Should the 1934 NFA and the Hughes Amendment to the NFA be repealed

[TurtleDude]

the law on banning machine guns might be constitutionally dubious but suppressors are not guns nor are they essential to the functioning of a gun

how does the federal government have a proper power in that law

how can anyone claim if I make a silencer for use in the same state that it is going to be used that such an action "affects interstate commerce"

and the 1934 is the NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT. if the government calls it a firearm then the 2A applies

so tell us why a "conservative" is so supportive of essentially a stupid law that has no valid purpose and is based on dishonest motivations?

 

[Crovax]

how does the federal government have a proper power in that law

how can anyone claim if I make a silencer for use in the same state that it is going to be used that such an action "affects interstate commerce"

and the 1934 is the NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT. if the government calls it a firearm then the 2A applies

so tell us why a "conservative" is so supportive of essentially a stupid law that has no valid purpose and is based on dishonest motivations?

So you think that poison gas falls under the second amendment because its listed in the NFA? Did you learn your constitutional law from Obama?

 

[Mycroft]

It shouldnt it will cost some extra for processing and administrative fees but the rest should be either used for something like gun safety classes or dropped

I guess I should have asked the question differently...why should one have to pay ANYTHING more than the market price for a silencer?

 

[TurtleDude]

So you think that poison gas falls under the second amendment because its listed in the NFA? Did you learn your constitutional law from Obama?

that's just plain stupid. its like anti gun idiots who whine about people owning nukes.

 

[Crovax]

that's just plain stupid. its like anti gun idiots who whine about people owning nukes.

You made the claim and now you are calling it stupid. A suppressor is no more a gun than poison gas or a nuke, you are right, to think otherwise is stupid.

 

[TurtleDude]

You made the claim and now you are calling it stupid. A suppressor is no more a gun than poison gas or a nuke, you are right, to think otherwise is stupid.

then why was it covered in the NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT

and where does the federal government get the power to ban someone making and not registering a suppressor in his own home state

and why do you support laws that are both of dubious constitutionality and have no real merit.

 

[Crovax]

I guess I should have asked the question differently...why should one have to pay ANYTHING more than the market price for a silencer?

There is little legitimate purpose for detachable silencers and a modicum of control on them is probably the right thing to do and hardly unreasonable

 

[Crovax]

then why was it covered in the NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT

and where does the federal government get the power to ban someone making and not registering a suppressor in his own home state

and why do you support laws that are both of dubious constitutionality and have no real merit.

poison gas was covered in the national firearms act

 

[Mycroft]

There is little legitimate purpose for detachable silencers and a modicum of control on them is probably the right thing to do and hardly unreasonable

I don't know much about silencers, but TD has given one useful purpose for the device. I see no reason to assume there aren't other purposes.

But why do you think any amount of control is desirable? What is it about silencers that bothers you? I mean, you say, "a modicum of control on them is probably the right thing to do". Why?

 

[TurtleDude]

There is little legitimate purpose for detachable silencers and a modicum of control on them is probably the right thing to do and hardly unreasonable

another control freak attitude that thinks citizens have to prove something is "useful" in order to have them versus the government having to make a very strong case for stupid regulations.

there are lots of good reasons for people to own suppressors. I already explained one

 

[Jerry]

There is little legitimate purpose for detachable silencers and a modicum of control on them is probably the right thing to do and hardly unreasonable

You have a muffler on your car don't you? Same thing. Or do you want to ban mufflers too?

I bet you also want to ban those little pads inside kitchen cabinet boors that keep them quiet. And I'm guessing you oppose noise ordinance.

 

[Jerry]

There is little legitimate purpose for detachable silencers and a modicum of control on them is probably the right thing to do and hardly unreasonable

There shouldn't be any control over silencers. Non. It doesn't do anything if not attached to a gun, just like all the many different stocks & scopes grips anyone can buy with no questions asked.

 

[TurtleDude]

There shouldn't be any control over silencers. Non. It doesn't do anything if not attached to a gun, just like all the many different stocks & scopes grips anyone can buy with no questions asked.

I just don't understand why control freaks aren't happy enough with laws that say

if YOU USE A SUPPRESSOR/MACHINE GUN/SAWED OFF SHOTGUN/"ASSAULT WEAPON to rob, maim or kill someone you get 10 extra years in prison

that solves the supposed problem without hassling honest people who say want a silencer to shoot rats in the basement without waking the baby or disturbing the neighbors.

the more i See "arguments" for gun bans, etc, the more it is obvious that these advocates want to harass people like me, not criminals

 

[Crovax]

You have a muffler on your car don't you? Same thing. Or do you want to ban mufflers too?

I bet you also want to ban those little pads inside kitchen cabinet boors that keep them quiet. And I'm guessing you oppose noise ordinance.

A gun is not a toy, when you shoot one its serious and the sound helps us realize what is going on. Yes there are a million dangerous things you can do silently but that is not a reason to make guns and gunfire potentially more dangerous

 

[TurtleDude]

A gun is not a toy, when you shoot one its serious and the sound helps us realize what is going on. Yes there are a million dangerous things you can do silently but that is not a reason to make guns and gunfire potentially more dangerous

I have seen lots of moronic posts on these gun threads. I will add another


noise is deleterious to one's ears. a suppressor makes a gun less dangerous to someone who uses it properly

 

[Jerry]

I just don't understand why control freaks aren't happy enough with laws that say

if YOU USE A SUPPRESSOR/MACHINE GUN/SAWED OFF SHOTGUN/"ASSAULT WEAPON to rob, maim or kill someone you get 10 extra years in prison

that solves the supposed problem without hassling honest people who say want a silencer to shoot rats in the basement without waking the baby or disturbing the neighbors.

the more i See "arguments" for gun bans, etc, the more it is obvious that these advocates want to harass people like me, not criminals

I want a silencer for hunting, so I don't disturb the environment nor have to wear ear plugs. I've been looking into moving to Ohio and come to find out you can only shoot people with your silencer, not game.

WTF?

Something for people to think about: the Army is looking for a new handgun and one of the Army's requirements for the new gun is the ability to use a silencer. This is for every joe, not just special forces. Everyone.

Think....what advantage does a silencer give a handgun that the Army would want silencers right next to extremely loud heavy machine guns?






A: Silencers improve accuracy by reducing muzzle-flip, and silencers let you keep your night vission.

 

[TurtleDude]

I want a silencer for hunting, so I don't disturb the environment nor have to wear ear plugs. I've been looking into moving to Ohio and come to find out you can only shoot people with your silencer, not game.

WTF?

Something for people to think about: the Army is looking for a new handgun and one of the Army's requirements for the new gun is bility to use a silencer. This is for every joe, not just special forces. Everyone.

Think....what advantage does a silencer give a handgun that the Army would want silencers right next to extremely loud heavy machine guns?

I have no idea. I have never heard an argument as silly as I need a blast to remind me that bullets are dangerous. I have a 200 pound pull crossbow that will kill and elephant I need to rig it up to go bang so Ii will know that a 450 grain arrow going 350 FPB with a razor sharp broad head is dangerous

 

[Crovax]

I just don't understand why control freaks aren't happy enough with laws that say

if YOU USE A SUPPRESSOR/MACHINE GUN/SAWED OFF SHOTGUN/"ASSAULT WEAPON to rob, maim or kill someone you get 10 extra years in prison

that solves the supposed problem without hassling honest people who say want a silencer to shoot rats in the basement without waking the baby or disturbing the neighbors.

the more i See "arguments" for gun bans, etc, the more it is obvious that these advocates want to harass people like me, not criminals

All those crimes have extremely long sentences anyway, do you really think criminals would be deterred by adding on 10 years to a life sentence or adding 10 years onto the death penalty. I want to lossen the current gun restrictions and yet you call me a control freak and a "gun" banner. Im farther to the right than probably 90% of Americans on gun laws and this is the type of hostility I encounter. There isnt a position extreme enough to accommodate you and your ilk, that is why stuff like the NFA will never get repealed.

 

[TurtleDude]

All those crimes have extremely long sentences anyway, do you really think criminals would be deterred by adding on 10 years to a life sentence or adding 10 years onto the death penalty. I want to lossen the current gun restrictions and yet you call me a control freak and a "gun" banner. Im farther to the right than probably 90% of Americans on gun laws and this is the type of hostility I encounter. There isnt a position extreme enough to accommodate you and your ilk, that is why stuff like the NFA will never get repealed.

you just cut your own argument apart. you want stupid restrictions on stuff that can easily be made. the only people affected by those laws are honest people.
you think keeping the idiotic restrictions on silencers and SBRs is going to make assholes like Feinswine or Obama might allow the Hughes Amendment to be repealed?

 

[Crovax]

you just cut your own argument apart. you want stupid restrictions on stuff that can easily be made. the only people affected by those laws are honest people.
you think keeping the idiotic restrictions on silencers and SBRs is going to make assholes like Feinswine or Obama might allow the Hughes Amendment to be repealed?

Silencers cant be easily made, even if silencers had no restrictions a decent one would cost you as much as the gun you put it on.

 

[TurtleDude]

Silencers cant be easily made, even if silencers had no restrictions a decent one would cost you as much as the gun you put it on.

yeah they can be. one's that work really well.

 

[Jerry]

Silencers cant be easily made, even if silencers had no restrictions a decent one would cost you as much as the gun you put it on.

The gun industry makes it's money on all the extra crap anyway. The firearm itself is practically a lead-loss, the reason you need to buy this new holster and subscribe to that magazine.

That's why the cereal numbered part itself is being reduced even more (Sig p320), so they can charge you for more customizations.

It truly is marketing brilliance.

 

[Mycroft]

A gun is not a toy, when you shoot one its serious and the sound helps us realize what is going on. Yes there are a million dangerous things you can do silently but that is not a reason to make guns and gunfire potentially more dangerous

Wait...are you saying that a gun is less dangerous if it's loud? Do you realize how plain dumb that is?

You know what? I'm getting the idea you really haven't thought this stuff through. I mean, you seem to dislike silencers and think they should be regulated, but when asked why, all you can come up with is stupid stuff like this. Maybe you should leave this thread alone and spend some time trying to find a more reasoned justification for what you want...and if you can't...well, that should tell you something, eh?

 

[LaMidRighter]

They are only expensive because of supply, they would be reasonably priced if the market was open.

Yep. In fact, the AK line was made from stamped metal and designed to be dirt cheap to obtain, maintain, and operate. They are overvalued because of stupid laws requiring tax stamps, and an artificial "made after" date which drove the supply of pre-1986 full autos through the roof. Just about every assault rifle is a mechanical variant of other intermediate rifles and are different by a factor of +/- a part or so.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Naturally criminals will have less availability to them because there are less in circulation.

You have no clue what you are talking about. One of the worst pieces of **** guns on the gang scene in the late 90s was the mac-10. Post ban guns ended up in the hands of street thugs who couldn't pass any type of background check and they were not legal to own due to the Hughes amendment. The gang members simply went black market and circumvented the system. It's simple, the second prohibits infringement, that is clearly stated. All the "nuh-uhs" in the world don't negate the clear language of that amendment nor do they invalidate the further writings of the authors of said amendment.