kenpoprofessor
Member
oldslurrydog1 said:Entertaining thread for sure, but I think that XJThrottle has a point.
Of course you do, I wouldn't expect any less.
Clyde
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
oldslurrydog1 said:Entertaining thread for sure, but I think that XJThrottle has a point.
YNOTAZ said:TheAccountant said:I think you read the wrong post.
Nope he asked if there was a flaw to AZ11----'s logic and I responded. I could have been overtly sarcastic and said, what logic but I said: rolling over and doing nothing because you will likely loose insures that you will loose.
But I'm on AZ---'s ignore list because snowflakes can't handle contrary opinion whether they are right or wrong. Their narcissism demands that they be right ergo, ignore.
AZ1182 said:Having the appearance of being right even under false pretenses, seems to be a bigger priority for our resident clique of Walter Mitty-minded boomer-gentsias rather than being authentic, accurate, honest, and being truthful about the subject.
Can two opposing views be correct at the same time and still peacefully coexist? Yes.
Is this often recognized? Nope!
Differences can cause growth, being petulantly stubborn will never do anything and this thread even with the professor that professes his ignorance 24/7, proves it.
In how many years have the same fudds argued relentlessly with same three persons favoring stocks and paying for it, were able to change the same three minds? Zero.
In how many years has the same clique of cantankerous boomy-boomers were able to change anything with the developments in DC that harms our freedoms, by wanting to infight with us? None.
This is what my friends in law enforcement or doing private detective work, would call a clue.
Jack Dupp said:Is this the softer, gentler Clyde 2.0? I would have expected Clyde to offer up an arse-kicking before the end of the 2nd page! Where is Clyde 1.0 and what have you done with him??
The difference is that it is illegal to tax a Constitutional right.XJThrottle said:kenpoprofessor said:TheAccountant said:Pay a fee, submit fingerprints and forms, take a class, and have your personal information entered into a database to get your CCW and you’re a “real” gun owner. Pay a fee and submit fingerprints and forms for a SBR and you’re a “collaborator” or “fudd.” Makes sense.
Ah, I was wondering when our local Democrat would pop in.
Clyde
Is there a flaw to his logic in regards to this post? Don't recall anyone getting bashed for getting a CCW/CWP. It's typically promoted. Concealed carry is a constitutional right WITHOUT all the steps, yet are praised by getting the check mark from the man. What's the difference here?
A_C Guy said:The difference is that it is illegal to tax a Constitutional right.XJThrottle said:kenpoprofessor said:Ah, I was wondering when our local Democrat would pop in.
Clyde
Is there a flaw to his logic in regards to this post? Don't recall anyone getting bashed for getting a CCW/CWP. It's typically promoted. Concealed carry is a constitutional right WITHOUT all the steps, yet are praised by getting the check mark from the man. What's the difference here?
The difference is the CCW is OPTIONAL, you don't need a CCW to exercise your 2nd amendment rights. It is an alternative to having a background check on each new purchase in AZ. It also allows us to carry in certain places where non CCW holders may not carry. It is a one time fee for all uses, not like the $200 tax on a $79 brace that is due and payable for each and every brace in your gun safe; for some people, the NFA stamps will add up to thousands of dollars plus the year long wait for each one.
The NFA system makes it difficult to transport an item, sell an item, modify an item (modifications to a suppressor are illegal). Your wife/spouse may not be allowed to be in possession of an NFA item unless you have a trust and she is listed. Your sons/daughters can not use your NFA items unless you are there with them. The restrictions on NFA item usage are onerous. I sold a suppressor, the buyer had to wait a year to take it home. I had to keep it in my safe for a year storing for him.
A_C Guy said:CCW is not a tax. It is optional, it is a fee we pay to expedite a process (no 4473 delays). If you don't want to pay for a CCW, you can still buy a new pistol, you just have to wait in line a little longer. My CCW just moves me into the express checkout line ahead of you.
No one is saying that you must buy a CCW retroactively. This NFA pistol brace move is retroactive.
Not having a CCW does not limit your use of your firearms. This NFA rule will limit your use of your pistol braced AR.
My logic may not be 100% sound in your opinion, but the initial post comparing the CCW to the NFA is a poor one; apples to oranges.
As Clyde points out, the appeasement of paying the NFA tax is just another step towards voluntary surrender / confiscation.
TheAccountant said:A_C Guy said:CCW is not a tax. It is optional, it is a fee we pay to expedite a process (no 4473 delays). If you don't want to pay for a CCW, you can still buy a new pistol, you just have to wait in line a little longer. My CCW just moves me into the express checkout line ahead of you.
No one is saying that you must buy a CCW retroactively. This NFA pistol brace move is retroactive.
Not having a CCW does not limit your use of your firearms. This NFA rule will limit your use of your pistol braced AR.
My logic may not be 100% sound in your opinion, but the initial post comparing the CCW to the NFA is a poor one; apples to oranges.
As Clyde points out, the appeasement of paying the NFA tax is just another step towards voluntary surrender / confiscation.
This is California logic. They impose “fees” because they don’t have the votes to impose a new tax. At the end of the day it’s money out of your pocket and into the state coffer. There isn’t a difference.
Beyond that, you missed the point. Nobody is arguing for the NFA. The point was there’s this attitude on this board, which I’ve never seen on any other board, that having NFA items is bad because you had to register. The point was that if you look at the process to register, it looks very similar to what people do to get their CCW, but somehow that’s viewed as a good thing around here.
At the end of the day, CCW or NFA, you are paying money to the government, giving your personal information, and waiting for permission to fully exercise your 2A rights. Neither are mandatory to carry or possess a firearm, but if you want to carry in certain places you must have a CCW and if you want to have certain firearms you must register under NFA.
I‘ll repeat this again just to be clear - I don’t agree with either regime. I posed the original question for someone to explain why people here think one is bad and one is good.
YNOTAZ said:A cut and paste from other "narcissists" or just roll-over and play dead:
SB Tactical:
Did you know that a NFA Tax Stamp for every brace is the fastest way to a willful submission to a National Firearm Registration?
Apparently they didn’t get the hint the first time. Back in December 2020 we got the ATF to remove their proposed rule change. This was a loud and clear message that we did not want them messing with our rights.
Somehow, this was taken as a suggestion to try again but THIS TIME with spreadsheets and bad math, as if all of the millions of gun owners were really just asking for their rights to be reduced to a points system “if it pleases the crown.”
Make no mistake they are coming for your braces, no matter who made it. They are coming for your receivers, and even the very definition of a “firearm” to arbitrarily remove your rights.
We are once again asking you to stand your ground by supporting the process, and submitting a comment when the Federal Register Posts. To beat them back and re-think whether the largest demographic of firearm ownership REALLY wants more gun control.
We will provide links, you just need to provide 5-10 minutes of your time to tell them what you really think (without cuss words).
A_C Guy said:The difference is that it is illegal to tax a Constitutional right.
The difference is the CCW is OPTIONAL, you don't need a CCW to exercise your 2nd amendment rights. It is an alternative to having a background check on each new purchase in AZ. It also allows us to carry in certain places where non CCW holders may not carry. It is a one time fee for all uses, not like the $200 tax on a $79 brace that is due and payable for each and every brace in your gun safe; for some people, the NFA stamps will add up to thousands of dollars plus the year long wait for each one.
The NFA system makes it difficult to transport an item, sell an item, modify an item (modifications to a suppressor are illegal). Your wife/spouse may not be allowed to be in possession of an NFA item unless you have a trust and she is listed. Your sons/daughters can not use your NFA items unless you are there with them. The restrictions on NFA item usage are onerous. I sold a suppressor, the buyer had to wait a year to take it home. I had to keep it in my safe for a year storing for him.
You have never been on AR15 . com?TheAccountant said:The point was there’s this attitude on this board, which I’ve never seen on any other board, that having NFA items is bad because you had to register.
They are as different as apples and oranges.The point was that if you look at the process to register, it looks very similar to what people do to get their CCW, but somehow that’s viewed as a good thing around here.
TheAccountant said:I‘ll repeat this again just to be clear - I don’t agree with either regime. I posed the original question for someone to explain why people here think one is bad and one is good.
A_C Guy said:They are as different as apples and oranges.
My CCW opens opportunities for me both in state and out of state; plus it is OPTIONAL.
NFA creates more restrictions in state and out of state; and it is MANDATORY.
To claim they are similar is very misleading and deceptive.
YNOTAZ said:A_C Guy said:They are as different as apples and oranges.
My CCW opens opportunities for me both in state and out of state; plus it is OPTIONAL.
NFA creates more restrictions in state and out of state; and it is MANDATORY.
To claim they are similar is very misleading and deceptive.
WOW, some people just don't understand the difference between CCW and NFA registration.
A_C_Guy, You missed another small be very important part in that ridiculous comparison.
Drive from Arizona to a neighboring state without permission, with your NFA legally registered weapon and you are subject to a $250,000 or $500,000 fine and up to 10 years in prison.
In order to get that kind of sentence in Arizona for any firearms violation;
you have to further an act of terrorism with a firearm
use a firearm in a street gang shooting into a residence THAT IS OCCUPIED
sell a weapon to a person that you know is going to commit a felony.
You could be trafficking in weapons for financial gain to street gangs and you will only be subject to a maximum of 8.75 years under Arizona law.
rhetorical question is 10 years and $250,000 different than 8.75 years even though one is likely to cause death and the other is a joy ride?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.