wb3jma
Active Member
GOA lawyer gets ATF to admit the new process puts you in a position if denied application that they can will take enforcement action against you.
GOA lawyer gets ATF to admit the new process puts you in a position if denied application that they can will take enforcement action against you.
I feel the same way. However, just because they can’t arrest all doesn’t mean they can’t arrest some. If they can only arrest some, they might even choose to arrest those they like the least.The ATF has let thousands of people register guns that were not only illegal, but illegally obtained including stolen from the US military. There is no way they are going to arrest and prosecute millions of Americans, many of whom bought the guns from licensed dealers.
I agree.Is 200 bucks really worth it? Yes, money is money, and everyone's financial situation is drastically different, but for some nominal amount, there is so little upside. Plus considering the general negatives that come with an SBR, people should really think twice. If you really want an SBR down the line, go the traditional route and pay that $200, meanwhile, pop the brace off prior to whenever the deadline is, and see how things shake out. Generally nothing in life is truly free, but for sure, nothing any government has to offer is ever free.
100% agree!Is 200 bucks really worth it? Yes, money is money, and everyone's financial situation is drastically different, but for some nominal amount, there is so little upside. Plus considering the general negatives that come with an SBR, people should really think twice. If you really want an SBR down the line, go the traditional route and pay that $200, meanwhile, pop the brace off prior to whenever the deadline is, and see how things shake out. Generally nothing in life is truly free, but for sure, nothing any government has to offer is ever free.
This. If they basically arrest people for doing what they're asking them to do, it's a surefire way to never get any compliance ever. They want compliance. Maybe a little fear, too, but entrapment is a little more specific and directed than this.The ATF has let thousands of people register guns that were not only illegal, but illegally obtained including stolen from the US military. There is no way they are going to arrest and prosecute millions of Americans, many of whom bought the guns from licensed dealers.
They can’t. It is controlled by legislation. And the original legislation made no provisions to tie it to inflation. Thankfully. Otherwise tax stamps would be about $5000 today. Pistols were a little more expensive then. Around $30 IIRC. Silencers were $8 on average. But yeah, the purpose of the NFA was originally banning machine guns and pistols for only the government and the rich. Pistols fell out of the NFA before it was passed, but SBRs and SBS along with AOWs stayed in, as those were considered a dodge around the effective pistol ban. Silencers were added in because not many people had them and there were game warden concerns people were using them to poach, so they wanted them banned.I agree.
If the AFT really wanted to get serious about all this, they would have raised the NFA tax. Back when it was conceived, $200 was an onerous tax, when you consider the average cost of a pistol(the original target of the NFA) was between $5-$10. Just imagine what that tax would be/could be today...
The "they" in my comment was Congress.They can’t. It is controlled by legislation. And the original legislation made no provisions to tie it to inflation. Thankfully. Otherwise tax stamps would be about $5000 today. Pistols were a little more expensive then. Around $30 IIRC. Silencers were $8 on average. But yeah, the purpose of the NFA was originally banning machine guns and pistols for only the government and the rich. Pistols fell out of the NFA before it was passed, but SBRs and SBS along with AOWs stayed in, as those were considered a dodge around the effective pistol ban. Silencers were added in because not many people had them and there were game warden concerns people were using them to poach, so they wanted them banned.
Back before crossbows and modern bows were a thing. Otherwise they probably would have been pushing to ban at least crossbows.
Oh. Sorry. Yeah, I should have figured that out. I am damned glad they haven't tinkered with it!The "they" in my comment was Congress.