Search found 4 matches

by flintknapper
Sat Mar 01, 2008 9:53 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Obama In San Marcos
Replies: 29
Views: 3245

Re: Obama In San Marcos

McKnife wrote:Thanks for the explanation.

Happy to do it Sir!
by flintknapper
Sat Mar 01, 2008 8:03 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Obama In San Marcos
Replies: 29
Views: 3245

Re: Obama In San Marcos

McKnife wrote:
quidni wrote:We need another Ronnie Reagan.




Now we're talking!
Was it not during Ronnie Reagan's term... the end of funding to register machine guns with the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of May 19, 1986?

How is he good? I'm confused.
Quidni and I... are of course speaking about his "entire" term as President and not about any particular "snapshot" of that time period. We are not basing our opinion of the man on a "single" subject or event.

But since you asked, if we look at the effect the FOPA had on gun owners...it adds a little balance to your charge.

Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986

The FOPA (99th Congress, S.49), also known as the McClure-Volkmer Act, significantly amended GCA68, providing gun owners some positives and some negatives. Specifically:

• Opens up interstate sales of long guns on a limited basis.

• Allows interstate transport of firearms in some circumstances. (Do not try to check in at a New York airport without NY permits. When you declare your firearms, they may arrest you).

• Makes it illegal for anyone to transfer a firearm to a prohibited person.

• Provides any prohibited persons can get relief of their disability by applying to the Treasury Secretary. This has been repealed in practice by the program being specifically unfunded in the federal budget.

• It prevents the government from creating a list of gun owners from dealer records.

• Limits the number of inspections on a dealer by the BATF without a search warrant.

• Allows FFL holders to engage in business away from their normal business location, if at a ‘gun show’ in their home state.

• Allows ammunition shipments through the US Postal Service (a repeal of part of GCA68). • Ended record keeping on ammunition sales, except for armor piercing (the real stuff, not what Kennedy calls armor piercing).

• Prohibits civilians from possessing full-auto firearms manufactured after May 19, 1986.

• Redefines 'machine gun' to include those sets of parts or parts that could be used to convert a semiautomatic firearm into a machine gun.

• Adds serious drug offenses to the list of crimes receiving enhanced penalties.

• Doubles the penalties for use of a machine gun, silencer or muffler in a violent federal felony.

• Eliminates the FFL requirement for ammunition only dealers.

• Specifically states that those disposing of personal firearm collections do not need an FFL and to get an FFL firearms do not have to be a principle business activity.

The majority of the amendment is spent reducing the power of the BATF, who had a reputation for abusing its power

And you want to complain about this??????


Actually, this is what happened:
The Hughes Amendment

The restrictions on full-auto firearms are a result of the Hughes Amendment (99th Congress, H.AMDT.777). The amendment prohibited the general public from possessing fully-auto firearms manufactured after May 19, 1986. Rep. William Hughes (D-N.J.) proposed the amendment late in debate and at night when most of the members of the House were gone. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), a long proponent of gun control, was presiding over the House at that time and a voice vote was taken. Despite the fact that the bill appeared to fail, Rep. Rangel declared the amendment approved and it was incorporated into House Bill 4332. Once passing the House, H.R.4332 was incorporated in its entirety into S.49. The Senate passed the final S.49 on April 10, 1986 by voice vote and it was signed by the President on May 19, 1986.


Yes, President Reagan signed it....and in doing so..got gun owners a pretty darn good deal IMO.
by flintknapper
Thu Feb 28, 2008 9:04 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Obama In San Marcos
Replies: 29
Views: 3245

Re: Obama In San Marcos

quidni wrote: We need another Ronnie Reagan.

Now we're talking!

:thumbs2: :patriot:
by flintknapper
Thu Feb 28, 2008 6:56 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Obama In San Marcos
Replies: 29
Views: 3245

Re: Obama In San Marcos

fm2 wrote: That makes me very nervous, that people can get so emotionally committed and not have the foggiest idea where they are going.

Bingo!

Return to “Obama In San Marcos”