzing off rounds at me.

 

Of course that just my opinion.

 

your arguement is that we should all be considered bad little children by our gov't until they have a chance to finally put the bag of chips down do a background check and " decide" that you're OK to own something that they shouldn't have any say over in the first place!! What a load of crap.

 

allow people to arm themselves as they see fit. This will make predators and bullies think twice about messing with you. I mean hell Billy the Kid didn't get his name because he was a big burly dude who could fight! He looked like a KID...but he was damn fast and damn accurate....probably not the best example, but you know what I mean.

The other side of the coin.....if you kill someone unprovoked...if you're a dirty bastard that preys on others and kills them then you are hunted down and you are killed as well. There's no 20yrs of appeals. If you're found guilty you die. The courts and the state would save a ton of money and jail space and I believe murders would go way down. This extra money could be used to do DNA testing for criminals to make sure they are the guilty party....it will also allow the state to actually try to rehabilitate the person instead of sticking them in a prison and letting them out early because they didn't kill anyone in prison!! Lol!

Hell since I'm on a roll....bring back chain gangs, install some useful workplace programs and relocate (mandatory) prisoners when they are released. To send them back to the same environment that bred them in the first place! That's the same thing as the definition of crazy....doing the same thing over and over, but expecting a different outcome......OK that's the end of my rant!

[mikegraffam 11]

 

We have god given rights and for you to argue that there is an acceptable compromise.....is pure idiocy.

 

I don't know where you're getting that from. I've never said we should compromise our freedoms. Read much?

 

Anyhow, I stand corrected on everything I've said. Clearly our gun laws are useless and don't work. One of the prime motivations of such law is to prevent mental defectives from possessing firearms.

 

Sorry.. just messing with you; but I don't like the word "idiocy" any more than you like "mental defective" I'm sure; so we'll call it even and quit it with the attacks, then?

[mikegraffam 11]

Just like your advocation of laws to limit the rights of others just on the off chance that those unregulated liberties "MAY" cause them to break the law! Wow my head hurt just typing that last part.......

 

I'm sure it did hurt. Lots of syllables, huh? But I never advocated any of that, actually.

 

What I said, that started all this - apparently - is that the original 1938 NFA was a decent model for US gun control, and that I didn't like the GCA of 68, or the FAOPA or 86.

 

And yes, I stand by that. The NFA does not outlaw ANYTHING. You are not prohibited from having ANYTHING under the NFA. What it does is tax obscure weapons, and keep a record of purchase and transfer of such controlled weapons. In 1938 that functioned as a primitive background check system to limit things like Tommy guns, sawed off shotguns and other weapons which were common in organized crime and often used against police. Legitimate civilian purchase or creation of said weapons was relatively low, from my understanding, and the NFA does not control any arms that are often used and bought by civvies. The NFA doesn't RESTRICT civvies either, it just requires a bit of paperwork and provides a mechanism for the gun dealer to insure that he is selling to a good guy, and not a bad guy.

 

At a time when we didn't have RICO and all we could get Capone on was tax evasion, yes - the NFA made sense as it provided a way to get on criminals without much hardship on civvies.

 

......there are more gun control laws then you can shake a stick at and the majority of them are shit.

 

I agree. But I don't think the NFA is one of them.

 

I mean what is the difference between having an 18inch barrel and a 17inch barrel?

 

My superior math skills tell me it is precisely 1 inch. Glad I could solve that timeless mystery for you.

 

I don't see them being more concealable. It's all arbitrary crap.

 

There was a famous gangster - I believe it was one of the Barker clan, that kept a sawed of rifle under a trench coat. If you don't see how cutting off a buttstock and barrel makes a gun more concealable.. I mean, I don't know but.. are you blind? You seem to have trouble at math, so maybe it is a geometry issue? Anyhow, it was generally agreed that cut down guns weren't something that civilians were commonly using, but still it was also understood that one needed to leave a path for citizens to exercise their rights. The NFA does that.

 

The NFA was a response to gangster crime of epic proportions. And if you actually care to read up on it, you'll find that it did actually make a dent in criminal use of machine guns and military quality grenades. Criminal use of home-made bombs and cut down weapons continued, naturally.. but it did give an extra charge to tack on to criminals possessing these weapons without stamps.

 

Now.. if you want to make ME the dictator.. we won't have the NFA, for damn sure. But in a democracy where we are trying to balance several opinions and simultaneously pass laws and make procedure that let us curb a crime wave, as well as protect the rights of free citizens, in an age without computers and a fast flow of information? Yes. I think the NFA was a valiant attempt.

 

As a model of selective taxation (i.e. there are Title 1 untaxed arms, and a graduated scale that one can move up) I think it is a workable model.. its needs to be updated, as I've mentioned elsewhere. But hey.. it was drafted a long time ago, what do you want?

 

 

There's no mathimatical formula that states the probability of harming someone goes way down if they regulate barrel lenght!

 

OH! We're using mathimatics!?! Why didn't you say so before! Of course, yes.. in that case 18 - 17 is completely undefined. I mean, maybe someday a mathimatical genius will come around and figure it out but.. you know, that's not for us with limited intelligence to think on.

 

Why are automatice weapons regulated? If someone is going to try to do me harm and shoot at me from afar.....I would rather they do it with an 8inch barrel on full auto rather than a 16inch semi auto. ask anyone with military or leo experience.....

 

Because cops in 1937 got real tired of going up against gangsters with Tommy Guns.. and apparently, those cops would rather NOT go up against an automatic weapons. Pussies, naturally. Thomas Jefferson would have taken 'em all on with a knife!

 

your arguement is that we should all be considered bad little children by our gov't until they have a chance to finally put the bag of chips down do a background check and " decide" that you're OK to own something that they shouldn't have any say over in the first place!! What a load of crap.

 

Wait, there's chips? Can I have some?

 

But no. My argument is that law abiding gun dealers should have a mechanism by which they can insure that they are not selling a gun to a criminal. Because you know.. giving criminals guns is really not something we want to do, generally speaking. I mean, if they can spell well then we make an exception.. but that is sort of rare.

 

The other side of the coin.....if you kill someone unprovoked...if you're a dirty bastard that preys on others and kills them then you are hunted down and you are killed as well. There's no 20yrs of appeals. If you're found guilty you die. The courts and the state would save a ton of money and jail space and I believe murders would go way down.

 

Yeah.. see uh.. the 20 years of appeals, that is kind of there to make good and sure the person is guilty before being put to death, because.. generally speaking, folks don't come back from the dead. I mean sure, it is supposed to have happened to a few fellas in history but there has recently been some debate as to the veracity of those claims.

 

On a side note, I believe this may be the longest continuous run you've had without a spelling error. So that's good. See, I bring out the best in you.

 

Hell since I'm on a roll....

 

I'm not up on my street drug slang. Which one is a 'roll'?

 

That's the same thing as the definition of crazy....doing the same thing over and over, but expecting a different outcome......OK that's the end of my rant!

 

Shame on you. You are not entitled to quote Einstein.

Edited March 5, 2011 by Michael Graffam

[mikegraffam 11]

i do not think 16 inch rifle barrel shotgun barrel would be legal.they sell rifled shotgun barrels and i believe the are 18 and 1/2 inches.

 

Yeah, but has ATF actually ruled on that? Do we know for sure? From their definitions (at least those I have found), a 12ga with a rifled barrel would not be a shotgun, despite the fact that it is chambered for a shotgun cartridge.

 

And it wouldn't affect DD status at all, it seems.

 

About all it might do is let you cut back to 16" w/o a stamp.

[Mike1234567 26]

I hate this thread! Someone please Rap it. Lol

 

 

You mean like this..... http://www.youtube.c...81044AC3791623F

 

Okay... that's just bad-azz!!

[bigmegina 3]

Michael

 

you are what they call a useful idiot,and a good slave.how can you even argue when you keep saying we live in a democracy?the form of government our forefathers set up was a republic.say the plegde of allegiance,and to the republic"NOT DEMOCRACY",for which it stands.and do not tell me to write and call my congress critter,because if voting really worked they would make it illegal.lennin said "give me one generation of your children and i will own your country without firing a shot".it it obvious you and millions more are one of that brain washed generation.i do not know how old you are,but i am old enough to remember when i used to live in amertica,not this communist police state that calles itself america today.stalin only dreamed of the total police state we live in."THOSE WHO GIVE UP LIBERTY FOR SECURITY WILL GET AND DESERVE NEITHER"Ben Franklin.all rights come from god,not government.

[PostsOnPercocet 32]

our founding fathers came up with common law,which ment at the time common sense.read thomas pains book,common sence.what we live in today is nothing like what the founding fathers fought and died for for over 8 years to give us our freedom.there are over 25000! gun laws alone.what we live in is a empire that masquardes as a republic.obey the law?,i bet everyone commits a felony every day without even knowing it.ever drive by a school with your gun?,FELON.ever go to the post office and buy a stamp carring your pistol,FELON.these are only 2 examples of probally 100s if not thousands of laws we break every day.we have become a society of lazy, liberal,decetent,tolerant,of every abomination that our rulers put on us,and we deserve it.we are cowards who talk about freedon and rule of law and do nothing but complain as our enimies in the district of crimnals steal out freedom and our money every day.if we had any balls like the people in the middle east,who instead of sitting on their computers calling each other names and bitching,are DOING SOMETHING to secure their freedom from tyrants.they are MEN like our forfathers were and are FIGHTING for there freedom."THE BEST SLAVE IS ONE WHO DOESN"T KNOW HE IS A SLAVE"."IT IS HARD TO BREAK A SLAVES CHAINES THAT HE ADORES"

 

Damn it. I feel like Al Pacino from the Godfather. "Every time I try to get out, they pull me back in!" ..

 

It is clear that YOU feel like a slave. It is indeed hard to break those chains, isn't it? It is terrifying to think that we are actually free - isn't it? This is what it is when there are millions of people, each free, with a different opinion who don't know how to use spell check. Yes, there are thousands and thousands of laws on the books. Some created by bureaucratic nonsense, some created to appease an opinion that is different from yours, or mine. Some created to appease us, and piss off someone else.

 

Welcome to democracy.

 

You act like the founding fathers all held the same opinion.. that they were "MEN" of a unified, homogeneous character. Nothing could be further from the truth. Their opinions varied, greatly - and in the beginning there were several, not just two, important political parties. They argued and bitched, more or less just like now. They attacked each other - sometimes viciously with political slogans and cartoons. Sound familiar? And each was sure the others were going to destroy the country - yay! We've reformed the system and made it just like 1802!

 

The main difference between our great Founding Forefathers and us, isn't that they were more manly, or independent .. its not that we are now slaves but they were mystically free men .. the main difference, really.. is that they didn't need spell check, and every letter they wrote to one another was a masterpiece.

 

U mite tri reding them somtim. (j/k)

 

We don't live in a democracy. You're an idiot. Good Bye.

[PostsOnPercocet 32]

Yeah, and it failed to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals just like it does know. People like you just. don't. get. it.

 

GUNS DON'T CAUSE CRIME. They are "things". We have to deal with the bad PEOPLE, not things. The government uses gun control as a bullshit line to feed ignorant sheep so they'll think our representatives are trying to do something about crime.

 

No, I'm afraid you don't get it.

 

Laws aren't for "dealing with bad people" - criminals don't abide by law. No threat of law will influence them. They refuse to consent to law, or be governed.

 

Law is for responsible citizens. As a responsible citizen, I don't whine like a child because I can't get my NFA cookie right NOW NOW NOW. I am content knowing that I am a free citizen and have the right to, and will get it after DUE PROCESS OF LAW has found that I am in fact a responsible citizen.

 

You are contradicting yourself! If criminals don't obey laws and ONLY law abiding citizens obey laws then why pass them on us? We are not the problem. It's idiotic posturing and feel good legislation implemented by politicians. Most of whom aren't worth a shit.

These feel good policies have inflated the current stock of NFA weapons by several thousand percent!!! That's right.. I said several thousand. take, for example, an registered HK F/A sear. It used to cost about 400.00 for one. Now 15yrs later they are 12,000.00 a piece!!! WTF?

look at the Saiga! it's a cheap stamped russian made weapon. not worth much and sells for 400-500bucks (usually) Now in a matter of weeks these have increased to 600-700! That's crazy.

 

We have god given rights and for you to argue that there is an acceptable compromise.....is pure idiocy. You don't ever let the camel get his nose under the tent. If you do the whole camel will be in the tent before long. We've been letting our politicians usurp way to much power from the individual states. We need to make this back into a republic with strong individual nation states. I for one do not want a single governing body and I do not want a bunch of wack jobs in NY,IL,CA,OR, D.C., and some other ultra liberal ghey states to have a word in dictating my rights in TX? They don't know me and from what I've met of them through business travels I sure as hell don't have much in common with them.

 

One more thing....Our country is based upon the premise that we are innocent and responsible citizens until proven guilty..........so why the hell should we have to prove that innocence to our overbloated gov't just to own something that was our right to own in the first place!

you probably were that kid that would raise your hand in class to use the restroom and if the teacher said no then you would squirm and hold it....maybe even pee yourself a little bit!

Me I was the kid that politely raised his hand asked to use the restroom.....and if my teacher tried to tell me to hold it I would get up and walk to the door. If my teacher was bold enough to try to stop me or berate me then I would tell them to go fuck themselves and that my bodily functions weren't going to adhere to their schedule.

 

that's probably the difference between you and I.

 

He just doesn't get it. He actually thinks respsonsible adult need to be told not to just go off and kill other people, or rape. That is how illogical he is. He's one of those people who isn't even worth talking to because God himself could come down from the sky, tell him he was wrong, and he would argue with God.

 

I mean, he doesn't even understand how illogical he is. According to him, the only reason we aren't in mass chaos is because of a bunch of laws. I gave him a real world example, Katrina, to prove me point. He has nothing but his VERY wrong opinion. I'm actually on the verge of thinking that that ATF or that government program that makes fake internet personas has infiltrated this place with a couple of accounts just to spread ridiculous information.

Edited March 5, 2011 by PostsOnPercocet

[corbin 621]

While educational, that video tells me those people should never try to rap again.

 

Oh, and to clarify the "grandfathered DD" thing, I was talking about how they DDd shotguns like the Streetsweeper and whether someone could then shorten the barrel afterwards. I don't know if they'll DD S12s or not, but that was the reason for my question.

[physicsnerd 139]

Wow, this thread continues to go into the bucket! I don't feel like arguing but I want to put a little perspective on the NFA for all those who think that it is reasonable. The tax for SBS, SBR, DD, FA and silencers is $200. In 1934 (I don't know where 1938 came from but the NFA dates to 1934) $200 would've been about 10 ounces of gold (before FDR revalued it to $35). So at $1,433.80 an ounce the tax in gold today would be $14,338. The whole point to the NFA was the not "outlaw" anything but to make them prohibitively expensive. Who was going to pay $200 to cut back their $8 double barrel to 16"? The only side benefit of the NFA is that the Federal Reserve has managed to brutalize our currency enough that $200 isn't *that* obscene.

 

Here is an interesting case to read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller

 

To conclude this post:

[mikegraffam 11]

Wow, this thread continues to go into the bucket! I don't feel like arguing but I want to put a little perspective on the NFA for all those who think that it is reasonable. The tax for SBS, SBR, DD, FA and silencers is $200. In 1934 (I don't know where 1938 came from but the NFA dates to 1934) $200 would've been about 10 ounces of gold (before FDR revalued it to $35). So at $1,433.80 an ounce the tax in gold today would be $14,338. The whole point to the NFA was the not "outlaw" anything but to make them prohibitively expensive. Who was going to pay $200 to cut back their $8 double barrel to 16"? The only side benefit of the NFA is that the Federal Reserve has managed to brutalize our currency enough that $200 isn't *that* obscene.

 

Here is an interesting case to read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller

 

 

Well, you're right.. the NFA was passed in '34, not '38. My mistake. Your numbers for the price don't seem exactly right - but they are ballpark correct; so lets go with it.

 

Yeah, $14k is prohibitively expensive for something like SBS/SBR. Consider this throwing a bone to the anti-gunners humming and hawing about gangsters with modified weapons. I never said I thought the NFA was perfect, or that I loved it .. I said it was a valiant attempt at making a fair law that appeased many different concerns.

 

If you think of it in terms of MG's though.. in the real world, today, a .30 cal MG might cost you $10k. I don't think that price tag wouldn be that high if the tax were at $14k, but lets say it was.

 

$24k for an MG? Pricey, sure.. but I don't think its that high, personally. Seems to me that market demand post FAOPA has driven up costs more than that, percentage wise.

I mean.. I'd be looking at $40 or $50k for a vehicle to mount it on (nice Humvee?) .. plus, you know, it costs 30 cents a round or thereabouts to shoot the damn thing..

 

A 1919 has a rate of fire of up around 1000 rds a minute. So, $300 a minute to shoot it?

 

That roughly $15k tax? That's 50 minutes of shooting time if you're using cheap milsurp with no tracers or fun stuff.

 

Sorry, I just don't see that as a big deal, and I don't see the tax as prohibitively expensive in proportion.

 

Are SBS/SBR taxed unfairly? Yeah, I'd have to say they are. But in 1936 if there was so much demand for super short rifles and shotguns, manufacturers could have made shotguns with short barrels and no stocks. These would NOT be classified for the $200 tax, they would have been classified as an AOW and the tax would have been $5. SBS/SBR are weapons made from shotguns/rifles. If the manufacturer makes them in that shorty config, its a different story, and there were a few guns classified this way.

 

But they weren't popular amongst civvies. Because most gun owners didn't want them. If they had been popular amongst citizens, they wouldn't have made it into the NFA. Like bolt action rifles, for example.

 

Why don't principled gun owners bitch about not being able to own a zip gun? I mean. Its our right, isn't it? I know the dirty truth.. it aint about principles all the time. Folks don't bitch about not owning a zip gun because zip guns suck. If the anti-gunners want to ban something that sucks and isn't fun? Well, who cares. Forget principles then. But don't take away my fun. This is more or less that same way it was back in '34, I'm guessing.

 

The problem, as I see it, is that both extreme sides of the gun control debate are unwilling to compromise or come to a consensus and both are rabidly fanatical and like to invoke "principles" when really, its all just bullshit.

 

If anti-gunners REALLY cared about public safety, they'd be just as active and vocal about making cars and roads safer. If pro-gun folks REALLY cared about the right to bears arms and self-defence for the principles of it.. they'd be fighting for zip guns, nunchucks and all sorts of other shit weapons that are illegal in many areas by local law.. and which are, actually, probably FAR easier to get the law changed for if enough people stood up for their "principles."

 

But no one gives a damn.. because most of us don't use those crappy weapons. Just like most people didn't use SBS/SBR, unless you were planning to rob a bank.

 

I'm not saying I think EITHER of these lines of thinking particularly smart. As I've said time and again.. I try to be stubbornly moderate. But I think the NFA is a decent compromise, and I'll tell you why:

 

Because it leaves BOTH sides of the debate feeling like the other side got the better deal.

 

That is how consensus should work.

[mikegraffam 11]

 

He just doesn't get it. He actually thinks respsonsible adult need to be told not to just go off and kill other people, or rape. That is how illogical he is. He's one of those people who isn't even worth talking to because God himself could come down from the sky, tell him he was wrong, and he would argue with God.

 

I mean, he doesn't even understand how illogical he is. According to him, the only reason we aren't in mass chaos is because of a bunch of laws. I gave him a real world example, Katrina, to prove me point. He has nothing but his VERY wrong opinion. I'm actually on the verge of thinking that that ATF or that government program that makes fake internet personas has infiltrated this place with a couple of accounts just to spread ridiculous information.

 

Get off the drugs. They are affecting your ability to read, comprehend, and they are making you paranoid. I'm not trying to be facetious or trying to insult you. I'm just judging buy your screen name, and the fact that you really don't seem to be able to understand my position.. because once again, I never said that I think adults need to be told not to kill, or rape.

 

That doesn't mean we don't need a LAW about these things though. We need the law so that we have a standard. We have 1st and 2nd degree murder, manslaughter, etc. Different criteria and definitions - laws - that we need so that we can fairly and consistently apply the same rules to everyone. We need definitions like this because we recognize that a murder performed in "cold blood" is different than murdering a person in extreme circumstances "in the heat of passion."

 

We need all of this stuff precisely because people like you and I disagree about it all. So we need laws which are standardized .. so that when you and I, as responsible citizens, sit on a jury together - even though we may disagree about much, we have a set in stone set of criteria by which to reason and judge.

[physicsnerd 139]

Well, you're right.. the NFA was passed in '34, not '38. My mistake. Your numbers for the price don't seem exactly right - but they are ballpark correct; so lets go with it.

 

Yeah, $14k is prohibitively expensive for something like SBS/SBR. Consider this throwing a bone to the anti-gunners humming and hawing about gangsters with modified weapons. I never said I thought the NFA was perfect, or that I loved it .. I said it was a valiant attempt at making a fair law that appeased many different concerns.

 

If you think of it in terms of MG's though.. in the real world, today, a .30 cal MG might cost you $10k. I don't think that price tag wouldn be that high if the tax were at $14k, but lets say it was.

 

$24k for an MG? Pricey, sure.. but I don't think its that high, personally. Seems to me that market demand post FAOPA has driven up costs more than that, percentage wise.

I mean.. I'd be looking at $40 or $50k for a vehicle to mount it on (nice Humvee?) .. plus, you know, it costs 30 cents a round or thereabouts to shoot the damn thing..

 

A 1919 has a rate of fire of up around 1000 rds a minute. So, $300 a minute to shoot it?

 

That roughly $15k tax? That's 50 minutes of shooting time if you're using cheap milsurp with no tracers or fun stuff.

 

Sorry, I just don't see that as a big deal, and I don't see the tax as prohibitively expensive in proportion.

 

Are SBS/SBR taxed unfairly? Yeah, I'd have to say they are. But in 1936 if there was so much demand for super short rifles and shotguns, manufacturers could have made shotguns with short barrels and no stocks. These would NOT be classified for the $200 tax, they would have been classified as an AOW and the tax would have been $5. SBS/SBR are weapons made from shotguns/rifles. If the manufacturer makes them in that shorty config, its a different story, and there were a few guns classified this way.

 

But they weren't popular amongst civvies. Because most gun owners didn't want them. If they had been popular amongst citizens, they wouldn't have made it into the NFA. Like bolt action rifles, for example.

 

Why don't principled gun owners bitch about not being able to own a zip gun? I mean. Its our right, isn't it? I know the dirty truth.. it aint about principles all the time. Folks don't bitch about not owning a zip gun because zip guns suck. If the anti-gunners want to ban something that sucks and isn't fun? Well, who cares. Forget principles then. But don't take away my fun. This is more or less that same way it was back in '34, I'm guessing.

 

The problem, as I see it, is that both extreme sides of the gun control debate are unwilling to compromise or come to a consensus and both are rabidly fanatical and like to invoke "principles" when really, its all just bullshit.

 

If anti-gunners REALLY cared about public safety, they'd be just as active and vocal about making cars and roads safer. If pro-gun folks REALLY cared about the right to bears arms and self-defence for the principles of it.. they'd be fighting for zip guns, nunchucks and all sorts of other shit weapons that are illegal in many areas by local law.. and which are, actually, probably FAR easier to get the law changed for if enough people stood up for their "principles."

 

But no one gives a damn.. because most of us don't use those crappy weapons. Just like most people didn't use SBS/SBR, unless you were planning to rob a bank.

 

I'm not saying I think EITHER of these lines of thinking particularly smart. As I've said time and again.. I try to be stubbornly moderate. But I think the NFA is a decent compromise, and I'll tell you why:

 

Because it leaves BOTH sides of the debate feeling like the other side got the better deal.

 

That is how consensus should work.

 

I'm not going to take much time to reply because I don't think it will get us anywhere. However, I do want to note that I think it is a bit disingenuous to say that a $14k tax isn't unreasonable and then use a gun at $10k to justify it. Select fire weapons need not be that expensive if the registry were to be reopened. A $400 auto sear with a $14k tax is silly.

 

Oh and I don't care if people own zip guns, or nunchucks, etc. Crimes should have victims. Merely owning something can in no way be considered a crime. These crimes of possession are ridiculous and SBRs and SBSs actually make great self defense guns for ease of maneuverability around an abode.

[bigmegina 3]

i wish the mods would lock this thread.all it does and proves is nothing.some people are S.O.S and their is no help for them,and the other half get madder by the day trying to debate them.i am now bowing out of the thread.

[mikegraffam 11]

Michael

 

you are what they call a useful idiot,and a good slave.how can you even argue when you keep saying we live in a democracy?the form of government our forefathers set up was a republic.say the plegde of allegiance,and to the republic"NOT DEMOCRACY",for which it stands.and do not tell me to write and call my congress critter,because if voting really worked they would make it illegal.lennin said "give me one generation of your children and i will own your country without firing a shot".it it obvious you and millions more are one of that brain washed generation.i do not know how old you are,but i am old enough to remember when i used to live in amertica,not this communist police state that calles itself america today.stalin only dreamed of the total police state we live in."THOSE WHO GIVE UP LIBERTY FOR SECURITY WILL GET AND DESERVE NEITHER"Ben Franklin.all rights come from god,not government.

 

And you are what they call a 'sheeple' content to rattle off slogans rather than think.

 

Thats OK. I have more than enough brain to think for both of us, so I'll lend you some. Here is a quick definition of democracy, please don't strain your feeble mind too hard trying to comprehend all at once. I'll help you. Given how you fail at spelling, I'm going to introduce you to a thing call a "dictionary." They are amazing resources. You can find one at dictionary.com. In addition to telling you how to spell, and pronounce a word (I have no doubt you struggle with that, too), dictionaries also provide wonderful things called "definitions" or if you prefer "the plain sense meaning of things you twit."

 

Democracy:

1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

2. a state having such a form of government: The United States and canada are democracies.

3. a state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges.

4. political or social equality; democratic spirit.

5. the common people of a community as distinguished from any privileged class; the common people with respect to their political power.

 

There now that we have that. Lets go to your contention that we are a republic, but NOT a democracy. Lets start by now looking at the definition of republic:

 

1. a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.

2. any body of persons viewed as a commonwealth.

3. a state in which the head of government is not a monarch or other hereditary head of state.

4. ( initial capital letter ) any of the five periods of republican government in France. Compare First Republic, Second Republic, Third Republic, Fourth Republic, Fifth Republic.

5. ( initial capital letter, italics ) a philosophical dialogue (4th century b.c.) by Plato dealing with the composition and structure of the ideal state.

 

Now, I don't know about you.. but the #1 definition for both terms "republic" and "democracy" seem pretty damn close to me, don'cha think? The fact of the matter is the America is, and always was - a Democratic Republic. Democratic because we have equal rights (definition #3, #4) and a republic because we have both a commonwealth of individuals and a commonwealth of states. Feel free to use dictionary.com to look up tricky words like "equal", "individuals" and "commonwealth." It is our democratic nature, which makes every citizen equal, and that is what I was referring to when I called America a democracy. If you read, you'll find I also did call it a republic in places as well.

 

As to your point about voting not working.. then that means we don't have a republic either.

 

Stop letting other people think for you. Stop rattling off slogans and quotes from other people and think for yourself. What is killing this country is people like you: ignorant, lazy people content to regurgitate (remember dictionary.com is your friend) slogans instead of think. Some sheep like yourself told you "we're not a democracy; we're a republic" and you've gone on (for years?) bleating like the sheep that you are repeating it. You are paranoid, conspiratorial and convinced that voting doesn't work - hence, I imagine you don't vote? Good job letting Obama get elected, douche.. though I suppose I should be glad the likes of you don't vote. Who the hell knows who we'd get in there then.

 

The sad part.. the really fucking sad part to me, is that you, and others like you whom I am familiar with - fancy yourselves as free and independent men who, given have a chance in a genuinely free society would be movers and shakers or some shit. You suck. You're a failure and you will be so in any possible world that could ever exist.

 

Christ, you can't even spell.

[Bridis 319]

How many more posts till we hit 15?

[lbsrdi 1,078]

Are we even discussing Saiga 12's anymore? This seems like political ranting to me. Although I may agree with some of this, it just seems better suited for the political section or fight club. If you disagree, I don't give a shit. Let's talk about Saigas. Carry on.

[mikegraffam 11]

 

I'm not going to take much time to reply because I don't think it will get us anywhere. However, I do want to note that I think it is a bit disingenuous to say that a $14k tax isn't unreasonable and then use a gun at $10k to justify it. Select fire weapons need not be that expensive if the registry were to be reopened. A $400 auto sear with a $14k tax is silly.

 

Oh and I don't care if people own zip guns, or nunchucks, etc. Crimes should have victims. Merely owning something can in no way be considered a crime. These crimes of possession are ridiculous and SBRs and SBSs actually make great self defense guns for ease of maneuverability around an abode.

 

I don't think its disingenuous or unreasonable to think this way. I'm not dealing in speculative terms or fantasy here .. I'm talking about real life, today. Go look for MG's. Sure, there are some FA weapons that are in the $3500 to $5000 range. Still expensive, and if you're going to SHOOT and TRAIN with it, as an MG - you're going to dump more than the tax on ammo. MG's are expensive, period.

 

Could they be cheaper? Yes. Would I like it if they were? Hell yeah!

 

My point is only that in our country, where we are trying to balance a lot of concerns and opinions in a democratic fashion - I don't find the NFA to be that bad. And I'll reiterate my earlier statements: but I don't like the GCA or the FAOPA.

 

Get it? I don't like the NFA as a bill and as gun control. I like it as a compromise which meets my concerns (I'm not forbidden from having weapons, just taxed) and meets the concerns of others (such as registration and making them not commonly available in stores where they might get stolen or such).

 

Just because I disagree with people about things (like the need for gun control) doesn't mean I just start calling them names and throwing out their concerns and opinions.

I seek a resolution that both sides can accept, if begrudgingly.

 

Sorta like the exact same way our Founders argued out the need for a standing army. No one was happy about how it panned out. But that's democracy.

[TTMR 11]

"draw the line"??!! lol, right.

 

How about I draw the line at I'll have whatever gun, in whatever configuration I want to because that is my right?

 

Hence the "big freaking if" part of my statement, I think you and I are on the same page...