Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

We Need A Great Offense - Now!


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 Mario Scarpino

Mario Scarpino

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 95 posts

Posted 13 September 2004 - 06:43 PM

All,


We need to keep fighting the fight and get the 1986 "no new machineguns" law repealed!! Its the next logical step. If the Thompson is on the C and R list, it has significant value to America (for various reasons). If it is seen as an outdated, old relic with only "historical" value, why then can we not purchase one of these "highly collectible" firearms? Well for me its the limited supply and high demand! We need to make the case that a C and R gun is on the list for a reason. Why should the government restrict us from owning an "outdated", antique firearm???
We should be able to work this to our advantage. We would be right back complying with NFA of 1934! What's the bid deal? If we go on the offensive and give finkstein, chucky, teddy and john boy this to worry about, any new laws to outlaw AW will be secondary and hopefully be a non issue. But we need to take the next step and that's protecting a hobby (Thompson Collecting!!) enjoyed by thousands of gun collectors throughout America.

Remember, there is a new caucus in the House that is supposed to be protecting our Second Amendment freedom. In their mission statement I think it specifically mentions "collect".

Let's Roll!!!!

Mario Scarpino


  • 0

#2 Lafayette Gregory

Lafayette Gregory

    New Member

  • Regular Group
  • 18 posts

Posted 17 September 2004 - 06:12 PM

Correct me if I am wrong. The 1986 law that Regan singned into law had no time limit and was a change to current law. Thus a new law would be required that would overright that former law. That may be almost impossible to do. The bottom line would read. Republicans now want to allow anyone to buy fullyautomatic weapons such as mac's and Tec's that can spray buttlets at 1000 rounds per min in your neighborhood.
And how many people would like to see their MP5 go from $15,000.00 to $1500.00 overnight. Thats just a little to think about?
  • 0

#3 DDAYJune6

DDAYJune6

    Regular Member

  • Regular Group
  • 115 posts

Posted 17 September 2004 - 06:32 PM

i would like to see an m1a1 in the 2500 range...........
  • 0

#4 Walter63a

Walter63a

    RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 1430 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Guns (Thompsons, Lugers, and Walthers mostly), History, Politics, Education, Nature, etc.

Posted 17 September 2004 - 06:33 PM

QUOTE (Lafayette Gregory @ Sep 17 2004, 07:12 PM)
Republicans now want to allow anyone to buy fullyautomatic weapons such as mac's and Tec's that can spray buttlets at 1000 rounds per min in your neighborhood.
And how many people would like to see their MP5 go from $15,000.00 to $1500.00 overnight.  Thats just a little to think about?

Lafayette, first off, I am an independent, and there are many Democrats who represent conservative areas of the nation and are pro-Second Amendment. I don't think that Republicans, or any other reasonable Americans, want to allow "anyone" to buy fully-automatic weapons. Most of the gun-owning community want existing gun laws enforced, which currently prohibit felons, the mentally incompetent, drug abusers, people convicted of domestic violence, etc., from owning firearms of any type. As far as allowing new production of submachineguns and machineguns for civilians, I'm all for it, because I haven't yet purchased my MP5. biggrin.gif Why should I be forced to pay $15,000, when $1,500 is much more reasonable, considering the actual cost of production? blink.gif cool.gif Regards, Walter
  • 0

#5 21 smoker

21 smoker

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 1333 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West coast ,FL
  • Interests:collecting nfa, old cars, huntin` n fishin`, reloading ammo

    NRA CERTIFIED INSTRUCTOR
    MVPA RESTORATION MEMBER
    MARINE CORP LEAGUE PISTOL TEAM MEMBER

Posted 17 September 2004 - 06:57 PM

`MP5 goes from $15,000 to $1500.`.. that`s the price one pays for owning a M.G. under a repressive government,..and then enjoys the liberation from that government and future lower prices...a small price to pay IMO...The HK has very little collector value without the artificially inflated price of being a transferable...still a world class full auto,but at a realistic price...why should LEO pay any less than civilians...I, for one, am in this game for the fun of shooting M.G.s and would accept the one time devaluation of my inventory if the miracle of the repeal the 86 fiasco should occur...here`s hoping... wink.gif
  • 0

#6 TommyFan

TommyFan

    Long Time Member

  • Regular Group
  • 143 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nashville, Tennessee

Posted 17 September 2004 - 08:25 PM

You are right!
Maybe we can hire a trial lawyer like John Edwards and get a class action lawsuit claiming discrimination ("Why does LEO get to buy one cheaper than I can- WAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!") Think the ACLU would take our case???
wink.gif
  • 0

#7 subman 1

subman 1

    New Member

  • Regular Group
  • 4 posts

Posted 17 September 2004 - 08:35 PM

It sounds like a really good idea.
but remember as in all good things "hustle makes it happen".
Don't be afraid to write or call your federal representitives. that's what their there for, they get paid to represent OUR wishes, so Let's all make sure they know what they are !!!
as always
"your friend on the line'
Subman 1
  • 0

#8 Mario Scarpino

Mario Scarpino

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 95 posts

Posted 17 September 2004 - 08:46 PM

All,

My intent was to focus on the Thompson (and only the Thompson). The rationale was that its a C and R gun. If its of such value and considered an "antique", then why shouldn't law abiding citizens (who live the right states) be allowed to own such a firearm? Again, NFA 1934 would apply. The only change we would be asking for is the change in the 1986 law to allow for production of "Thompson submachine guns", models 1921A, 1927, 1928, (with or without compensators), MI and M1A1.

I thought one of the reasons for the "C and R" rule (I live in Missouri a C & R state) was to allow private citizens the oppurtunity to own full auto gun, knowing that they were of such value or collectibility that only a true collector would be interested in owning such a gun. I just don't see the gang-bangers going out and filling out the paper work and getting finger printed in order to own a new production Thompson.

The only real change would be that a few more Thompsons would be manufactured (by the Moonies!!??? yuk!!) and owned by LAW ABIDING CITIZENS. The only thing stopping me from getting a Thompson is the money. I have already passed the background check for my conceal carry and for the SBR on my 1927A1.

I guess if the Thompson is not a good choice, how about the BAR? I say we just ask for one little opening in the 1986 law. And if we were to get an opening I would hope it would be for production of the Thompson.

How many new production Thompsons do you think Kahr could sell in a 5 year period? Assume a "new model 1921" sells for $4,500.00. My guess would be about 4,000 to 5,000 total. No big deal, not a lot guns in the grand scheme of things, and their in the hands of law abiding citizens, collectors like you and me. Personally, I think there may come a day when we will be facing terrorism in our own neighborhoods. It would be nice to have "some" firepower. I know a Tommy is no match for an AK 47, but its better than a bolt action .22 (the liberal version of self protection)!!! Since our government will not protect our borders, it would appear that it will be up to us to keep our families safe.

I am not interested in owning any other subgun, so Uzi's, etc. are not part of this plan, if it were up to me.

I think I will write the new Second Amendment caucus in the House and see what kind of a response I get.

I think we need to at least stir the pot a little. Its like anything else, you have to have the right contacts.

Mario
  • 0

#9 Sgt

Sgt

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2047 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eastern TN
  • Interests:Militaria, Chess, Tools, Sherlock Holmes, Printmaking, UFOs, Ghosts, Electronics, Comic Books, Long walks in the rain, with my Savage 1928a1. (just kidding on the last one; it doesn't have to be raining) -- Ralph

Posted 19 September 2004 - 07:16 PM

I think it is wise to keep the focus on the Thompson. You can make a strong argument for the historical design. I'm not sure if our representatives would give a flip about the MG crowd, but maybe they can understand how the Thompson played a significant contribution in US history. However, there may still be a political stigma still lingering from the gangster era. The big obstacle is that many will view this as opening "Pandora's box," that could be a field day for the anti-gun crowd.
  • 0

#10 junkyard4$

junkyard4$

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 27 posts

Posted 19 September 2004 - 07:38 PM

Why not have a new law stating that any unregistered machine gun made before 1945 can now be registered? Since these guns are already out there how about they be in the system and not in the basement of a P.D. or in grandmas attic never to see the light of day. This would also bring in more tax money which is what the government always likes.
  • 0

#11 colt21a

colt21a

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3465 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:arizona desert.
  • Interests:Whatever we can do in Life

Posted 19 September 2004 - 10:11 PM

never happen!!not in another 50 years.....the old blood is dyin off less then 2,500 class three dealers in the u.s.a.and the ind. owners do not number that much more....the 177,000 guns on record are owned by less then 50% of those out there..there is not 180,000 m.g.owners out there to fight anything..


triple the amount of dealers and you still don't have a big enough voice...i fought them on this issue for years...state and fed wise...lost!!

and more and more little guys drop off every year.and some don't even want people to know they own mg's...

{real private owners}in the closet.big buck's>
the kind that say i got mine,now don't bother me.

so go do the math of the amount on the fed registry.that includes p.d.guns registered also.

divide, multiply,extract and deduct however.and we don't have the number's....and the n.r.a.they just don't care....

if on jan,1.2005 they said you guys can't own them anymore..a few voices would arise...the rest of the public would say who cares..

gold ,silver,cash,some real estate,a fast car,and a gold plated desert eagle,wink!!can get you far!!

can't run too far with a few safe's of tommies...think about it,chime in folk's a good post take care,ron
  • 0

#12 John Jr

John Jr

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 1956 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mena, Arkansas, USA
  • Interests:Plenty

Posted 19 September 2004 - 11:16 PM

Hi Mario.

QUOTE
then why shouldn't law abiding citizens (who live the right states) be allowed to own such a firearm?


They already are and have NEVER been restriced to owning a Thompson.

QUOTE
I just don't see the gang-bangers going out and filling out the paper work and getting finger printed in order to own a new production Thompson.


They have never filled out any paperwork, not even since 1934. No less 1968. Criminals don't use registered machineguns in crimes.

QUOTE
The only thing stopping me from getting a Thompson is the money.
Now we are getting somewhere...

QUOTE
How many new production Thompsons do you think Kahr could sell in a 5 year period?


I wouldn't buy anything from Kahr. FA or SA. Junk. Legal or otherwise.


The government isn't going to legalize machine gun production for citizens. I wish they would, but they won't.

Face facts, save your money like the rest of the FA community and pay the piper to play the game.

Sorry, that's the way it is sad.gif

Jr









  • 0

#13 Sgt

Sgt

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2047 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eastern TN
  • Interests:Militaria, Chess, Tools, Sherlock Holmes, Printmaking, UFOs, Ghosts, Electronics, Comic Books, Long walks in the rain, with my Savage 1928a1. (just kidding on the last one; it doesn't have to be raining) -- Ralph

Posted 20 September 2004 - 06:21 AM

Another thought occurs to me. At this moment MG ownership is relatively stable and is somewhat low key. Is this something we want to bring attention to? I wonder what would happen if our lawmakers revised the transfer tax, inflated to today's economy. OUCH! I hate being a devil's advocate, but it is something to consider.
  • 0

#14 Bruce V 21/28

Bruce V 21/28

    Regular Member

  • Regular Group
  • 114 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pike Road, AL. (Near Montgomery)
  • Interests:TSMGs; Hunting; Motorcyles (HDs) Metal Detecting; History.

Posted 20 September 2004 - 09:19 AM

The only realistic chance we “might” have to accomplish our goal would be to adapt an incremental approach. The legislative “home run” will never happen. We should start out by asking for legislation that would make it illegal for any Government agency to knowingly destroy “any item” of “historical significance”. This is a non-treating way to start the ball rolling in our direction. What politician would be afraid to agree to this? This approach would allow us to stop the Government from destroying its inventories of historical firearms (Please stop calling your guns WEAPONS, housewives and wimps fear weapons). Can you imagine how many TSMGs, BARs, M-2s, 1919s etc. are destroyed each year? This is not to mention all of the historically significant firearms that U.S. Customs, DEA, BATF, etc. destroys. If the Government can’t destroy it, and they can’t afford to store it, one of the only other things they “might” be able to do is to sell it. It is a fact that prior to 1968 U.S. Customs would sell at auction to the public all firearms it had confiscated. Also, at the same time, we would need to “lock down” the whole C &R process and procedure as well as the CIII transfer fees so that they could not be changed to thwart our goals.
  • 0

#15 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 20 September 2004 - 10:41 AM

QUOTE
Hi Mario.

QUOTE 
then why shouldn't law abiding citizens (who live the right states) be allowed to own such a firearm? 


They already are and have NEVER been restricted to owning a Thompson.

QUOTE 
I just don't see the gang-bangers going out and filling out the paper work and getting finger printed in order to own a new production Thompson. 
They have never filled out any paperwork, not even since 1934. No less 1968. Criminals don't use registered machine guns in crimes.
QUOTE 
The only thing stopping me from getting a Thompson is the money. 
Now we are getting somewhere...
QUOTE 
How many new production Thompson's do you think Kahr could sell in a 5 year period?
I wouldn't buy anything from Kahr. FA or SA. Junk. Legal or otherwise.
The government isn't going to legalize machine gun production for citizens. I wish they would, but they won't.
Face facts, save your money like the rest of the FA community and pay the piper to play the game.

Sorry, that's the way it is 

Jr


Wow! That would have been my repost to Mario. Instead of trying to move the sun and moon (no pun intended) to turn the clock back to pre 1986 NFA prices, and waiting even longer to make a purchase on a weapon that will have only increased in price, why not just bite the bullet and pony up the coin for a TSMG like everyone else has since the escalation in prices.

A newly produced replica "Thompson" smg as manufactured by Kahr wouldn't be a C&R weapon anyway.

  • 0

#16 tedgun1911

tedgun1911

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 24 posts
  • Location:The People's Republic of Massachusetts
  • Interests:Anrique American firearms, especially Colts and Winchesters, also WWI &amp; WWII military; old firearms accessories, advertising, catalogs, other promotional materials; old cartridge boxes (preferably filled); gun<br>books;

Posted 21 September 2004 - 04:57 AM

Ain't never gonna happen! Ever!

Yes, Thompsons are obsolete and outdated. But only for tactical military purposes! No modern, fully-equipped army would ever use one.

They want, and use, M-16s, MP-5s, FALs, Uzis and the like: lightweight, inexpensive-to-make, accurate guns. Thompsons just don't fit the bill. Outdated Thompsons are, however, still machine guns. Obsolete or not, they spray lots of bullets. Liberals don't like lots of bullets.

And if you think the likes of Fat Teddy, Barbara Boxer, Schmuck Shumer, Diane Finkstein, and the anti-gun, liberal media are gonna permit more of them "on the streets of America" think again.

Ain't never gonna happen! Wish it would, but it ain't. mad.gif
  • 0

#17 96lt1ss

96lt1ss

    Regular Member

  • Regular Group
  • 120 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Home of the St Valentines Day Masacre

Posted 21 September 2004 - 09:00 AM

Sometimes I wish more people understood what we go through in the Democratically controlled states such as Illinois. Even with my C&R license the state prohibits and SBR, Full Auto, and doesn't care what the Feds say. It doesn't matter what your license allows there will be no NFA transfers into the state unless it's to a department.

We are one of only five states prohibiting anyone but a police officer from concealed carry. To give you an idea how anti-gun this state is the Chicago Mayor is attempting to pass legislation overiding the off duty/retired officers right to carry. He doesn't even want police officers to be able to carry off duty, and has already banned handguns in the city limits. The laws don't even work because we are consistently at the top of the list for number of homicides, deaths per capita and so on. Depsite his attempts to convince everyone he is making things safer it's getting worse.

Sorry if I went a little off subject but it's frustrating when cost is irrelevant rights have been taken away.
  • 0

#18 tomp38

tomp38

    New Member

  • Regular Group
  • 12 posts

Posted 21 September 2004 - 10:59 AM

The question is what are the criminals using?.. I dont think they are using WW2 era weapons during bank heists, and against police, etc.. I say make these C&R type weapons legal to own everywhere with a standard gun license and keep the more modern MP5 type weapons more restrictive. We are all collectors not criminals and deserve the right to own these pieces of history. And for that matter, in New Jersey I cant own squat..
  • 0