Post 86 machine guns may be possible - Uzi included.

[scar17]

Crowd funding link:

http://www.gofundme.com/fmxlnk

Explanation of challenge:

http://www.examiner.com/article/attorney-seeks-to-overturn-federal-machine-gun-ban-on-constitutional-grounds


http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1624460_NOW_ACCEPTING_DONATIONS__ATF_approved_post_86_machine_guns_for_NFA_trusts__updated_10_11_14.html&page=88

 

[michaelkih]

I honestly don't think there is even the slightest chance that things will be changed for the better.

 

[CaliBoundAR15]

I sadly agree.... Most sheeple vote for "assault weapon" laws because they are led to believe that they are actually machine guns... So I don't think public opinion will allow for actual ones to be legal again. Even if it should be protected by the 2nd....

 

[krinkman]

THEY WANT TO BAN 30 ROUND MAGS HOW IS THIS GOING TO WORK? I HOPE IT GOES BUT IT WILL NOT.

 

[MPA guy]

After carefully watching the actual Hughes Amendment votes, it is clear that the law was forced through in error anyway.

For those that have not seen it for themselves:

 

[THM7]

I checked out the link and I just wonder about the mentallity of people that actually think that this is possible. Total pipe dream at best a scam to get you to contribute at worst. One more mass shooting involving young Kids (just a matter of time) and a assault weapons/magazine ban will fly thru Congress and Senate.

 

[THM7]

Scar17 first post hmmmm

 

[ekim]

I checked out the link and I just wonder about the mentallity of people that actually think that this is possible. Total pipe dream at best a scam to get you to contribute at worst. One more mass shooting involving young Kids (just a matter of time) and a assault weapons/magazine ban will fly thru Congress and Senate.

I don't think it would fly through but I could see a big push for it. To many would just say no way and how it could be enforced is beyond me. It would be a death wish for those that try to enforce it. Does the PA sniper idea come to mind of anyone else. Many states would not even attempt to enforce it I believe. But I also don't see many gun laws/rules being repealed either.

 

[softaildeluxe]

Scar17 first post hmmmm

I have more than one post so hopefully I qualify. If people want to send me money, I will be happy preach pro machine gun ideals to the masses.

 

[jt526]

It is a pretty long thread on ar15.com, I'm not giving any money, but I did submit a F1 for a machinegun that got denied after the whole "They are sending out F1 approvals for machineguns". I missed the window but since the ATF wants them back I doubt I missed much. I also think there is 0 chance this will work, but that didn't stop me from ponying up $200 to the ATF to see if a F1 went through.

 

[416Rich]

The Web site states over 20,000$ funded in three days.

 

[wanneroo]

Playing around with the judiciary these days is like russian roulette. You might not like what you get back.

The real solution is to get the 1986 law repealed and that will only happen in a Republican controlled executive and legislative branch. It will have to happen like in 1986, a sneak attack amendment attached to a bill or something along those lines.

 

[bullyforyou]

there was a lot of nay-sayers over heller too...

as a MG owner who also thinks this is a long shot, it's better than sitting back and doing nothing, and the $20 out of my pocket to help isn't taking any food out of my mouth.

 

[MontanaRenegade86]

Playing around with the judiciary these days is like russian roulette. You might not like what you get back.

The real solution is to get the 1986 law repealed and that will only happen in a Republican controlled executive and legislative branch. It will have to happen like in 1986, a sneak attack amendment attached to a bill or something along those lines.

Gay marriage advocates "played around" with the judiciary and are winning that war. Within a few years, I foresee same sex marriage being legal in all 50 states.

The second part of your post is inane. Who was president in 1986? Reagan. Who controlled the Senate in 1986? The Republicans. Hell, even the most hardcore "pro-gun" Republicans (what a laugh) are willing to sell us out. Remember the ruckus over "invisible to x-ray plastic guns" about a year ago? It was a Republican who got that crap stirred up.

I know this is a long shot and it may come back to bite us. But, damnit, I'm sick of always playing defense. It is high time to go on the offensive for once.

Our forefathers had the stones to go up against the most powerful government in the world - why can't we muster the same courage?

Renegade out.

 

[wanneroo]

Gay marriage advocates "played around" with the judiciary and are winning that war. Within a few years, I foresee same sex marriage being legal in all 50 states.

The second part of your post is inane. Who was president in 1986? Reagan. Who controlled the Senate in 1986? The Republicans. Hell, even the most hardcore "pro-gun" Republicans (what a laugh) are willing to sell us out. Remember the ruckus over "invisible to x-ray plastic guns" about a year ago? It was a Republican who got that crap stirred up.

I know this is a long shot and it may come back to bite us. But, damnit, I'm sick of always playing defense. It is high time to go on the offensive for once.

Our forefathers had the stones to go up against the most powerful government in the world - why can't we muster the same courage?

Renegade out.

I don't think you read my post well. Going up against government and creating a long lasting solution to our issue is going to be done with repealing the law and that is the way it should be fought. Trying to get lawyers to finagle some crafty word play and hoping the judiciary will agree is not a long lasting solution. We are putting too much power into the hands of judges these days and leaving the decisions in our personal lives and elsewhere up to them and hoping they rule in our favor as though we are petitioning the king.

 

[MontanaRenegade86]

I don't think you read my post well. Going up against government and creating a long lasting solution to our issue is going to be done with repealing the law and that is the way it should be fought. Trying to get lawyers to finagle some crafty word play and hoping the judiciary will agree is not a long lasting solution. We are putting too much power into the hands of judges these days and leaving the decisions in our personal lives and elsewhere up to them and hoping they rule in our favor as though we are petitioning the king.

Again, I must point out the whole same sex marriage issue. Just a few short years ago same gender marriage was unheard of. Now, it's all but a foregone conclusion.

I just don't see how we can get a repeal of Hughes through Congress. No elected politician is going to come out in favor of junking 922(o) - even Ron Paul wouldn't touch that issue as a congressman.

I agree with you that congressional action would be ideal but I'm afraid it just isn't feasible. I was born exactly three weeks after Hughes took effect and in my lifetime I remember only one time when congress did the right thing by gun owners - even so I'm convinced that it was only because it was an election year that the bastards let the AWB sunset.

 

[Heavy Gear]

I hope that suppressors continue to sell like wild fire. that we end up with millions of voters that have a vested interest in NFA.
When they all start thinking.. heck I own a suppressor. but I can't own a new made machine gun when it's the same paperwork??
then we'll have the political weight to make changes.

 

[brazos609]

He has filed a FOIA request for multiple things but one of the listed requests is, " Please provide a properly redacted copy of each Form 4 (5320.4) approved after May 19, 1986 by a person that is not “a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof” " By doing this he has asked for a copy of virtually every single Form 4 transfer for the past twenty-eight years because any transfer to or from an agency would be on a Form 5. He did not specify that he only wanted copies of Form 4s for machineguns much less only copies of Form 4s for machineguns that had been manufactured after May 19, 1986. That is just a waste of time and manpower that will slow down the NFA Branch even more. Even pre-samples and post-samples are required to transfer on a Form 4 at times. I have bought dealer/agency only pre-samples that I had to pay the $200 and transfer them to me on a From 4 because the seller no longer had his FFL or SOT. My friend has purchased dealer/agency only post-samples where he had to pay the $200 and transfer them on a From 4 because the seller no longer had his FFL or SOT.

 

[ateamrob]

what a total "chaotic JOKE" it was watching those numbskulls pass that back in 86. Funny how fast and foolish things are passed without people even knowing what the hell just happened.

Rob

 

[roscoeturner]

what a total "chaotic JOKE" it was watching those numbskulls pass that back in 86. Funny how fast and foolish things are passed without people even knowing what the hell just happened.

Rob

What is funny to me having watched that in 1986 is watching people today turning to the same organization that allowed it to pass in the first place without as much as a whimper for help now - the NRA.