PDA

View Full Version : Internet ammo, FOPA and repeal of the Hughes' Amendment


lomalinda
07-31-2012, 5:26 AM
Guys, is there any likelihood that the FOPA would need to be repealed outright in order to get the mail order ammo ban that Obama wants? And if it were, would the pre/post-1986 issue be rendered obsolete by taking the Hughes' amendment with it?

ke6guj
07-31-2012, 6:47 AM
no, they won't need to repeal all of the FOPA to put a mail order ban back in effect.

Uxi
07-31-2012, 7:53 AM
I would like the Republicans to not kill Lautenberg's bill... maybe throw him a lark and require registration of 100,000 rounds or more at one time or something like that, but twist it into something beneficial with amendments, including a repeal of Hughes. :D

mag360
07-31-2012, 6:01 PM
repeal hughes amendment and only require non obligational self reporting of any ammo purchase greater than 100,000 rounds to you UPS delivery man so they can send an extra guy on his delivery run.

RMP91
07-31-2012, 6:49 PM
We're skipping about 20 chapters here folks...

Hughes will be the 2nd-to-last thing we fight to strike down.

After we've dealt with our own AWB, standard-capacity ban, NFA, GCA, CCW Recip, Unlicensed OC/CCW, registration repeal etc. Which will more than likely take upwards of 40-50 years (far too long IMO).

After that, we can deal with reopening MG sales to the general public.

While all this is going on, we have to keep anti-gun politicians and stupid people out of office, but apparently that's a tall order for some voters because they want to keep their entitlement/welfare checks to pay for their crack habits... Oh, and illegal immigrants too, they are trying to inflate their own vote count by allowing illegals to vote.

dantodd
07-31-2012, 7:40 PM
We're skipping about 20 chapters here folks...

Hughes will be the 2nd-to-last thing we fight to strike down.


Despite Clement and Kennedy we may not have a choice to wait on the Hughes amendment.

Bhobbs
07-31-2012, 8:05 PM
We're skipping about 20 chapters here folks...

Hughes will be the 2nd-to-last thing we fight to strike down.

After we've dealt with our own AWB, standard-capacity ban, NFA, GCA, CCW Recip, Unlicensed OC/CCW, registration repeal etc. Which will more than likely take upwards of 40-50 years (far too long IMO).

After that, we can deal with reopening MG sales to the general public.

While all this is going on, we have to keep anti-gun politicians and stupid people out of office, but apparently that's a tall order for some voters because they want to keep their entitlement/welfare checks to pay for their crack habits... Oh, and illegal immigrants too, they are trying to inflate their own vote count by allowing illegals to vote.


If NFA goes down, wouldn't Hughes be irrelevant?

Bhobbs
07-31-2012, 8:07 PM
Despite Clement and Kennedy we may not have a choice to wait on the Hughes amendment.

Why do you say that?

RMP91
07-31-2012, 8:23 PM
Despite Clement and Kennedy we may not have a choice to wait on the Hughes amendment.

It's like cutting to the chase. Only problem is, the general public will be caught completely by surprise and that is what the Bradys take advantage of. They'll use the Hughes amendment being (hypothetically) struck down as an excuse to paint gun owners with a broad brush calling us "evil" and "baby-killers".

That's NOT what we want right now.

Besides, even if it were to happen tomorrow, we Californians would not be affected whatsoever by it, we still have an AWB and NFA prohibition in place.

Don't bite off more than you can chew.

RMP91
07-31-2012, 8:26 PM
If NFA goes down, wouldn't Hughes be irrelevant?

By my understanding of it, not as much as you might think.

Hughes prevents the sale and transfer of Post-May 19, 1986 manufactured MGs to civilians. It would only affect those made before that date and even then, good luck trying to get them at a cheap price or for a collector to give them up without paying hundreds of thousands of dollars...

Hughes needs to go down first IMO, THEN we can worry about the NFA.

Bhobbs
08-01-2012, 10:35 AM
By my understanding of it, not as much as you might think.

Hughes prevents the sale and transfer of Post-May 19, 1986 manufactured MGs to civilians. It would only affect those made before that date and even then, good luck trying to get them at a cheap price or for a collector to give them up without paying hundreds of thousands of dollars...

Hughes needs to go down first IMO, THEN we can worry about the NFA.

I thought Hughes prevented new MGs from being registered so they could be sold to civilians. If there is no need to register MGs, how can Hughes stop us from getting them?

Fyathyrio
08-02-2012, 8:47 AM
Gee, once Hughes/NFA straightened out, early M-16s will be C&R! :D

Gray Peterson
08-02-2012, 8:55 AM
I thought Hughes prevented new MGs from being registered so they could be sold to civilians. If there is no need to register MGs, how can Hughes stop us from getting them?

It's a criminal prohibition, not a registration ban.

Bhobbs
08-02-2012, 8:57 AM
It's a criminal prohibition, not a registration ban.

Which means what? Hughes would still have to go down even if NFA is gone?

Gray Peterson
08-02-2012, 8:59 AM
Which means what? Hughes would still have to go down even if NFA is gone?

Yes.

littlejake
08-02-2012, 8:59 AM
And if the GCA 1968 is repealed there will be no C&R classification -- as C&R and the C&R license were created by the 68 GCA. Before that, we could by milsurp rifle by mail. The NRA sold 1911s and they were shipped directly to people.

Bhobbs
08-02-2012, 9:01 AM
Yes.

So what does Hughes do exactly? I thought it closed the NFA MG registry at least to civilians.

Gray Peterson
08-02-2012, 9:08 AM
So what does Hughes do exactly? I thought it closed the NFA MG registry at least to civilians.

It prohibits the possession of MG's made after may 1986 to civilians. Even if the ATFE NFA branch were to register one to a regular citizen, it doesn't legalize the possession.