More on the ATF Reform Act
NRA has a summary. I can’t find the part about making it illegal for ATF to export guns to Mexico.
10 Responses to “More on the ATF Reform Act”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
March 17th, 2011 at 12:22 pm
Allow for the manufacture and transfer of machineguns for annumition producers.
And theatrical houses.
Nothing in there about eliminating “sporting clauses”, or a push to remove the Hughes amendment. If its a legislative act, they could even push for the removal of suppressors on any list categorizing them as firearms.
And they would be giving the ATF shades of gray in harassing good small businesses.
March 17th, 2011 at 12:37 pm
Why does the NRA think that Hollywood has a superior right to own a machinegun than us mere peasants?
Who the fuck do they think they represent?
March 17th, 2011 at 1:03 pm
“Why does the NRA think that Hollywood has a superior right to own a machinegun than us mere peasants?”
Don’t you know? Some animals are more equal than others. And if you’re an anti-gun liberal who loves using machine guns for anti-gun propaganda, then the NRA is on your side.
I cannot fathom why the NRA is singling out some of the most anti-gun people out there for a special exemption like this. The second amendment is NOT about making movies.
March 17th, 2011 at 2:18 pm
A.) Won’t pass this Senate. B.) Even if it passes this Senate, it won’t be enough to override the Anoited One’s Veto. C.) Even if it is Veto Proof, the Anoited On’e Administration will not implement it nor enforce it, and the BATFEIEIO (and maybe Laser Weapons) wouldn’t follow the Law anyway. But it never hurts to keep up the Pressure. Now if only the Republitards would give us a Constitutional Loving, Pro-Gun Candidate (FUCK ALL RINOS, AND THAT MEANS ROMNEY!), and purge out the House and Senate in Nov. 2012, I’d think this bill would move forward.
March 17th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
Isn’t it already illegal for ATF to export guns to Mexico without export licenses?
NRA is smart enough to know that double-illegality doesn’t stop a law enforcement agency with rogue elements.
(And on the comments above, iterative change works.
Demanding the whole wish-list at once scares the horses and servants, as the saying goes – and while it Feels Good, it doesn’t get you what you want most of the time.)
March 17th, 2011 at 5:01 pm
How about eliminating the fee for an FFL and allowing anyone who can own a gun to get one? Why should we have to pay to have our constitutional rights raped by a malevolent bureaucracy?
I’m tired of having to coordinate FFL’s when I win a gun on an Internet auction. The local one won’t accept deliveries from the USPS, while the one selling is rural and can’t easily or economically ship any other way. The local FFL can’t manage to send his license by email, while the selling FFL has no ability to receive it by fax. No FFL is under any obligation to handle the transfer for you, so you can end up stuck with having paid the seller, but with no legal way to receive the gun. It’s ridiculously bad, wrong and stupid, and the anti-gunners want it to stay bad, wrong and stupid.
Right now, any criminal who isn’t locked up can easily get a gun on the street. But if you are a law-abiding citizen, the government is going to give you as hard a time as they can.
If we get rid of ATF’s budget, we save a billion dollars a year, and while any criminal on the street will still be able to get a gun on the street, the situation for law-abiding gun owners will be much improved. For the sake of a billion dollars a year less in taxes, and our freedom, I think we should get rid of ATF. And do something about those criminals being on the street! Like the ones with ATF badges who’ve been running guns to Mexico! Lock ’em up!
March 17th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
The bill is about reforming ATF, not fixing every problem with federal firearms laws. Like it or not, Congress isn’t going to defund ATF, repeal the Hughes Amdt or remove suppressors from the NFA anytime soon. They certainly could have put it in the bill but it would just guarantee it goes nowhere.
I’m sure we could all write a bill that fixes all the wrongs with respect to federal firearms laws and does away with ATF but you have to be realistic about what’s achievable and what’s not. Even as written, it will be difficult for this very limited reform to be enacted into law.
As for the hollywood exemption, it may have been asked for by a member of congress.
March 17th, 2011 at 6:40 pm
“As for the hollywood exemption, it may have been asked for by a member of congress.”
The response should have been:
“Sorry, but we don’t believe that some animals are more equal than others. And how many people in Hollywood are members of the NRA, anyway?”
March 17th, 2011 at 7:50 pm
I have no idea why that section wld be in there (just speculating)but telling a member of congress who generally supports what you’re trying to do to pound sound doesn’t seem like an effective strategy to get your bill passed. It’s easy to say no compromise or shall not be infringed on a blog but I don’t see that working too well when you’re working with lawmakers to try to pass your bill.
The goal is passing a bill which will ultimately reform how ATF works. Is it perfect, of course not but that is the nature of the legilsative process. You don’t always get everything you want. Nra could have loaded up the bill with a very broad wishlist (hughes amdt repeal, Nics repeal etc) but then they’d have a bill with no chance of being enacted as opposed to one with some chance.
March 17th, 2011 at 8:23 pm
I’m not saying it should go for a full Hughes repeal – I’m saying it shouldn’t offer any special handouts to Hollywood. Apparently the NRA believes that Hollywood deserves special treatment or something. And of course Hollywood would love to see the 2nd disappear (so long as it doesn’t interfere with their movies anyway). Supporting things like this erode what little respect I have for the NRA. The rest is fine, I just don’t get why they’re pulling a Monica for Hollywood all of the sudden.