PDA

View Full Version : FA ban petition


midnitereaper
01-29-2007, 9:27 AM
Found this link to an online petition to remove the ban of full auto weapons.

http://www.petitiononline.com/NFABAN2/petition.html

bwiese
01-29-2007, 9:40 AM
Online petitions are useless and in fact dangerous.

They give the feeling to those answering the petition that they're doing something useful.

brighamr
01-29-2007, 10:00 AM
midnitereaper: I think it's a good find, but trust me, no one else here will. you will get about 50 pessimistic replies stating "it's already been done before" and "it'll never pass". Most people here just want to talk about their neutered toys and SHTF BS, so don't feel bad when you get all their 'we have already given up' replies...


Found this link to an online petition to remove the ban of full auto weapons.

http://www.petitiononline.com/NFABAN2/petition.html

bwiese
01-29-2007, 10:06 AM
I ask you, what good will an online petition do?

It's worth the paper it's written on.

FA stuff is politically radioactive anyway, you get to FA by going thru alternate indirect steps.

midnitereaper
01-29-2007, 10:21 AM
I ask you, what good will an online petition do?

It's worth the paper it's written on.

FA stuff is politically radioactive anyway, you get to FA by going thru alternate indirect steps.

What are alternate indirect steps?

bwiese
01-29-2007, 10:24 AM
What are alternate indirect steps?

Parker vs. DC, full RKBA thru courts, etc.

Trying to get FA restrictions lifted is just pure stupid/naive. It will never happen, it has to be a side effect of something else.

Direct pursuit of FA is as stupid as the Silviera case was. It emboldens opponents, and brings an 'ugly' issue into courts. Better to have a safer issue in the courts, w/FA legalization as a byproduct.

You're in CA - why are you working for something like FA when AW stuff still needs to be shut down?

We need to clear the decks on semiauto/AW stuff even before FA stuff is looked at.

ARRRR-15
01-29-2007, 11:59 AM
+1. You'll end up with a FA fixed 10 round mag. That would get old real fast.:) I guess a MMG setup in FA wouldn't be that bad.

midnitereaper
01-29-2007, 12:47 PM
hmm a direct pursuit on FA sounds like a direct attack. Tactically thinking here. I would agree that a direct attack on FA would be a pointless move but what about a direct attack on FA bans followed by a flank on AW bans followed up in the rear with the 2nd Amd. and throw in some air strikes on .50 cal. bans. What I am saying here is IMO it would be better to attack the DOJ on all issues rather than one at a time. I don't think it is a waist of time or pointless to go after the FA ban because every little bit helps.

SunshineGlocker
01-29-2007, 12:51 PM
FA should be legal, but it is radioactive at this point as bweise says. I have written my senators (Diane and Barbara) asking them to introduce a bill to repeal 922(o) but I haven't heard back form them on that.

Bill is right. Send a letter if you want to feel like you're doing something, but there are far more pressing things to work on.

383green
01-29-2007, 4:11 PM
Y'all have probably noticed by now that I'm a raving second amendment fundamentalist, but I think I need to agree with bwiese here from a tactical standpoint. It seems like we've made a lot more progress in taking back our second amendment rights recently by whittling away at various infringements a little piece at a time, particularly in the AW ban area. It's very much the same strategy that the anti-gun folks have been using against us for a long time.

As far as I'm concerned, our ultimate goal is nothing less than full restoration of the second amendment rights which have been incrementally taken away througout most of the last century. While I refuse to yield any more ground (i.e., I will never be in favor of giving up some little thing in hopes of making later progress, or even just placating the anti crowd), I think that in the near future we'll make the most forward progress by taking smaller, incremental steps. I look forward to a time when a bold and open move like this petition will work, but I don't think we're there yet. I'm happy to say that I think we might actually get there someday, and I couldn't say that before the whole OLL carnival started a little more than a year ago.

Yes, I believe that FA stuff should be legal, unrestricted, unlicensed and untaxed for all adults who are neither violent felons nor dangerously insane, but I agree with some of the other posters here that going after it now would cause a backlash that would hurt our cause. Let's keep working towards that goal a little at a time as opportunities come up.

bwiese
01-29-2007, 4:13 PM
Thank you, 383Green.

This is what the friggin' Silviera people just couldn't recognize (aside from fundamental structural & legal issues with their suit).

SemiAutoSam
01-29-2007, 4:17 PM
Repeal of the NFA in general would be ideal but thats a long ways off even if it is a reachable goal. First the state issues and then the federal one step at a time.

After the state issues then go after the Brady BS and GCA68 and then the take down the NFA.

383green
01-29-2007, 4:42 PM
First the state issues and then the federal one step at a time.

After the state issues then go after the Brady BS and GCA68 and then the take down the NFA.
I don't necessarily see a problem with making a two-pronged atack at both state and federal levels, particularly where they might interact with each other (for example, federal CCW reciprocity could shake things up in CA, too). Each prong should be carefully orchestrated for maximum forward gain without backfiring.

It surprises me to see myself writing something like this... a year ago I would have been all for a full frontal attack. Now, I've seen real, unprecedented advancements made through a more measured approach over the last year, and that's changed my strategy. I think we might finally be turning things back around.

We're not only taking ground back a little bit at a time; by willingly and enthusiasticly pursuing things like fixed-mag OLLs and turd-grip featureless guns (which would have seemed like thoroughly stupid and valueless ideas once upon a time), we're helping the gun control house of cards collapse upon itself. Folks who don't otherwise care one way or another about guns won't see any reason to fix our gun control laws if they don't know that they're broken. By showing that the laws in place not only do not address the presumed cause of reducing violent crime, but don't even have the effect of eliminating those scary-looking black guns like they were supposed to, we're pushing things to the point where no one will be able to pretend that current gun control laws are anything more than a convoluted pile of garbage. We've maintained all along that those scary black guns are no different than any other kinds of guns in any meaningful way, and now we're proving it by showing that they cannot even be defined clearly enough to be singled out for banning.

Ok, so which hill are we taking next? :D

bwiese
01-29-2007, 4:43 PM
Gun control is likely fairly static at the Federal level if we can keep the pressure up - I think we can, because progun vs antigun didn't change too much after the election [although some real big city antigun libs got choice committee assignments].

Gun control will be fought at the local and state and at the regulatory level. We have enough people on the ground, if we're all committed and nonfragmented, to stave things off and get gradual minor improvements that accumulate into major improvements.

I submit AB2728 is a good example of this tactical moving forward.

brighamr
01-29-2007, 7:45 PM
This is what I love about this forum. A bunch of people exploit a loophole in the state laws. There hasn't been a new law yet that closes the hole (mind you pelosi just got elected, and hilary will be elected soon). The senate and house are filled with dems who will follow hilarys lead..... So currently we have FAKE guns that temporarily exploit a loop hole, where's all this progress everyone keeps commenting about? indeed, a bunch of people have been arrested for having look alike weapons. Some of them got the guns back after spending a lot of money and time in jail. is that what you consider good progress?

I agree, an attempt to remove NFA ban while AW are still banned probably wouldn't survive, but if we dont TRY, it will never happen. A joint attack on the state AW bans and the NFA ban at least has a chance, granted enough people get off their *** and support it. (I don't mean signing online petitions, or talking about it in a forum, I mean grouping en mass at the white house or the capitol with pro-gun senators\governors\NRA\thousands of supporters)

The Brady Campaign is trying and succeeding in convincing people to be pro-gun control. The people here are trying and succeeding in exploiting loop holes rather than fixing the f***ing problem (ie. changing the actual laws themselves)

midnitereaper
01-29-2007, 9:06 PM
Unity is the key, and Calguns helps us all stay coordinated adn on the same page.

FA is like taking Berlin in WWII. We have to strom Normandy first and hold the beach head first.

Ah but we didn't just storm the beach now did we? No We also dropped paratroopers inland. And how did we take Berlin? On all sides.