Read up on the Firearms Protection Act of 1986Were there a lot of crimes committed with machine guns back then? Is that why the gov banned them?
No, crime was not an issue. This law needs to be done away with.Were there a lot of crimes committed with machine guns back then? Is that why the gov banned them?
And, it sucks.No, crime was not an issue. This law needs to be done away with.
A lot needs to be done away with...even the batf. If people still want a 4473 done they can and a state can still operate point of contact. It's just the batf as an agencie is not only a bad use of funds but their track record of being beneficial to society is kind of made up. For example research the history of 922r and you will see it's just a form of market control. I'm making up the term market control but it's basically what it is. Plus remember the batf is a branch of the treasury really. They are the treasury really. So paying a 200 dollar tax stamp for a crappy sheet of paper that says I can own my suppressor and not be arrested is ridiculous. Especially considering my background checks are fast and I held security clearances at an airport that I had more background checks done to get. That 200 dollar stamp doesn't serve a purpose. Plus we need to deregulate nfa items. Not one nfa owner to my knowledge committed a mass shooting. How many prison cells are we gonna fill up with people who who violate nfa rules? I never have but looking at it from a financial aspect, why is it even funded? Pretty much as with most gun control and especially the 1986 ban, so much of it is useless and doesn't apply to actual problems.
Were there a lot of crimes committed with machine guns back then? Is that why the gov banned them?
Unfortunately I was so busy working and having kids at that time, I missed the boat.......A $800.00 Colt M16 then.... is now 25K........
Lt. Dan invested in some kind of fruit company.Yeah, and I would be a millionaire if I would have bought stock in Microsoft in the 80's.
I wrote this on another forum:Ironically, this was an amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act that was designed to end ATF abuses, which it has for the most part.
I watched the live broadcast on CSPAN as FOPA was passed. Clearly, the voice vote on the critical Hughes amendment did not pass. The acting Chair, Charlie Rangel, simply ignored what had happened, declared that it had passed, ignored pleas for a recorded vote, and moved on to other business.
It was an astonishingly brazen abuse of power.
However, that is not a sufficient reason to overturn the entirety of FOPA. Much of the law serves good purposes.
I would, however, like to see SCOTUS throw out certain “poison pill” amendments that were added at the last second, enabled via Rangel’s complete lack of integrity.
I recall a law suit a few years ago aimed Rangel declaring it passed. Don't know what happened to it.I wrote this on another forum: