Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Lamacorn t1_ir7x192 wrote

Reply to comment by Spirit117 in Reported Shooting at University of Arizona by OakTeach

But you can still get them, so I don’t really know what your point is.

−1

Spirit117 t1_ir7z0x7 wrote

If you count a 200 dollar tax stamp to the ATF, a fingerprint check, 6 months of your gun waiting in ATF jail before you can take possession of it, plus the cost of the gun itself, as something that "just anyone" can get. You also need to request prior written approval from the ATF to take them out of state lines from the state they were registered in.

There's no national gun registry, but there is one for NFA items, the ATF knows exactly who owns what and where it is supposed to be - violating the NFA is a 10 year prison sentence if you're lucky. If you're unlucky they'll no knock you and shoot your dog in the process. If you're really, really unlucky, it was actually your neighbor they were after and they no knocked the wrong house.

Sure you can get them but it's like..... Who's got time to jump through all those hoops?

Also, most automatic weapons had to have been manufactured before 1986 to be eligible for private ownership - which creates a limited supply which drives up price. Your basic bitch milspec AR15 costs 500 bucks from your nearest gun shop, a fully automatic eligible for transfer pre 86 ban M16 probably will cost you 15 grand.

But sure, just anyone can get these.

−3

Mr_Bad_Example20 t1_ir7znu3 wrote

But why does anyone need one

−6

Spirit117 t1_ir80y6x wrote

That question is irrelevant. The fact that the NFA itself hasn't been overturned or amended says the entire govt for the last 90 years agrees that "not just anyone can have these, if you want one of these, you gotta jump through extra hoops".

I can't find a single example of a mass shooting being committed with a properly licensed NFA weapon in the USA..... because there's no reason to use one.

The closest you can get is the Vegas shooting where the dude used bump stocks, which at the time were legal to own for anyone, and have since been reclassified as machine guns and now fall under the jurisdiction of the NFA.

5

Mr_Bad_Example20 t1_ir81ug6 wrote

In that case, I guess we need to heavily restrict handguns, since they're the most commonly used gun for homicides in the US.

−7

Spirit117 t1_ir825yt wrote

Heller Vs DC already settled that. It says you can go pound sand :)

6

Mr_Bad_Example20 t1_ir82tdm wrote

I'm aware of heller v dc. I was merely using your "logic" that if automatic weapons aren't needed to commit mass shootings then maybe the weapons that are readily available to commit them need to be (well) regulated more. Also, I own guns.

−2