Repeal NFA Petition (thoughts)

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • sicegcivic

    Plinker
    Rating - 100%
    27   0   0
    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/repeal-nfa

    I am sure that this would fit better in the NFA section, however I figured it would get more action in here. Also if this has already been posted then please disregard.

    Asside from that, feel free to sign the petition if you agree and voice your thoughts on the change.

    I personally do not expect the government to give up the revenue NFA regs create. Not to mention the dramatic effect on the values of some of these items.
     

    rvb

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 14, 2009
    6,396
    63
    IN (a refugee from MD)
    I personally do not expect the government to give up the revenue NFA regs create.

    I don't think NFA will ever completely just go away, if nothing else due to the DD component. Now to deregulate everything else NFA is maybe possible. Removing silencers and SBRs while keeping MGs NFA and repealing Hughes is a more likely starting point / middle ground.

    I think people make too much of the $ govt makes. $200 is nothing these days when you figure all they have to do.... run fingerprints, process paperwork, not to mention legacy support functions (e.g. every year I send in multiple 5320.20s to cross state lines), maintaining the registry, etc. People forget ALL the paperwork involved to buy something... it's not just your form 4, there are forms to register when the item is made, forms to transfer from manufacturer to dealer, THEN to you. I'd be shocked if the govt breaks even over the life of an item in the registry. Maybe many years ago when $200 was "worth more" and there were fewer transfers, but not in today's economy.

    -rvb
     

    10mmfan

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 24, 2013
    321
    18
    I believe machine guns and destructive devices should stay there but the whole pre86 post 86 etc. should go away. SBR, SBS, AND SUPPRESSORS should require nothing more than a 4473 and suppressors should require nothing as they are an accessory. I personally would have multiple sbr and suppressors right now if not for the regulations an wait times.
     

    sicegcivic

    Plinker
    Rating - 100%
    27   0   0
    $200 is nothing these days when you figure all they have to do.... People forget ALL the paperwork involved to buy something... it's not just your form 4, there are forms to register when the item is made, forms to transfer from manufacturer to dealer, THEN to you. I'd be shocked if the govt breaks even over the life of an item in the registry. Maybe many years ago when $200 was "worth more" and there were fewer transfers, but not in today's economy.

    -rvb


    Although I have dealt with all of these forms, I have never looked at it from this angle until now. Seems they could potentially save money (and certainly work/time) by removing certain items from the regulations.
     

    d.kaufman

    Still Here
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    128   0   0
    Mar 9, 2013
    14,715
    149
    Hobart
    Ive signed the petition and im hoping at the minimum silencers and sbr's are removed. I do believe that it all should be removed and we should be allowed to own everything and anything that the military uses. The 2A doesn't specify that machine guns shouldn't be had by "We the People" I believe we should be able to own whatever we want!
     

    rvb

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 14, 2009
    6,396
    63
    IN (a refugee from MD)
    Although I have dealt with all of these forms, I have never looked at it from this angle until now. Seems they could potentially save money (and certainly work/time) by removing certain items from the regulations.

    Yea, and I didn't even mention other activities where the NFA branch has to loose $... e.g. tax-free transfers when someone dies, $5 AOW transfers, criminal investigations, etc...

    NFA taxes were never about revenue, they were about dissuading citizens from purchasing certain arms.

    -rvb
     
    Last edited:

    Old Prof

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 8, 2015
    87
    8
    West Lafayette
    I believe machine guns and destructive devices should stay there but the whole pre86 post 86 etc. should go away. SBR, SBS, AND SUPPRESSORS should require nothing more than a 4473 and suppressors should require nothing as they are an accessory. I personally would have multiple sbr and suppressors right now if not for the regulations an wait times.

    At a minimum, Automatic weapons having to be pre-1986 should go. There is no reason for it other than to restrict the supply and raise the price for legal ownership. Any organization bringing in tons of heroin, cocaine, marijuana or meth a year has no problem keeping themselves supplied with automatic weapons.
     

    masterdekoy

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    56   0   0
    Feb 12, 2013
    854
    28
    Columbus
    As mentioned I don't think the $200 tax stamp offsets the cost of running the checks associated with the NFA. I'm at the least all for removing SBRs and SBSs from the NFA. There is still a case for restrictions on silencers and full auto firearms. However, I would be for repealing the Hughes Amendment and allowing private ownership of full auto firearms given the current processes in place. Just my opinion.
     

    croy

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Apr 22, 2012
    1,875
    48
    Indiana
    There is still a case for restrictions on silencers and full auto firearms. However, I would be for repealing the Hughes Amendment and allowing private ownership of full auto firearms given the current processes in place. Just my opinion.

    Like what? Where in the 2nd amendment does it say full auto and silencers should be heavily regulated?
     

    m82mike

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    18   0   0
    Nov 28, 2009
    329
    28
    Milton,In.
    Signed, and I believe many European countries have it right, as you can walk in and purchase a suppressor with NO paperwork or waiting. No good reason for even doing a transfer, in my opinion.
     

    Sling10mm

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 12, 2012
    1,117
    38
    Not to pile on, but what is the case for maintaining restrictions on silencers and full auto firearms?

    As mentioned I don't think the $200 tax stamp offsets the cost of running the checks associated with the NFA. I'm at the least all for removing SBRs and SBSs from the NFA. There is still a case for restrictions on silencers and full auto firearms. However, I would be for repealing the Hughes Amendment and allowing private ownership of full auto firearms given the current processes in place. Just my opinion.
     

    masterdekoy

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    56   0   0
    Feb 12, 2013
    854
    28
    Columbus
    Not to pile on, but what is the case for maintaining restrictions on silencers and full auto firearms?

    I actually typed out a response, but after some time on these boards feel it will create more drama than it's worth, which is not my intent. . I'll just say it's my opinion. It's not my desire to completely restrict access to silencers or full auto, but feel there needs to be some mechanism in place to restrict access to these. The system we currently have in place works ok... if the turnaround wasn't so long. But in my research I have yet to find a country where there is a permissive environment on gun ownership (everyone but prohibited persons can purchase) and free unrestricted access to silencers. Please let me know if I'm wrong on that, I do admit I didn't spend a long time researching it.
     
    Top Bottom