Why Are Short Barreled Rifles Actually Regulated in the US?

[Paladin]

Why Are Short Barreled Rifles Actually Regulated in the US?



Very interesting discussion on SBRs.

[Grayling813]

Why Are Short Barreled Rifles Actually Regulated in the US?

Because the Supreme Court was too weak to strike down the NFA as unconstitutional, which led the way for future courts to weasel out of striking down further infringements.

[Paladin]

The sensible thing is to remove these from the NFA and add penalties for felons in possession and criminal misuse. The current law ONLY impacts law abiding citizens.

[Jose_in_Dallas]

The sensible thing is to remove these from the NFA and add penalties for felons in possession and criminal misuse. The current law ONLY impacts law abiding citizens.

I would definitely say more stringent penalties for criminals in possession. I agree, only law abiding citizens are being punished for following the letter of the law.

Off subject but somewhat related. We are seeing a rash of these Glock switches being used in crimes. There was a guy busted recently in the DFW area for selling them. Not sure that the penalties are stringent enough to deter this stuff.

[anygunanywhere]

The sensible thing is to remove these from the NFA and add penalties for felons in possession and criminal misuse. The current law ONLY impacts law abiding citizens.

I would definitely say more stringent penalties for criminals in possession. I agree, only law abiding citizens are being punished for following the letter of the law.

Off subject but somewhat related. We are seeing a rash of these Glock switches being used in crimes. There was a guy busted recently in the DFW area for selling them. Not sure that the penalties are stringent enough to deter this stuff.

No penalties are strict enough to prevent any criminal from doing criminal stuff. These switches that make pistols full auto are about the stupidest firearm accessory in existence and are valuable only to gang bangers who want to be seen as gangsters. There is an obvious penalty for breaking laws that will guarantee a criminal never again does criminal stuff but society has no stomach for it. It seems that society has the stomach to tolerate the carnage, death and misery caused by criminals and are intent to allow it to continue.

[Paladin]

Haynes v. United States

Haynes v. United States, 390 U.S. 85 (1968), was a United States Supreme Court decision interpreting the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution's self-incrimination clause

...As with many other 5th amendment cases, felons and others prohibited from possessing firearms could not be compelled to incriminate themselves through registration.[3][4] The National Firearms Act was amended after Haynes to make it apply only to those who could lawfully possess a firearm. This eliminated prosecution of prohibited persons, such as criminals, and cured the self-incrimination problem.

...The original Haynes decision continues to block state prosecutions of criminals who fail to register guns as required by various state law gun registration schemes.

[Grayling813]

Haynes v. United States

Haynes v. United States, 390 U.S. 85 (1968), was a United States Supreme Court decision interpreting the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution's self-incrimination clause

...As with many other 5th amendment cases, felons and others prohibited from possessing firearms could not be compelled to incriminate themselves through registration.[3][4] The National Firearms Act was amended after Haynes to make it apply only to those who could lawfully possess a firearm. This eliminated prosecution of prohibited persons, such as criminals, and cured the self-incrimination problem.

...The original Haynes decision continues to block state prosecutions of criminals who fail to register guns as required by various state law gun registration schemes.

….’To ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the law abiding gun owner that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless”……

Lysander Spooner

[The Annoyed Man]

I watched this video a week or 2 earlier. It pretty much covers the stupidity of the sausage making that went into the NFA.

[Excaliber]

Haynes v. United States

Haynes v. United States, 390 U.S. 85 (1968), was a United States Supreme Court decision interpreting the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution's self-incrimination clause

...As with many other 5th amendment cases, felons and others prohibited from possessing firearms could not be compelled to incriminate themselves through registration.[3][4] The National Firearms Act was amended after Haynes to make it apply only to those who could lawfully possess a firearm. This eliminated prosecution of prohibited persons, such as criminals, and cured the self-incrimination problem.

...The original Haynes decision continues to block state prosecutions of criminals who fail to register guns as required by various state law gun registration schemes.

….’To ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the law abiding gun owner that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless”……

Lysander Spooner

So then.....

If someone fails to register his braced pistol within the 120 day amnesty period, he joins the privileged class of felons - right?

At that point, is he no longer required to register said gun because doing so would incriminate himself?

Of course presumably he could still be charged with the possession.