HR 1263 Adds semiauto rifles and shotguns to NFA 1986

[Odinvalknir]

I hope this is just one of those outlandish bills created knowing that it will be struck down by the Senate, but this gun control nonsense is really getting out of hand. I know that it says semi auto rifles but I'm sure can easily include semi-automatic handguns as well since they all take detachable magazines. I really hate to sound like a crackpot conspiracy theorist but I fear there will come a day either in my lifetime or my kids where we will actually need to use the Second Amendment to stand up against a tyrannical government.




https://news.unclesamsmisguidedchildren ... t-of-1986/

[Allons]

This is going nowhere. If it does I will not comply, PERIOD!

[Odinvalknir]

This is going nowhere. If it does I will not comply, PERIOD!

That's kinda how I feel about it. I don't believe it will make it past the Senate, but stranger things have happened. If crap like this starts going through I guess I'll just have to be living life as an uncharged felon, at least until the BATF comes for me like they have so many others.

[longtooth]

A lot of us old Patriots wont comply.

[K.Mooneyham]

So, the BATFE is the agency which would be charged with enforcing this proposed law, like they are the agency charged with enforcing the current NFA laws. A quick search I did shows that there were about three thousand armed agents, as of 2017. Let's say that was doubled, or even tripled. Ten thousand armed agents, sounds like a LOT of agents...until you compare that to the tens of millions of people who own semi-automatic rifles and shotguns. Even if those agents didn't do anything else but track down people who hadn't registered their firearms, they would still never complete their task. In fact, a serious attempt at full enforcement would become a suicide mission, as a certain unknown, and likely large, percentage would refuse to comply. The law is simply unenforceable. In fact, the Democrat Congressman who proposed this thing likely knows that not only is it unenforceable, but also that it won't pass. He wants to be able to blame "evil Republicans" in the Senate and/or the POTUS, so he can fundraise for his reelection campaign. It's a garbage law, and all it will do is cause a bunch of people to be upset. It's just political dirt.

[bfm1851]

I agree, this bill would have a hard time gaining any support. " tubular device which is only capable of operating with .22 caliber rimfire ammunition." What about all my lever action rifles? .30/30, .45colt and even my 454 casull . Guess they will be the next assault rifles?

[RPBrown]

A lot of us old Patriots wont comply.

[Gator Guy]

Unless somebody doesn't comply with NFA already, I'm skeptical they will start, no matter what other firearms fall under that unconstitutional un-law.

[montgomery]

Unless somebody doesn't comply with NFA already, I'm skeptical they will start, no matter what other firearms fall under that unconstitutional un-law.

Non-compliance is a cowardly act in the absence of performing a patriot act.

[SQLGeek]

I agree, this bill would have a hard time gaining any support. " tubular device which is only capable of operating with .22 caliber rimfire ammunition." What about all my lever action rifles? .30/30, .45colt and even my 454 casull . Guess they will be the next assault rifles?

And that's why incrementalism has been so damaging to our rights.

[K.Mooneyham]

Unless somebody doesn't comply with NFA already, I'm skeptical they will start, no matter what other firearms fall under that unconstitutional un-law.

Non-compliance is a cowardly act in the absence of performing a patriot act.

Can someone explain to me what those two statements are supposed to mean in this context? I seriously do not get it.

[SonOfTheRevolution]

Obviously this ain’t gonna get through the entirety of our Congress, and would get vetoed by the executive in the Oval Office, but that’s not to say it couldn’t happen at a later date under a less 2A friendly regime. All the more reason to vote, hold your elected representatives accountable, and support the NRA.

[longtooth]

Obviously this ain’t gonna get through the entirety of our Congress, and would get vetoed by the executive in the Oval Office, but that’s not to say it couldn’t happen at a later date under a less 2A friendly regime. All the more reason to vote, hold your elected representatives accountable, and support the NRA.

Yes and we also have to raise up a younger generation to wave the and vote too.

[RicoTX]

Unless somebody doesn't comply with NFA already, I'm skeptical they will start, no matter what other firearms fall under that unconstitutional un-law.

Non-compliance is a cowardly act in the absence of performing a patriot act.

Can someone explain to me what those two statements are supposed to mean in this context? I seriously do not get it.

I agree with gator guy.
Basically I think gator guy means if you already comply with the rules, chances are you will comply in the future regardless of the rules. In other words, you haven't fought back yet regarding 2a restrictions, why would anyone believe differently in the future?

I think what Montgomery is saying is that most people won't put their money (and freedom/life) where their mouth is... basically.

My interpretation.... apologies to both if I missed the mark.

[The Annoyed Man]

Unless somebody doesn't comply with NFA already, I'm skeptical they will start, no matter what other firearms fall under that unconstitutional un-law.

Non-compliance is a cowardly act in the absence of performing a patriot act.

Can someone explain to me what those two statements are supposed to mean in this context? I seriously do not get it.

I agree with gator guy.
Basically I think gator guy means if you already comply with the rules, chances are you will comply in the future regardless of the rules. In other words, you haven't fought back yet regarding 2a restrictions, why would anyone believe differently in the future?

I think what Montgomery is saying is that most people won't put their money (and freedom/life) where their mouth is... basically.

My interpretation.... apologies to both if I missed the mark.

Some will continue to comply. Some won't. I don't think you can make a realistic blanket statement about what all will do or not do, until such time as the event happens. To date, I have been compliant with the NFA, as regards those NFA items I already own. I complied, because NFA was already the state of the law at the time that I acquired/built NFA controlled items, and I generally want to be a law-abiding person.

Similarly, I got myself a CHL/LTC when I moved to Texas, because that was the state of existing law in Texas, and I wanted to be able to lawfully carry a firearm. But when I still lived in California, I occasionally carried a handgun unlawfully, occasionally on my person, occasionally in my vehicle. I did not carry one by default, only doing it when I felt as though carrying one was the only reasonable thing to do. For instance, I carried one while the Rodney King riots were ongoing, and I worked in downtown Los Angeles. For all practical purposes, you can't get a carry license in Los Angeles county, where I lived. There was no remediable way for me to obtain the license so I could carry lawfully. Therefore, I carried unlawfully whenever I felt it to be the prudent, reasonable thing to do.

BUT.... I did not sign up for further restrictions on those rights. I'm not happy with the current state of the law, but I also see no profit in going to prison as long as there is a fairly easy way to get/do what I need to get/do, within the confines of existing law. But if HR 1263 becomes the law of the land, that changes everything.

If it passes, I will simply not comply with it. There are ways to resist. I already have two NFA-registered AR lowers on my trust, and some suppressors. I think it's a given that if HR 1263 passes, ATF will show up some day to demand that those items to be surrendered. Those two lowers are FAR from the only ones we have. I am NOT going to register, turn in, or destroy anything else that is not currently registered, and I am NOT going to get rid of them. And now, I know how to manufacture suppressor replacements if necessary. Hell, there's no 4473 on file with MY name on it for a number of the firearms I lawfully purchased. Where there IS such a 4473 on file with my name on it, I sold that gun to a guy named Joe I met at a farmer's market two years ago. There are a lot of options that would "keep me in business" until it is strategically time to dig them up and put them to use for tactical purposes.

Here's a thought for the hotheads.... is it better to throw your life away with little meaningful result, or is it better to fight a delaying action and live until you are able to strike back with good effect? I'm not a young man. I've had a good life. If I have to die in defense of liberty, I'd view that as a better death than dying of a wasting disease at an older age. But if I am to die in defense of liberty, I want my death to have meaning. My death is meaningless if I am quietly killed in the middle of the night by federal agents who tell all my neighbors that I was a terrorist plotting an attack to blow up the Alamo on Texas Independence Day. My neighbors will say, "wow, and he was such a quiet guy. He was the perfect neighbor. Who knew?"

No. I'd want my death to mean more than that. I'd want my neighbors to be inspired by the sacrifice to begin resisting gov't themselves. I'd want my sacrifice to result in extensive damage to the gov't's ability to prosecute such a campaign against other American gun owners. That means playing it smart - EVEN IF the hotheads aren't satisfied because I didn't handle it they way they think I should have.

My stuff. My life. I'll decide how to manage it.