Jump to content


Photo

Future hicap mag ban, no NFA exception


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 DGinGA

DGinGA

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 43 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southeast US
  • Interests:Interests: C & R NFA, subgun competition
    Member Ohio Valley Military Society
    Thompson Collectors Association

Posted 09 August 2019 - 01:03 PM

When a mass shooting occurs, the calls to do something are heard. My sense is that this time, election and all, something will be done - a high capacity magazine ban (along with more Red Flag laws and universal background checks). Politically that is low hanging fruit; gun owners and the NRA will complain, but the visual of an AK or AR platform rifle with a 100 round drum juxtaposed with grieving people in affected cities will push it through. Given Trumps action on bump stocks, in a close election its not hard to see him sign it. Most gun owners dont feel strongly about this.
My fear is magazines and belts for MGs wont be exempted. Or only those possessed before passage can be kept (needless to say after being registered) but not transferred. This will collapse the MG market - have fun shooting your MG 42 with a six inch 10 round belt, or 1921 Thompson with a 10 round drum. The NFA world is small, politically inconsequential, and slightly suspect anyway, acceptable collateral damage.
Should we join or form a national organization to at least make our concerns known?
  • 0

#2 RoscoeTurner

RoscoeTurner

    Respected Member

  • Moderator
  • 3059 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:WWII Military Thompsons
    WWII Browning Automatic Rifles
    Russian M1910 Maxims
    Vickers
    01/SOT

Posted 09 August 2019 - 01:50 PM

The NRA stuck it up NFA owers rear ends in 1986, I certainly would not look in their direction for any help.


  • 0

#3 hawksnest

hawksnest

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 1095 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:central Ohio
  • Interests:Class III weapons

Posted 09 August 2019 - 02:44 PM

  2019

 -1986

      33


Edited by hawksnest, 09 August 2019 - 02:46 PM.

  • 0

#4 johnsonlmg41

johnsonlmg41

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 800 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 August 2019 - 08:33 PM

I posted this on another forum in response to a similar question re: background checks.

 

 

"I have a better idea. How about no fees and no background checks. You put a note on every felons ID that they are a convicted felon. Problem solved and the rest of us go on about our business doing all things legal without hassles. This method saves everyone a lot time including cops on stops who often let crooks go because the info they need isn't readily available at all times. If it says your a pedophile on your ID and you're at the swingset in the park, you don't pass go.

You've bought into the liberal idea that we have to "prove our innocence" every time we wish to conduct a legal transaction between parties. That's crap and is solely meant to discourage us from engaging in our hobbies and business'. This is how communist's operate."

 

 

If this whole concept is not reversed soon to what I outlined we will have a serious problem.


  • 0

#5 RoscoeTurner

RoscoeTurner

    Respected Member

  • Moderator
  • 3059 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:WWII Military Thompsons
    WWII Browning Automatic Rifles
    Russian M1910 Maxims
    Vickers
    01/SOT

Posted 10 August 2019 - 05:35 AM

  2019

 -1986

      33



33 years and counting on the promises made by the NRA in 1986 to remove the Hughes Amendment they helped to pass by their assurances made to Reagan to fight for the appeal of if he would sign the FOPA.  You can thank LaPeirre for that one.

 

Attached Files


  • 0

#6 TSMGguy

TSMGguy

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2505 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West of the Pecos, Texas
  • Interests:Motorcycles, old airplanes, and guns.

Posted 13 August 2019 - 09:05 AM

There's just been too much blood shed. I think we're going to lose this one in a big way. Look for a new AWB that doesn't sunset, along with bans on high capacity mags. We've already seen this kind of legislation introduced in the US house. The difference between these more recent bills and the original bans is that the new efforts are far more concise and better researched. It's clear that these bills were written by experts with plenty of backing. There are no more unintentional loopholes. All of the hardware is mentioned by name and manufacturer. I'd be surprised if any automatic that'll accept a high capacity mag will be grandfathered, or high cap magazines, either. Or formerly military surplus ammunition. Maybe they'll let me keep my old five shot 98K.  


  • 0

#7 Oldtrooper

Oldtrooper

    RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 240 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 August 2019 - 12:27 PM

There's just been too much blood shed. I think we're going to lose this one in a big way. Look for a new AWB that doesn't sunset, along with bans on high capacity mags. We've already seen this kind of legislation introduced in the US house. The difference between these more recent bills and the original bans is that the new efforts are far more concise and better researched. It's clear that these bills were written by experts with plenty of backing. There are no more unintentional loopholes. All of the hardware is mentioned by name and manufacturer. I'd be surprised if any automatic that'll accept a high capacity mag will be grandfathered, or high cap magazines, either. Or formerly military surplus ammunition. Maybe they'll let me keep my old five shot 98K.  

I think the only research that has been done is how to play upon people's fears ... "Never let a crisis go to waste" This has reached a point of mass hysteria, and one more incident (except any weekend in Chicago) will probably lead to some poorly thought out, immediate heavy handed legislation. To illustrate how people speak in ignorance I recently had someone chastise me for being a firearms collector by saying to me ... "Why don't you just be a classic car collector? ... Cars never killed anyone!" ... This is the kind of ignorance and hysteria we face.


  • 0

#8 junglewalk

junglewalk

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Donor
  • 436 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:by Ft.Knox,Ky.
  • Interests:The 98k rifle, MP-40 & 44; the Thompson.......reloading, HO scale military miniatures.......

Posted 20 August 2019 - 09:24 PM

I come back on here again, about the fight ahead when the bozos come back to Wash/DC in a couple weeks:> ….If you're listening to the President, he is stressing congress nailing the mental past & present of people who should not have a gun....You can see where he and Sen.McConnel are going, regardless of the Liberal jerk-offs on the democrat side.

…..You got to email, call or write your Senators & Reps up there, because you know damn well the other side is doing that right now!.....

.And yes, former military guys who are receiving more than 40% PTSD from the VA, are supposed to be on the 'No-Gun" list:..> This was begun back in the 1990s, under that hero of a president , Clinton, and Janet Reno...….they may have adjusted the percentage, and maybe it should be checked out if you know someone who is getting money for PTSD in a big way...….When enforced, there will be some upset people, but again, one can not have it both ways!...…….


Edited by junglewalk, 20 August 2019 - 09:26 PM.

  • 0

#9 bmarvin

bmarvin

    RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 728 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 August 2019 - 07:39 AM

I think IF there's a national ban on magazines over 10 rounds that you will be able to register what you own by a certain date and just not be allowed to obtain any more. I also think non compliance will be staggeringly high


  • 0

#10 Speeddemon02

Speeddemon02

    RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 365 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Mexico
  • Interests:Guns, Trucks, Games, and Woodworking

Posted 21 August 2019 - 10:32 PM

And yes, former military guys who are receiving more than 40% PTSD from the VA, are supposed to be on the 'No-Gun" list:..> This was begun back in the 1990s, under that hero of a president , Clinton, and Janet Reno...….they may have adjusted the percentage, and maybe it should be checked out if you know someone who is getting money for PTSD in a big way...….When enforced, there will be some upset people, but again, one can not have it both ways!...…….

 

 

Again, I am not sure what you are basing this on.  I did not follow the laws during some of the time period you mention, but currently there is nothing that I am aware of or able to find on the federal level that comes close to what you refer to.  It could be on a local level near where you are.  There are some worrisome things regarding the VA and guns, but it is not quite the same thing.  It has been said by VA personnel that there are vets with PTSD that should not have guns and do, but the majority are some of the most responsible gun owners.  No two ways about it.


Edited by Speeddemon02, 21 August 2019 - 10:32 PM.

  • 0