Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Mg Ownership And Political Stability


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#21 45wheelgun

45wheelgun

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 33 posts

Posted 03 June 2005 - 05:33 AM

QUOTE (October1971 @ Jun 2 2005, 08:45 PM)
Many years back, a South Florida politician suggested that with inflation, the transfer tax on a mg ought to be $1796.27.

This got me thinking, so I visited the Federal Reserve's Consumer Price Index Calculator. $200 in 1934 equals $2914.93 in today's dollars.

Here is the link to the Fed's CPI Calculator:

http://minneapolisfe...h/data/us/calc/
  • 0

#22 junglewalk

junglewalk

    Long Time RKI Member

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

Posted 03 June 2005 - 07:39 PM

October 1971; a voice of history & necessary forced prospective in a few paragraphs..........Why do we forget things so fast. I do remember, the incompitent Janet Reno did want to increase transfer fees to $750. bucks during the clinton administration. She did not like all the transferring going on with NFA weapons.....
wacko.gif ........................jw
  • 0

#23 bug

bug

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 1468 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SE PA
  • Interests:Hunting, fishing, shooting, reloading, metalworking, woodworking, photography.

Posted 04 June 2005 - 10:11 AM

October 1971,

Excellent post. Welcome to this forum, you're a breath of fresh air.

Bob D
  • 0

#24 Grey Crow

Grey Crow

    RKI Member

  • Board Donor
  • 1077 posts
  • Location:North Central Pennsylvania
  • Interests:Thompson Submachine guns, computers, reptiles.

Posted 04 June 2005 - 07:08 PM

As a thought I feel that NFA weapons would be the easiest to take if they wanted them simply due to the fact that we are all in the top drawer so to speak. Because we as responsible owners do all that is required by the feds. Collection would be fairly simple, the feds would only need to contact the local LEA that signed off for you. Cost? Sure, it would be handled by the tax payers in each municipality. Also the NFA weapons would be the least expensive to collect due to the paper trail and relatively small quantity.

Second would be the registered handguns.

Last would be long arms, as they can be sold without any paper between individuals within a state.

Personally though the automobile should be banned first as the fatality rate is the highest.

Seeing that I have a SBR it still falls within the same drawer. Even if I replace the barrel with the 16" its under the eyes of the assault banning freaks.

Its all cRaZy! Enjoy them while you have them. Its a wait and see game.
  • 0

#25 Walter63a

Walter63a

    RKI Member

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

Posted 05 June 2005 - 08:02 PM

I agree with Phil, and most of you guys. cool.gif Just remember that when the proverbial, "shit hits the fan," you are on your own, as far as the government (local, state and national) is concerned. ohmy.gif blink.gif Before any of you turn in your firearms, because the, "government says so," consider the following highly interesting information. ph34r.gif

http://www.endtimesr...MATIVE_DUTY.htm

http://www.endtimesr...omedefense.html

http://www.endtimesr...y_Reloading.htm


Regards, Walter

P.S. Remember, the government (police) has (have) No Affirmaive Duty to protect you.

P.P.S. Therefore, I ask, can the government which claims it has no duty to protect its citizens (cannot be sued for failure to protect-has absolutely no duty to protect), also legally, morally require the same citizens to disarm, leaving them at the mercy of criminals, terrorists and thugs?
  • 0

#26 Asmodeus

Asmodeus

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 67 posts

Posted 07 June 2005 - 07:42 AM

One comment on the "lock transfers" scenario.

All of my NFA items are owned by one of my corporations. If the guns can't be transferred to a new owner, the corporation can always be sold to a new majority stockholder. Even my LLC has provisions to survive my death, and since it has its own EIN, it's its own entity.

While I might not be able to sell the NFA items, I can make anyone a member of the LLC with the full rights to use the assests of the corporation, including the NFA items. Live in a different state? Open a branch office and transfer assets to that branch. The opportunities are pretty broad, and it wouldn't take much to develp a set of standardize contracts for this procedure.

Think that the .gov wants to start screwing with regulations regarding corproate governance without something like an Enron debacle giving them the illusion of moral authority?
  • 0

#27 skoda

skoda

    Long Time Member

  • Regular Group
  • 72 posts

Posted 07 June 2005 - 04:22 PM

Why are you all feeding ideas to the idiots?

If none of them read this then fine but think of the high-cap magazine ban, it was initiated by Bill Ruger (to keep his low-cap pistols competitive with Glocks). The know-nothings said, "What? High capacity magazines? Yah-yah, we need to ban these RIGHT NOW ..... for the children." If there is talk somewhere then talk about it and how to react. But don't dream up bad scenarios and then debate them for something to do.
  • 0

#28 October1971

October1971

    Industry Expert

  • Regular Group
  • 283 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 June 2005 - 08:16 PM

Right on Phil,

I see Skoda falling into the trap of thinking all the idiots are waiting for us to accidentally tell them how to take our guns.

As I said in an earlier post, they KNOW HOW and they will make every attempt to do so.

They probably even have SOP manuals with things which none of us have even thought of.

And if we don't have a forum like this one where we can all share our thoughts, then "they" have already won the battle by making us afraid to openly discuss the problem.

One of the keys for us is to expose our friends and acquaintances to our LEGITIMATE hobby/avocation in a positive light. The old adage "talking to the choir" comes to mind. As we all write back and forth to each other, what are we doing about trying to EDUCATE those people who have never been exposed to NFA? We need to RETAIN our present base, CONVERT THOSE from the opposition's base, and RECRUIT currently neutral and/or those undecided.

I've used the illegal drug comparison for years. When a friend says he didn't know you could own a mg, and he thought they were ILLEGAL, I ask him if when he reads about a drug bust in the newspaper does he call his local Eckerds Pharmacy to complain about them selling drugs? He says Of course not.

So I say, well mgs are like narcotics, you have those that are legally sold, controlled, and regulated and taxed (ie registered and transferred in accordance with the laws we must currently operate under) vs those that are ILLEGAL and UNREGISTERED.

It seems to help put things in perspective and has worked well for me in the past in trying to get my point across.

FWIW

October1971


  • 0

#29 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 11 June 2005 - 07:14 AM

Amen Brother Bill!!!... smile.gif wink.gif
  • 0