General Discussion

DanTex

(20,709 posts)

64. So are you saying I'm wrong? That's a serious question.

Fri Apr 26, 2013, 04:18 PM

Apr 2013

I've never sold an NFA gun, so maybe my understanding is actually wrong. I don't think I'm wrong, but I don't feel like digging through US legal code. This shouldn't be that difficult a question to settle.

Just tell me if you're disputing the fact that NFA guns require a fee and a registration transfer with the Federal Government, even if it is a private, in-state sale.

If you're disputing that, then maybe someone else on this board has transferred an NFA gun in-state and can tell us what the process is.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

92 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The problem gun reformers face [View all] ProSense Apr 2013 OP

The bottom line is that pipoman Apr 2013 #1

No, that's not the "bottom line" ProSense Apr 2013 #2

Another false NRA talking point. They just keep flowing... DanTex Apr 2013 #3

"talking point" "talking point" pipoman Apr 2013 #4

Maybe look into why nobody with a clue about constitutional law has even hinted that DanTex Apr 2013 #5

Dan, are you not aware of the interstate commerce clause of the Constitution? Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #9

Are you not aware of the NFA, which requires intra-state sales between private citizens to be DanTex Apr 2013 #17

Would you quit scaring billh58 Apr 2013 #23

Dan, intra-state sales between private citizens already gets a background check. Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #41

Intra-state means within the same state. DanTex Apr 2013 #44

What provision of the NFA governs sales within the same state? Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #49

If you sell an NFA gun to someone within the same state, you need to transfer the registration. DanTex Apr 2013 #56

Dan, I'll ask again. Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #60

So are you saying I'm wrong? That's a serious question. DanTex Apr 2013 #64

Dan, all I'm asking you to do is prove your claim. Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #73

I'm not sure what you are trying to argue here. DanTex Apr 2013 #74

Ain't it tough splainin to folks who can't get their "nomenclature" correct. Hoyt Apr 2013 #53

Hoyt, I dont' actually know the difference between a magazine and a clip. Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #55

Guns are far from "progressive." Hoyt Apr 2013 #68

You don't think that the right of self-defense is a progressive value? Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #71

The right of self-defense and the right to own a gun are different things. DanTex Apr 2013 #72

I don't recall seeing a Constitutional Amendment that guarantees you to be free from gun violence. Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #75

The constitution also doesn't say anything about self-defense either. DanTex Apr 2013 #76

Are you a 100 pound woman? Typical gun cultist BS. Hoyt Apr 2013 #80

Instead of insulting me, why don't you address the point I raised? Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #81

I could put a bunch of photos of shot kids, give us a break and stop promoting more guns. Hoyt Apr 2013 #87

And the weapons restricted under NFA pipoman Apr 2013 #54

Whether guns are in common use or not has nothing to do with commerce clause or states' rights. DanTex Apr 2013 #58

It has everything to do with NFA registry... pipoman Apr 2013 #61

The "NFA Registry" is not part of the constitution. DanTex Apr 2013 #65

Dan, so basically what you're saying is that because the Fed regulates machines guns one way... Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #78

Constitutionally, yes. DanTex Apr 2013 #79

Dan, let's get real here. Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #82

You are confusing the commerce clause and the second amendment. DanTex Apr 2013 #83

No, I didn't! Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #84

OK, I think this is where I hop off the crazy train. DanTex Apr 2013 #85

No, all I'm asking is that you prove your claim. Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #90

The ONLY reason that the NFA pipoman Apr 2013 #88

About the constitutional scholar thing. DanTex Apr 2013 #47

So then why didn't it happen praytell? pipoman Apr 2013 #57

Umm, because there weren't enough votes in the senate. DanTex Apr 2013 #59

How do we explain the several Democrats who didn't vote for it? pipoman Apr 2013 #62

They are right-wing Dems like Max Baucus. DanTex Apr 2013 #67

Now, let's be specific: NRAtalkingPoint™ No. 20358 Eleanors38 Apr 2013 #6

In other words, nobody with a clue has any doubts about the constitutionality. DanTex Apr 2013 #7

So the ACLU has gone over to the Dark Side? Eleanors38 Apr 2013 #8

The ACLU didn't say it was unconstitutional. DanTex Apr 2013 #13

Dan, a national gun registry is prohibited by law. Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #10

Wow, you guys don't even know about NFA! Fascinating! DanTex Apr 2013 #12

Yes, I am aware of it... Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #43

That wouldn't affect the commerce clause or the Federal Government's jurisdiction. DanTex Apr 2013 #45

No, it would. Alva Goldbook Apr 2013 #51

Miller was a second amendment case. The "unusualness" matters to the second amendment, DanTex Apr 2013 #52

Where is this registry? former9thward Apr 2013 #11

LOL. So not only do you not know what a "Harvard Study" is, you also don't know about the NFA. DanTex Apr 2013 #14

I thought the NFA was a registry for certain firearms, like machine guns, premium Apr 2013 #15

I didn't say "all firearms". But the NFA is most definitely a national gun registry. DanTex Apr 2013 #16

Thanks for the reply. premium Apr 2013 #18

Of course, not of all firearms. DanTex Apr 2013 #21

I tend to agree with you, premium Apr 2013 #22

You never know what Scalia and Co are going to do, but DanTex Apr 2013 #25

Except there is no way to register existing guns using the NFA model hack89 Apr 2013 #39

NFA 1934 umt9 Apr 2013 #35

Thanks. premium Apr 2013 #42

Has it never ever prevented 1 criminal? Poor logic. Since one is able to get an illegal weapon.... uppityperson Apr 2013 #46

Re-read my post umt9 May 2013 #92

LOL. former9thward Apr 2013 #19

The percentages don't affect the constitutionality question. DanTex Apr 2013 #20

I am still waiting for you to disprove one fact presented in that study. former9thward Apr 2013 #30

Amazing, you're still standing by it! Even after it was shown to you that it is right-wing DanTex Apr 2013 #31

Wow a typo! former9thward Apr 2013 #32

LOL. Using false data is not a "typo". DanTex Apr 2013 #33

That dog don't hunt any more. upaloopa Apr 2013 #26

It only takes one person to challenge and you can bet on that person being out there somewhere.. pipoman Apr 2013 #63

It also takes money and a court willing to hear it upaloopa Apr 2013 #77

The money will be there through lobbying groups like NRA pipoman Apr 2013 #89

No it isn't Progressive dog Apr 2013 #66

thye unsolvable problem actually is : we already have 200 million guns librechik Apr 2013 #24

Your last few words billh58 Apr 2013 #28

Yep. Zoeisright Apr 2013 #69

From the article... rrneck Apr 2013 #27

So the GOP is counting on the ignorance of the American people. DanTex Apr 2013 #29

Nothing but falsehoods. former9thward Apr 2013 #34

Uh huh. "There's no loophole". Where have we heard that talking point before? DanTex Apr 2013 #36

Why did you post falsehoods? former9thward Apr 2013 #37

I think everyone outside the NRA bubble understands that you are the one posting falsehoods. DanTex Apr 2013 #38

a "friendly top"? former9thward Apr 2013 #40

"Loophole" pipoman Apr 2013 #91

Yes. rrneck Apr 2013 #48

Maybe their problem is the outright contempt that they have for millions of Democrats and AnotherMcIntosh Apr 2013 #50

Speaking of NRA propaganda billh58 Apr 2013 #70

The problem they face: Goobers rustydog Apr 2013 #86