Jump to content

NFA (National Firearms Act) could be a thing of the past


Recommended Posts

I sure hope so. The ATF is the most ridiclous agency in the country. Their changes on a whim of firearm classifications, rules, etc. is arsine to say the least. 

 

https://www.ammoland.com/2022/07/motion-to-dismiss-atf-firearms-case-claiming-nfa-unconstitutional/#axzz7aA01ot8b

 

It's an interesting case and with SCOTUS recent ruling... we might see the NFA be a thing of the past.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

What effect would the ruling have on guns, gun laws, etc? 

 

It would remove the restrictions... sbr (Short barrel rifles), sbs (short barrel shotguns), silencers (suppressors... we're literally one of the only countries that regulates them which is moronic), possible full-automatic (would still have a registry and major restrictions). 

 

The problem with the ATF and NFA is that rules change as they want. Great example is "pistol grips", they've gone back and forth with their "rules" about a dozen times. "Now you're a felon!" then 3 months later "Never mind, you're good."... so on and so on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ArdmoreRyno said:

 

It would remove the restrictions... sbr (Short barrel rifles), sbs (short barrel shotguns), silencers (suppressors... we're literally one of the only countries that regulates them which is moronic), possible full-automatic (would still have a registry and major restrictions). 

 

The problem with the ATF and NFA is that rules change as they want. Great example is "pistol grips", they've gone back and forth with their "rules" about a dozen times. "Now you're a felon!" then 3 months later "Never mind, you're good."... so on and so on. 

So mass shooting can get much more deadly. This is progress? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

So mass shooting can get much more deadly. This is progress? 

 

 

 

I have zero issue with regulating full auto in some capacity. 

 

The rest are stupid to even have on the list. Suppressors are the most ridiculous. Finland, France, and New Zealand (listing first world countries) have zero regulations on them. There is NO reason to regulate them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, ArdmoreRyno said:

 

I have zero issue with regulating full auto in some capacity. 

 

The rest are stupid to even have on the list. Suppressors are the most ridiculous. Finland, France, and New Zealand (listing first world countries) have zero regulations on them. There is NO reason to regulate them. 

But if a guy with a silencer is walking around killing, there is far less warning for everyone else to protect themselves. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

But if a guy with a silencer is walking around killing, there is far less warning for everyone else to protect themselves. 

 

Says someone who gets their gun information from movies and people in DC. You think the John Wick 2 scene in the subway station with he and Common shooting at each other is accurate, right? LOL

 

Go watch a video of a suppressed AR-15. Look at the dB output. No one is getting a "less warning". You're talking dB of 135+

 

What else is 135 decibels? 

 

Jet engine 

Quiet AF. Definitely would give less warning! 🤣 
 

 

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regulating suppressors is insane. The only guns I've been able to make quiet enough with a suppressor to not need ear protection (still loud just won't make your ears bleed) are .22s and a 300BLK using subsonic ammo.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, LeviF said:

Regulating suppressors is insane. The only guns I've been able to make quiet enough with a suppressor to not need ear protection (still loud just won't make your ears bleed) are .22s and a 300BLK using subsonic ammo.

 

Yep! Its a health issue. You can destroy your hearing with one shot from a bunch of different guns. 

I have a 300 Blackout myself and roll my own subs to shoot suppressed. The 120 grain supers are still LOUD. I got a Grand Power Stribog 9mm earlier in the year and using 'hush' 9mm rounds, it's pretty quiet but that John Wick scene... people think that's how suppressors work/sound. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, ArdmoreRyno said:

 

Yep! Its a health issue. You can destroy your hearing with one shot from a bunch of different guns. 

I have a 300 Blackout myself and roll my own subs to shoot suppressed. The 120 grain supers are still LOUD. I got a Grand Power Stribog 9mm earlier in the year and using 'hush' 9mm rounds, it's pretty quiet but that John Wick scene... people think that's how suppressors work/sound. 

 

 

 

I hope your not expecting a logical reply from Tibs or Billstime on this subject !

 

I'll just be real honest & tell you i don't know a thing about suppressors instead of playing the cards they do . I just know guns go boom when you pull the trigger & if your are demented enough to point them at another human then they will probably be gravely injured by doing so .

 

But those dam guns just won't listen to the laws the law makers write .

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, aristocrat said:


how will it do in the senate?

 

It probably doesn't matter.  Even if it passes,  it's very likely to end up in the Supreme Court in short order.  Given the Dems' recent string of high profile losses in that venue in recent months,  they're pretty stupid to even try this right now. 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2022 at 7:09 AM, Tiberius said:

 

 

Again, pointless and moronic. 

 

It won't do anything to stop "mass shootings" or gun violence. Going after the firearm that only accounts for 0.016% of gun homicides.  Brilliant idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, ArdmoreRyno said:

 

Again, pointless and moronic. 

 

It won't do anything to stop "mass shootings" or gun violence. Going after the firearm that only accounts for 0.016% of gun homicides.  Brilliant idea.

No, those guns should either not be legal or very strictly regulated 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

No, those guns should either not be legal or very strictly regulated 

 

Again, they are going after a firearm system that account for very few deaths in the United States. 

 

There is zero logic to it and you're just full of crap or an idiot if you don't see that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ArdmoreRyno said:

 

Again, they are going after a firearm system that account for very few deaths in the United States. 

 

There is zero logic to it and you're just full of crap or an idiot if you don't see that. 

There is no civilian need for them. Most Americans want them banned, let the will of the people prevail 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...