WH petition to repeal NFA

[dotman]

If you are for repealing the NFA here is the official petition to the White House.

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

 

[nwbow87]

Signed

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[MTHunter20]

Done here.

 

[Backpack Hunter]

Done. It looks like it has already reached the goal of 100,000 to require a response.

 

[nwbow87]

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...arreled-rifles-sbr-national-firearms-act-1934

Slow starter but it's along the same lines.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[airlocksniffer]

Why? The NFA appears to tax and regulate firearms like machine guns, mortars, anti-tank guns, etc. All gun control is bad/shut up libtard/why do you hate freedom/Thanks Obama/Make America Great Again are not valid answers.

 

[MTHunter20]

Because it also contains useless regulations on short-barreled rifles and suppressors. There's no logical argument for why a 12" barreled rifle is more dangerous than a 16" one. I can't think of a reasonable argument against suppressors either.

 

[sneaky]

It doesn't make much sense to be perfectly honest. The people who can buy and afford automatic weapons aren't the type who waltz in to schools or churches and shoot large numbers of people. They are collectors, enthusiasts, good folks. NFA is just another tax grab and a way to keep people registered. Hollywood makes everyone afraid of suppressors. Far more benefits to suppressors than detriments.

 

[dotman]

It is funny that in countries that have very strict gun laws they don't have as strict of laws on silencers as we do. But like I said if your for it sign, if not don't sign it. We all have our reasons for our decision don't see a need to try to sway each other to our own points of view.

 

[airlocksniffer]

Because it also contains useless regulations on short-barreled rifles and suppressors. There's no logical argument for why a 12" barreled rifle is more dangerous than a 16" one. I can't think of a reasonable argument against suppressors either.

I can see that. In your opinion does it make sense to change the law rather than throw the whole thing out? Do you think firearms like mortars, etc should still be regulated in this way? I'm sure you know but the NFA doesn't prevent ownership, just makes more hoops (possibly unnecessary) to jump through.

 

[airlocksniffer]

It is funny that in countries that have very strict gun laws they don't have as strict of laws on silencers as we do. But like I said if your for it sign, if not don't sign it. We all have our reasons for our decision don't see a need to try to sway each other to our own points of view.

No intention to try and sway anybody. I enjoy thoughtful discussions and hearing other peoples logical points of view.

 

[MTHunter20]

If they would change the law to remove regulations on suppressors and SBR's, I'd certainly support that. However, I would not be opposed to repeal of the whole law as well (hence, why I signed the petition). Just because something is legal, doesn't mean it's affordable or available and I do think the founders intended us to be able to be armed sufficiently to overthrow a tyrannical government. That doesn't mean you're gonna go to the gun shop and pick up the newest submachine gun and a pack of mortars to take to the range on the weekend. Like was said above, machine guns are so cost prohibitive to own and shoot, most people that have them are serious gun collectors.

What is your argument against repealing the whole law? and would you be in favor of removing regs on silencers and SBR's?

 

[airlocksniffer]

If they would change the law to remove regulations on suppressors and SBR's, I'd certainly support that. However, I would not be opposed to repeal of the whole law as well (hence, why I signed the petition). Just because something is legal, doesn't mean it's affordable or available and I do think the founders intended us to be able to be armed sufficiently to overthrow a tyrannical government. That doesn't mean you're gonna go to the gun shop and pick up the newest submachine gun and a pack of mortars to take to the range on the weekend. Like was said above, machine guns are so cost prohibitive to own and shoot, most people that have them are serious gun collectors.

What is your argument against repealing the whole law? and would you be in favor of removing regs on silencers and SBR's?

Thanks for the reply. I don't care if people want to own silencers or sbr's. I'd like to consider myself a pragmatist and outright repeal of many laws is short sighted and neglects to see any benefit the current law may offer. We may disagree on this but I don't think citizens should be able to own all arms the government does. Anyway not to derail the thread, I shall bow out. Cheers.

 

[5MilesBack]

We may disagree on this but I don't think citizens should be able to own all arms the government does.

Oh, we definitely disagree. Citizens should absolutely be able to own and possess everything the military does as long as they have the money to buy them. Full auto rifles can easily be had......for the money. That's just a tax on our rights to own and possess them. Remove the law in its entirety, because any of it is an infringement.

This is just another of those "Oh well, if it doesn't affect me then I'm OK with it" mentalities. Some guys may never have the inclination or desire to own a full auto weapon so they're OK with them staying on some restrictive law. Some may not want suppressors so they're OK with them staying under that repressive law. And some may never want a SBR so don't care if they stay under the law. That's the problem.......it doesn't matter whether it affects an individual.......what matters is that it affects the nation.

 

[Violent Hippie]

Signed it last night. Thanks for the link.

 

[Stwrt9]

signed!