BREAKING: High-Ranking ATF Official Proposes De-Regulation of Suppressors, Allow M1 Garand Imports

Send to Kindle

The Washington Post recently obtained an 11-page “white paper” written by the second-highest-ranking official at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) that proposes 15 policy changes, including the deregulation of suppressors and firearm imports, and a clarification of the infamous “arm-brace” rule.

The author, ATF Associate Deputy Director Roland Turk, published the paper “to provide the new Administration and the Bureau multiple options… to reduce or modify [firearm] regulations.”

Taken as a whole, the list focuses on reducing paperwork, streamlining regulations, saving taxpayer dollars, and clarifying policies.

But gun enthusiasts are most excited about several of Turk’s individual proposals.

The rule change garnering the most attention calls for the redefinition of “silencers” to allow for easier access by consumers. Ultimately, Turk wants suppressors to be removed from the National Firearms Act, a 1934 law that imposed a $200 tax stamp and additional paperwork for any suppressor purchase.

“The change in public acceptance of silencers arguably indicates that the reason for their inclusion in the NFA is archaic and historical reluctance to removing them from the NFA should be reevaluated,” he says.

Turk notes that suppressors are rarely used in crimes and have become popular with hunters nationwide. He also admits that the eight-month wait time to process suppressor purchases has become “widely viewed by applicants and the industry as far too long, resulting in numerous complaints to Congress.”

The ATF cannot remove suppressors from the NFA by itself, but, according to Turk, it can revise the definition of “silencer” to include only those parts necessary for the suppressor’s operation. This would remove the NFA requirements from many individual suppressor parts, and only require a tax stamp for those parts that make the suppressor fully operational (see the first full paragraph on page 7).

Turk’s second significant change would loosen the restrictions on the importation of modern sporting rifles (MSRs) like AR-15s and AK-47s. Turk notes that these firearms are already widely available in the United States, so restricting their importation serves “questionable public safety interests” and imposes a heavy workload on the ATF.

Turk proposes that the agency revisit its almost 20-year old Sporting Purpose Study to “bring it up to date with the sport shooting landscape of today.” Modern sporting rifles are used by thousands of shooters in competitions and hunting trips every year. Admitting that MSRs are commonly used for sporting purposes could significantly decrease the import restrictions imposed under the Gun Control Act of 1968.

Another proposed change to import requirements would allow old U.S. military rifles like the M1 Garand and Carbine to be reintroduced to the U.S. public. Turk notes that there are many such rifles awaiting importation, but they have been denied importation and sale rights due to unreasonable “public safety concerns” from previous administrations.

Another change Turk suggests would allow a firearm user to shoulder a pistol without re-classifying that weapon as a “short barreled rifle.” The current rule states that if a user installs an arm brace or stabilizing brace on a pistol-length MSR, that pistol does not constitute a short-barreled rifle (which are regulated under the NFA). But as soon as that shooter uses the arm brace like a stock, the firearm changes classification and becomes an NFA-item.

To mitigate this confusion, Turk says that the ATF could “amend the determination letter to remove the language indicating that simple use of a product for a purpose other than intended by the manufacturer – without additional proof or redesign – may result in re-classification as an NFA weapon.”

Before the pro-gun community starts counting their proverbial chickens, it’s worth noting that, according to the document, “the opinions expressed within this white paper are not those of the ATF; they are merely the ideas and opinions of this writer.” The title page states that the document was not meant to be public—it was designed as a series of suggestions for the ATF to use internally.

Still, it’s encouraging to see a high-ranking ATF official recognize the concerns of the firearms community and propose real, effective solutions to many of the agency’s most ridiculous rules.

Turk covers other topics as well, including FFL’s that deal exclusively at gun shows, armor piercing ammunition, a database of agency rules, and interstate firearm sales.

{ 149 comments… add one }
  • Varn Ford February 27, 2017, 4:24 pm

    With this “white paper” it appears that the ATF may be now designating AR-15’s (and maybe AK’s) as modern sporting rifles (MSR’s). So, if the ATF designates these rifles as modern sporting rifles what will that do to the classification in various states (California is one) of the AR-15’s as assault rifles? If the ATF sees these firearms as modern sporting rifles, as they really are, then they can’t very well be called assault rifles, since they never were assault rifles in the first place. Isn’t the AR-15 now the most popular rifle in the USA used in competition target shooting matches?

  • Just1Spark February 13, 2017, 5:41 pm

    This white paper is a fucking stupid waste of time.

    “The ATF cannot remove suppressors from the NFA by itself, but, according to Turk, it can revise the definition of “silencer” to include only those parts necessary for the suppressor’s operation. This would remove the NFA requirements from many individual suppressor parts, and only require a tax stamp for those parts that make the suppressor fully operational (see the first full paragraph on page 7).”

    So, if you have a muzzle break that looks ‘suppressory’, then Maybe you wont get railroaded by the ATF then.
    Otherwise, sounds like, if you want a functional suppressor, you are still swimmin in the asinine red tape.

    • Joe in NJ February 15, 2017, 4:39 pm

      I agree, it doesn’t actually solve anything.

  • Mike in Ohio February 13, 2017, 4:59 pm

    As of today, HR 367 has 97 cosponsors.

  • Mike in Ohio February 13, 2017, 4:47 pm

    Write or email your Senator (SB 59) and your U.S.Congressman (HR 367) ask them to co sponsor these bills, not just support. My congressman responded within a week by co-sponsoring HR367. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Get busy!

  • Unconvinced February 13, 2017, 2:24 pm

    Low and behold I not convinced that any action is going to take place. I will not be holding my breathe !!! Congress and all the other people in this government still have to justify the jobs they have. The pass a health care bill that causes increases to people that are all ready trying to deal with such costs. The providers pay billions to top people instead of using that money to pay and make health care reasonable and they call them self non profit. Mean while the health care for them is free and the best in the land. Their retirement is the same. And you really expect them to make any meaningful changes??? Think about it why would they change there free ride.??
    They don’t need guns they have a security force protecting them. One unproven person can’t make anything happen the system is still broken .

  • Archangel February 13, 2017, 10:17 am

    “The rule change garnering the most attention calls for the redefinition of “silencers” to allow for easier access by consumers. Ultimately, Turk wants suppressors to be removed from the National Firearms Act, a 1934 law that imposed a $200 tax stamp and additional paperwork for any suppressor purchase”

    That works.

    “according to Turk, it can revise the definition of “silencer” to include only those parts necessary for the suppressor’s operation. This would remove the NFA requirements from many individual suppressor parts, and only require a tax stamp for those parts that make the suppressor fully operational (see the first full paragraph on page 7)”
    This is WORTHLESS AS IT CHANGES NOTHING!

    • Arthur Girardin February 13, 2017, 11:05 pm

      I agree, if i want a suppressor how does this change anything for me???? looks like i Still haver to go through all the steps and Pay the $200. what good is all this???

  • Mark February 12, 2017, 5:40 am

    Not so sure? Don’t worry, the rest of us are.

  • Chris Baker February 11, 2017, 12:03 pm

    Not allowing silencers on firearms is like not allowing mufflers on cars.

    Also, the NFA of 34 and the act of 68 are both major infringements on the right to bear arms and should be abolished.

    About those Garands and carbines, weren’t most of them (if not all) actually made in the U.S.A.? So it wouldn’t be importation at all, it would be repatriation. I’ve always wanted a Garand but never been able to afford one. Perhaps some of these will ease the price so that I can afford one along with a lot of other people.

    • Abdulla Musthav Morterroratacks February 11, 2017, 2:41 pm

      I agree! Silencers make for easier getaways while doing political assassinations! I love the ATF.

      • Brian February 11, 2017, 5:41 pm

        Sure, people assassinate public officials all the time and we need to change things to help them!!! Everyone who has a silencer uses to kill right? Are you saying that there are enough silent killers to keep the manufacturers in business?
        Don’t know what fantasy land you live in, but you seem to watch too many movies and TV shows.

        • Jim February 13, 2017, 9:01 am

          Brian. If you had a brain you would be dangerous.

      • B Steve February 13, 2017, 8:15 am

        you think you’re cute, suppressors are excellent anti terrorism tools to eliminate tools like you

      • Richard Engler February 13, 2017, 9:11 am

        What an uninformed, liberal asshole, you are.

    • DSwancutt February 13, 2017, 10:01 am

      On the Garands and M1 Carbines, it depends on whether they were bought by the country, IE South Korea or MAP, such as all the Greek M1 Garands. If they are owned, they have to be reimported, if MAP, they go through CMP.

  • Jim February 11, 2017, 9:50 am

    They really need to get rid of this restriction on “Silencers” as these SUPPRESSORS are NOT SILENT! All they do is keep the noise down enough to keep you from losing your hearing if you shoot often. I know my hearing has been greatly reduced because of firearms. I do say “Huh?” much more than I should. Suppressors are the way to go if you wish to save the hearing of many people. The problem is that the movies show all these killers and professional hitmen using them to quietly murder all these people. IT’S A MOVIE PEOPLE and I know of no killers who have ever used one. Yes I have met professional killers as well as many just plain old killers and none of them have ever thought of using a suppressor. Change the law already!

    • Mahatma Muhjesbude February 11, 2017, 1:49 pm

      Sorry Jimbo, you can ‘suppress’ or ‘silence’ a .45 to where it sounds like a beer fart and a .22LR to where you only hear the action’s mechanical noice if it’s a semi-auto. Which means, you’d probably only notice the sound in a normal noise environment only if you were standing right next to the shot, but not across the street, or if you were inside your house and the silenced shot was fired in your back yard, non-subsonic ammo not withstanding.

      • Doug February 11, 2017, 5:37 pm

        I shoot silencers even on my .22’s and they still make a lot of noise. Wrong on saying beer fart, etc!!

      • Pops45 February 13, 2017, 5:35 am

        Damn you must drink some hoppy beer!

      • Shane February 13, 2017, 6:22 am

        Mahatma: You are correct with your logic but here’s some more logic: These days, there are many different high caliber air rifles that are capable of harvesting large game such as .45 and .50 caliber air powered rifles. These rifles are unregulated and I believe acceptable to be possessed by a felon. With the appropriate air charge, these rifles can deliver a deadly projectile at sub-sonic speeds. We can “What If” this all day long but in the end, how many air rifle murders have you been reading about lately? I personally think Suppressors should be removed from the NFA but I still think they should have the same 7 day minimum waiting period required on handguns. That will make some people feel all warm and fuzzy inside, but still make them available to legitimate buyers in a reasonable amount of time. It won’t prevent their use in a crime any more than it does for handguns, but it may give pause for some to ponder. If a criminal wants a suppressor, he/she will simply make one or steal one. Because suppressors make a weapon harder to conceal, I would guess many criminals decide not use them or simply don’t give a hoot. BTW…we banned illegal narcotics in this country several decades ago. That’s working out just great

        • Boss February 13, 2017, 10:40 am

          7 day minimum waiting period? You must live in a police state. In free states you buy your gun and walk out the door.
          Please tell me what good comes from a 7 day minimum waiting period.
          Liberals believe in 7 day minimum waiting period(s) so that law abiding citizens won’t buy a gun and go out and shoot someone in anger.
          I hear of more people being killed WAITING for a gun to protect themselves because of your 7 day minimum waiting period.

          2/4 3rd MarDiv

    • badbob February 13, 2017, 2:22 am

      Jim you and me both. If they get rid of the tax stamp maybe we can start a class action suit to buy us hearing aids.

    • Gerald February 13, 2017, 7:24 am

      So make sure you, and every one you know, and every one they know signs every petition to remove suppressors from NFA registration, and disband the ATF. It takes no money, and no more time than it takes to give someone the bird to sign the petitions.

  • Bill February 11, 2017, 8:10 am

    I am not so sure it is a good idea to remove suppressors from the NFA. Remove short barreled rifles, though.

    The primary change I would make is to accelerate the application process. For $200 and the cost of a trust you ought not to have to wait so long for an approval.

    • Tie Toter February 13, 2017, 8:15 pm

      The NFA was enacted more to keep several thousand “Revenuers” on the payroll after the ratification of the 21st Amendment in 1933 legalized liquor again and threatened to cost them their jobs than it was to insure any public safety. You could buy machine guns through the mail but there was never any widespread crime or abuse due solely to their availability.

    • Chuck February 14, 2017, 3:32 pm

      Bill, it’s a good idea to remove suppressors from the NFA because of the hearing protection benefit. Not only that, but it makes all firearms easier to be around. Live near anyone that shoots a lot? It’s nice to keep the noise down for everyone. And remember all of the regulations of the National Firearms Act of 1934 were in response to the murder and mayhem by the criminal gangs in Chicago. The NFA is an infringement of our 2nd Amendment rights and should be rescinded along with the Gun Control Act of 1968, and the Hughes Amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986.

    • Vanns40 February 17, 2017, 11:00 am

      I’m reading through all the comments and almost without exception nowhere do I read what is the logical avenue, repeal of ALL firearms laws. Yup, every single one of them. Looking at all these laws, currently numbering more than 22,000, they all have one thing in common; they presume the law abiding citizen has committed a crime and prevent him from owning or carrying an object until he proves he either has not committed a crime or is “worthy” to do so in the case of carrying.

      We already have laws against rape, robbery, assault and murder. Why do we require additional laws against the same crimes just because we use a certain inanimate object? Is it not the same if we use a knife, baseball bat or piece of pipe? Do we have special laws for them?

      Arms laws are the result of four things: control, bigotry, money and power, in no particular order. It has been that way since the beginning of time. Any politician who says gun control laws make us safer needs to be challenged on the four previously mentioned items and asked which one (or more) he has a vested interest in. Watch them run. Ask them to prove you are safer when you are disarmed. Ask them to prove criminals won’t be able to get a gun, knife, car, truck or piece of pipe and kill you. Ask them why they refuse to let women have the means to defend themselves against rape and murder.

      We need to stop arguing over minutiae and start looking at the entire picture, all gun laws need to be repealed.

  • Archangel February 10, 2017, 8:28 pm

    it can revise the definition of “silencer” to include only those parts necessary for the suppressor’s operation. This would remove the NFA requirements from many individual suppressor parts, and only require a tax stamp for those parts that make the suppressor fully operational…..WTF??
    THEN WHAT IS THE POINT?
    WE STILL HAVE TO PAY FOR A TAX STAMP AND WAIT, RIGHT?
    KICK THAT STUPID REQUIREMENT TO THE CURB AND LET’S SHOOT A LITTLE QUIETER ALREADY!

    • Chris February 13, 2017, 8:53 am

      Glad you and others caught that. Not sure how the author of the article considers this “Deregulation of Suppressors”.

  • MAS February 10, 2017, 6:35 pm

    It’s time to rid the law abiding citizens of USA of ALL UNCONSTITUTIONAL INFRINGEMENTS upon their UNALIENABLE RIGHT to keep and bear arms!

  • Paul February 10, 2017, 5:17 pm

    How about we just disband the BATFE?

  • KBSacto February 10, 2017, 4:54 pm

    Since the President appoints the Director of the ATF, I’m wondering if Mr. Turk may be signaling that he is interested.

    • Mahatma Muhjesbude February 10, 2017, 8:02 pm

      The only thing he’s signaling is that the public outcry for these disarmament agenda Fiat decrees made WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF WE THE PEOPLE, is making the ATF sweat and his real concern is that he won’t have ANY position at all in an agency that no longer exists if we have any further say about it. This is just another bullshit redirection and obfuscation of the issues in the hopes that Soros & Cartel will spend enough to neuter the power the Right Wing Conservatives and Bible and Gun hugging Religionists now wield under the Candidate they got elected, in the next Congressional/Senate elections.

      So no time to waste mentally masturbating here over imaginary situations that never will happen. This is typical Totalitarian mind control distraction. They will never stop until they get what they want, or until We, the Free American Arms Bearing Patriots kick the shit out of their shadow government by making our Congressional employees Repeal All current Gun Control Laws and passing new laws to preclude any further violations of the 2nd/A. Like the Hearing protection Act now moving forward. If you have time to comment here, then send one to your Rep insisting she/he heavily support this new silencer Bill with NO compromise, no backdoor deals, and no weaknesses. Any background checks registration of a stupid piece of tube related to your lawnmower muffler is an insult to our collective weakness and stupidity that had these people laughing at us for decades. Time to once again become a Nation of Real Men and Women.

      • Jerry S. February 11, 2017, 9:08 am

        You sir, should run for office. Kudos on your post.

      • Ben Leucking February 13, 2017, 4:36 pm

        Amen, brother!

  • loupgarous February 10, 2017, 3:26 pm

    This non-binding “policy brief” is less than it appears. Its most impressive-sounding proposals actually aren’t going to help gun owners much at all – they remove the least-defensible pillars of the Obama administration’s gun policy, the absurd finding that freeze plugs purchasable at any auto parts store and battery tubes for “Mag-Lite” type flashlights fall under the ATF’s regulatory ambit (they clearly don’t, as anyone with unimpaired common sense can see), and that M-1 Garands and M-1 carbines are somehow capable of causing a clear and present danger to the citizens of the United States “in the wrong hands”. You can search the Internet in vain for a single record of a felony committed with either weapon in the past few decades – statistically, they’re less associated with violent crime than SUVs and steak knives. So this isn’t outreach to law-abiding gun owners as much as it’s damage control in advance of hearings before Republican-dominated Congressional panels asking about idiotic regulations like this, and who in BATFE failed to tell his political masters in Justice to take a walk before writing them up.

    BATFE does some good work. I feel better knowing that someone’s watching the nation’s civilian explosive inventories. But we don’t really need to have our national alcohol and tobacco consumption supervised by an armed police force, and that agency will forever be stained by numerous raids on the law-abiding and those Americans who were only violating laws which were unforgivable abridgements of the Second Amendment to the Constitution. But AOWs, NFA items and machine guns (as defined by Federal law) are the least-used weapons in violent crimes because the BATFE keeps track of who uses them. They have a legitimate purpose in our government.
    But generations of misguided lawmakers have given them too much to do. This policy brief is a step in the right direction of re-directing BATFE’s efforts toward its legitimate missions of keeping explosives and the weapons which could do the worst harm out of the wrong hands (the same felons Obama just pardoned for breaking the same laws he was still anxious to enforce on law-abiding citizens). To the people saying that enforcement of our national gun laws ought to be in the hands of the FBI, I say that mission falls squarely in Homeland Seciurity’s ambit. Customs and Border Protection’s mission dovetails better with BATFE’s than does the FBI. BATFE ought to be moved over to the Department of Homeland Security and away from the control of the next arch-liberal Attorney General (after the President and Mr. Sessions leave office).

    • badbob February 13, 2017, 2:43 am

      The DHS is just one of the over 2,000 government agencies that should have never been. They don’t meed billions of hollow point ammunition, or 2,600 mind proof armor personal carriers, or 10,500 Real full auto Assault weapons. For a government that only has 30 duties. Since most of those duties are done poorly or not at all and on a national holiday there is no rush hour traffic. Now is our opportunity to rid our self of at least 1,975 of those agencies, Now there might be someone out there that has used one of these government agencies and not have made their problem ten times worse. If there is I don’t know any so speak up.

  • Pete February 10, 2017, 2:59 pm

    Maybe I missed it, but I didn’t see anything about de-regulating suppressors. Until they are functional, ATF is willing to leave them alone. But that isn’t a serious change from the present situation. It would still cost $200.00 to own a working one.

    • JOHN NORMILE February 10, 2017, 10:37 pm

      Ya…i caught that to….

  • CoreyA February 10, 2017, 2:57 pm

    I’m not a big fan of the BATF constantly redefining overly vague legislation, how about Congress just does it job and re-writes the laws so we have some clarity and then we don’t have to wonder what the hell it’s going to happen 4 to 8 years from now when another administration takes over…

    • Levi February 10, 2017, 10:31 pm

      How about the ATF just goes away, along with all their regs.

  • Steven February 10, 2017, 2:50 pm

    The removal of suppressors is a positive thing. The removal of short barreled rifles and short barreled shotguns would be a positive move as well. The removal of the Hughs amendment that froze the NFA registry in 1986 for machine guns would be assume since that amendment is unconstitutional per the 2nd amendment of our constitution. Really abolishing the 1921,1934 and 1968 gun control acts would be the best thing to happen for all US citizens, and fully reinstate our 2nd amendment rights. It’s about protecting our persons and our family. It’s never been about hunting. Laws that restrict our 2nd amendment rights, set us up to be victims. Nation wide concealed carry is also a bold and positive move. The American citizen who can own firearms can be trusted to behave responsibly. If it comes down to it, fighting against an opposing force with single shots, bolt actions or or even semiautomatic isn’t very good when they have full autos rifles and belt feed automatics. Survival is a human right, whether it’s a ratical group, a terrorist, or corrupt government over reaching, we the people have the right to live through the experience. Restoring and leveling the playing field on our 2nd amendment is a good start for that. There are potions out there to abolish the 1968 gun control act, sign it! Pleasuring Congressmen to make these changes is the only way to get it done! Your/our survival as a free people is dependent on this. There has never been a better opportunity with President Trump and a Republican majority in the Congress and Senate.

    • Chris Baker February 11, 2017, 12:12 pm

      Potions? Pleasuring? Did you mean “petitions” and “pressuring” by any chance?

  • elgavilansegoviano February 10, 2017, 2:50 pm

    …….Kind of late in the game!!,…..They were playing tag team all along for 8 years with the Muslim Traitor, they were an extension to his Communist anti Constitution Agenda, now they see that the American people don’t forget,……..Close them down!!,…….

  • Alan Sumrall February 10, 2017, 2:15 pm

    Would love to see them extend the period of antiques that do not involve Federal firearms law from 1899 to 1919. Write your congressman. The anniversary of WWI is coming up and these firearms, including the machine guns of the period are not used in crimes and do not need federal regulation.

  • WEDGE February 10, 2017, 2:11 pm

    As ‘they’ see defeat staring them in the face, the attempt to obfuscate and deflect to avoid total annihilation becomes far more desperate. Example-note how the globalists are now blaming Russia for the likely turn over via election of France and the Netherlands, ala Trump 2017. Take heart, my fellow American Patriots, ‘they’ (the adversaries) are on the ropes and know it. Not a time to let down your guard. This is the time the beaten fight with more ferocity. So lets put them down for good with first telling this ATF shill to stick his ‘policy changes’ where the sun don’t shine. Continue supporting the HPA until passage. The rest will fall into place with continued vigilance and action.

  • Fred February 10, 2017, 2:07 pm

    Please unsubsidized me.

  • wtshimmin February 10, 2017, 12:19 pm

    Reading the article regarding suppressors; the proposal in reality will do little if anything to relieve the ramifications of consumers obtaining fully operational suppressors. According to the proposal, the Tax Stamp will still be required. So, how does this alleviate the potential 8 month waiting period for paperwork processing? Whats taking place is redefining what constitutes an operational suppressor, thus qualifying is as NAF and requiring the Tax Stamp. This redefinition carries impact for the ATF and law enforcement, simplifying in distinguishing when a person is in violation. By defining what the critical component is (needed to form an operational suppressor), i.e., affixed end cap to complete retention of internal components, ATF will no longer need to address the other components. Who ever is touting the proposal for being a benefit to aid consumers, by easing regulations in obtaining a suppressor obviously can’t critically read.

    • kb31416 February 10, 2017, 1:08 pm

      A closer reading reveals that he proposes that congress deregulate suppressors, but in the absence of congressional action, the ATF could modify regulations to exclude many suppressor components.

    • Jimbo February 10, 2017, 1:20 pm

      Didn’t Obummer order the Garands all destroyed?

      • loupgarous February 10, 2017, 3:45 pm

        Yes, and from what I read, the Garands sent back from stockpiles in South Korea were thrown into the Pacific Ocean enroute back to the United States. It’s actually not clear that BATFE had anything to do with that particular act, but repatriation of weapons either made here or which are part-for-part replicas of such weapons is what the policy brief we’re talking about addresses (along with import bans on FALs and other such weapons with more curio value than any potential for use “in the wrong hands”).

        I hope the BATFE looks at Barack Obama’s pardoning of felons in our Federal penitentiaries for breaking the Gun Control Act of 1968, as well as the pardon of a terriorist bimber, and reflects that they now effectively are a tool in the hands of an unscrupulous leftist, racist social engineer who has spoken out repeatedly against the same Constitution he and they swore to uphold before going to work in the Federal government. We’ve already seen that one of the drug pushers Obama pardoned earlier murdered a woman and her two children – and I hope that someone’s keeping track of how many more needless innocent lives Barack Obama took with his pen and his phone – probably because if he’d had a son, the people he was pardoning would look like him.

    • AD Gray February 10, 2017, 9:50 pm

      Removal of the Suppressor from the NFA, says more than your seeing, if removed from The NFA, you would be free to doas you please, legally, with no requirement to pay for a tax stamp!

  • Winghunter February 10, 2017, 11:03 am

    Forget this piecemeal crap! Defund/disband the ATF and retire the current federal agents forbidding them any other job in government! Let the FBI take over the ATF’s responsibilities and repeal ALL infringing laws that have murdered so many of us by keeping us defenseless – Enough of this crap!

    • mcFoo February 10, 2017, 11:39 am

      Agreed- ATF is a leftover relic that should have gone by the wayside with things like Prohibition. ATF is mainly there to enforce tax collection money for gov on three significantly high tax items. A heavy handed collection agency, that’s about it. ;p
      So if they do not go away, and with MJ (Cannabis) becoming legalized at Fed level in the near future, will it become ATFM? lol. Put this dinosaur department out of its misery.

      • Jimbo February 10, 2017, 1:22 pm

        I agree with you, but don’t think the RINOS in Congress will permit it. And the Dumbocrats will tie it up in the courts.

      • DIYinSTL February 10, 2017, 1:38 pm

        You two have the seed of a great idea. Move the F and E to the FBI, change the Bureau name to ATM or ATT (for tetrahydrocannabinol – THC) and return it to the Treasury department.

      • AD Gray February 10, 2017, 9:54 pm

        You seem to have over looked the DEA, who as of now, enforces Drug laws, which Marijuana falls under, that said, I donot foresee Marijuana deregulated at the Federal Level!

      • Chris Baker February 11, 2017, 12:19 pm

        The federal government does not have the constitutional authority to control private citizen’s use of drugs as long as the drugs haven’t crossed state lines. If anyone thinks I’m wrong please show me in the constitution where it says they can do that. Otherwise it falls under the 10th amendment and is forbidden to the federal government.

  • gourdhead February 10, 2017, 10:49 am

    I think this is pathetic. Finally with their richly deserved demise in the near future, these scumbags want to throw a couple of little bones to us peasants. Get rid of their ass. Congress will take care of the silencers and imports as there are already bills in the works addressing both these issues.

    • Charles Moon February 10, 2017, 11:32 am

      Amen, I am a veteran combat infantry. 11B40 mos I have a FFL and have had since 1980,
      30 years or so. I purcased a suppressor Jan.. 2016 finally got it just before the 1 year mark.
      I purchased another in July before obamas jump through more hoops bill went in to effect and am still waiting for the tax stamp on this one to show up. I have called ATF NFA side and asked if mattered that I have had a FFL FOR 30 years. The answer to that was no and theman hung up.
      I would suggest they do the change all the way and not half ass it like some thing are done especially by people that really have no idea what theyare doing in the 1st place

    • Robert February 10, 2017, 1:16 pm

      This is a job for the U.S. Congress, not an agency. Repeal the NFA and GCA.

      The U.S. Congress criminalized our inherent right to keep and bear arms and committed the outright infringements. With Republicans in control of both houses of the U.S. Congress and the Presidency, it’s time to repeal the infringements and restore our rights.

      Anything less is scraps from the table.

      It’s time to put up or shut up.

      Repugnican RINOs opposed to the restoration of our inherent rights need to be thumped in the mid-term elections. The time for action is now.

  • Larry English February 10, 2017, 10:19 am

    Only weapon in 50 years I had blow up on me was an M-1.

    • Homer February 10, 2017, 11:15 am

      Because you are ignorant.

      • WardDiddy February 11, 2017, 1:39 am

        HaHa that’s good. I own a m1 garand and 3 m1as and I’ve never had any problems like that, I guess it’s the difference between people that know how to take care of their weapons and people who obviously don’t.

  • Free Man February 10, 2017, 7:56 am

    I purchased a M1 Garand at CMP (Civilian Marksmanship Program)
    when I learned that OBAMA had BANNED the re-importation from
    American allies because “He” did not want them
    “Falling into the WRONG hands.”
    You know: Law Abiding American Citizens
    I was born in 1950. My Garand was made in 1942.
    AKA: (Day Rifle) the M1 Grand was standard issue in WW II
    It is still good for harvesting deer; and backing off tyrant government.

    • ~ Occams February 10, 2017, 10:40 am

      As WikiLeaks conclusively proved what most of us knew all along, Obama and Hillary created, trained, armed, funded, supplied – and had US Military personal advising (I call that treason; Aiding and abetting) ISIS, while al Qaeda belonged to Bush

      But WE must have laws and restrictions.

      Go figure.

      And this is all moot, anyway, because if I read Trump’s 2nd Amendment stance correctly, existing State Laws would remain in place – even those that SERIOUSLY violate the Constitution.

      • rich February 10, 2017, 10:48 am

        WTF are you talking about?! Obama and Clinton did nothing of the sort. Stop making shit up to support your ignorant lies. And remember, President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton killed Bin Laden. That’s something that little draft dodging bitch W couldn’t, or wouldn’t, do.

        • Tripwire February 10, 2017, 11:00 am

          Troll… Obummer and Klinton killed nobody, AMERICAN military got UBL, The two dipshits sat in a nice safe office and watched it on TV. The word was going to get out that UBL had been located so BHO had no choice but to allow the raid to go forward.
          Now lets discuss your hero Klinton and BHO leaving Americans on the ground and refusing to come to their aid..
          Go away troll, you don’t belong here on this site.

        • Bill February 10, 2017, 11:11 am

          Seriously. Wiki Leaks didn’t “prove” anything. Obama and Clinton are guilty of enough crap without some idiot with confirmation bias making us all look like conspiracy theory kooks. It’s people like this yahoo that give all gun owners a bad image to the no-gun owning public.

          • matthew martinez February 10, 2017, 2:48 pm

            the conspiracy theorists and complaints about OUR former POTUS are half the fun of this site!

        • Bill February 10, 2017, 11:13 am

          Seriously. Wiki Leaks didn’t “prove” anything. Obama and Clinton are guilty of enough crap without some idiot with confirmation bias making us all look like conspiracy theory kooks. It’s people like this yahoo that give all gun owners a bad image to the non-gun owning public.

        • Ronnie February 10, 2017, 11:47 am

          Obama and Hillary didn’t kill Bin Laden. The Military did and the planning of it started the day after the World Trade Centers were destroyed. Obama and Hillary just happen to be on watch when they finally located Bin Laden.

        • wayne smith February 10, 2017, 11:47 am

          “that little draft dodging bitch W” as you called him- not only served in the Air National Guard but is also the one who set up the groundwork to nail Bin Laden- obama didn’t have all that much to do with getting bin laden other than oking it when he was finally located. and i’m thinking obammy hated to kill a fellow muslim and only did it because he feared what would happen if the general public found out that obama had the chance, but did not terminate bin laden.

        • JoshO February 10, 2017, 12:00 pm

          LOL…neither Obama nor the Hildebeast would’ve known which end of the 416 to point at Bin Laden and he couldn’t have been tracked down without Bush era interrogation tactics.

          None of these idiot politicians killed anyone.

          • ChuckO February 10, 2017, 3:32 pm

            That’s not quite right. Hillary had Vince Foster killed before he could testify against her. I had the ORIGINAL crime scene photos of Foster’s death taken buy the Park Patrolman that found his body. He correctly did a 360 view coverage of the body and the area around it. NO WEAPON!!!. The photos released by the FBI to the public clearly showed the supposed “suicide” revolver close to Foster’s body. NOT THERE IN THE ORIGINAL PHOTOS! As a forensic photographer for more than 25 years I am well qualified to analyze crime scene photos to determine their value to a case. A blind drunk monkey could determine that weapon was not there originally!

        • Jonathan C. Wright February 10, 2017, 12:17 pm

          President George W. Bush served in the Texas National Guard along with Senator Lloyd Bentsen’s son during the Vietnam war.
          Remember Vice President Dan Quale? He served in the Illinois National Guard for 6 Years.
          Bill Clinton had a letter ordering him to report for induction, He quickly enrolled into ROTC at the University of Arkansas & had a ROTC deferment. After the draft was put on a lottery system & Bill Clinton had a very high draft number, He elected to drop out of the ROTC program.
          He also went to Russia with Hillary & demonstrated against the war in Vietnam.
          President Barack Obama never served in anything. He was a neighborhood agitator in Chicago, Never run anything, Not even a Dairy Queen. Friends with Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers.

        • David February 10, 2017, 12:41 pm

          Are your for real dude! Navy SEALS killed Bin Laden, and for the record, the lake of human intelligence gutted by Bill Clinton and a Military also gutted by Clinton couldn’t manage Bin Laden and that’s how we got 911 in the first place. No intelligence gathering. Bush got handed that shit stick because of liberal left policies that nearly crippled our CIA, DIA, and the US Military. If your gonna pop your mouth off do it with facts, otherwise don’t expose the fact that you and the rest of your left leaning buddies are ill informed.

      • Keith February 10, 2017, 5:53 pm

        I believe in the United States Constitution. George W. Bush was hostile to the Second Amendment. He wanted to reauthorize the Clinton gun ban that went away around the year 2004. I’m glad he failed in his desires along with the little tyrant Bill Clinton.

        • WardDiddy February 11, 2017, 1:46 am

          I’m not calling you a LIAR, but what Proof do you have of that information

    • Jimbo February 10, 2017, 1:25 pm

      I bid on a Garand, but before the auction was over, that tyrant Cuomo made them illegal assault weapons in my home state (NY). Only way I can bring one in, is to arrange for the bayonet lug to be ground off before it enters, and then register it as an assault weapon.

      • Jake February 10, 2017, 10:20 pm

        The bayonet lug is on the gas cylinder. If you got a Garand will matching original parts, just get a different gas cylinder and grind the lug off. Damned idiot Cuomo.

    • John Bibb February 10, 2017, 4:29 pm

      ***
      HI FREE MAN–also–there were tens of thousands of .30 caliber M1 CARBINES that would have been returned by the South Korean Military to the USA for sale to Citizens or sent to CMP for rebuilding. It wasn’t just M1 Garand Main Battle Rifles. The left’s long time dream is to ban all effective firearms. This was just another “for openers” gambit.
      ***
      Despite clones of both weapons being made by American Arms Companies already.
      ***
      John Bibb
      ***

  • TONY February 10, 2017, 7:48 am

    THEY KEEP GETTING MY HOPES UP. IVE ALWAYS WANTED AN OLD M1 GARAND BUT I DONT THINK THIS WILL HAPPEN.

    • Powder Burns February 10, 2017, 11:16 pm

      I own 2 of them….A National Match .308 and an original 30-06…I’ve owned them most of adult life. I’m 55 years old.. They are highly overrated. They are expensive to shoot. Kick like mules and in most states are illegal for Deer Hunting due to their magazine capacity… Fully loaded they weigh over 10 lbs. which trust me is no fun to lug around anywhere….

  • Ray Z February 10, 2017, 7:43 am

    I had a garand and a carbine in the days when when they were cheap to buy and cheap to shoot. The carbine was a fun gun to plink with and the garand was an inexpensive first high power rifle. The 7.62×39 shell casings were 6″ deep at the rifle range at the club I belonged to at the time. some were steel but most were brass. My boy would go with me, to the club, and pick up brass, and take it to the junk yard, for extra money for dating. Nobody got hurt and shooting was affordable for everybody.

  • Chuck Conrad February 10, 2017, 7:33 am

    NO, NO !
    What ATF gives, it can take away.
    The Republican congress needs to stand up and make the Law clear and Constitutional that American citizens have a Right to arm themselves Not just for sporting purposes !
    Also Congress needs law reform so hat the ATF cannot interpret the law but only carry it out (arm braces, sporting purposes etc.)

    • JOHN T. FOX February 10, 2017, 10:12 am

      AGREED!

    • Steve February 10, 2017, 10:47 am

      AGREED. Also, this is in reaction to the possibility of ATF going bye, bye if I recall past reports properly. Although a positive step (let it happen) I still want the Trump administration to slash ATF and some other agencies. ATF will bend the way the wind blows just to keep ‘its’ job(s). If we were to have another Democrat in office for example …

    • Alan February 10, 2017, 10:51 am

      “Not just for sporting purposes”??
      WHEN was it EVER about sporting purposes????
      There is NO interpretation of the 2nd that could possibly relate to “sporting purposes”.
      BTW, the SCOTUS has made the individual right clear.
      Now, Congress needs to make clear to the Executive branch that Laws are their purview, and that it will not tolerate Executive Orders outside of the Executives purview.
      That was the system of checks and balances our Founding Fathers wanted, and the area that Obama so grossly stepped upon with his illegal “executive orders”.
      And it’s the fault of the CONGRESS for NOT doing their jobs.
      And it’s the fault of the American people for not lambasting their Representatives for NOT lambasting the POTUS!!!

    • Tripwire February 10, 2017, 11:05 am

      Any “rule” can be changed, it’s like a promised “Reduction” on a tax, it’s not a removal, so it can later be raised even higher… No, I say let the Congress if it has the balls remove ATF period. Don’t replace it, give most of it to the FBI as far as actual law enforcement cases. Too many honest people are in prison over paper mistakes.

    • Z February 10, 2017, 11:33 am

      “Admitting that MSRs are commonly used for sporting purposes could significantly decrease the import restrictions imposed under the Gun Control Act of 1968.”

      What are you raging about? That’s the authors comment, not the ATF representative.

    • The Great Gearoni February 10, 2017, 12:54 pm

      Ditto that!

    • Rivahmitch February 10, 2017, 12:55 pm

      Exactly right! The ATF serves NO USEFUL PURPOSE. It’s a key part of that so-called “Domestic Security Force” (aka Obozos Gestapo) designed to keep the Washington cabal secure from accountability to the American citizens.

  • Bill February 10, 2017, 7:17 am

    I’m thinking SBR’s should come off the list but most of the other conditions should probably remain. I think it is ridiculous that you should have to buy a stamp to add a folding stock to some devices.

    I’m not so sure it is a good idea to remove suppressors from the list, though. Yes, people probably have hearing problems related to shooting but it is more common that people are losing their hearing due to listening to music that is too loud or not wearing hearing protection when shooting in the yard or on the farm.

    • Mark February 10, 2017, 10:11 am

      You are not a 2A supporter what so ever. Everything or nothing my friend.

      • Mike February 10, 2017, 10:44 am

        That’s probably a bit harsh. A guy that wants to deregulate SBRs can’t be defined as anti 2A.
        He understates the value of suppressors to the average shooter. It would definitely be easier to introduce people to firearms and get them into the lifestyle. When I’ve brought people to the range, the noise intimidates them.
        If it wasn’t such a pain to purchase, I’d have several, and my ears and others would thank me.

    • bison1913 February 10, 2017, 10:44 am

      I have a gut feeling you are an imposter… trying to twist it to your anti 2A agenda.

      • Z February 10, 2017, 11:37 am

        I have a feeling you’re a troll trying to discourage rational dialogue with inflammatory and unfounded labels.

        • matthew martinez February 10, 2017, 2:50 pm

          no no let him. youre either sporting a tin foil hat or your anti 2A. hes right!

    • Tripwire February 10, 2017, 11:07 am

      Any “rule” can be changed, it’s like a promised “Reduction” on a tax, it’s not a removal, so it can later be raised even higher… No, I say let the Congress if it has the balls remove ATF period. Don’t replace it, give most of it to the FBI as far as actual law enforcement cases. Too many honest people are in prison over paper mistakes.

    • Whyawannaknow1 February 10, 2017, 11:14 am

      In Europe, using a sound moderator is considered desirable as a courtesy to OTHERS. You can buy them without any license, paper work etc. in places like England where you can’t even own a pistol or functional semi auto rifle. They even use them on some of the higher powered air guns.

      Your neighbors probably do not want to be bothered by a few hundred un moderated muzzle blasts as you practice? And same goes for any other shooting near people. I have been waiting only 4 of the estimated 8 months now, and am limiting my rifle practice on my own property due to some neighbors who work 2nd shift.

    • JoshO February 10, 2017, 12:24 pm

      And your point about suppressors is? You sound like someone who hasn’t ever seen one in person and is under the impression (impressed upon you by Hollyweird) that you can kill someone in a hotel room and no one else on the floor will know!

      Your opinion about the main causes of hearing loss is irrelevant. There is no reason why suppressors should be regulated AT ALL, not even by a back ground check. They should be an off the shelf item like a box of ammunition.

    • DIYinSTL February 10, 2017, 1:48 pm

      I’m counting on memory here and I’m sure to be corrected if wrong. The NFA was enacted during the height of the Great Depression and supressors were included only to keep them from being used to poach game or livestock. If you’re starving and can’t afford a can of beans, you certainly can’t afford $200 to make poaching easier.

      • Mahatma Muhjesbude February 11, 2017, 1:44 pm

        Well, DiyinSTL, that would be the short bullshit government history answer, but it does not represent the true method behind the madness of this first major effort to begin the formal disarmament of the populate. The NFA was actually a reaction to the fear of the proliferation of Organized Crime and the future potential for organized ARMED political opposition/ resistance to an emerging nascent Totalitarian socialism based on the plans of a post WWI established American power elite under full cooperation by the POTUS at any given time.

        The instant anonymous purchase of over the counter cash and carry surplus of military grade full auto combat weaponry and artillery to the general public struck fear in the hearts of the closet Marxist politicians who had visions of Totalitarian socialist sugar plums dancing in their heads.

        Back then they weren’t so ‘ballsy’ in terms of outright stated hatred of the 2nd/A as the Democratic Totalitarians are today, because Americans still had a profound respect for our Constitution. So they just made slippery ass laws and initiated the first phase of one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the public. The more honest reason for the silencer ban included in the NFA was that it would supposedly limit the relative ‘ease’ of which attacks could be carried out without detection allowing the perps/resistanc fighters/ etc. to more easily escape unnoticed. Same reason today with the ShotSpotter technology starting to proliferate everywhere…which, of course, is the real reason, the ATF is so anally ‘retentive’ of their dedication to keeping silencers off of potential armed political dissent.

        The early 20th century government politics is fascinating all the way to the present in reference to the steady intentional agenda based erosion of our rights and ability to direct a government by consent of the people. You can easily connect the dots proving that it never was about crime prevention or public safety.

        That’s why it is so imperative to take back our control over the government the way the Framers allowed us to do any time we had enough of feckless greed and power control. But, of course, we have to be FREE from all firearms restrictions that can eventually, in any way shape or form be used to disarm us, if we don’t want to have the inevitable slavery that always comes soon after they take your guns.

  • jeremy Watson February 10, 2017, 6:51 am

    To allow for looser regulations on new imported rifles or firearms in general allows for easier foreign made arms to be sold, cut and compete in the market of U.S. produced products manufactured by US workers, where the income of those workers is disposable income to prop up the revenue of small business owners of their communities.

    To purchase foreign produced products, you support the laborers, manufacturers and communities outside your region and your country.
    VERY UNPATRIOTIC! USA, USA!!!

    • Mark February 10, 2017, 10:17 am

      …And they buy our mostly crappy US made guns in return and the world goes around,

    • Jocko February 10, 2017, 10:26 am

      You obviously do not believe in free trade. I believe that the less fortunate among us still deserve the right to purchase good quality, affordable defensive arms at a price point they can afford and that just can’t happen with made-in-the-USA-only firearms. Also, there are just as many if not more US jobs created from the selling, upgrading & gunsmithing of imports. I think it’s a win-win myself. And don’t call me unpatriotic. I served my country during Vietnam and even though I’m getting old now I’d do it again tomorrow.

    • Z February 10, 2017, 11:51 am

      Are you making a random statement? You aren’t replying to the article. The importation of previous US manufactured rifles has nothing to do with foreign made imports.

  • jtaylo February 10, 2017, 5:35 am

    How about making all those semi M-14 like I used in boot camp-USMC- in the ’60’s available for sale by CMP

    • Elnonio February 10, 2017, 6:14 am

      They were semi only because of the lock. They were perfectly capable of automatic fire, which makes them “machine guns”.

      • JOHN T. FOX February 10, 2017, 10:13 am

        AGREED!

      • JOHN T. FOX February 10, 2017, 10:14 am

        NEWSFLASH, ANY FIREARM CAN BE CONVERTED INTO A “MACHINE GUN” THEY DID IT WITH BOLT ACTION RIFLES AND ANY SEMI-AUTO IF THE SEAR WEARS DOWN OR IS FILED OFF GOES FULL AUTO!

        • Jake February 10, 2017, 11:47 am

          John Browning’s first full auto prototype was an 1894 Winchester. The Pederson Device allowed an M1903 bolt gun to convert quickly into a full auto firing a .30 caliber pistol cartridge.

          • Tom February 10, 2017, 2:56 pm

            The Pedersen device converted the Mark 1 1903 Springfield into a semi auto rifle not a full auto and I own one.

        • Z February 10, 2017, 11:55 am

          A “full auto” bolt action rifle. You idiot.
          Have you ever looked up the definition of a, “machine gun”? I’m fairly certain if you pulled your head out of your ass, like a groundhog checking for his shadow, you’d realize that a bolt action rifle can’t possibly be turned into a machine gun.

          • Jake February 10, 2017, 10:31 pm

            You remove the bolt and replace it with something resembling a Pederson Device with a selector and you could have a full auto weapon installed on a bolt gun. It would not be a bolt gun with the accessory mounted in place of the bolt. I suppose you cannot imagine Browning turning an 1894 lever gun into a full auto weapon either? You happen to be very rude in addition to being an uninformed ignoramus.

        • Mahatma Muhjesbude February 11, 2017, 1:57 pm

          Yeah, Fidel Castro was an expert at converting anything they could lay their hands on into full auto weapons. I saw some pictures once in an intelligence file of common Winchester lever actions converted to full auto, LOL!

      • DIYinSTL February 10, 2017, 1:51 pm

        Sure, they are full auto capable but they were also manufactured before 1986 and therefore transferable. I’d pay the extra $200 for a real M-14.

  • Patrick February 10, 2017, 5:28 am

    While I like the suggestion of eliminating the NFA altogether it is probably too large of a first step. So let’s dismantle it piece by piece by removing suppressors and SBRs. This is similar to the approach taken by the left when trying to dwindle gun rights. Chip away and make the changes seem less drastic.

  • Tar Heel Realist February 10, 2017, 4:44 am

    “they (M1s Garand & Carbine) have been denied importation and sale rights due to unreasonable “public safety concerns” from previous administrations.”

    I can’t recall ever reading or hearing a story about crimes being committed with a Garand or Carbine…I doubt the “Thug Life” would even know how to load an en-bloc or let alone know the difference between a .30 cal carbine round and a .30 cal Garand round.

    • James Thomas February 10, 2017, 6:29 am

      Not trying to take the anti gun side by any means. And I generally agree with your comment on Garands and M1 Carbines. But there is dash cam video on YouTube of Laurens Co Deputy Kyle Dinkheller being shot multiple times and dying by a crazy Vietnam vet with an M1 Carbine. It’s very disturbing video and audio. You never see Dinkheller. But you here him screaming and calling for help. And you clearly see the guy and the M1C blasting away at the car.

      • Mike February 10, 2017, 7:23 am

        He was killed because he was previously disciplined for being too aggressive and hence failed to act appropriately during the traffic stop you mentioned. He was more afraid of losing his job than his life. He had plenty of opportunity to smoke that crazy veteran. The type of rifle used to kill him should not be relevant.

      • Dan Forbey February 10, 2017, 7:26 am

        And? I’ve been a full-time cop for almost two decades and I’ve never seen either an M1 Garand or a Carbine used in a crime. Both are so ignored by criminals that any value in their prohibition is vastly outweighed by the esteem credited them by patriotic Americans. Cops die. Tragic, but it ain’t the gun’s fault.

      • srsquidizen February 10, 2017, 8:02 am

        That’s just one crime. Everything that can possibly kill a person has been used to do that and might have a video on YouTube by now.

        Here in Kansas a few years back we had a murder committed with a muzzle-loader. And I read about one with a crossbow. Should black powder and archery weapons, which at one time were also used in warfare, be banned from import as well?

      • Joe McHugh February 10, 2017, 10:33 am

        James Thomas, so a miscreant used an M1 Carbine to shoot a lawman. I’m shocked, I tell you shocked! Um ………would it have been better if the killer used a brand new Caliber .308 Remington semi-automatic rifle to kill the lawman? I mean a .308 cartridge has at least twice the power of the M1 Carbine ammunition. Heck, the bad guy wouldn’t have needed to shoot him nearly as many times to get the desired effect. One .308 bullet entering the lawman in the left upper arm, while he was sitting in his cruiser, would have shredded both lungs and his heart before exiting his body and blasting through the passenger’s door.

        How many times does it take to get the point over. It’s the bad people who misuse firearms, not the guns that should be outlawed. Oh, wait! I’m almost sure that it IS already illegal to kill innocent people. So what are we to do about the behavior of the bad guys? Here’s a thought, lock them up and throw the key away. Make the criminals who threaten, injure and kill innocent people with guns, stay in prison until they need a walker to get from the bed to the toilet. It’s not a “mistake” to threaten an innocent person with a lethal weapon.

        And the people who have not misused guns yet? Call me crazy but I think such people are referred to as “law-abiding” citizens. No one can tell what another might, or might not do with a gun. There is a word that is used a lot without much thought, namely the word “trust”. We either trust our fellow man with things like guns, cars, heavy equipment, etc.or we don’t. The only way one can guarantee that someone will not misbehave is to lock him up before he can break a law. Tell you what, I’ll lock you up, and you stay confined for the rest of your life so no one needs to worry about what you MIGHT do with a “dangerous” firearm.

        James, you played the Devil’s advocate well, but you didn’t present the other side of the argument. A citizen could acquire a fully charged and operational WWII flame thrower, walk down a busy city street and not be breaking a law. Yep, walking around with a device that could incinerate a crowd of people at a corner, waiting for a green light, is not illegal. What would be illegal would be to use that fearful instrument as designed. Owning a flame thrower is not illegal, misusing it is.
        That’s exactly what the Second Amendment states, “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be be infringed.” Politicians make laws to control guns because it looks like they are “doing something about crime”, they are not.

    • Jake February 10, 2017, 11:59 am

      Right after WW2, gangster Bugsy Siegel was ventilated with an M1 Carbine by an unknown assailant in Hollyweed. Carbines are underrated. It is really a full stock subgun. The .30 Carbine round is the most powerful submachine gun round. 2,000 fps with a 110 grain slug it outclasses the 9mm and .30 Tokarev. It would have been much more effective if it had been slowed to 700-800 rounds per minute in the M2 selective fire version which runs around 1,200 plus per minute. The .30 Carbine also has nearly three times the ft. lbs. of energy as the vaunted .45 acp. It is a wicked CQB choice with soft point rounds.

      • loupgarous February 10, 2017, 4:01 pm

        Carbines are not, as such, “really full-stock subguns”. You’re mixing up the M1 semiautomatic carbine with the M2 selective-fire carbine.

        Also, while the .30 M1 carbine round is a compromise between pistol caliber carbines and the less controllable high-power rifles with short barrels and either no stocks or flimsy folding ones, it’s not the best compromise or even as good as, say, a Ruger 10/44 in a bullpup configuration (which would put that cartridge’s awesome terminal ballistics in a more controllable weapon) for CQB – or Col. Jeff Cooper’s proposed “Thumper” 10mm Norma carbine/submachine gun. H&K used to make “MP5/10” and “MP5/40” versions of their iconic MP5 machine pistol/carbine (in 10mm Norma and .40 S&W, respectively), but problems with them led the firm to discontinue them. Which is a shame, but the firearms industry took a step back from 10mm Norma for pistols because few manufacturers could build one that stood up to the number of practice firings military and police users must put their sidearms through (I think we never really found out if Bren Tens were also prone to “premature disassembly mode” because of their relative expense and shortages of spares, even magazines. Most Bren Tens are probably resting comfortably in gun safes as I write this)..

        • Jake February 10, 2017, 10:37 pm

          If you read more carefully you would see where I stated M2 regarding the selective fire version. My statement of the .30 Carbine being the most powerful sub gun cartridge stands. There are hundreds of thousands of M2’s opposed to some nonexistent theory gun or failed prototype.

      • loupgarous February 10, 2017, 4:24 pm

        Looking at a GOOD carbine for CQB, I’d like to expand my previous remarks on H&K’s machine pistols: their UMP, a less expensive and complex follow-on to the MP5 series, comes in .45 ACP, .40 S&W as well as 9mm Parabellum. Used to be a civilian semi-only version with a Clinton ban-compliant thumb hole stock, but that went the way of all good things in 2013.

  • Bob Silcox February 10, 2017, 4:38 am

    As an avid shooter I would love to be able to use a suppressor just to keep the noise down. I have shot weapons all over the USA and the biggest complaint by everyone has been the noise involved with shooting. Criminals do not buy $1000 dollar suppressors to rob a store for a couple of bucks, that’s just wrong headed thinking by idiots.

    • Jake February 10, 2017, 12:49 pm

      Idiots see TV shows where bad guys use “silencers” on revolvers and think it’s real. I saw a movie with Arnold where an assassin had an M-14 with a suppressor that made no sound except a tiny “pffft” All the anti-gun crazies see this and think you can hide somewhere and shoot with no sound.

  • Joe February 10, 2017, 4:20 am

    Promises Promises…..
    I’ll believe it when I see that rifle in my safe…

  • DRAINO February 9, 2017, 7:00 am

    Nice ideas/gestures. I appreciate his thoughts. But wouldn’t it be better to just repeal the entire unconstitutional NFA AND the ’68 Gun Control Act??? Let’s get to the heart of this thing and stop trying to put lipstick on the pig. If it infringes…..get RID of it!!! PERIOD! Stop playing the middle in an effort to “end the govt gridlock” and do what needs to be done. “Reaching across the aisle” and compromising freedoms is a BAD THING!!! You can’t compromise freedoms and think its for the greater good. That’s one of the biggest LIES the people have been tricked into.

    • Steve kara February 10, 2017, 5:08 am

      Wow bravo to you sir. 100 percent agreed. Coming from communist California.

    • M1 Garand February 10, 2017, 5:44 am

      Getting government to trim anything regulatory, is like cutting or eliminating taxes. They really do believe it is their duty and right, to interfere in our lives.
      Any movement that cuts red tape, or reconnects American Citizens with their God Given rights, has to be a plus. Limits on the 2nd Amendment by any government agency, local, state, or federal, should be illegal.

    • Ken W. February 10, 2017, 7:44 am

      Damn straight! Each and every infringing law and regulation must be swept away once and for all and by all I mean in a way that makes it impossible to ever enact again.

    • Michael Keim February 10, 2017, 11:48 am

      You’re absolutely right! I would like to add that nowhere in the Second Amendment does b it mention hunting or sporting purposes. Any politician that mentions either one is just another anti gun dirt bag.

    • SGT-N February 10, 2017, 1:19 pm

      Also, Congress needs to eliminate the Hughes Amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 that prohibits the sale of new machine guns to law abiding citizens!

    • Robert February 10, 2017, 1:32 pm

      End the piecemeal garbage. The Republicans control the U.S. Congress and the Presidency. If the time for complete repeal is not now, when will it be?

      Throw out any RINO bum who blocks the restoration of our inherent right to keep and bear arms in the 2018 mid-term elections.

    • loupgarous February 10, 2017, 4:03 pm

      I agree. It’s safer for the citizenry all around to remove statutory authority a Federal agency doesn’t need to exercise, than to count on them never to abuse that power.

  • Justin Opinion February 7, 2017, 5:55 pm

    I like to think that my article swayed his point of view. That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it!

  • Tom Horn February 7, 2017, 3:51 pm

    So, who has all these surplus M1 Garands and Carbines? Are these rifles the American taxpayers purchased for/gave to South Korea, the Philippines, and such, and now the American public will be able to buy them back? Glad to have them back. Perhaps it will drive the price back down to military surplus level prices (unless you collect them as an investment).

    • Silver Back February 10, 2017, 5:31 am

      I believe the price of M1 Garand and carbines will most definitely drop. I’ll be ready to pick up a few immediately. This is all very good news. I just hope this doesnt end up taking three or four years to be implemented.

      • MarkOwen February 10, 2017, 7:55 am

        Pick up a couple for my collection hell, I just want ONE to take to the range.

      • Jonathan D Olenick February 10, 2017, 10:44 am

        Wait, don’t import them yet and lower the price until I sell my M-1 Garand. Jon.

    • Mike February 10, 2017, 7:09 am

      Many of the NATO member countries have used and retired the Garand. That’s why you can buy Greek HXP surplus 30-06 ammo from the CMP in bulk.

      Most US allies were issued these rifles back in the fifties and sixties, and they’ve been sitting in storage for decades now- still technically US property.

  • Fred Ziffle February 7, 2017, 2:17 pm

    I would be much more excited if President Trump fired the lot and shuttered the needless and anti-Constitutional ATF. It has always been a redundant agency, doing what the FBI quite capably do.

    • James M February 7, 2017, 10:03 pm

      Seems like they feel the breathe of the executioner down the ATF’S neck. And have chosen to conform in hopes of survival. Guarantee we will see alot more doing the same since Trump is tossing any and all who choose to resist.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend