What if they make AR's, AK's, and the like, NFA items?

[MattCFII]

So if I understand it correctly, the ATF made an in house ruling that the Street Sweeper was a DD under the sporting purpose clause and it would take an amendment to the NFA to add "assault weapons" from Congress and Obama to sign it. "Assault weapons" aren't just something Obama can EO or ATF can rule into the NFA unless it is a shotgun (because of the sporting purpose clause exception).

The logistical problem alone even if half of the "assault weapons" were registered would be staggering for the ATF. I got to imagine the number of them would be several times what the current registry is.

The other problem off the top of my head with opening the NFA can of worms again is that they could raise the tax stamps to give them more of their original desired effect (Inflation worked for us for once!). But on the other it would also give our guys chances to add the Anti-Hughes and suppressor to AOW amendments. Overall though, we need to fight this from happening in the first place and keep the status quo until a better time.

 

[Hoosierkav]

My fear is not so much in legislation, since that will take a while, and be subject to public comment/input, though it will probably be tied to something else, like healthcare reform or military spending. My fear is in the unknown of an executive order--one day it is legal, the next day it is not.

 

[Psode27]

Tupperware..... Check
Grease....... Check

 

[xryan.jacksonx]

Would it even be legal to ban a firearm that was already legal before *****stein's proposed bill became law?

Yes, from their perspective. While it deals with a group instead of the entire population, the principal was the same: If you were a convicted felon before 1968 you could own a firearm. After 1968 it became illegal for you to own one, even though the law was passed after your conviction. No grandfathering was given.

 

[CampingJosh]

If you were a convicted felon before 1968 you could own a firearm. After 1968 it became illegal for you to own one, even though the law was passed after your conviction. No grandfathering was given.

This could (should) be challenged from a legal perspective; it is definitely ex post facto. Actually, it probably has been.

The first definition of what exactly constitutes an ex post facto law is found in Calder v Bull (3 US 386 [1798]), in the opinion of Justice Chase:

1st. Every law that makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal; and punishes such action. 2d. Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed. 3d. Every law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed. 4th. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or different, testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense, in order to convict the offender.

 

[Bert]

not all ar-15 rifles are .223 / 5.56 . would all calibers be banned ? my old lost in the lake .458 socom used 5.56 mags but didn't hold 30 . only around half . so its not a high cap mag , right ?

 

[Bmrdude]

Possible insurance involvement?

I could see some sort of agreement between insurance companies and the government requiring any firearms owned, carried or transported in your car be "declared" on your insurance policies (health, homeowners, auto, etc....). Insurance rates for firearms owners would be higher in order to accommodate the healthcare costs associated with firearms injuries/deaths. Non-compliance by not declaring them would equal no insurance coverage or be a case for insurance fraud if a firearm is found or used in self-defense.

Just a thought...

 

[CampingJosh]

so its not a high cap mag , right ?

The 30 round magazine for the 5.56 AR is not a high capacity magazine, either. It's the standard capacity.

The Glock 17 uses a standard capacity 17 round magazine.

Just because it's a big number doesn't make it anything other than the standard for which the gun was designed. Don't let them win by changing the definitions of words.

 

[xryan.jacksonx]

This could (should) be challenged from a legal perspective; it is definitely ex post facto. Actually, it probably has been.

I've looked and I haven't been able to find anything on it. Anyone know of a legal challenge in this area?

 

[Roscoe38]

look for the 5 round box to become standard....

 

[strokin7.3]

look for the 5 round box to become standard....

5 rounds is standard...



in my bolt guns

 

[indymike]

if you read Feinsteisn language of her current work in progress, it was already rolling before last Friday. She wants no Grandfathering and possession of assault weapons will be illegal, period. In her world your decision is keep them and break the law or turn them in. Use them if they come for them?

She stated last Sunday that a grandfather clause is included in the language of the bill she will bring to the floor in January.

"I’m going to introduce in the Senate and the same bill will be introduced in the House, a bill to ban assault weapons. It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession. Not retroactively but prospectively." (her exact words, italics mine).

Feinstein will introduce assault weapons ban in Senate


The fact is that with a 30 or so seat Republican majority in the house, she knows very well that she could never pass anything more than the '94 ban and it may well get really watered down if it is to make it out of the House at all.


To the OP question, if it is a choice between absolutely no "assault weapons" (their term) or "assault weapons" legal with NFA-type treatment, I'll take the NFA-treatment of them absolutely. At least we'd still be able to get new ones at decent prices.

 

[longbow]

I thiink all the new gun owners will be very vocal in making sure this will not happen

 

[minuteman32]

Since semi autos don't meet the definition of the other items in the NFA (machine gun, destructive device, sbs, sbr) wouldn't they have to be an AOW w/ a $5 stamp?

 

[indykid]

I know how to write the new law!!!

"Semi-automatic weapons (pistols, rifles, and/or shot guns) are hereby illegal to be used in the murder of anyone in a gun-free zone."

There, that should solve the problem!

Actually the NFA came about because congress back then knew that banning machineguns and the other mentioned items would violate the second amendment, so they just made it harder to get one and made you pay a tax to own one. Taxing something is legal and has been upheld by the current Chief Supreme Court Justice. You can't ban them, but you can make them harder to get by taxing them.

Back then, $200 for the tax was more than the cost of most firearms, not to mention the required paperwork being a pain. I would not want to see what the current adjusted for inflation dollar amount a tax would be if semi-autos were added to the NFA of 2013.

 

[Prometheus]

if it is a choice between absolutely no "assault weapons" (their term) or "assault weapons" legal with NFA-type treatment, I'll take the NFA-treatment of them absolutely. At least we'd still be able to get new ones at decent prices.

So you'd prefer to get raped in the $%^ with a condom vs no no condom.

How about no $%^ raping at all?

Shall NOT be infringed.

How about we not be the cowards our fathers, their fathers and their fathers before them were and DEMAND the Constitution be followed?

If you fall into that age range, yeah, I'm talking about you too.

 

[indymike]

So you'd prefer to get raped in the $%^ with a condom vs no no condom.

How about no $%^ raping at all?

Shall NOT be infringed.

How about we not be the cowards our fathers, their fathers and their fathers before them were and DEMAND the Constitution be followed?

If you fall into that age range, yeah, I'm talking about you too.

I'm not sure you understood the context of my post. I simply stated that if two options would be put before me, one being that I cannot have an AK or AR in any configuration I want or the other being I can have them but have to jump through the NFA hoops, I'd take the NFA option.

In no way did I say I endorse that either option be federally codified. I was answering a hypothetical that was put forward.