Mega Rad Gun Thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
There is an interesting development going on in West Virginia.

It appears that at least one member of the West Virginia legislature is trying to get around the NFA, GCA and Hughes Amendment by creating some kind of state monopoly on machinegun sales by creating an "Office of Public Defense" as part of the West Virginia State Police
Screenshot_20260223-152222.png


Bill Text

The supposed basis for the feasibility of this is claimed to be found 18 USC 922(o)(2)(A)

Which reads
"a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof."

So basically, this lawmaker, and Gun Owners of America believe that there's a loophole in the NFA allowing for state level machinegun sales. As a transfer BY a state, is perfectly permissible
1771879587134.jpeg

Will this work? Probably not, but its worth a shot.

@AnOminous
Thoughts?

 
Last edited:
AGPinochet said:
There is an interesting development going on in West Virginia.

It appears that at least one member of the West Virginia legislature is trying to get around the NFA, GCA and Hughes Amendment by creating some kind of state monopoly on machinegun sales by creating an "Office of Public Defense" as part of the West Virginia State Police
View attachment 8610502


Bill Text

The supposed basis for the feasibility of this is claimed to be found 18 USC 922(o)(2)(A)

Which reads
"a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof."

So basically, this lawmaker, and Gun Owners of America believe that there's a loophole in the NFA allowing for state level machinegun sales. As a transfer BY a state, is perfectly permissible
View attachment 8610478

Will this work? Probably not, but its worth a shot.

@AnOminous
Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I like it. This should be fun.
 
AGPinochet said:
There is an interesting development going on in West Virginia.

@AnOminous
Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Well, it certainly raises some interesting issues. I couldn't actually predict an outcome. I'd say no before Heller, but maybe now. It seems unlikely Congress will directly do anything about it (at least immediately), so the feds would have to rely on existing law and try to enforce their interpretation against the state.

If they did it would probably ultimately be decided by an historically pro-2A SCOTUS.
 
AGPinochet said:
There is an interesting development going on in West Virginia.
Click to expand...
someone sent me that legislation and my first thought was "Florida should open the Department of Selling Sick Ass Machine Guns to People" but fucking mountain hillbillies might get them first 😤
 
DocAwe said:
After you buy your state sold MG does it get treated like any other pre 86 mg?
Can I sell it if I get tired of it?
Click to expand...
From the linked bill text: "(2) Subsequent Transfer. Should a Qualified Person to whom a Machinegun has been transferred under this Act subsequently wish to transfer that Machinegun to another Qualified Person, such transferor shall present the Machinegun to the Office and, for a fee of $275 payable by the new transferee to the Office of Public Defense, the Office shall transfer such Machinegun to the new transferee and issue a new certificate to that Person. In the case of a transfer of a Machinegun to an heir or other beneficiary of an estate following the death of the Machinegun’s original owner, the representative of the estate shall follow the same procedure listed in this subsection, provided that the fee for such transfer to any heir or other beneficiary shall be $0."

If I'm reading that correctly, you don't get to directly transfer it person to person like a normal pre-86 transferable. Instead, you transfer it back to the State and the State then transfers it to whoever you are selling it to.
 
Taser Confetti said:
If you’ve got 15-20K to drop on ammo for prepping you should be dropping the money on things like water filtration, solar panels w/ batteries, backup generators and etc IMO.
Click to expand...
"You can't eat ammo."
Pretend To Imagine said:
I’m definitely not a pepper, and I think a lot of them are very silly.
Click to expand...
Maybe the real peppers were the KF friends we made along the way.
Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa said:
If I'm reading that correctly, you don't get to directly transfer it person to person like a normal pre-86 transferable. Instead, you transfer it back to the State and the State then transfers it to whoever you are selling it to.
Click to expand...
LOL. LMAO, even. Fuck that.
 
What do you all think about the democrats trying to enforce gun control? Why are they so insistent on taking as much of your 2nd amendment rights away whenever a tragedy happens?
 
Payne in the Max said:
What do you all think about the democrats trying to enforce gun control? Why are they so insistent on taking as much of your 2nd amendment rights away whenever a tragedy happens?
Click to expand...
1. Mini Mike "The Kike" Bloomberg has an all consuming hatred of firearms because he cannot come to the realization that many negroes cannot be trusted with them, and as a result believes nobody should have a gun, he funds the entire anti-gun activist apparatus
2. They represent populations with lots of negroes who shoot each other, to save dey keedz negroes vote in support of banning guns
3. Democrats want to implement Gay Race Communism

Now keep in mind, Libtards do all this while at the same time believing Jaquandinarous shouldn't be punished for having a Glock wit dat muhfuggin switch because subconsciously they view negroes as retarded children who cannot be held accountable for their actions.
 
Payne in the Max said:
What do you all think about the democrats trying to enforce gun control? Why are they so insistent on taking as much of your 2nd amendment rights away whenever a tragedy happens?
Click to expand...

They want to change the country in drastic, unpopular, un-American ways and want to do so unopposed. What the Dems want to do would be literal tyranny and they know that the Second Amendment was literally put in place so that American citizens can stand up to tyranny. Democrats hate America and the Constitution. They are traitors.
 
Payne in the Max said:
What do you all think about the democrats trying to enforce gun control? Why are they so insistent on taking as much of your 2nd amendment rights away whenever a tragedy happens?
Click to expand...
The guys at the top might be worried about what will happen to them if they try to do tyrannical things, but the left also has a whole lot of true believers/useful idiots who push for gun control at a grassroots level. (Never mind the funding from billionaires to bus these people around, buy them signs, give them media coverage, etc.)

Anti-gun liberals often have a kind of maladaptive compassion where the thought of shooting someone, or even having the ability to shoot someone, is so unpleasant that they will deny basic facts rather than acknowledge that sometimes you do need a gun. If you try to speak with anti-gunners about why you might need to kill someone, they tend to follow a pretty consistent train of thought. If you can convince them that violent criminals exist and might hurt them, they'll think of police or less lethal options like pepper spray and tasers. You can explain that each of these options is unreliable and that a gun is the only reliable way to stop a motivated criminal, but even then they'll try to weasel out of acknowledging that killing someone might be the only option if they want to live. Since they don't know much about self defense law, they usually suggest warning shots, shooting criminals in the leg, etc. If you can keep the conversation going long enough and get them to admit that sometimes the only options are shooting a criminal in the vitals or letting the criminal victimize you, they'll usually end up saying something like "I dunno man, I just don't think that I could shoot somebody." They might also throw something in about how criminals need rehabilitation and social programs, as if that's relevant when a criminal is attacking you in real time.

There are also the liberals who take the privilege hierarchy to its logical endpoint and assume that criminals have less privilege than legal gun owners, so self-defense is oppressive somehow. These people are simply retarded.

Since they can't conceptualize any good reason to own a gun, and they don't understand that gun control doesn't reduce crime, gun control seems reasonable to them. They have a utopian vision of everyone holding hands and singing kumbaya, and can't imagine that banning guns would just leave us getting stabbed like the British.
 
Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa said:
Anti-gun liberals often have a kind of maladaptive compassion where the thought of shooting someone, or even having the ability to shoot someone, is so unpleasant that they will deny basic facts rather than acknowledge that sometimes you do need a gun.
Click to expand...
They also often admit that they'd kill themselves or go on a killing spree if they owned a gun.
 
Null said:
someone sent me that legislation and my first thought was "Florida should open the Department of Selling Sick Ass Machine Guns to People" but fucking mountain hillbillies might get them first 😤
Click to expand...
I don't see Florida making machine gun ownership easier. Florida, after all, banned bump stocks and FRTs.
 
quaawaa said:
They also often admit that they'd kill themselves or go on a killing spree if they owned a gun.
Click to expand...
whenever someone pulls up that stupid ass stat (you know the one) and starts ignorantly spouting about how "ackstually having a gun in your house makes it MORE likely for you to commit suicide! or spontaneous mass murder! or say curse words! or listen to gangsta rap!" this song starts playing in my head
Payne in the Max said:
Why are they so insistent on taking as much of your 2nd amendment rights away whenever a tragedy happens?
Click to expand...
an unfortunate part of that is once they do, none of the supposed pro-gun republican politicians ever put effort into reversing it or even stopping it. all of them are complete fakes, even trump is anti-gun, he banned bump stocks and his admin's response to the pretti shooting was horrific. not saying democrats are any better, they clearly aren't as we all have seen but neither side of the elite will ever come to our aid which is why the 2nd amendment exists to begin with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom