Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by glockman66, Jul 19, 2020.
But if the SC rules that it's a fee, not a tax, then it's cool with them.
If you are referring to the Roberts decision on the mandate for the "Unaffordable Care Act", then it is the other way around.
The party of the one drop rule strikes again.
Sure sounds like infringement to me.
He wants civil war.
The $200 NFA tax is a making and transfer tax. Not a registration tax. So you could keep what you have by filling out a form but no longer buy or sell on the used market.
I in no way support a gun ban. But we shouldn't go around making stuff up by stating you will have to pay $200/gun to keep what we already have. It makes us look uninformed and ignorant and nobody takes uninformed, ignorant people seriously.
If the Democrats win big in November they are going to try to pass some sort of gun ban in the next few years. Our best hope would be filibusters in the Senate. But they won't get everything they want. They would like a Beto/Swalwell confiscation program but will take what they can get.
One big wildcard would be if those NFAC idiots start shooting at property owners trying to defend their businesses and homes from "its OK, they have insurance" looters. Give people a reason to fear groups of private citizens openly carrying AR-15s they are going to vote for politicians that promise to ban them.
I never wrote any of what is referenced in your post. I didn’t make anything up.
I wrote in response to the OP, that what is in the OP “sounds” like infringement.
If you believe that the information in the OP is “made up” you should be taking up the issue with him.
It would/will be like 2013 when states, cities and counties will tell the feds to go pound sand. And the Balkenization of the USA will continue to gain steam.
If its time to hide them its time to use them. Die on your feet; or live on your knees.
This is more proof that Biden is just a placeholder. All throughout his decades-long political career, he has been relatively moderate as far as liberal Democrats go. These new policies are an extreme Left shift, even for him. He is saying what he's told to say, he's not in control anything whatsoever. I knew he was going to (be forced to) choose a Lefty like Harris for VP, because the idea is to get the extreme Left into power. Joe is just the bridge.
And by the way,
1. Title II items are still transferable (ie buy/sell, new or used). In fact, (provided the Title II item is legal in the “home” state) Title II items may be transferred from individual to individual (no FFL) within the same state.
2. The NFA requires registration of Title II items, and the paid tax is a requirement (among other things) for registration for an individual.
3. The Biden proposal to require registration of “assault weapons” and “high capacity magazines” under the NFA is located right at Joe’s website; and references a Gifford Center document (which references registration, transfer and $200 tax). Neither is clear about how the registration would be implemented; but from the reference to Gifford’s document and the wording at Biden’s site one might reasonably infer that there would be a $200 tax per firearm and magazine.
How's the NY safe act working out? Didn't most of the affected gun owners refuse to comply?
Fair enough. This didn't start with the OP, there was an article on Brietbart that said the same thing about the $200 fee and it popped up on a lot of gun sites. Sadly, conservative writers often don't know much about guns and gun laws just like their left-wing colleagues.
I don't think the NFA requres a $200 fee to register a gun, at least it didn't in 1934. But the NFA is just a law and congress has amended it before and can do so again. What Biden has on his website is a wish list that includes every antigun proposal the left has proposed except for the mandatory "buyback" Beto and Swallwell proposed. But wish lists don't usually become law. Remember building a wall along the whole southern border and repealing Obamacare? Platforms are easy, getting it passed is much harder.
Biden is bad for gun rights and if he wins I am sure he will sign every piece of anti-gun legislation that makes it through congress. But I am tired of places like breitbart exaggerating the facts so they can get more clicks on their website.
Steve Scalise: ‘Joe Biden Wants to Take Our Guns Away’
AWR HAWKINS 10 Aug 2020
Well, for this thread - if it didn't start with the OP - then where did it start? The OP referenced the Brietbart article, which referenced an op-ed. You don't have to go very far to see where this (BB/Op-Ed) came from, you only have to visit the biden site.
The NFA in 1934:  requires registration of Title II items,  requires a "tax stamp" of $200 or $5, and  other procedures which have changed along the way till present.
You might argue that existing items didn't require the $200/$5 fee (tax stamp) to register items owned at the time (pre-1934), but that was a long time ago and doesn't effect us now. The Biden/Giffords proposals imply that there would be a $200 fee for registration of "assault weapons" and "high capacity magazines" [political terms] along with other requirements.
I don't see the implication (under the biden/gaffords proposals) that this would be an annual fee.
Not only was registration free in 1934 it was also free in the 1968 amnesty. The amnesty was not a big deal outside of the class 3 community so there is not a lot of information but a search on "1968 nfa amnesty fee" will provide a lot of links. It looks like the guns were registered using the same form as someone buying an existing weapon but did not require the $200 tax stamp. I get the impression a background check was required though. But since you were registering a weapon it was a felony to own I am not sure what the point of the background check was.
He doesn't discuss fees but the guy at forgotten weapons has an interesting video about the 1968 amnesty at https://www.forgottenweapons.com/what-you-didnt-know-about-the-1968-machine-gun-amnesty/ .
The odds are pretty good that both of us have done more research and know more about the NFA than whoever wrote that part of Biden's platform. The left often seems to be proud of being completely and totally ignorant of all things gun related. They wear their ignorance like a badge of honor. Biden's website gives a good idea of what he is promising his base, basically every anti-gun proposal they can think of. But don't expect it to factually accurate.
Just say No to Joe and the Ho