Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Trailrider #896

$200 per semi-auto and per mags over 10rds

Recommended Posts

Well, you knew something like this was coming: Biden is proposing a $200 tax and registration under the NFA 1935 for each semi-auto rifle (nothing said...yet...about semi-auto shotguns)...OR...sell your gun to  the gub'mint! (At what price?) Same for each magazine with a capacity over 10 rounds!  Failure to comply could result in a $10,000 fine and possibly jail time!  :angry::angry::angry:  That'll get those nasty guns off the street...right?  Wonder if they will be able to raise the funds to pay for the buy-backs...OR...build prisons to house all those who choose not to comply?  IF the Dems get control of the Senate this could come to pass, and it would likely be upheld by SCOTUS as a tax, not confiscation. :wacko:

 

In other news from the "land of the free", the governor of Oregon has told people who spot their neighbors in gatherings exceeding six people, to call the police!  Anyone know the English translation of the Russian words to the Internationale?  We may need to learn them!

Happy(?) Thanksgiving, Pards!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gonna be a lot o' rusty water in local lakes....  <_<

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 There are tens of millions of pistol and rifle magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. None of them have a serial number which would be required for listing as an NFA or any other type identifiable regulated item. Plus the sheer numbers and as long as they have been in circulation qualify them for a common usage item. I don't see that passing any legal test.

 

The weapons themselves, so called assault rifles and anything with a folding arm brace will be a little easier to pursue with that draconian and unconstitutional line of persecution but again the sheer numbers of these things in private hands, 20 plus million ARs and AKs alone not counting the 1001 other types of mag-fed semi auto rifles out there, banning them won't pass legal muster because again they are a commonly owned and used item.

 

These anti-American and Bill of Rights hating democrats will indeed try but it will wind up at the Supreme Court for a final decision. Unless of course these anti-American and Bill of Rights hating democrats succeed in packing the Supreme Court with their liberal activist anti-American and Bill of Rights hating judges.

Edited by Dantankerous
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Senate runoff races in Georgia are kind of important for the next two years, As are the mid-term elections two years from now.

 

And two years later, we will need viable candidates to go against the Harris-Sanders ticket (assuming Biden is no longer coherent).

 

Unless there is court packing during that time, there is a SCOTUS backstop in place.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take a chill pill everyone. No bill has been floated and nothing is even in committee, nor will be anytime for some months if at all. We’ve a long way to go before then. 
 

Until then, I’d like to enjoy the holidays as best I can in this &$:*@ year. I’m planning on having a splendid thanksgiving with my lovely wife. 
 

Cheers! :)

 

Edited by Abilene Slim SASS 81783
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't consider my Model 8 Remington an assault rifle, but I know people who do.  Semi-auto, five round internal magazine introduced in 1906 and made in 1921. 

 

Same with my 1911 pistol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been wanting a Mossberg 930 JM Pro, and just found out a 940 version has been available for months!

 

But my lady wants a Saiga which has bigger magazines.

 

Don't tell Shotgun Joe about any of them, please. If he actually looks at and compares the ballistics of a 12 GA to a .223, we will be screwed. Heck, if he compares the ballistics of any hunting rifle to the .223...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taxation without representation.

Me thinks we have a Constitution, Boys. 
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taking $200 out of the pocket of an honest citizen should really curb the crime rates..... NOT!

 

..........Widder

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Patagonia Pete said:

Don't worry ... they will probably legalize weed first ... 

 

85596349_felixweed1.jpg.fb6e2e5b706e9f4bc385e11696945231.jpg

funny yet not , this is exactly why ive thought there was a move to legalize , i know thats not the general trend thinking but what better way to make the general public complacent ??? 

 

just far fetched enough to be true ? then assume it is , what better way to make the general populace complacent - government controlled pot distribution ? OH YES that could control the section of the communities that riot and burn and loot , no black helicopters here - wont need them 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the anti-gunners want to do is one thing. What they're likely to get is another. Silently they're admitting that Beto O'Rourke's proud boast that he was going to take away all of our AR-15s and AK-47s is a little easier said than done.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

Taking $200 out of the pocket of an honest citizen should really curb the crime rates..... NOT!

 

..........Widder

 

 

If the time comes where this proposal is made in earnest, I will be asking all of my friends who voted Biden, "Why does Joe hate poor people?" and "Why should only the rich be able to defend themselves?" Then watch them try to justify things.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2020 at 7:16 PM, John Kloehr said:

The Senate runoff races in Georgia are kind of important for the next two years, As are the mid-term elections two years from now.

 

And two years later, we will need viable candidates to go against the Harris-Sanders ticket (assuming Biden is no longer coherent).

 

Unless there is court packing during that time, there is a SCOTUS backstop in place.

That's a big assumption that Bernie will be coherent in 4 yrs. He's slightly older than Joe. I think they're both likely to be dead.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DocWard said:

 

If the time comes where this proposal is made in earnest, I will be asking all of my friends who voted Biden, "Why does Joe hate poor people?" and "Why should only the rich be able to defend themselves?" Then watch them try to justify things.

 

Doc, you will be met with a wall of deflective arguments and fogging, both traits they learn early and well.   -_-

 

After all, the fact that one of their "elected officials" does something illegal, unconstitutional, unethical and immoral flat out pales when compared to the Donald possibly having said something rude to one of them years ago.  :wacko:

 

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are scarier rumors floating around about future changes if Dementia Joe is the ultimate winner, more still if the R's lose Georgia. Keep the faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2020 at 9:40 PM, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said:

Taxation without representation.

Me thinks we have a Constitution, Boys. 
 


True. 
 

But I’ve been trying to connect the dots between Biden’s executive pedigree and his comments, and it leads me to thinking he might go all ‘pen and phone’ on the U.S. and use an EO to define the scary rifles in a way to get them regulated under the NFA of 34, or to convolute a definition already in the law so it will apply to AR/AK rifles. 
 

The taxation is already in place, the administrative structure is there — all it takes is a little expansion of a definition and it’s done. 
 

Shouldn’t be possible, but that doesn’t seem to slow some people down much. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Ozark Huckleberry said:


True. 
 

But I’ve been trying to connect the dots between Biden’s executive pedigree and his comments, and it leads me to thinking he might go all ‘pen and phone’ on the U.S. and use an EO to define the scary rifles in a way to get them regulated under the NFA of 34, or to convolute a definition already in the law so it will apply to AR/AK rifles. 
 

The taxation is already in place, the administrative structure is there — all it takes is a little expansion of a definition and it’s done. 
 

Shouldn’t be possible, but that doesn’t seem to slow some people down much. 

Then we should March on Washington. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2020 at 6:42 PM, Abilene Slim SASS 81783 said:

Take a chill pill everyone. No bill has been floated and nothing is even in committee, nor will be anytime for some months if at all. We’ve a long way to go before then. 
 

Until then, I’d like to enjoy the holidays as best I can in this &$:*@ year. I’m planning on having a splendid thanksgiving with my lovely wife. 
 

Cheers! :)

 

Actually in the 116th Congress, HR 5717 has all this in place

Next Congressional term it will be back with a new number,

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To tax, you must assess.

To assess, you must inspect and inventory.

Inspectors will demand exorbitant salarys and large life insurance policies due to short life expectancy.

I'm old and I don't care.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joke Um quite wrong you think they they assessed the value of Class 3 weapons, .......not..........

You bought a $500 Glock, $200 for the Glock and $600 for the 3 magazines, for the paltry sum of $800 you

can keep your $500 Glock?!  Seems fair..............................You don't pony up and jpoin the NRA

and contribute extra $$$$$, you won't have anyone fighting this.

The NY lawsuits against the NRA were to drain the funds they would have given the Trump campaign!!

They have no money to fight this unless we step up,!!!

Pay now with cash or pay later with your guns!

Edited by Dutch Nichols, SASS #6461
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dutch Nichols, SASS #6461 said:

Joke Um quite wrong you think they they assessed the value of Class weapons, .......not..........

You bought a $500 Glock, $200 for the Glock and $600 for the 3 magazines, for the paltry sum of $800 you

can keep your $500 Glock?!  Seems fair..............................You don't pony up and jpoin the NRA

and contribute extra $$$$$, you won't have anyone fighting this.

The NY lawsuits against the NRA were to drain the funds they would have given the Trump campaign!!

They have no money to fight this unless we step up,!!!

Pay now with cash or pay later with your guns!

 

Hear! Hear! 1000  Thumbs Up!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I wrong here or doesn’t this tax on firearms and mags have to passed by Congress/Senate?? There may be enough pro gun Dems to help us out. Joe Manchin is rated A by the NRA!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Rye Miles #13621 said:

Am I wrong here or doesn’t this tax on firearms and mags have to passed by Congress/Senate?? There may be enough pro gun Dems to help us out. Joe Manchin is rated A by the NRA!

 

Not a tax....just a processing fee.  Just ask Chief Justice Roberts.

 

LL

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NFA is already law of the land: United States v Miller.  The NFA 1934 was designed to require all owners of the covered firearms to register and buy a tax stamp and no transfer in the future until such time as the tranferor obtained permission to transfer to the transferee.  The way the Democrats have this worded is that by XXX date all owners of the newly covered firearms must obtain a tax stamp from the ATF and then if they choose to sell in the future, the transfer will take place under the current rules. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2020 at 4:42 PM, Abilene Slim SASS 81783 said:

Take a chill pill everyone. No bill has been floated and nothing is even in committee, nor will be anytime for some months if at all.

 

House Resolution #5717 has been floating around for quite awhile.


• 30% tax on all firearms
• 50% tax on all ammunition
• $500 fine for each violation
• $50 million yearly for attorney general budget
• Colleges and Universities are gun-free zones
• Expanded Red Flag laws
• Mandatory 21 years minimum age for purchase or transport
• Mandatory Federal gun owner license
• Mandatory Federal license annual background check
• Mandatory gun locks
• Mandatory secure storage
• Universal background checks with CA DROS type data
• Warrantless searches of gun stores and records

 


 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Muleshoe Bill SASS #67022 said:

The NFA is already law of the land: United States v Miller.  The NFA 1934 was designed to require all owners of the covered firearms to register and buy a tax stamp and no transfer in the future until such time as the tranferor obtained permission to transfer to the transferee.  The way the Democrats have this worded is that by XXX date all owners of the newly covered firearms must obtain a tax stamp from the ATF and then if they choose to sell in the future, the transfer will take place under the current rules. 

That was for fully automatic weapons.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Rye Miles #13621 said:

That was for fully automatic weapons.

 

Or other firearms such as short barrelled shotguns, etc.  What the demos are proposing now is to include AR-15, AK, most semi auto pistols and rifles a bunch of semi auto shotguns into the NFA classed firearms and thus they would be now considered NFA weapons.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Muleshoe Bill SASS #67022 said:

Or other firearms such as short barrelled shotguns, etc.  What the demos are proposing now is to include AR-15, AK, most semi auto pistols and rifles a bunch of semi auto shotguns into the NFA classed firearms and thus they would be now considered NFA weapons.

 

Let's say that happens and everyone complies. It would be impossible to process all that paperwork. NFA item paperwork takes 12 months average per application to process. Can you imagine waiting 152 years to get your NFA tax stamp back on a semi-auto 22 pistol?

 

Logistically this is not doable.

 

They'll cash your $200 check and that will be the end of it.

 

Of course, if the "buyback" offers $10K per gun there will be very few NFA applicants.

Edited by Dantankerous
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that the original language for NFA included handguns. They only excluded those at the last minute to ensure passage of the bill.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eventuality you'll have to just say "no".  Then be ready to back it up.  Worrying about who might pass what law or regulation is yesterday's thinking.  See what Mr. Thomas Jefferson says about the "Tree of Liberty".

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2020 at 9:40 PM, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said:

Taxation without representation.

Me thinks we have a Constitution, Boys. 
 

Think back to Obamacare/ACA and Robert’s justifying individual mandate because it was a tax, although, remember back, we were told it wasn’t a tax, keep your doctor, keep your plan. Think about it, just like the IRS enforced a so called “health policy”, if this goes through, the IRS will be the one enforcing gun control policy, not the justice department. Judge Robert’s, I’m afraid will once more go along with it.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Dirty Dan Dawkins said:

Think back to Obamacare/ACA and Robert’s justifying individual mandate because it was a tax, although, remember back, we were told it wasn’t a tax, keep your doctor, keep your plan. Think about it, just like the IRS enforced a so called “health policy”, if this goes through, the IRS will be the one enforcing gun control policy, not the justice department. Judge Robert’s, I’m afraid will once more go along with it.

If gun owners don’t rise up and fight they can all go to hell, in my opinion. Everyone makes a lot of noise and bluster then they just b!tch and roll over. 
 

If we don’t fight we deserve what we get. 

Edited by Pat Riot, SASS #13748
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said:

If gun owners don’t rise up and fight they can all go to hell, in my opinion. Everyone makes a lot of noise and bluster then they just b!tch and roll over. 
 

If we don’t fight we deserve what we get. 

Just to be clear, who can go to hell? The gun owners that don’t fight, the bureaucrats, or both?

 

The unchecked, unbridled, unaccountable bureaucracy is as much or more of a threat than the politicians. The way I see it, the bureaucracy runs more than we’d like to admit or know.  The courts green light them while Congress generally remains dead-locked, their main purpose ginning up anger, sowing discord  and fear every couple of years.

 

image.jpeg.535dfc7d7c0bed244b887f6f904c8c7a.jpeg

Edited by Dirty Dan Dawkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said:

If gun owners don’t rise up and fight they can all go to hell, in my opinion. Everyone makes a lot of noise and bluster then they just b!tch and roll over. 
 

If we don’t fight we deserve what we get. 

I agree with you but how do we fight? Who do we fight? Do you mean actual armed resistance? That could get really ugly!! I assume you mean at the ballot box?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.