REPEAL the NFA

[Bob A]

Done.
79309

 

[MMartini1969]

Done. Getting closer.

 

[Boss94]

Done, was around 79900.

 

[killng]

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/repeal-nfa


89,357 just a little more ppl!!!

 

[lennyk]

Done and Done

 

[MrNiceGuy]

it's never going to happen- too many gun owners are invested in the inflated prices due to the limited supply. Do an amnesty or three instead. That will get things rolling. NO legislation required.

Of course it'll happen. A handful of people losing some economic interest weighed against everyone else being able to exercise their God-given, Constitutionally-guaranteed right to keep and bear arms? Please. It's going to happen and it's just a question of how soon and whether the legislature wakes up and resolves the situation before the SCOTUS solves it for them.

 

[FGT1958]

Done and 52K over the 100K needed!

 

[Atlasarmory]

Done and 52K over the 100K needed!

 

[miker/t]

Signed! 152,282 total

 

[Pinecone]

Problem is, repealing the NFA will not allow more machine guns in the pool.

The Hughes amendment to FOPA 86 is what limits the available machine guns for transfer.

 

[hi3cho]

Done

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Problem is, repealing the NFA will not allow more machine guns in the pool.

The Hughes amendment to FOPA 86 is what limits the available machine guns for transfer.

The NFA is just one of the dominoes. Once any of the major restrictions (FOPA, GCA, NFA, etc) goes down, the others won't be far behind. They all rely on the same broken understanding of the Second Amendment and as soon as you call that understanding into question and resolve the question appropriately, none of the rest have a leg to stand on any longer.

 

[DaemonAssassin]

Problem is, repealing the NFA will not allow more machine guns in the pool.

The Hughes amendment to FOPA 86 is what limits the available machine guns for transfer.

Actually the Hughes Amendment is nothing, if NFA is repealed. The HA closed the machine gun registry. If the machine gun registry no longer exists, what the the HA actually close? The answer is; The HA is now a relic of a bygone era that can not be enforced due to the changes in the laws it was tied to.

It is the same thing as FSA2013 being repealed. The regulated firearms list will technically disappear in the blink of an eye, because there would not be a regulated firearms list in COMAR that could be infringed on.

 

[Pinecone]

The NFA is just one of the dominoes. Once any of the major restrictions (FOPA, GCA, NFA, etc) goes down, the others won't be far behind. They all rely on the same broken understanding of the Second Amendment and as soon as you call that understanding into question and resolve the question appropriately, none of the rest have a leg to stand on any longer.

Really?

You think the Congress works on LOGIC??????

REALLY???

 

[Pinecone]

I would have to look at the language in the two laws.

You are right with FSA 2013, because they changed the text of that section of the MD Law.

However, they COULD repeal FSA2013, by rolling back the language to pre-FSA2013, and the regulated long gun list would reappear.

It all depends on the wording of the new bill.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Really?

You think the Congress works on LOGIC??????

REALLY???

Not at all, but once the SCOTUS sets the bar (and they've been moving toward it with a much less friendly court than what I would expect to see by the end of this administration), it isn't all that difficult (albeit time consuming) to start measuring everything else against that bar. The basic elements of the test are already in play: does the Second Amendment apply to individuals? (yes), does it apply to common firearms (yes), does it apply to military weapons (yes). Now tie those bits together and ask the basic, simple, obvious question: "do the NFA, GCA, etc make sense and pass legal muster under the Second Amendment?"

Logically, we're already there. A friendlier court will merely be less resistant to taking larger steps forward on a path the court has already forged. I expect nothing good out of Congress, regardless of who's there. But I do still have some faith that the Supreme Court eventually gets things right, even if it takes them a long time to do it. A thousand restrictions on rights can be undone in a single pro-liberty decision. In the end, liberty wins. Oppression is hard work.

 

[mdlowrider]

176,942 this morning. I did this, but am not so sure I really want to repeal the NFA. Certainly we should change NFA, but I think it's in our interest to promote responsible gun legislation because if we don't, we'll get irresponsible gun legislation. We too often let the lefties control the narrative on guns. Who better to figure out how to balance 2A rights against legitimate public safety interests than the 99% of us who are responsible gun owners? Surely not some Baltimore city council wackadoodle who thinks "assault rifles" are anything that looks scary and doesn't know the difference between a magazine, a cartridge and a bullet. But too often, we respond to the wackadoodles, instead of making them to respond to us. And I'm afraid all the wackadoodles will welcome a petition to repeal NFA as evidence they can use to prove that all gun owners (or at least 176 thousand of us) want no restrictions on our Stinger missiles, grenade launchers, and automatic weapons. You know they will say this. So does the petition really help us? I signed it, so am leaving that question to wiser heads than me, but I do think we should be proposing what we want to see more often, and rejecting something somebody else proposed less often.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

And I'm afraid all the wackadoodles will welcome a petition to repeal NFA as evidence they can use to prove that all gun owners (or at least 176 thousand of us) want no restrictions on our Stinger missiles, grenade launchers, and automatic weapons. You know they will say this.

They're correct, at least in my case. I don't believe the Constitution makes a distinction. If you can buy it or construct it, you can own it and you can bear it. I'd like there to be a searchable system that anyone can use at any time to see whether the person they're about to sell to is a wanted criminal (so long as that system keeps no records of searches), but beyond that, I don't believe in restrictions for free citizens.

I don't believe that those who are confined against their will (prisoners or mental patients) should be able to practice their Second Amendment rights just the same as I don't believe they should be voting or have freedom of movement or association. That's where I'll accept an infringement. Everyone else? If you're safe enough to be out on the street operating under your own free will, you're safe enough to fully enjoy your rights. If you aren't safe enough to hand a firearm to, why on Earth are you allowed to walk around freely? That's insane.

 

[DaemonAssassin]

I would have to look at the language in the two laws.

You are right with FSA 2013, because they changed the text of that section of the MD Law.

However, they COULD repeal FSA2013, by rolling back the language to pre-FSA2013, and the regulated long gun list would reappear.

It all depends on the wording of the new bill.

I agree that it depends on the wording of the new bill. But if it says that NFA is repealed and that's it, the the HA is now restricting something that no longer exists. But if the book says something else and repeals the HA, that would be the smarter move.

 

[scjamesm]

There is a petition for the hughes amendment I posted in a different thread. Only one day left though.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/repeal-1986-hughes-amendment