User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 1:50:26 PM EDT
[#1]
You can shoot an AR pistol from the shoulder with just the buffer tube, and that doesn't magically transform it into an SBR. But having the brace on does? How about a sling attachment, or a light, or a laser, or...
When the ATF starts saying one firearm is legal to shoot from a particular position, but another identically-classified firearm is not, I think their game is over. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 1:50:58 PM EDT
[#2]
Has the supreme court rules on the constitutionality of the NFA?
I could have sworn they said it was, but I cannot say for sure, but such a case would surely put the argument to bed. Next up, I want to see someone try this: Install a "safety" sear in a semi-automatic weapon, and explain to the ATF that your INTENT is to use it to keep the weapon from firing out of battery (and, certainly, NOT to make it full auto) 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 2:21:26 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the NFA is perfectly constitutional. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 2:50:15 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It would seem the denial came from the CLEO, and not the ATF. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Great! However, once again you fail to address the issue raised. Qualified individuals who have been denied NFA stamps. Who? I've been into NFA for over 10 years, and have never heard of a qualified individual denied by ATF for a SBR, SBS, AOW, DD, or transfer of a MG. I know several folks who were unable to get approval because the CLEO would not sign off on the application. You call it a local issue....doesnt change the fact that qualified individuals were unable to get to the crucial ATF approval part of the stamp process. It would seem the denial came from the CLEO, and not the ATF. Seems like ATF can't "infringe" so they delegate authority to CLEO who will? Hmmmm, smells like a loophole or a workaround to me. No shortage of scofflaws in and out of the gov it seems. It's pretty clear to me, in plain language construct, that a subject which simply "shall not be infringed" is protected against infringement by all comers; as opposed to something which is only protected against trampling from a specific potential assailant, like Congress in "Congress shall make no law" not being a prohibition against private party curtailing of speech. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 2:55:19 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You can shoot an AR pistol from the shoulder with just the buffer tube, and that doesn't magically transform it into an SBR. But having the brace on does? How about a sling attachment, or a light, or a laser, or... When the ATF starts saying one firearm is legal to shoot from a particular position, but another identically-classified firearm is not, I think their game is over. Show me the letter. Someone has to have it. It's not that I don't believe you. I just want to see the letter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 3:19:18 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Does Congress not have the power to tax interstate commerce? Are firearms that are made and shipped all over the country not in interstate commerce? With the obvious exception of (and previously stated) machine gun ban, how exactly is it unconstitutional? EVERYONE who is legally qualified gets their stuff when they pay their tax. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the NFA is perfectly constitutional. http://www.ar15.com/media/viewFile.html?i=71346 Does Congress not have the power to tax interstate commerce? Are firearms that are made and shipped all over the country not in interstate commerce? With the obvious exception of (and previously stated) machine gun ban, how exactly is it unconstitutional? EVERYONE who is legally qualified gets their stuff when they pay their tax. Are you familiar with the concept of "Poll Tax"? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 3:25:34 PM EDT
[#7]
I'd just like to understand what tangible service the $200.00 tax provides to the public at large. If none can be readily attributed then wouldn't it simply amount to nothing more than a for-profit "fee"; a fee that is inordinate relative to the process involved? If it is only as much, a flat fee of $5.00 should be held across the board.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 3:29:48 PM EDT
[#8]
does anyone have stats on arrests made for NFA violation <STRICTLY nfa violations> that were not add on charges for other issues?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 3:35:00 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
does anyone have stats on arrests made for NFA violation <STRICTLY nfa violations> that were not add on charges for other issues? Probably can count them using only your appendages... |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 3:37:47 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Probably can count them using only your appendages... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
does anyone have stats on arrests made for NFA violation <STRICTLY nfa violations> that were not add on charges for other issues? Probably can count them using only your appendages... i suspect it is almost zero. hell the ATF can't even be bothered to prosecute BG felons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 3:38:33 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd just like to understand what tangible service the $200.00 tax provides to the public at large. If none can be readily attributed then wouldn't it simply amount to nothing more than a for-profit "fee" that is inordinate relative to the process involved? If it is only as much, a flat fee of $5.00 should be held across the board. http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/national-firearms-act "While the NFA was enacted by Congress as an exercise of its authority to tax, the NFA had an underlying purpose unrelated to revenue collection. As the legislative history of the law discloses, its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms." |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 3:41:47 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/national-firearms-act "While the NFA was enacted by Congress as an exercise of its authority to tax, the NFA had an underlying purpose unrelated to revenue collection. As the legislative history of the law discloses, its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'd just like to understand what tangible service the $200.00 tax provides to the public at large. If none can be readily attributed then wouldn't it simply amount to nothing more than a for-profit "fee" that is inordinate relative to the process involved? If it is only as much, a flat fee of $5.00 should be held across the board. http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/national-firearms-act "While the NFA was enacted by Congress as an exercise of its authority to tax, the NFA had an underlying purpose unrelated to revenue collection. As the legislative history of the law discloses, its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms." Wow. From their own site. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 3:44:02 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
the NFA is perfectly constitutional. http://www.ar15.com/media/viewFile.html?i=71346 LOL |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 3:44:29 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
i suspect it is almost zero. hell the ATF can't even be bothered to prosecute BG felons. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
does anyone have stats on arrests made for NFA violation <STRICTLY nfa violations> that were not add on charges for other issues? Probably can count them using only your appendages... i suspect it is almost zero. hell the ATF can't even be bothered to prosecute BG felons. I had a felon steal a suppressor from me (along with other firearms). Called ATF. They didn't care. He wasn't prosecuted by the fedgov at all for weapons possession or possession of unregistered NFA, he was prosecuted by the state of AZ for "misconduct involving weapons". |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 3:48:50 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wow. From their own site. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'd just like to understand what tangible service the $200.00 tax provides to the public at large. If none can be readily attributed then wouldn't it simply amount to nothing more than a for-profit "fee" that is inordinate relative to the process involved? If it is only as much, a flat fee of $5.00 should be held across the board. http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/national-firearms-act "While the NFA was enacted by Congress as an exercise of its authority to tax, the NFA had an underlying purpose unrelated to revenue collection. As the legislative history of the law discloses, its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms." Wow. From their own site.  How has that never been ruled unconstitutional? Maybe that's why Nolo is so enthusiastic right now |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 3:53:39 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I had a felon steal a suppressor from me (along with other firearms). Called ATF. They didn't care. He wasn't prosecuted by the fedgov at all for weapons possession or possession of unregistered NFA, he was prosecuted by the state of AZ for "misconduct involving weapons". Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
does anyone have stats on arrests made for NFA violation <STRICTLY nfa violations> that were not add on charges for other issues? Probably can count them using only your appendages... i suspect it is almost zero. hell the ATF can't even be bothered to prosecute BG felons. I had a felon steal a suppressor from me (along with other firearms). Called ATF. They didn't care. He wasn't prosecuted by the fedgov at all for weapons possession or possession of unregistered NFA, he was prosecuted by the state of AZ for "misconduct involving weapons". Wow. So it's likely they wouldn't give a shit if someone defended themselves with a shoulder-fried SigBraced pistol ? Man, if only folks could be assured of that actually being the rule of the day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 4:01:00 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/national-firearms-act "While the NFA was enacted by Congress as an exercise of its authority to tax, the NFA had an underlying purpose unrelated to revenue collection. As the legislative history of the law discloses, its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'd just like to understand what tangible service the $200.00 tax provides to the public at large. If none can be readily attributed then wouldn't it simply amount to nothing more than a for-profit "fee" that is inordinate relative to the process involved? If it is only as much, a flat fee of $5.00 should be held across the board. http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/national-firearms-act "While the NFA was enacted by Congress as an exercise of its authority to tax, the NFA had an underlying purpose unrelated to revenue collection. As the legislative history of the law discloses, its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms." As described, not really a service per se. As far as it's ulterior motive, it really hasn't worked because it hasn't dissuaded the criminal element from commiting criminal acts with NFA regulated weaponry. We are talking about criminals, yes? Not you or I, no? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 4:03:57 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the NFA is perfectly constitutional. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 4:04:37 PM EDT
[#19]
Screw the ATF.
Just wanted to get another one in today. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 4:07:11 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Show me the letter. Someone has to have it. It's not that I don't believe you. I just want to see the letter. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You can shoot an AR pistol from the shoulder with just the buffer tube, and that doesn't magically transform it into an SBR. But having the brace on does? How about a sling attachment, or a light, or a laser, or... When the ATF starts saying one firearm is legal to shoot from a particular position, but another identically-classified firearm is not, I think their game is over. Show me the letter. Someone has to have it. It's not that I don't believe you. I just want to see the letter. This letter says its ok and references 99146 that you are looking for. Still can't find 99146 though.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_122/525036_Request___Scans_of_any_letters_from_the_BATFE__that_pertain_to_AR_pistols.html&page=4#i6425917 |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 4:08:58 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wow. How has that never been ruled unconstitutional? Maybe that's why Nolo is so enthusiastic right now Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'd just like to understand what tangible service the $200.00 tax provides to the public at large. If none can be readily attributed then wouldn't it simply amount to nothing more than a for-profit "fee" that is inordinate relative to the process involved? If it is only as much, a flat fee of $5.00 should be held across the board. http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/national-firearms-act "While the NFA was enacted by Congress as an exercise of its authority to tax, the NFA had an underlying purpose unrelated to revenue collection. As the legislative history of the law discloses, its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms." Wow. From their own site. How has that never been ruled unconstitutional? Maybe that's why Nolo is so enthusiastic right now I mean yah, until I read that I thought the ATF was just a neutral arbiter of gun rights, just there to smooth the flow of commerce in deadly weapons. They gave me permission to get a 8.3 oz piece of harmless metal just the other day  I only had to fill out one mildly intelligence-insulting form to get it too. They're my friends. I'm sure they are !!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 4:10:25 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd just like to understand what tangible service the $200.00 tax provides to the public at large. If none can be readily attributed then wouldn't it simply amount to nothing more than a for-profit "fee"; a fee that is inordinate relative to the process involved? If it is only as much, a flat fee of $5.00 should be held across the board. Surely, somebody out there has filed FOIA requests to the ATF to figure out how much per year the ATF takes in for tax stamps for: SBR's SBS's suppressors Full autos (???) And then there is some sort of money trail which shows what that revenue actually pays for. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 4:15:15 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Surely, somebody out there has filed FOIA requests to the ATF to figure out how much per year the ATF takes in for tax stamps for: SBR's SBS's suppressors Full autos (???) And then there is some sort of money trail which shows what that revenue actually pays for. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'd just like to understand what tangible service the $200.00 tax provides to the public at large. If none can be readily attributed then wouldn't it simply amount to nothing more than a for-profit "fee"; a fee that is inordinate relative to the process involved? If it is only as much, a flat fee of $5.00 should be held across the board. Surely, somebody out there has filed FOIA requests to the ATF to figure out how much per year the ATF takes in for tax stamps for: SBR's SBS's suppressors Full autos (???) And then there is some sort of money trail which shows what that revenue actually pays for. that would be interesting to see |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 4:19:02 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As described, not really a service per se. As far as it's ulterior motive, it really hasn't worked because it hasn't dissuaded the criminal element from commiting criminal acts with NFA regulated weaponry. We are talking about criminals, yes? Not you or I, no? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'd just like to understand what tangible service the $200.00 tax provides to the public at large. If none can be readily attributed then wouldn't it simply amount to nothing more than a for-profit "fee" that is inordinate relative to the process involved? If it is only as much, a flat fee of $5.00 should be held across the board. http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/national-firearms-act "While the NFA was enacted by Congress as an exercise of its authority to tax, the NFA had an underlying purpose unrelated to revenue collection. As the legislative history of the law discloses, its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms." As described, not really a service per se. As far as it's ulterior motive, it really hasn't worked because it hasn't dissuaded the criminal element from commiting criminal acts with NFA regulated weaponry. We are talking about criminals, yes? Not you or I, no? Correct. Not a service for the benefit of benign gun owners. Not a service to keep weapons out of the hands of those who would use them to harm others. Bad guys get them anyways. Serves only the interests of those who wish to curtail arms ownership among the general populace. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 4:24:42 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This letter says its ok and references 99146 that you are looking for. Still can't find 99146 though.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_122/525036_Request___Scans_of_any_letters_from_the_BATFE__that_pertain_to_AR_pistols.html&page=4#i6425917 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You can shoot an AR pistol from the shoulder with just the buffer tube, and that doesn't magically transform it into an SBR. But having the brace on does? How about a sling attachment, or a light, or a laser, or... When the ATF starts saying one firearm is legal to shoot from a particular position, but another identically-classified firearm is not, I think their game is over. Show me the letter. Someone has to have it. It's not that I don't believe you. I just want to see the letter. This letter says its ok and references 99146 that you are looking for. Still can't find 99146 though.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_122/525036_Request___Scans_of_any_letters_from_the_BATFE__that_pertain_to_AR_pistols.html&page=4#i6425917
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 4:34:30 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You can shoot an AR pistol from the shoulder with just the buffer tube, and that doesn't magically transform it into an SBR. But having the brace on does? How about a sling attachment, or a light, or a laser, or... When the ATF starts saying one firearm is legal to shoot from a particular position, but another identically-classified firearm is not, I think their game is over. Show me the letter. Someone has to have it. It's not that I don't believe you. I just want to see the letter. This letter says its ok and references 99146 that you are looking for. Still can't find 99146 though.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_122/525036_Request___Scans_of_any_letters_from_the_BATFE__that_pertain_to_AR_pistols.html&page=4#i6425917
And 99146 is the one I care about. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 4:44:32 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the NFA is perfectly constitutional. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 5:41:16 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wow. From their own site. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'd just like to understand what tangible service the $200.00 tax provides to the public at large. If none can be readily attributed then wouldn't it simply amount to nothing more than a for-profit "fee" that is inordinate relative to the process involved? If it is only as much, a flat fee of $5.00 should be held across the board. http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/national-firearms-act "While the NFA was enacted by Congress as an exercise of its authority to tax, the NFA had an underlying purpose unrelated to revenue collection. As the legislative history of the law discloses, its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms." Wow. From their own site. Believe it or, there are some people in the BATFE that complete understand the actual basis for the firearms laws their agency enforces and the Consitutionality of those laws. Some of them are "just doing their job" and don't think about it. And some of them agree with the basis, regardless of the Constitutionality because they think they are "doing good". An some of them would like to see their own agency shut its doors. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 5:49:08 PM EDT
[#29]
Hey Y'all!
Is this the "where can I find the cheapest Sig Brace?" thread? Oh, I guess not, I'll keep searching |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 6:05:27 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Article 1 Section 8: Section. 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; I have never heard of a qualified individual being denied an NFA Stamp. Have you? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
With the obvious exception of the machinegun ban, the NFA is perfectly constitutional. 
Article 1 Section 8: Section. 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; I have never heard of a qualified individual being denied an NFA Stamp. Have you? Okay, I have to jump in here because you just went full retard. If I try to get an NFA stamp, right now, I will be denied, flat on it's face. My CLEO *WILL NOT SIGN* any NFA paperwork. Without that signature it is denied. No SBR's, no AOW's, No happy switch. Flat won't sign it. Have I been denied? Fuck no, but I'm not stupid enough to even try. I know what the outcome will be. Others have tried and they've all gotten turned down. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 6:06:42 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's a local problem, not an NFA problem. I support "shall sign" legislation No, that's a Federal problem. Why is the CLEO signature even necessary? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 6:07:21 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hey Y'all! Is this the "where can I find the cheapest Sig Brace?" thread? Oh, I guess not, I'll keep searching Wonder how many people picked up one the day this thread popped up? 
I will point out, yet again, that that ATF letters mean nothing. They can change their mind at any time - and the letter won't keep you from getting wrecked in court, because the number of things the feds can charge you with is really only limited by how much they want to nail you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 6:27:14 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, that's a Federal problem. Why is the CLEO signature even necessary? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
That's a local problem, not an NFA problem. I support "shall sign" legislation No, that's a Federal problem. Why is the CLEO signature even necessary? the intention was a courtesy notification. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 6:49:31 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Okay, I have to jump in here because you just went full retard. If I try to get an NFA stamp, right now, I will be denied, flat on it's face. My CLEO *WILL NOT SIGN* any NFA paperwork. Without that signature it is denied. No SBR's, no AOW's, No happy switch. Flat won't sign it. Have I been denied? Fuck no, but I'm not stupid enough to even try. I know what the outcome will be. Others have tried and they've all gotten turned down. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
With the obvious exception of the machinegun ban, the NFA is perfectly constitutional.
Article 1 Section 8: Section. 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; I have never heard of a qualified individual being denied an NFA Stamp. Have you? Okay, I have to jump in here because you just went full retard. If I try to get an NFA stamp, right now, I will be denied, flat on it's face. My CLEO *WILL NOT SIGN* any NFA paperwork. Without that signature it is denied. No SBR's, no AOW's, No happy switch. Flat won't sign it. Have I been denied? Fuck no, but I'm not stupid enough to even try. I know what the outcome will be. Others have tried and they've all gotten turned down. Link The above is where e ATF is attempting to do away with the trust folks getting around the CLEO signature, finger print and photos for NFA items. I skimmed through the 62 pages and the ATF plans to revising the form 1 for the CLEO sig. to just state something to the effect of "I don't have any reason to believe the individual in this application would be unable to own this NFA item" I will read it all when I have more time. They go on to say they understand and have received phone calls from CLEO's that have said they don't feel comfortable signing for liability purposes. But they if point out how the CLEO signature IS outdated and they have access to the same, if not more back ground check data that local law enforcement does! I have my form 1 all ready... Just waiting to hear back from the county sheriff via email. If I don't hear back in a few days I will call. If denied iI won't let it die and give up. I am in no rush, I will go through every appeal process I can. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:01:20 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Does Congress not have the power to tax interstate commerce? Are firearms that are made and shipped all over the country not in interstate commerce? With the obvious exception of (and previously stated) machine gun ban, how exactly is it unconstitutional? EVERYONE who is legally qualified gets their stuff when they pay their tax. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the NFA is perfectly constitutional. http://www.ar15.com/media/viewFile.html?i=71346 Does Congress not have the power to tax interstate commerce? Are firearms that are made and shipped all over the country not in interstate commerce? With the obvious exception of (and previously stated) machine gun ban, how exactly is it unconstitutional? EVERYONE who is legally qualified gets their stuff when they pay their tax. Arfcommer defending the NFA - WTF
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:07:14 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
pretty much. local LE don't enforce ATF letters. IF anyone gets charged 99.9% will be an add on charge involved with another crime <felony>. i don't see the atf running out to ranges looking for sig brace violators anymore than i see them out there looking for actual SBR violations. Even IF they charged someone with conflicting explanations i think they are going to have a hard time getting an actual prosecution. the pistol with a brace installed is 100% a pistol. it is 100% legal to own and use. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Nobody at the BATFE gives a single fuck about how you use your sig braces, and not a single person will ever be brought on charges for any "misuse" of anything. Only about .01% of brace owners will ever read some flavor of the day "ruling". They will continue to buy these things by the thousands in every local gun store for years to come, and the only fucks given, will be by wannabe lawyer fucks on AR15.com. Buy, enjoy, and quit worrying about the sky falling..........cause it's not pretty much. local LE don't enforce ATF letters. IF anyone gets charged 99.9% will be an add on charge involved with another crime <felony>. i don't see the atf running out to ranges looking for sig brace violators anymore than i see them out there looking for actual SBR violations. Even IF they charged someone with conflicting explanations i think they are going to have a hard time getting an actual prosecution. the pistol with a brace installed is 100% a pistol. it is 100% legal to own and use. But on the off chance a member catches heat for something else it could be brought up. Like when I got those guns taken because the house got shot, once the officer figured out it wasn't likely me(as in no fucking way he could charge me) he started digging for other things to charge me with, and the SBR GSG-5 was something he tried to stick me with. Little did he know I did have it properly registered, but he wasted a couple of months playing phone tag with my lawyer figuring out what "paperwork" I had on it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:14:35 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
i suspect it is almost zero. hell the ATF can't even be bothered to prosecute BG felons. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
does anyone have stats on arrests made for NFA violation <STRICTLY nfa violations> that were not add on charges for other issues? Probably can count them using only your appendages... i suspect it is almost zero. hell the ATF can't even be bothered to prosecute BG felons. There is a PA statie that really wanted to make me one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:16:49 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Surely, somebody out there has filed FOIA requests to the ATF to figure out how much per year the ATF takes in for tax stamps for: SBR's SBS's suppressors Full autos (???) And then there is some sort of money trail which shows what that revenue actually pays for. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'd just like to understand what tangible service the $200.00 tax provides to the public at large. If none can be readily attributed then wouldn't it simply amount to nothing more than a for-profit "fee"; a fee that is inordinate relative to the process involved? If it is only as much, a flat fee of $5.00 should be held across the board. Surely, somebody out there has filed FOIA requests to the ATF to figure out how much per year the ATF takes in for tax stamps for: SBR's SBS's suppressors Full autos (???) And then there is some sort of money trail which shows what that revenue actually pays for. We know where it goes. That's no secret. It goes to the DOJ general fund. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:18:16 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Arfcommer defending the NFA - WTF Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the NFA is perfectly constitutional. http://www.ar15.com/media/viewFile.html?i=71346 Does Congress not have the power to tax interstate commerce? Are firearms that are made and shipped all over the country not in interstate commerce? With the obvious exception of (and previously stated) machine gun ban, how exactly is it unconstitutional? EVERYONE who is legally qualified gets their stuff when they pay their tax. Arfcommer defending the NFA - WTF And I suppose everyone who paid thier Poll tax got to vote too. You can't tax voting or free speech guy, why would it be any different. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:18:30 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
that would be interesting to see Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'd just like to understand what tangible service the $200.00 tax provides to the public at large. If none can be readily attributed then wouldn't it simply amount to nothing more than a for-profit "fee"; a fee that is inordinate relative to the process involved? If it is only as much, a flat fee of $5.00 should be held across the board. Surely, somebody out there has filed FOIA requests to the ATF to figure out how much per year the ATF takes in for tax stamps for: SBR's SBS's suppressors Full autos (???) And then there is some sort of money trail which shows what that revenue actually pays for. that would be interesting to see The general fund pays for just about anything related to the DOJ. It's not like for every $200 tax paid transfer the ATF gets another gold star and a mouse pad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:21:21 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the intention was a courtesy notification. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That's a local problem, not an NFA problem. I support "shall sign" legislation No, that's a Federal problem. Why is the CLEO signature even necessary? the intention was a courtesy notification. And that's why those idiots at nfatca or whatever they went by were trying to get rid of the CLEO sign off. Totally back fired, but back when it was put in place the local chief of police would actually know the person who was making the request as he knew everyone in his town. In this day and age most CLEO wouldn't know most of the people living in their jurisdiction. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:25:49 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But on the off chance a member catches heat for something else it could be brought up. Like when I got those guns taken because the house got shot, once the officer figured out it wasn't likely me(as in no fucking way he could charge me) he started digging for other things to charge me with, and the SBR GSG-5 was something he tried to stick me with. Little did he know I did have it properly registered, but he wasted a couple of months playing phone tag with my lawyer figuring out what "paperwork" I had on it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nobody at the BATFE gives a single fuck about how you use your sig braces, and not a single person will ever be brought on charges for any "misuse" of anything. Only about .01% of brace owners will ever read some flavor of the day "ruling". They will continue to buy these things by the thousands in every local gun store for years to come, and the only fucks given, will be by wannabe lawyer fucks on AR15.com. Buy, enjoy, and quit worrying about the sky falling..........cause it's not pretty much. local LE don't enforce ATF letters. IF anyone gets charged 99.9% will be an add on charge involved with another crime <felony>. i don't see the atf running out to ranges looking for sig brace violators anymore than i see them out there looking for actual SBR violations. Even IF they charged someone with conflicting explanations i think they are going to have a hard time getting an actual prosecution. the pistol with a brace installed is 100% a pistol. it is 100% legal to own and use. But on the off chance a member catches heat for something else it could be brought up. Like when I got those guns taken because the house got shot, once the officer figured out it wasn't likely me(as in no fucking way he could charge me) he started digging for other things to charge me with, and the SBR GSG-5 was something he tried to stick me with. Little did he know I did have it properly registered, but he wasted a couple of months playing phone tag with my lawyer figuring out what "paperwork" I had on it. as a pistol it would be resolved as soon as he made a call to the atf. local PD do not enforce federal gun laws. they can confiscate until proof is provided but thats about it. if you have a receit for it that pretty much ends his investigation. this is where knowing the law and your rights is important. you can be charged with pretty much anything if the officer is a douche. being convicted is a different story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:26:15 PM EDT
[#43]
just pay the stamp.. i say SBR.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"To SBR or not SBR..........that is the question?" Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
you guys still wankin over this..... i thought we where dropping it ?  "To SBR or not SBR..........that is the question?" |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:29:50 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Arfcommer defending the NFA - WTF Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the NFA is perfectly constitutional. http://www.ar15.com/media/viewFile.html?i=71346 Does Congress not have the power to tax interstate commerce? Are firearms that are made and shipped all over the country not in interstate commerce? With the obvious exception of (and previously stated) machine gun ban, how exactly is it unconstitutional? EVERYONE who is legally qualified gets their stuff when they pay their tax. Arfcommer defending the NFA - WTF Double
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:39:25 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Double
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the NFA is perfectly constitutional. http://www.ar15.com/media/viewFile.html?i=71346 Does Congress not have the power to tax interstate commerce? Are firearms that are made and shipped all over the country not in interstate commerce? With the obvious exception of (and previously stated) machine gun ban, how exactly is it unconstitutional? EVERYONE who is legally qualified gets their stuff when they pay their tax. Arfcommer defending the NFA - WTF Double
Triple
The guy calls all arfcommers douchebags (pg.15) and then defends the NFA. Really swingin' for the fences there, Squirt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:52:39 PM EDT
[#46]
Still waiting for someone to show me where the NFA is unconstitutional...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:55:09 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Still waiting for someone to show me where the NFA is unconstitutional... Are you ignoring the part about having to pay a tax to exercise your Constitutionally protected right? Or would it be okay to start collecting a poll tax again? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:56:37 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Still waiting for someone to show me where the NFA is unconstitutional... Still waiting for you to answer how someone who has both sbr's as well as pistols with sig braces is trying to get away with something and what they are trying to get away with. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 7:57:45 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are you ignoring the part about having to pay a tax to exercise your Constitutionally protected right? Or would it be okay to start collecting a poll tax again? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Still waiting for someone to show me where the NFA is unconstitutional... Are you ignoring the part about having to pay a tax to exercise your Constitutionally protected right? Or would it be okay to start collecting a poll tax again? So where is the outrage over Pittman-Robertson? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2014 8:01:41 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So where is the outrage over Pittman-Robertson? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Still waiting for someone to show me where the NFA is unconstitutional... Are you ignoring the part about having to pay a tax to exercise your Constitutionally protected right? Or would it be okay to start collecting a poll tax again? So where is the outrage over Pittman-Robertson? How does the lack of outrage over a different topic determine whether or not the NFA is Constitutional? Pittman-Robertson is not as well known as the NFA, so you will get less people pissed off about it. Pittman-Robertson also isn't amended repeatedly to contradict what was okay a few months ago |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
