How will all semiauto firearms be banned or become NFA items.

[Yarome]

Mark Smith brought up a really compelling argument in how the executive branch may be setting the framework to ban all semiauto firearms (staring with the AR types)... or at the least, cause them to be covered by the NFA and require registration and be taxed.

What it amounts to is how they are changing the definition of frame and receiver.

Originally they were defined just how the name implies. They act as a frame or receiver for the control/firing group. (highly paraphrased)
From 1968 the arguments changed to alter the definition into more about, "how does it look... today?" Slightly expanding the definition.

What we see lately, most apparently in the recent frames and receiver rule, they are trying to further alter the definition into, "what can they become?" IE., an 80% can "become" a "firearm" so they should be defined and regulated as such.

HERE is the danger!! If this expanded definition is allowed to stand, what is the precedent it establishes? Well... a semi auto frame or receiver has the potential to "become" fully automatic, right?? Just as much as an oddly shaped hunk of plastic or metal may "become" a firearm and should be regulated as such.

It's not much of a leap to then say that all semi-auto's may be deemed "like" machine guns and regulated under the NFA.

We've already seen some of the groundwork being laid and even in the recent Maryland case a judge ruling that AR's are "like" military firearms and as such, are not protected by the 2A. (That's BS anyway since there is no "military weapon" exclusion in the 2A and no historically analogues restrictions to that effect, but still)

Anyway. Some interesting food for thought....

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVodKWj0UNs

Read More

 

[msgriff]

Anyone who thinks that the leftists were going to stop with "assault weapons" is in denial. Democrats have been increasing their use of the term "semi-automatic" in the last few years when discussing gun control. This is a deliberate and coordinated effort set forth by such groups as Everytown for Gun Safety and Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, with talking point provided to Democratic lawmakers. They will also target muzzle energy limitations, much like Canada, but no doubt worse. I believe that the vast majority of voters on the left would repeal the 2nd Amendment, if given the chance.

 

[Alexx1401]

Anyone who thinks that the leftists were going to stop with "assault weapons" is in denial. Democrats have been increasing their use of the term "semi-automatic" in the last few years when discussing gun control. This is a deliberate and coordinated effort set forth by such groups as Everytown for Gun Safety and Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, with talking point provided to Democratic lawmakers. They will also target muzzle energy limitations, much like Canada, but no doubt worse. I believe that the vast majority of voters on the left would repeal the 2nd Amendment, if given the chance.

Sadly I have been watching this all my life because it works. A lot of gun owners refuse to lift a finger. Many of them because they tell themselves what they own will be safe. Many of them expect the courts to save them. So we keep losing.

 

[Koda]

I believe that the vast majority of voters on the left would repeal the 2nd Amendment, if given the chance.

Ive talked to gun owners even enthusiasts that have owned AR type weapons that believe in virtually all the gun control laws and future ideas including permits to purchase. Essentially they believe that the "right" means the "right" to apply for an approval.
It really baffles my mind the logic, they are either anti gun in disguise or really blind.

 

[Koda]

Sadly I have been watching this all my life because it works. A lot of gun owners refuse to lift a finger. Many of them because they tell themselves what they own will be safe. Many of them expect the courts to save them. So we keep losing.

A lot of gun owners don't want AR type weapons, and while thats fine they don't realize that semi auto handguns are next. Many do own Glocks for at least home defense.

 

[Alexx1401]

A lot of gun owners don't want AR type weapons, and while thats fine they don't realize that semi auto handguns are next. Many do own Glocks for at least home defense.

This is what I have been talking about. Those who don't own gun XYZ think that its fine to ban them. They keep telling themselves that the guns they do own are safe. When they come for their gun then they will scream for the courts to save them.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Been saying this for a while. Congress simply has to amend NFA 1934 to remove the "and unusual" part of "dangerous and unusual", and add "to society", as in "dangerous to society" , and then they'll have free reign to add semiautomatic rifles as a category to NFA, or specifically, "assault weapons" that has all of the AWB language in it.


This would make mockery of Miller, Heller, and every 2A case to Bruen. all these 2A cases depends on NFA, GCA, FOPA laws being "constitutional".

if Congress changes the language through a tax/budget bill amendment system (NFA is a tax law); then there's no practical way to repeal a tax law if all further bills relating to taxes have to go through the Joint Senate Comittee on Taxation, or the House Committee on Taxation also the specific reason why bills to remove SBRs and SBS and silencers/suppressors have consistently failed to make it out of committee

Edit. Since Caetano seems to say "200k is common use" ; if Congress (successfully) removes "unusual" language from NFA, then the "common use test" is meaningless, and Fed Courts will have to find ways to make "dangerous to society" either Constitutional or Unconstitutional, and twist Bruen to fit their agenda.

 

[Koda]

When they come for their gun then they will scream for the courts to save them.

I don't even think they will squeak a sound. Just look at Canada, they are in the ban all handguns phase and not a word.

 

[Nosferatu]

Continuously using terms like "a lot" and "many" when referring to a complex demographic is completely arbitrary and meaningless.

Using such vague terms though makes you appear ineloquent, misguided and boorish.

It has nothing to do with this discussion. These laws, rules, whatever they get called would be pushed through without a vote of the people. What "most gun owners" wish is completely irrelevant.

 

[Koda]

Continuously using terms like "a lot" and "many" when referring to a complex demographic is completely arbitrary and meaningless.

To clarify my comments above I'm referring to the gun community as a whole, not just the hardline 2A absolutists presumably AR15 owners. I supposed I could look up exact statistics on how many gun owners support universal background checks to avoid sounding "ineloquent" but that would just have me citing research by gun control groups like Everytown.

 

[Mike_M57]

Yeah, well, a woman can "become" a man, too.

Don't assume my firearm's 'gender'!

 

[L84Cabo]

Ive talked to gun owners even enthusiasts that have owned AR type weapons that believe in virtually all the gun control laws and future ideas including permits to purchase. Essentially they believe that the "right" means the "right" to apply for an approval.
It really baffles my mind the logic, they are either anti gun in disguise or really blind.

There is definitely a substantial sub group within gun owners that think this way. Often times they are democrats who own guns (there's more than a lot of people think), hunters that don't think anyone will ever come for their hunting shotguns or bolt action deer rifles, and woefully ignorant people who have no idea what is really going on in the political sphere.

 

[Koda]

These laws, rules, whatever they get called would be pushed through without a vote of the people. What "most gun owners" wish is completely irrelevant.

When Trump was elected he was elected by votes of the people. He then appointed justices to the highest court that recently shot down lower courts ruling the ATF had arbitrary power to define the law without the vote of the people.

 

[Nosferatu]

I'm referring to the gun community as a whole

Part of my point is; there's no such thing.

 

[L84Cabo]

Yeah, well, a woman can "become" a man, too.

Don't assume my firearm's 'gender'!

My AR 15 identifies as a musket.

 

[Koda]

There is definitely a substantial sub group within gun owners that think this way. Often times they are democrats who own guns (there's more than a lot of people think), hunters that don't think anyone will ever come for their hunting shotguns or bolt action deer rifles, and woefully ignorant people who have no idea what is really going on in the political sphere.

Yes, these are the "many" in the gun community I'm referring to. If they voted, heck maybe if even only half of them voted pro gun there wouldn't be gun control.

Side note: the hunters like this are interesting in that most don't realize that hunting rifles are actually all based on military designs. Eg the bolt action.

 

[Yarome]

...remove the "and unusual" part of "dangerous and unusual", and add "to society", as in "dangerous to society"...

Speaking of which. Here's a little more food for thought.

If they deem semiauto's as a threat to society, or illegal... "mandatory buybacks" wouldn't actually require them to pay out anything. Confiscation of dangerous or illegal items falls outside the law requiring "just compensation".

Maybe you get $200 for a $2000+ firearm as a way for them to claim it's not an outright confiscation (so as not to enflame the common citizenry) but a firearm owner trying to sue for just compensation would be more likely to hit a brick wall.

"We don't have to pay you anything so just be happy to get what you got" kinda deal.

 

[40nascar]

I don't even think they will squeak a sound. Just look at Canada, they are in the ban all handguns phase and not a word.

Canada does not have anything close to a second amendment in their Governing documents. Firearm ownership in Canada is a privilege and Not a Right.
The Democrats are attempting to replicate Canada's firearm regulations here in the USA.

 

[Koda]

Part of my point is; there's no such thing.

Then this loses me.
"as a whole" Im referring to every US citizen who legally owns any gun.

 

[Koda]

Canada does not have anything close to a second amendment in their Governing documents. Firearm ownership in Canada is a privilege and Not a Right.
The Democrats are attempting to replicate Canada's firearm regulations here in the USA.

Yes, and thats what I mean above how many (US) gun owners believe the 2A means "the right" to apply for a permit to own a gun. A permit approval is a privilege system.
This is how all semi autos can get banned.