Armory Sponsor
Posted: 6/21/2012 6:36:43 PM EDT
|
Interesting link here for ATF firearm stats: http://www.atf.gov/publications/firearms/050412-firearms-commerce-in-the-us-annual-statistical-update-2012.pdf
In reference to the thread compiling tax stamp purchases, page 11 of the report shows $12.5+ million dollars in revenue from NFA "occupational, making and transfer" taxes paid in 2011. The stats also show the reason that processing has slowed so much, last year was also record on every single NFA category with the exception of Form 5 transfers. |
| Amazing how many MG's are registered in states like IL and CA where they are illegal for private citizens to posess or extremely difficult to get state approval. IL really surprises me considering pretty much everything NFA is illegal, are all these PD guns in IL? |
|
Quoted:
Amazing how many MG's are registered in states like IL and CA where they are illegal for private citizens to posess or extremely difficult to get state approval. IL really surprises me considering pretty much everything NFA is illegal, are all these PD guns in IL? Yes, I like how in those states, it's ok for law enforcement to have a ton of that stuff, but no citizens can. Rediculous commie states. |
|
Quoted:
Massachusetts has 3,769 registered silencers compared to 2,782 in New Hampshire? Does that include what the manufacturers (YHM) are sitting on? Because other than that, only LEO can possess them in MA. ETA: Class 3 dealers can, too IIRC. I'm guessing that is a full and current data dump of the registry, which includes everything from law enforcement agencies, manufacturers (the Colt factory is probably why CT has so many MGs), dealer stock (movie guns in CA) and private owners. While interesting, it does skew the numbers a bit with respect to the private ownership figures we'd be most interested in. I'd really like to know the per capita privately owned MG figure on a state by state basis. My home state of NV looks pretty high. (6800 MGs over a population of 2.7 million = 2.5 MGs per 1000 citizens) But again, the numbes are skewed due to LEO and manufacturers. |
|
I like the Form 1 and Form 4 apps going up five fold in the past three years.
Deluge them Market forces, causing big-business to see profits in NFA is the only way to improve this crap beyond a drawn-out court win. Money makes shit happen. Even with political poison like NFA |
|
[span style='font-weight: bold;']Money makes shit happen. Even with political poison like NFA
All we need is someone in Congress to figure out how much money they would make if they let us buy NEW MG's again. The flood of F1's and F4's would be insane... And a 5 year wait... 
Jk |
|
Quoted:
[span style='font-weight: bold;']Money makes shit happen. Even with political poison like NFA
All we need is someone in Congress to figure out how much money they would make if they let us buy NEW MG's again. The flood of F1's and F4's would be insane... And a 5 year wait...
Jk They don't really get to see that money. I'm thinking more along the lines of big business lining their pockets with donations and board appointments and keeping workers in their district fat and happy. We can get the registry open in one of two ways.... court challenge to the entirety of NFA 34 on either the grounds of tax or constitutionality. via legislation, reopen registry of MG to match the rest of NFA regs. Essentially wind the clock back to pre-FOPA 86. I'd honestly be happy with legislation winding the clock back to 1985 in regards to NFA. $200 isn't shit these days. Again, the money from big business would ensure the congressional questioning and budget limits to ensure that NFA was updated to a faster, more modern system. (one of the big reasons that NFA will not get with the times, is because that the registry is so damaged that it would expose how flawed the database is, and likely invalidate the whole thing in any court case). A third way exists....... Eric Holder can reopen it on an ongoing "amnesty" and we will let him keep his job (at least until we boot his boss out in November) 
|
|
i'm guessing that all the DDs in some states are flash bangs and other explosive type stuff? like one state with 212,000+ registered DDs
i'm also surprised at CT for having just over 1,000 SBRs now for the MGs in Cali, some are state or FFL owned, what about the private guys who had them prior to 86 or the new Cali laws that banned them, do they still have them? |
|
Quoted:
now for the MGs in Cali, some are state or FFL owned, what about the private guys who had them prior to 86 or the new Cali laws that banned them, do they still have them? There are a very, very few wealthy collectors in Cali who have machine guns. The state does not ban then; state law only requires a permit. But only someone who is very, very, very connected can get a permit. Same goes for the folks who were grandfathered in; most of the ones still alive and still owning MGs are power types. My understanding is that there are fewer than 100 permitted MG owners in the state today. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
now for the MGs in Cali, some are state or FFL owned, what about the private guys who had them prior to 86 or the new Cali laws that banned them, do they still have them? There are a very, very few wealthy collectors in Cali who have machine guns. The state does not ban then; state law only requires a permit. But only someone who is very, very, very connected can get a permit. Same goes for the folks who were grandfathered in; most of the ones still alive and still owning MGs are power types. My understanding is that there are fewer than 100 permitted MG owners in the state today. Oh so they weren't automatically grandfathered in like some other places? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
now for the MGs in Cali, some are state or FFL owned, what about the private guys who had them prior to 86 or the new Cali laws that banned them, do they still have them? There are a very, very few wealthy collectors in Cali who have machine guns. The state does not ban then; state law only requires a permit. But only someone who is very, very, very connected can get a permit. Same goes for the folks who were grandfathered in; most of the ones still alive and still owning MGs are power types. My understanding is that there are fewer than 100 permitted MG owners in the state today. Oh so they weren't automatically grandfathered in like some other places? That, I do not know. It is difficult to get a handle on how MG permits are actually doled out in Cali because the folks who do have them do not take calls from mere mortals like us.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
now for the MGs in Cali, some are state or FFL owned, what about the private guys who had them prior to 86 or the new Cali laws that banned them, do they still have them? There are a very, very few wealthy collectors in Cali who have machine guns. The state does not ban then; state law only requires a permit. But only someone who is very, very, very connected can get a permit. Same goes for the folks who were grandfathered in; most of the ones still alive and still owning MGs are power types. My understanding is that there are fewer than 100 permitted MG owners in the state today. Oh so they weren't automatically grandfathered in like some other places? That, I do not know. It is difficult to get a handle on how MG permits are actually doled out in Cali because the folks who do have them do not take calls from mere mortals like us. When did the people of California start handing their rights over? It was pretty recent wasn't it? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
[span style='font-weight: bold;']Money makes shit happen. Even with political poison like NFA
All we need is someone in Congress to figure out how much money they would make if they let us buy NEW MG's again. The flood of F1's and F4's would be insane... And a 5 year wait...
Jk They don't really get to see that money. I'm thinking more along the lines of big business lining their pockets with donations and board appointments and keeping workers in their district fat and happy. We can get the registry open in one of two ways.... court challenge to the entirety of NFA 34 on either the grounds of tax or constitutionality. via legislation, reopen registry of MG to match the rest of NFA regs. Essentially wind the clock back to pre-FOPA 86. I'd honestly be happy with legislation winding the clock back to 1985 in regards to NFA. $200 isn't shit these days. Again, the money from big business would ensure the congressional questioning and budget limits to ensure that NFA was updated to a faster, more modern system. (one of the big reasons that NFA will not get with the times, is because that the registry is so damaged that it would expose how flawed the database is, and likely invalidate the whole thing in any court case). A third way exists....... Eric Holder can reopen it on an ongoing "amnesty" and we will let him keep his job (at least until we boot his boss out in November) +1 on this post. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
but to the question i asked earlier the 2mil + DDs on the registry are mostly flash bangs owned by PDs right? Yup. Each flash-bang must be registered individually. That's just stupid. 
Even more stupid: A year or two ago, the Department of Homeland Security started requiring the registration of flash-bangs exclusively made and sold for export around the world. Previously, only ones destined for U.S. sale had to be registered. That along added thousands of new items to the NFA Registry, and helped to overload NFA Branch staff. 
|
Armory Sponsor