Will they come after us first ?

[RobMa]

I am thinking of form 1'ing both my MPX and SP5.

What is the consensus on who the gun grabbers will target first and whether it would be more of a detriment then it's worth just so I can put a stock on the pistols?

Is there any legal protection for those who SBR their guns?

Thanks

Read More

 

[OldTengu]

I don't know. I haven't dove into nfa items, yet, but if they start in with confiscation, prosecution and whatever else, it's kind of an "in for a penny, in for a pound" kind of deal.
But yeah, I imagine they will.

 

[dmmv]

I often wonder this. If at some point they force tax stamp / ATF registration and you've already processed a form 1, it may actually be less of a headache.

 

[RobMa]

I worry less about the headache and the paperwork and more about them kicking my door down and slaughtering my family to make me obey.

 

[FLYINGPICKLE]

hmmmm

 

[RobMa]

I guess they will have to figure out how to take away our knives next…
They might consider my 400 year old Japanese sword to be a threat against their power and authority…

 

[Member 34319]

The NFA registry isn't open to the public. Politicians likely don't have access to it.

If there is one category on there they would likely pay attention to in an event, it's not the SBR.

So in other words, no.

 

[RobMa]

If that's the case then why are they making such a fuss about braces? the argument is that a braced pistol (Pseudo SBR) can be easily concealed so someone can carry out a horribly dastardly deed and hurt people.

 

[The Heretic]

The NFA registry isn't open to the public. Politicians likely don't have access to it.

If there is one category on there they would likely pay attention to in an event, it's not the SBR.

So in other words, no.

It isn't the public or the politicians that will knocking on doors, it is the ATF/et. al.

 

[Member 34319]

It isn't the public or the politicians that will knocking on doors, it is the ATF/et. al.

That or the FBI.

Again, it's highly unlikely. If they were to go after anyone, it would be those in legal possession of full automatic weapons and destructive devices.

Considering the NFA has been around for nearly a century, I just don't see them coming for them if they haven't already.

It does scare folks away from owning NFA items. Not that they aren't on some list already for being on a gun forum or buying a gun using their credit card or buying through the web where everything tracks everything.

But what do I know, I'm just some guy on the other end of the internet!

 

[RobMa]

That or the FBI.

Again, it's highly unlikely. If they were to go after anyone, it would be those in legal possession of full automatic weapons and destructive devices.

Considering the NFA has been around for nearly a century, I just don't see them coming for them if they haven't already.

It does scare folks away from owning NFA items. Not that they aren't on some list already for being on a gun forum or buying a gun using their credit card or buying through the web where everything tracks everything.

But what do I know, I'm just some guy on the other end of the internet!

Yes I realize this as well, one of the many things I have taken into consideration. Especially now that you/us/we could be on a number of any watch list for just about anything nowadays.

 

[The Heretic]

That or the FBI.

Agreed, which is why I included "et. al."

Again, it's highly unlikely. If they were to go after anyone, it would be those in legal possession of full automatic weapons and destructive devices.

Considering the NFA has been around for nearly a century, I just don't see them coming for them if they haven't already.

wait for it...

It does scare folks away from owning NFA items. Not that they aren't on some list already for being on a gun forum or buying a gun using their credit card or buying through the web where everything tracks everything.

Oh I am sure there is a list, if not a list, then one can be made quickly enough from all the data the NSA collects every second of every day. I am sure it would be a very customized and prioritized list too, with complete profiles and risk assessments, etc. - so yeah, most people with NFA items would probably be higher up on that list than someone who has a .30-30 lever action.

As for the NFA being dissuasive - yeah, that was its purpose. The $200 tax stamp was a LOT more of a penalty and "social tax" back in the late 30s than it is now. Then there are all the rules about keeping the ATF up to date on location/etc.

I am personally not really that interested in SBRs/SBSs - what with Shockwaves/et. al. and pistol braces, etc. - and even if those didn't exist, I am much more interested in suppressors.

 

[Member 34319]

Yes I realize this as well, one of the many things I have taken into consideration. Especially now that you/us/we could be on a number of any watch list for just about anything nowadays.

Also take into consideration that there are millions, literally millions, of gun owners in legal possession of SBRs SBSs Suppressors etc. Those people die. The ATF does not keep track of your everyday life, they usually have no clue you are dead. No ATF or FBI show up to collect the items, most go on to the next of kin completely unaware they have to file paperwork to show the path of ownership. Imagine, in 30-40 years as most of the older population that owns these items start dropping off the radar, and these items enter into the world with little to no ability to truly track them. Illustrating, that they simply aren't watching your every single move whenever you join the millions of law abiding gun owners by registering a NFA item.

The NFA is to keep honest law abiding, honest and law abiding. The amount of crime committed with registered NFA items is incredibly low. The cases of crime by registered items can likely be counted on one hand. That is by design. That in a way (warning unpopular viewpoint ahead) shows the law is working. Unregistered NFA items, are already illegal so those that use those in crimes just get more years tacked to their sentences for using them. While those who have them registered DONT use them for criminal activities. This is why politicians really want ARs and similar in the NFA.

 

[Hueco]

That or the FBI.

Again, it's highly unlikely. If they were to go after anyone, it would be those in legal possession of full automatic weapons and destructive devices.

Considering the NFA has been around for nearly a century, I just don't see them coming for them if they haven't already.

It does scare folks away from owning NFA items. Not that they aren't on some list already for being on a gun forum or buying a gun using their credit card or buying through the web where everything tracks everything.

But what do I know, I'm just some guy on the other end of the internet!

There's wisdom from this rando internet dude.

Google, effectively, runs the internet. What I mean is, their tracking scripts are on a large, large percentage of web sites. Those that don't use Google likely use another service and every one of them sell/swap metadata with each other and big business. Your bank or credit card company know your buying habits. Does anyone really think the electronic 4473 just dies in cyberspace after being sent in? C'mon now.

So...sure the NFA is a list of gun owners...so too are all of the data points listed above. It's not tough to compile data. Point is: if they're coming, then they're coming - NFA or no.

Personally, I just got my first suppressor and am gearing up for an SBR after we move.

I disagree with @Reno on what they'd come for: my guess would be suppressors. Seems they're becoming a proxy battle that's polarizing: one side claiming only legitimate use and the other claiming only murderous intent with them. This should be a moot point since it's already an NFA item...but since it's not, I can only assume that the Dems will wish to do to cans what they did to machine guns or to ban them outright. Should that be the case, then yes, I would expect the ATF/FBI to use the NFA to hand out marching orders to local LEO's to go collect cans.

Might make for an interesting showdown between sanctuary states and the Fed, though...especially given Texas's new suppressor law.

 

[Member 34319]

There's wisdom from this rando internet dude.

Google, effectively, runs the internet. What I mean is, their tracking scripts are on a large, large percentage of web sites. Those that don't use Google likely use another service and every one of them sell/swap metadata with each other and big business. Your bank or credit card company know your buying habits. Does anyone really think the electronic 4473 just dies in cyberspace after being sent in? C'mon now.

So...sure the NFA is a list of gun owners...so too are all of the data points listed above. It's not tough to compile data. Point is: if they're coming, then they're coming - NFA or no.

Personally, I just got my first suppressor and am gearing up for an SBR after we move.

I disagree with @Reno on what they'd come for: my guess would be suppressors. Seems they're becoming a proxy battle that's polarizing: one side claiming only legitimate use and the other claiming only murderous intent with them. This should be a mute point since it's already an NFA item...but since it's not, I can only assume that the Dems will wish to do to cans what they did to machine guns or to ban them outright. Should that be the case, then yes, I would expect the ATF/FBI to use the NFA to hand out marching orders to local LEO's to go collect cans.

Might make for an interesting showdown between sanctuary states and the Fed, though...especially given Texas's new suppressor law.

If anything we will get another Hughs Amendment on some gun bill. Eliminating future suppressors from the registry. Making those in existence similar to select fires.

 

[Hueco]

If anything we will get another Hughs Amendment on some gun bill. Eliminating future suppressors from the registry. Making those in existence similar to select fires.

Yea, that's what I'd expect. Still goes against Texas's can law (assuming their gov signs it) [the law's tldr; Cans made and sold in Texas to remain in Texas do not need to be registered].

The NFA is to keep honest law abiding, honest and law abiding. The amount of crime committed with registered NFA items is incredibly low. The cases of crime by registered items can likely be counted on one hand. That is by design. That in a way (warning unpopular viewpoint ahead) shows the law is working. Unregistered NFA items, are already illegal so those that use those in crimes just get more years tacked to their sentences for using them. While those who have them registered DONT use them for criminal activities. This is why politicians really want ARs and similar in the NFA.

I get why some politicians want AR's on the NFA, but it's not quite apples to apples as with cans. Cans don't really offer a criminal much benefit and they're not easy to obtain. AR's and parts are so ubiquitous now that there really is no putting the cat back in the bag. I actually don't quite understand why pistol length AR's are not used in more crime as they're a superior weapon for the average drive by or gang shooting. Maybe we're simply at the start of the curve?

 

[The Heretic]

Yea, that's what I'd expect. Still goes against Texas's can law (assuming their gov signs it) [the law's tldr; Cans made and sold in Texas to remain in Texas do not need to be registered].\

Which is complete and utter bovine fecal matter. States cannot override federal law and it is the NFA that requires a tax stamp and registration of "cans", not state law. At best this is just a feel good law, at worst someone will actually believe it and do time in a federal "pound me in the anal orifice" prison.

I get why some politicians want AR's on the NFA, but it's not quite apples to apples as with cans. Cans don't really offer a criminal much benefit and they're not easy to obtain.

It isn't about crime, it is about a perceived threat to their power.

 

[EHJ]

There's wisdom from this rando internet dude.

Google, effectively, runs the internet. What I mean is, their tracking scripts are on a large, large percentage of web sites. Those that don't use Google likely use another service and every one of them sell/swap metadata with each other and big business. Your bank or credit card company know your buying habits. Does anyone really think the electronic 4473 just dies in cyberspace after being sent in? C'mon now.

So...sure the NFA is a list of gun owners...so too are all of the data points listed above. It's not tough to compile data. Point is: if they're coming, then they're coming - NFA or no.

Personally, I just got my first suppressor and am gearing up for an SBR after we move.

I disagree with @Reno on what they'd come for: my guess would be suppressors. Seems they're becoming a proxy battle that's polarizing: one side claiming only legitimate use and the other claiming only murderous intent with them. This should be a mute point since it's already an NFA item...but since it's not, I can only assume that the Dems will wish to do to cans what they did to machine guns or to ban them outright. Should that be the case, then yes, I would expect the ATF/FBI to use the NFA to hand out marching orders to local LEO's to go collect cans.

Might make for an interesting showdown between sanctuary states and the Fed, though...especially given Texas's new suppressor law.

Sauron's Aggregator :

Palantir

Foundational Software of Tomorrow. Delivered Today.™

www.palantir.com

There are many things the Fed's "technically" can not do... But nothing stops them from contracting out the 'private' sector for their desired data.

 

[Longwalkhome]

When things are close you need to step back and get a bigger picture. When things are happening far away you need to get a closer look. The real answer is in a question, "who really is they?"

 

[The Heretic]

Sauron's Aggregator :

Palantir

Foundational Software of Tomorrow. Delivered Today.™

www.palantir.com

There are many things the Fed's "technically" can not do... But nothing stops them from contracting out the 'private' sector for their desired data.

NSA/CIA/DHS does it anyway