Owning full auto weapons

[kswiss2783]

My father and I got into a discussion concerning this and he told me it is illegal for an individual to own a full auto weapon. Can someone please explain/show me the info disproving him? I know that you can, but am not sure of the exact process one would take in order to own one.

[ax157]

Take a look in the Free Fire Zone (http://www.glocktalk.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=49)

These threads should have alot of information.

http://www.glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=199037
http://www.glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=199038

Aswell as

http://www.impactguns.com/store/machineguns_legalities.html

[kswiss2783]

Originally posted by ax157
Take a look in the Free Fire Zone (http://www.glocktalk.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=49)

These threads should have alot of information.

http://www.glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=199037
http://www.glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=199038

Aswell as

http://www.impactguns.com/store/machineguns_legalities.html


Exactly what I was looking for. Thanks!

[ElevatedThreat]

Originally posted by kswiss2783
My father and I got into a discussion concerning this and he told me it is illegal for an individual to own a full auto weapon. Can someone please explain/show me the info disproving him? I know that you can, but am not sure of the exact process one would take in order to own one.

Unfortunately, it is true that it is now illegal to produce NEW full-auto weapons for civilian ownership. That is, while Class III licensees can continue to trade the ever-dwindling supply of such existing weapons, there will be no more new ones joining the fleet -- unless the NRA somehow suddenly gets 40 million members, instead of 4 million....

-ET

[kswiss2783]

Originally posted by ElevatedThreat
Unfortunately, it is true that it is now illegal to produce NEW full-auto weapons for civilian ownership. That is, while Class III licensees can continue to trade the ever-dwindling supply of such existing weapons, there will be no more new ones joining the fleet -- unless the NRA somehow suddenly gets 40 million members, instead of 4 million....

-ET


Right, I forgot to say that I was telling him about the 1986 Act and that you could own them if they were manufactured prior to that year.

[M2 Carbine]

Show this to your Dad and tell him to stop getting his gun information from the TV talking heads.:supergrin:

This video, of a half dozen of us having a little machine gun shoot, was taken on a Fort Worth policeman's place. I think he was the only one that didn't own a machine gun.:)

(Left click on the picture and it will load)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v135/Bell406_206B/Video/th_P1010149.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v135/Bell406_206B/Video/?action=view&current=P1010149.flv)

[fellow14]

Originally posted by ElevatedThreat
Unfortunately, it is true that it is now illegal to produce NEW full-auto weapons for civilian ownership. That is, while Class III licensees can continue to trade the ever-dwindling supply of such existing weapons, there will be no more new ones joining the fleet -- unless the NRA somehow suddenly gets 40 million members, instead of 4 million....

-ET

It would not matter if the NRA had 10 million members. Most gun owners don't think you or I need CIII weapons. I didn't say gun enthusiasts, I said gun owners. You know dear old dad with his .357. Uncle Fred with his .30-30. Grandpa and his duck gun. Those folks do not give a * * * * about NFA. I would venture to say there are quite a few enthusiasts who do not give a rat's ass about NFA. It will be a frosty day in hell before the NRA supports a repeal of NFA.

[digitspaw]

Well, I live in the free state of Nevada and I'm lookin' at a UZI 9mm come January.:banana:

[ax157]

I never have, and never will understand the logic behind restricting things based on if you need them or not.

The question over something being banned should NEVER EVER be asked in the form of "do they need it?".

Unless you like the government running your lives.

[hankhan]

Let's not forget that the name of the 1986 legislation - that was supported by the NRA - is the Firearm Owners Protection Act. One thing about Congress is they have a great sense of humor.

[fellow14]

Originally posted by ax157
I never have, and never will understand the logic behind restricting things based on if you need them or not.

The question over something being banned should NEVER EVER be asked in the form of "do they need it?".

Unless you like the government running your lives.

Well I think it is mildly retarded as well. But that is how the rest of the country processes thoughts and such.

[ax157]

Originally posted by hankhan
Let's not forget that the name of the 1986 legislation - that was supported by the NRA - is the Firearm Owners Protection Act. One thing about Congress is they have a great sense of humor.

As I understand it, the FOPA was really a Firearm Owners Protection Act up until the last minute when the machine gun banning provision was added.

[JWP]

as a life member of the nra, i contribute to the goa rather than nra because the nra's position is that nfa firearms and 50 bmg firearms are "not necessary"

it's not about need, it's about rights

and they don't care except for certain rights

[fellow14]

Originally posted by JWP
snip
...and they don't care except for certain rights

The right to a big ass bank roll.

[Allman]

Originally posted by fellow14
It would not matter if the NRA had 10 million members. Most gun owners don't think you or I need CIII weapons. I didn't say gun enthusiasts, I said gun owners. You know dear old dad with his .357. Uncle Fred with his .30-30. Grandpa and his duck gun. Those folks do not give a * * * * about NFA. I would venture to say there are quite a few enthusiasts who do not give a rat's ass about NFA. It will be a frosty day in hell before the NRA supports a repeal of NFA. The overwhelming majority of gun owners have accepted that the government has a right to restrict, ban, or otherwise regulate the type and number of firearms they can own.

Most will deny this, but most will, at the same time, defend government regulation of machine guns and other "destructive devices" and condemn anyone prosecuted for owning one outside the law. (and it is admittedly stupid to violate the law, I just don't condemn someone that does as being a true criminal for the act of ownership alone.)

It's just a matter of time till we end up with the same laws as England or Australia.

[Allman]

Originally posted by ax157
As I understand it, the FOPA was really a Firearm Owners Protection Act up until the last minute when the machine gun banning provision was added. So, what got protected as far as firearms ownership?

IIRC, it repealed the requirement to sign for hand gun ammo, but that was just removing a worthless regulation not protecting anything and was only part of the bill (and I may have that confused wtih another bill, they're all too long to study unless you have serious time and need for research).

[vote Republican]

Originally posted by digitspaw
Well, I live in the free state of Nevada and I'm lookin' at a UZI 9mm come January.:banana:

The 12 gauge autoloader...

[Fred]

Originally posted by ax157
Take a look in the Free Fire Zone (http://www.glocktalk.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=49)

...

Yep, and that's where I'm moving this thread... ;)

[rkba_net]

Originally posted by Allman
So, what got protected as far as firearms ownership?


It repealed the "contigious state" language in regards to the ability to buy a LONG-GUN from an out of state FFL... now you can buy a long-gun from any state as long as you obey both states laws... also it added a safe passage provision on transport of firearms from one locale to another as long as the firearms are unloaded and in a locked case... and the firearms are legal in the beginning and ending locations...it also allowed mail order sales of ammo.. in addition there was another negative... it was originally going to outlaw suppressors but that was changed to changing the definition of a suppressor to include parts... that is why you never see suppressor parts for sale anymore as they require ATF paperwork now...

[BlackBelt]

Was McClure-Volkmer part of the FOPA? Or was it separate?

[rkba_net]

Originally posted by BlackBelt
Was McClure-Volkmer part of the FOPA? Or was it separate?

The McClure-Volkmer Act is another name for the FOPA of 1986.