Senior ATF Official Proposes Loosening Gun Regulations

Reports have shown that the second-highest-ranking official at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives recently wrote a proposal to reduce gun regulations—including examining a possible end to the ban on importing assault weapons into the United States. However, for many, that may not be the most exciting part. What about loosening the regulations on Short Barreled Rifles (SBR), or deregulating suppressors?

ATF Logo
Read the white paper by clicking here.

Ronald B. Turk, associate deputy director and chief operating officer of the ATF, in a “white paper” called for removing restrictions on the sale of gun suppressors. He also proposed initiating a study on lifting the ban on imported assault weapons among other things.

“Restriction on imports serves questionable public safety interests, as these rifles are already generally legally available for manufacture and ownership in the United States,” Turk wrote of the ban on imported AR-15s and AK-style weapons.

The 11-page white paper, reported on by The Washington Post, is titled “Options to Reduce or Modify Firearms Regulations.” Curiously, the proposal opens with the wording of the Second Amendment and is dated Jan. 20, which coincides with the end of the Obama Presidency and the beginning of Donald Trump’s.

Several of the proposals in Turk’s white paper are supported by the National Rifle Association—some the NRA have been lobbying for years. The report is not without its critics though. In a statement released by Chelsea Parsons, vice president of guns and crime policy at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank: “This white paper offers a disturbing series of giveaways to the gun industry that would weaken regulatory oversight of the gun industry without adequate consideration of the impact on public safety.

“ATF has long described its regulatory function as a core part of its law enforcement mission to fight gun crime, yet this paper seems to prioritize reducing perceived burdens on the gun industry over an interest in protecting public safety from the illegal diversion of firearms,” Parsons said.

Although the white paper bears the ATF seal on its cover and lists Turk’s name and ATF title, a spokeswoman said it doesn’t represent the views of the ATF.

“It’s simply his opinion, and it’s to generate dialogue,” said spokeswoman Jan Kemp.

While legal to buy silencers in most states, you’ll pay a hefty “tax” and wait six months to year before approval to actually take it home. The gun industry has long sought relief from the National Firearms Act when it comes to suppressors. Crime data supports a relaxation as well.

“We look forward to working with the new attorney general as he puts the focus of the Justice Department back where it belongs—on prosecuting violent criminals, not harassing law-abiding gun owners. After eight years of overreach by the Obama administration, it’s time to roll back regulations that serve no legitimate law enforcement purpose,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action.

President Trump has long held that some of his best advisors are those closest to him—his family. It is no secret that his sons are strong supporters of the Second Amendment, shooting and hunting rights. Backing up the President is a friendly Republican legislature that has proposed legislation that properly addresses issues from reasoned platforms such as the public health issue of hearing loss and suppressors.

“Silencers are very rarely used in criminal shootings,” Turk notes in his white paper. “Given the lack of criminality associated with silencers, it is reasonable to conclude that they should not be viewed as a threat to public safety.” In 1989, George H.W. Bush’s administration banned the import of semiautomatic assault rifles. Turk’s white paper, which refers to them as “modern sporting rifles,” notes that their use has “increased exponentially in sport shooting.

“Those firearm types are now standard for hunting activities. These restrictions have placed many limitations on importers, while at the same time imposing a heavy workload,” claims Turk.

Turk’s paper states that its purpose is “to provide the new administration and the Bureau multiple options to consider and discuss regarding firearms regulations.” “These general thoughts provide potential ways to reduce or modify regulations, or suggest changes that promote commerce and defend the Second Amendment without significant negative impact on ATF’s mission to fight violent firearms crime and regulate the firearms industry,” ~Ronald B. Turk, associate deputy director and chief operating officer of the ATF.

Are you optimistic about the future of firearm legislation? Did Associate Deputy Director and Chief Operating Officer Turk get it right? Why or why not? Share your answers in the comment section.

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (90)

  1. KN,

    so, they are not for you lets make them so people can’t get them? so, some one could die because of their lack of knowledge? i can empty a glock semi in 2 to 5 seconds at 30 feet in an 8 inch circle. so i guess semi’s are dangerous and we should make them illegal? there is an idiot and it seems to be coming from your illogical statements. yes people die, yes they make mistakes, just listening to you would be one. life is not perfect, wow what a thought. someone buys a muscle car and can’t control it, and kills an innocent bystander. let us outlaw muscle cars, right? your communist views that we need someone as smart as you to make our decisions, does not sit well with me. i want to make my own decisions, right or wrong. i am the one that has to live with the mistakes. i am the one that has to go through the justice system not you. my life not yours. freedom not domination and being forced to live the way the elites feel i should.

    my statement is, if you read and can comprehend, a bump fire is not as fast as an auto, get it? should i state it again for you. there can be no more auto’s in the civilian market place. that is why they are so expensive. yes you can convert a semi to auto and if someone is allowed to do it legally, then it would not be rented so i am sure you did not shoot it. so you have shot some auto and find it is not for you so ban autos? ban semi’s because they can be converted? so ban auto and semi auto’s because so could die? typical communist, we know what is best for you and we will take care of you.

    i knw this will be hard to understand but everyone is different and some people can control an auto, get it? since some cannot let us ban them, right? someone could be killed, ban them, right? so you are you and others are themselves. we all have the right or should to choose for ourselves, not the elite doing it for us. i am tired of being the pee on. if i wanted someone making decisions for me i would have never left home.

    as far as guns go shall not be infringed has already been infringed to much. reduce government and give the people back a lot of their freedoms. if i want to do heroin it is my choice not yours. hell, we have made it illegal to kill yourself in many states, what are we going to do, throw the body in jail? semi’s can be converted and unless under some strict guide lines you are talking about it is illegal to do. even though it cn be do and it is not that hard, there is not and has not been a problem. so, what are you ranting about kn? they were highly regulated because of prohibition, which only causes more crime just as the war on drugs did. so moire freedom, less government and strangely enough there will be less crime. freedom

  2. MR G-MAN. i may have missed your response, here on this shooters log, but i was hoping to see your inside data on 1992 RUBY RIDGE & 1993 WACO. as you stated,you have 35+ years of knowledge and experience in LE & i gathered a hint you may be a FED or even a BATFE workerbee. those 2 events were not SHINNING examples of good law enforcement. chaos ruled, lies were told & good people died on both sides of the LAW. could you share some insight as to how and why so many things went wrong at both events.

    1. @ dave,

      I tried 5 to 6 times to answer you days ago, but for some reason the site would not accept my post. Whenever I clicked “Submit” it would recycle the page but my response would not show up. Also some systems view the order of certain characters as malicious code and will reject it for safety reason because it thinks it’s a virus. I will re-type what I wrote and try posting again.

  3. yea, well, a full auto with 17 rounds is really something. while you might be correct, as far as i know they cannot make fulls autos from a semi legally. now. they also have few parts not more. so they are a little faster then semi’s, which is what a bump fire is. you could be correct, mr. know it all, but it does not make your views or your claims right. where is all this data. yes i know you can rent full autos never been my thing. i am sure it is yours. you would like to keep shooting the autos all to your self. never said i have always been right i leave that to you mr know it all. you tell me there have been 2 deaths since , was it 34, by legally owned auto’s. you not only give no proof, you do not give the specifics mr. democrap. you try to spin a good story but it is full of holes. so you want something that is really not a problem which it exactly what you gun grabbers do. plain and simple. i suppose you are an expert with an auto also, right? people like you want what they call socialism which is just barely right of communism and while if looks good on the books it does not work in real life. that is because it is not free. everything including commerce is controlled by the state. the ATFE should be abolished especial after fast and furious. hell, with your handle you might have been involved. that is exactly why we don’t need government control. power corrupts and total power corrupts totally. then those in power get filthy rich. not a good system. then we make the government bigger so we can enforce those corrupt government employees. pretty soon the government runs out of money. we are there right now. it is because of people like you. so when we are all starving to death remember who did it.while both parties are guilty your party doubled the national debt in 8 years. your party increased the money supply by double, which can only be increased with productivity increases. thanks obummer and his appointment old yeller. total fiscal irresponsibility done by almost communists. less government not more. you have not prove anything except make your self look silly by saying 2 have been killed by autos that were legal and they very well and probably are justified killings. english is my worst subject but my logic is sound. your writing cannot make illogical things sound logical, no matter how hard you try. i know mr know it all that you can rent autos. i know people have been killed with all sorts of guns, just as our founding fathers knew. that does not make it right taking the second and making it useless as 4 supreme court judges feel right now. you cannot make that logical. you can make it democrapic.give us some links mr know it all. where are they, prove me wrong, show us just how many have died and i will show you more died from cars. life is not perfect and i am not prefect. you jesus you are, right? WTF!! come on get us some links to study not just take in your good faith because i do not believe you. you sir have an agenda, and those types cannot be believed without proof.where is it???

    1. I really don’t give a f*#k if you believe me or not about the legally converted G17 by a Class3 FFL. But I think it’s hilarious that you think it’s “a little faster then a semi…which is what a bump-fire is.” If you want something to reference, a picture is worth 1,000 words. Just search “Glock Full Auto Conversion” on YouTube and then tell me that they’re only as fast as a bump fire.

      It’s funny you scoff at 17 rounds of full auto being “really something”. Well, if you consider that in the average shooters hands one or two might be on target and then the other 15 will be god knows where in less than 2 seconds, then that’s hardly something to scoff at.

      As to the rest of your rant, you seem to have me confused with your fellow [yet disgruntled with you] idiot, “G-Man”. I myself never mentioned any death counts with full autos. All I said was that IF full autos become as readily available as semis, then they will surely be used in more crimes. In-turn, the more rounds that are sprayed, the higher the chance of collateral fatalities with innocent bystanders. Anyone who doesn’t believe that is either lying to themselves or completely and utterly stupid. I also mentioned my concern with the potential of otherwise good honest folks making fatal mistakes by thinking they could handle a full auto, only to find out that they couldn’t.

      As for my preference…yes, I tried one at the range a couple of times to see what they were like and immediately saw these potential dangers. Haven’t bothered with one since.

  4. ok, the laws in acted in 34 after prohibition ended came about because of prohibition. is that not true.

    admittedly i have never fired either. so i guess you have. i guess you have the documentation to give us to prove your point instead of just telling us how you are right and i am wrong, correct?? i am always willing to admit mistakes but not just because someone tells me i am. where are your facts?

    you say autos have more parts the semi autos and i believe you are wrong there also. you have to throw in a trigger disconnect in the semi and it has to be reset after each shot the auto has no such device and the hammer just follows the slide back. so having an engineer’s back ground the slide can only move so fast for each weapon. you are telling me that this bump fire that has to reset the trigger reset each time also is faster? even if it was as fast it cannot make the slide function any faster. so my guess is you have some sort of political science background, which is a laugh calling it science. the slide has only so much energy. when you use some of that energy to function the trigger it does not have as much. so with less energy how does it function faster? please i am willing to learn from you infinite wisdom, but give me some data to study. you know what i mean, guess? these articles proving that a slide fire is faster. i am sure you will tell me it is not only faster but more accurate then a full auto. you also appear to be a democrap, trolling pro gun sites trying to convince people how dangerous all of this is.

    what sort of qualification do you have? give us the proof and quit telling others just how wrong they are, prove it!! please clear up my misconceptions with facts not you typing skills.

    2 killings with auto legally owned since 34. boy, that sounds like a problem, doesn’t it? were they justified, that could make a big difference. was it user error? there have been killings with illegal or illegally acquired autos, i would not doubt it. how many mr know it all. these illegal weapons were used by criminals. since you say semi’s can be converted to auto easily, why aren’t there a lot of them around? you see restriction and prohibitions will stop nothing because of the money side of the factor. you see i know business also, after my ME i went into the MBA program. so the only thing you stop is the honest citizen. that puts them at a disadvantage. which by the way, that was the reason the extreme regulation of auto’s was put into effect. the police did not have the auto’s at first. now they do.

    so, the only data you have given is 2 deaths in almost 100 years. now that is a big problem and you did not say whether it was justified. don’t just tell us mr know it all g-man give us links. we can read, we can make our own decisions without you just telling us it is true. prove your point. i have no problem being proved wrong i have been wrong many times, but i am sure you haven’t. WTF! it you are in the ATFE, you are probably one of those involved with selling guns illegally to known criminals, could that be the case? wanting everyone to have less firer power then your self is an elitist plan to control the pee ons. the pee ons can only become so poor before they are going to want things changed one way or another. that is partly why the second amendment was written. to stop an abusive government shall not be infringed does have a meaning.. nothing is perfect but the constitution comes pretty close. to bad we allowed people to fu@k it up. .

    1. @ Art,

      So because I happen to possess the intellect to know what I’m talking about, I must somehow be a “Democrap”. Obviously you’ve not been on this forum long or you’d have seen my years of commentary which overwhelmingly establishes that I am quite the conservative.

      On the other hand, it is usually the fact-less crap-talkers like you that falls under the suspicion of being a trollistic “Democrap” – who is only looking for an argument. Here is how it works: The person making the challenge must bring the proof, not the other way around. That would be you, so bring it!

      Solid and confident in my actual experiences and knowledge, I was in the midst of informing another commenter – when you suddenly decided to jump into our conversation armed with nothing more than your lack of experience and speculative opinions. You even admitted as much, but then ignorantly expect that I should be responsible for cleaning up your mental mess by proving your ignorance to be wrong. As I’ve stated, that is your burden since you jumped in, not mine.

      Intellectuals would never get anything accomplished if they spent all their time showing stupid people how stupid they are, and all just because stupid people demanded it. We just don’t have time for that. But here you are anyway, demanding I do exactly that. Go do your own research.

      The solution to all your irrational guesswork has been so simple all along, yet apparently doing your own research just never occurred to you. All this time you were but a few Google and YouTube searches away from ever making yourself look like an idiot over this topic again… yet miserably you failed to do even that.

      So, I highly suggest you use the resources I’ve mentioned and go discover what I’ve been telling you all along. And then come back and apologize for being so rude about it all.

      I’ve already paid my dues by dedicating my own time and experiences towards accumulating the knowledge I feel will enrich my own life and then sharing it with others that truly care to listen. I simply refuse to do your research to prove your idiocy just because you are too lazy or incompetent to do it yourself.

      And one more thing, it is absolutely ridiculous how you ignore the fact that you’ve already been forced to walk back several of your statements thus far, and yet think you somehow still look credible. You are ridiculous.

    2. And one of those two crimes was perpetrated by an Ohio cop as a paid “hit”–with a full auto owned by his department!

    3. well, that makes sense. i believe these pro gun places have been inundated with anti gun people , even more so since the election. boy are they sore loser’s. no one but the police state with guns. with the way the police state is going i guess you can’t blame them for trying to make sure the public can’t revolt. the state wants more fire power and that is not what the constitution is all about. it is about the state having enough fear of the people to keep them in line.

  5. KN
    you give me a link to someone that says he knows but give no facts in this same article. that’s great. he also say there is no difference in rate of fire. like i said a gun can only function as fast as it can cycle. so he proves you wrong. the thing is when you have to make the stock function you cannot be as accurate even as an auto in my opinion. we all seem to have them. i also said i believe that a semi is more accurate then spray and pray. that does not mean it has no uses, even to the general public which already has them. you say semi can be converted to autos easily so why don’t we see more in action? you obviously are anti gun trying to act like a pro gun at a pro gun sight.i said that we should just can all of the ATFE they have proved themselves useless. not only that are still killing people with the semi’s they had sold illegally to criminals. WTF! most of these regulations were started because of prohibition. so let us get rid of the regulations and the prohibitions and not start more which it seems you would like to get rid of semi’s from your statements. you cannot seem to show any data showing auto’s legal or illegal that have caused crime. so what is the problem? i never stated that they do not have any uses in the civilian s hands. they certainly do. everyone needs practice with what ever gun they are going to use, that is just common sense. get rid of the ATFE, deregulate guns it is an infringement on the second amendment. in fact reduce a lot of the government. 1/2 of the employees are employed by the government. how long do you think the other 1/2 can support them? giving someone else remarks in this area is not proof. WTF!! give me some hard facts not well this can happen. show me where it has.

  6. ok, mister 35 years in LAW ENFORCEMENT. WHERE DID THE WRITTEN ILLEGAL ORDER (ROE) TO SHOOT ON SIGHT, at RUBY RIDGE GO? supposedly the SENIOR LE BADGE demanded the order in writing, from WASHINGTON DC & delivered by courier. how did the FBI HRT avoid a court date to explain their F UP AND COVER UP. the WEAVERS & FRIENDS were acquitted, due to entrapment. the WEAVERS then won their CIVIL LAW SUIT, which was $ 3 million +. why was VICKIE WEAVER SHOT WHILE HOLDING HER BABY? what ever happened to the LE SNITCH, who entrapped RANDY WEAVER in the first place? why were so many LE PERSONNEL & armored equipment involved? why was the LE so ARMORED UP AND TACTICAL? why did anyone SHOOT THE DOG? then they shot RANDY’S SON IN THE BACK? why were the state of IDAHO MURDER CHARGES, against the FBI SNIPER forced to be dropped, by the FEDS? out of curiosity, are you one of the FBI AGENTS, who was at RUBY R & WACO? 35 years of LE means you were probably wearing a BADGE during both events. yes i fully understand you probably will not have any or all of the answers to my questions. oh yes, you obviously are superior in intellect articulate the ENGLISH LANGUAGE far beyond anything i can scribble down. hope to keep the lines of communication OPEN, even if you do not LIGHTEN UP.

    1. government people expect the public to forget what happened and some people just do not forget. yes it was crazy and you know i had forgot she was shot while holding her baby. in the door way. that should never have happened. in fact if i remember correctly it was them that fired the first shot. these government people need to be held accountable for their actions. just as the ATFE needs to be held accountable for fast and furious.we are suppose to have laws. the problem with the police is they have the blue code, so no matter how F@@@ed up they are the department stands behind them. so the aholes remain. not a good system if you want to keep it clean.

      our country has turned into a police state and i for one do not like it. government needs to be reduce, and we need to have our freedoms back. the right to make our own choices not the choices the government forces us to have. this country is sure getting a lot closer to communism every day and the democraps seem to want to push it there quicker. the right is not much better. they all want bigger government and to force us to live their way.

  7. finally, someone who has a mature and calm view of the problem. paying the STAMP-TAX is one thing, but does not explain the LONG DELAY in taking possession. it is just another FEDERAL AGENCY, exercising it’s control of the masses. that is just my opinion.

  8. G-MAN, you want me to get down and beg forgiveness for my ignorance or praise you for your arrogance. i did what i did & i said what i said. i am the only one who knows the truth. you write like a lawyer or bureaucrat & i just assumed you were a badge wearing BATFE goon, active or retired. i have zero respect for the OBAMA STOOGES the BATFE became, during his dictatorship. AGAIN YOU NEED TO TAKE A NAP AND LIGHTEN UP! just for YOUR EDUCATION, watch PBS AMERICAN EXPERIENCE tonight 8 central, 9 eastern. THE RUBY RIDGE MASSACRE. do some research on it & then research the WACO MASSACRE. then tell me why NOT ONE FEDERAL LE OFFICER ever went to jail,even though crimes were committed “UNDER COLOR OF LAW” with JANET RENO & BILL CLINTON,in both cases.

    1. @ dave,

      I sense we are not really connecting here. Nowhere did I solicit you to “praise my arrogance” or “get down and beg forgiveness”. That’s a concoction rolling around in your own mind; for which I am not responsible.

      However, what I did do is point out your multiple inaccuracies regarding BATFE’s motives for collecting Tax Stamp revenue. Thereafter I succinctly offered you a corrective explanation so you’d better understand how these revenue agencies and the government actually function.

      Admittedly I was a bit terse, but I find it annoying when folks make outrageous statements that have no bases in facts. In other words – it was your repeated abuse and distortion of the facts that I took issue with, not your attack on the BATFE. As I’ve subsequently stated, I could care less about the BATFE.

      Nevertheless, it was you who came back all pissy and decided to sidetrack the issue by ridiculously claiming I should have detected your tirade of posts as some form of humor. Yet in the same breath you had the nerve to tell me to “lighten up” while at the same time you’re going off on some temper tantrum about the BATFE, Ruby Ridge and Waco.

      My second post was quite clear that it had absolutely nothing to do with a defense of BATFE, and that instead it was your general fact-bending that I took issue with. But despite you knowing this, here you come again pointlessly telling me to “lighten up” while you spazz out over your hatred for the BATFE and demand I watch some PBS show about Ruby Ridge. Seriously dude, get a grip!

      I’ve been a regular for years in this forum, and on several occasions made it quite known that the BATFE should be abolished. Plenty of forum members can vouch for me on that. But I never brought it up because the BATFE was never my point when I chose to address you. My goal had always been to simply correct your fact-less misstatements regarding revenue collection in general; nothing more – nothing less.

      So in actuality it is you who could benefit from a “nap” which may help you “lighten up”; because in all honesty it was you that got all frustrated and unnecessarily turned this into some BATFE anger rant and hate fest.

      One more thing: As a federal law enforcement agent of 35 years (and counting) I think I probably know a bit more about Ruby Ridge and Waco than you or some PBS show could ever teach me.

  9. I think a traceable serial number along with the same registration as a firearm along with a hefty transfer tax should be enough as far as suppressors go. The wait is ridiculous and I would need someone to show me that any additional useful information associated with the wait is ever accomplished. If there is none then what are we waiting for except to produce a level of discomfort and pointless discouragement for sportsmen who prefer their use. Should you fear criminal use increase the penalty greatly in commission of a crime which appears all to lenient in all gun crimes anyway.

  10. G-man. what you say it true. there are other considerations also. first the government is the most wasteful business there is. all government agency want more money. they do this by making sure they spend every dime that is given so they can ask for more in the next budget. a lot of agency are very political and of course it depends on who is in office. higher ups can reward those helping their goals with raises and promotions. not only do they want a bigger budget, they want more power. with that power usually comes abuses. now lets take the BATFE. their last little illegal activity was fast and furious and project gun runner. this little gift from them could actually be trying to get the little episode off our minds. throw a little crumb to the pee ons. they sold guns to known criminals through the border gun shops. the border gun shops call them and told them these folks were buying guns and the BATFE told them to sell them to them even though it was illegal. they said they had an investigation going on and they were going to follow those guns to the heads of the cartel. the only problem was they just let those guns walk and they are still killing people. poor officer Terry’s family paid the ultimate price. no apology from them or obummer and holder. now if you had more money then god would you be buying semi-automatics from the US?? NO, they buy autos from china and europe coming up threw central and south america. what they did was illegal! now an anti gun pres, obummer, it would seem, would want to get to the bottom of that, right? well, he didn’t and holder would not release the info through the freedom of information act until ordered to by an appeal court. holder resigned 2 days after that order. pretty strange if you ask me. at the time they were doing this MSM was saying how the border shops were selling guns to criminals. boy, did they shut up after officer terry was killed and it all came to light. i bet over a thousand americans and mexicans have been killed and are still being killed with those guns. not only was it not investigated, no one involved was charged or even demoted. i think one was transferred. i would bet by now some have been promoted and of course with that comes a pay raise. you have to pay those dong your biding or they would not do it. so there are ways for these government employees to get paid for doing dirty work.of course holder will take the fall for obummer but we or at least some of us know where it came from. some people do not care how many people end up dead as long as they get what they want. the end justifies the means. i personally think that those involved should pay for what they did. the BATFE is a useless arm of government and can be put under something else and most of the regulations are crap and the power of the people to live free and protect themselves should not be infringed.

    our government has become a super nanny and she needs to be cut down to size. reduce government and decentralize it. put it closer to the pee ons.maybe they would not be peed on so much. we learned or were suppose to learn during prohibition the prohibition does not work never has and never will. it causes more crime and does not help so we change the name and think it will work this time, like the war on drugs. what a joke if so many people weren’t ending up dead over it.i am sure this war on guns will work this time to, WTF!! if someone wants to do heroin who’s F@@@ing business is it anyway? yours not the government. sorry this really ticks me off. we need to pull our heads out and smell the crap, i mean democrap. sorry i could not help myself. i am neither right or left but the left with it’s platform on guns has lost any support from me and it looks like there are a lot like me now.

  11. 1805– first if a criminal wants something they can get it on the black market. second silencers are easy to make. third, they reduce the sound but it is not silent. they are only hurting the law abiding folks. if you put a silencer on a gun it’s size increase a lot so it makes the weapon less concealable. that is why they are not used in crime. fourth it saves hearing and is more in tune with nature. they made automatics hard to get and expensive. as you say the criminals have plenty of money and they do not care about the law. so it they want one they get one. all these laws just increase the criminals money through the black market. prohibition has never worked in the history of the world and it never will. all it does is create crime not reduce it. we were suppose to learn our lesson on alcohol but no we just keep f@@@ing up. if a grade school kid wants heroin they can get it on the corner. the war on drugs what a joke. freedom is where it is at. if i want to do heroin it is my problem no one else. all we did was increase crime and make some of the worst people in the world filthy rich.

    when it comes to guns, what is it about the second amendment that is hard to understand. “shall not be infringed” they made automatics illegal (hard to get) because of alcohol prohibition. WTF! forcing people to live the life you want them to live does not sound very free to me. the government needs to be reduce a lot. 1/2 the people working, work for the government, how long do you think it will be before the other 1/2 cannot afford the government? no one can live on credit and our government has been trying to do it for a long time. we are about to see the greatest depression the world has ever seen. a total collapse of the economy. it is going to be ugly. hope what i see if bull crap, but the spend spend spend of the democraps is about to strangle us. the elites are looking forward to it though. you see it will be away for them to instigate electronic money. then they will have total control of everyone. you cannot have freedom without tolerance. diversity is a good thing. it is where progress comes from. less government, more freedom.

  12. HEY G-MAN, LIGHTEN UP. your response has a GOVERNMENT TAINT to it. maybe a FEDERAL EMPLOYEE. maybe an INSIDE-MAN, BUREAUCRAT, with a badge. anyone who defends the BATFE & how they function, probably do not remember their 2 major victories of the past. RUBY RIDGE & WACO. yes there were a LOT of badges, from many agencies & they all FAILED 100% to conduct themselves as PROFESSIONALS & OATH takers. yes, i understand budgets & allocations of monies & yes the NFA FEES for our toys DOES NOT GO directly into someones pocket to PARTY. HUMOR IS PART OF THIS EXCHANGE OF VIEWS. have a good day/night, whatever.

    1. @ dave,

      Sure the “party“ comment was obvious sarcasm, but I think we both know your overall combined messages were a bit more than just your lame attempt at lighthearted humor; especially when you posted twice about it and even took the time to do some Tax Stamp math to prove your point.

      It wasn’t until after I schooled you on how ridiculous you made yourself look- only then did you suddenly decide it was all just your brand of humor.

      You gave no other indication this was anything other than your sincere belief with a resounding commitment to your absurd misconceptions, so please do not think you’ve gotten away with fooling anyone that you intended it all to be taken as nothing but humor.

      People that warp and morph their positions on-the-fly to squirm their way out of humiliating situations because they simply can’t man-up and own their embarrassment are nothing short of pathetic. You said what you said and now must own it.

      What is humorous is the fact it’s not so funny to you now that you are getting all butthurt-serious and defensive. The respectable thing would have been to just own-up and let it go. But instead you decide to whitewash your embarrassment by mounting some pitiful attack against me – by stating I have somehow defended the BATFE; and all because I corrected your so-called fake humor with facts.

      I could care less about whichever agency you misspoke. Were you to have made the same grossly ignorant comments (or humor as you now claim) regarding any other facts, I would have corrected you all the same.

  13. I’m a gun lover but I don’t support the deregulating of silencers. I hate paying the tax and waiting the wait just like everyone else, but I think the extra barrier (extra money and tougher background check) keeps them out of the hands of the people who shouldn’t have them. The statistics quoted in Turk’s paper regarding their use in crimes is probably due to their scarce availability.
    You can’t deny that these would make gun related crimes easier to get away with for the criminal. Think of all the drug dealers who have money burning a hole in their pocket and how easy it would be to “straw purchase” one if you could walk out of the shop with it the same day.
    Also, if there were to be an increase in unsolvable gun crime, that could give the gun grabbers massive political ammo and possibly further endanger the whole 2nd amendment in general.
    Sorry, I feel like a traitor for opposing this, but I feel we have to reign it back on this issue, so there won’t be a backlash in the future.
    Plus, they’re only an tactical advantage if not everyone has one!

    1. I don’t believe the legalization of suppressors would ever be a big factor in crime. For years now, anybody could/can go on eBay and buy a “solvent trap” or oil filter kit. If suppressors were going to be a significant crime presence, there would already be rampant use in crimes of these illegal, untraceable, cheap & easy methods.
      However, I completely agree with your perspective about giving political power to the grabbers, and making things worse for gun ownership down the road if full-auto weapons were ever de-regulated.

    2. KN
      the gun grabbers do not need a reason, they will fabricate one. their tactic is how you eat an elephant one bite at a time. this is no big deal give us this, that is all we want.

      auto were made illegal during prohibition. they were never a big part of crime, yes there were some incidences but that law did not solve anything. it just put the law abiding at a disadvantage. most are too big to carry around if you are a criminal.

      we all know or should prohibition does not work, never has and never will. the only thing it does is create crime and makes criminals very, very rich. the war on drugs proves my point. did we get rid of drugs, no we just caused more crime and spend more money trying to stop something that cannot be stop. legalize all drugs, crime will be less and we can down the size of government. makes perfect sense to me. if someone wants to do heroin they just go to the corner. legalize it, tax it, and control it that way. besides, it i want to do heroin who’s business is it anyway. we make it illegal to kill your self. what are we going to do throw the body in jail. what someone does if they are not hurting someone else is their business, right or wrong, they have to live with their choices. if i wanted a mother and father to tell me what to do all my life, i would have never left home. what is so hard to understand about freedom. you cannot have freedom without tolerance. allowing others to live their life the way they see fit, not someone Else’s idea of how we should live.

    3. Art,
      What makes you think full autos are too big to carry around or conceal? You do realize that every semi auto is inherently fully automatic until a way to interrupt the cycle is engineered and introduced into it, right?? Oh sure…of course you did. So, a pistol modded to full-auto is cool with you for anyone to own then? With a cyclic rate on average of 10 rounds per second? Do you think the average shooter (even with good intentions) can control that? HELL no…the first one might be on target, then the (minimum) follow-up 2 rounds that’ll go off before he can even release the trigger will probably be between 2 and 10 feet above target at 10 yards.
      Like I said to the other “anarchist” G-Man, its the unrealistic and unreasonable views from people who will make the deregulation of almost anything impossible, because of the all or nothing mindset and approach.
      As to your outlook…sure, f-it, lets legalize everything. We’ll see how long it takes all the Suburban Captan Americas with the Billy Badass anarchy attitudes to change their minds when things go to hell.

    4. KN
      no lets take so more freedom away from the people, after all we know what is right and wrong and we can force people to live the way we want, right?

      not only would it make so much money for the government it would reduce government spending. it would reduce crime.when all the drugs were legal for most of americas existence. of course you know best. lets keep putting all that money in the cartels pocket, right? let us keep the crime rate up and government spending up. prohibition has never worked in the history of the word but this time you can make it work, right? you live in a fairy tale world. why don’t we bring back the prohibition of alcohol while we are at it, right?

      drugs were never a problem in the US until they made them illegal. yes let us legalize everything, pull our heads out of our arse. let us allow the people to make their own minds up instead of telling them what they should do. why? because prohibition does not work. how many times do we have to f@@@ up before we learn our lesson. exactly why do you think they legalized alcohol in the 30’s? because the war on anything including guns will only bring crime and throw more money down the rabbit hole. WTF!! you take something that was never a problem and make it one, exactly how does that help?

      unfortunately for you we should have freedom. it is no ones business but the person making the decisions on what and how they are going to live. the real bad thing for you is with freedom, you will have to learn tolerance. you don’t have to like it, agree with it, or anything. you can stay away from those that you disagree with, it is your right. to take the rights of others because you think you are smarter, do you believe that is right? if someone is not hurting someone else, why should you care? who made you god? you either believe in freedom or you don’t and every time you take someones freedom, not only is it not right, it will come back and take yours in the end. that is where people like you have taken the freedom away from the people and it looks a lot like communism where the state tells us what is right and wrong and forces us to live their perfect life.

      exactly how is making your own decision anarchy? while a agree there is some abuse drugs, it is still their right. we did not stop that we just made it worse. i mean F@@@ we have made it illegal for someone to kill themselves,.what are we going to do? throw their body in jail. this is crazy crap. sure let us build the cartel up more and more just as we did the mafia, right? we take something that was not a problem and make it into one, we look like fools. just as trying to take the guns from people. that prohibition we certainly work, we’ll just call it something else or change the definition, right?

      yes get the government off the people’s back. reduce government. put it closer to the people not the elites. they will never be satisfied. they will always want more money and power and you appear to want to give it to them. well we do not and there are getting to be more of us. maybe you won’t be able to control the masses like you planned. logic is not on your side. just as claiming the streets will run with blood over the gun laws, it does not happen and makes you look foolish. i want my freedom back. the right to choose. i do not need you telling me how to live, right or wrong. it is my choice not yours. what is so hard to see? is freedom a bad word. anarchy, you make me laugh, ha ha. history does not support your view, never has and never will.

    5. Wow…that’s some rant. Since when did I ever say that alcohol and drug prohibition should coincide with the continued regulation on full-auto weapons??
      Like you, I’m of the opinion that if people want to kill themselves with drugs, alcohol, or whatever, I say let them have at it!
      But, I don’t want to have to worry about some thug spraying the streets with a full auto gun. More likely to happen will be the Billy Badasses who think they can handle their newfound full auto freedom and accidentally spray the gun ranges, or worse yet – over the hills with their uncontrolled muzzle rise into our neighborhoods with a dozen rounds before they can let go of the trigger.
      There’s a difference between freedom and reckless apathy.

    6. full auto should be legal. what you want to give everyone a single shot? you see it is called freedom, the right to make a choice. that does not mean you get to make it for us. prosperity comes with freedom not government control by a select group of individuals. i think they call that communism. it does not work and never will.

    7. KN,

      It is unfortunate, despite my official offerings of facts to the contrary, that you still elect to disregard my advice and continue to stick with decisions based off of your speculations founded in nothing but a personal belief.

      Disregarding facts when making important decisions is simply not prudent. It tends to lead to poor decisions when voting, or worse – the safety of your entire family down the road.

      It would be remise of me if I did not point out your mention of “solvent traps or oil filter kits” and the fact they are still illegal and carry the same penalty when used as a firearm suppressor without first acquiring a tax stamp.

      However, in stark contrast there is no tax stamp required to buy off-the-shelf “Bump Fire or Slide Fire” stocks – which enables semi-automatic rifles to operate at the same (or higher) rate of fire as full-automatics. These too have been widely available for years, yet unlike the “filter kits” for suppression the “bump fire” stock is completely legal to use for running a rifle at full-auto.

      Add to this – with a simple Dremel tool and a bit of Internet knowhow, anyone can modify many types of rifles (and handguns) to run as full-automatics as well. So the difference between your assumptions versus my facts is that despite the combined availability of illegal modifications and legal off-the-shelf full-automatic solutions, we still never see this “rampant use in crimes” that you fearfully speak of.

      So now that I have clearly debunked your myth that fully-automatic capabilities are somehow less prevalent than suppression capabilities, let’s move on to additional facts comparing both available methods in crime statistics:

      All things being equal, statistically there are significantly more homicides on record from suppressed weaponry than by fully-automatic firearms. While it is true the data shows an average of 7 times more criminal investigative traces conducted on fully-automatic weapons than suppressors, interestingly there are far more homicides traced to suppressed weapons than to fully-automatic firearms.

      In other words – out of criminal investigations which only compare full-auto gun traces to suppressed weapons traces, more homicides were carried out by a suppressed weapon than a fully-automatic firearm; despite the fact that full-autos are 7 times more likely to be the subject of a firearms trace.

      At this point the only thing I have left to offer is to ask that you re-read my first two paragraphs in the hopes it will broaden your perspective to include additional information previously not known to you – before making such future definitive decisions.

    8. g-man
      a bump fire is a full auto. i guess you do not understand the definition, do you? it has to do with how many trigger pulls it takes to make each round go off. that is why a bump fire is not a full auto. it will not shoot more rounds then a full auto per minute either. also instead of just pulling the trigger you have to push and pull the stock back and fourth for each round. not only is it slower it certainly is less accurate then auto which is less accurate then semi-auto. it also takes into account the trigger reset for each fire of bullet. that is why it is legal and while auto are legal are more restrictive. by the BATFE. seems simple and basic to me, and auto should not be regulated either. in fact, we really do not need a BATFE any more and with them selling guns illegally to known criminals and the death toll is much higher then the crimes you talk about, i guess it is time to just shut them down and get our shall not be infringed back. they restricted them during alcohol prohibition because the criminals were using them. i am sure the criminals got rid of them immediately. WTF!

      not sure when they restricted the suppressors but they only reduce the noise they do not make them silent. hit men are going to do their job with or without them. why? because they are criminals and do not follow the law. you know the definition.

      silencers are hit man weapons and are a very select usage. they are not very concealable and that is why they are not used by criminals very much, except hit men. the average criminal is an opportunist and they need conceal-ability. so since these restriction should not be in place just get rid of a lot of paper work and government spending.

      our decision about the pres was because you folks can only produce criminals for candidates and i guess there are a lot of us that are tired of your representatives. plus, she only wanted Australia’s gun control. pump shot guns are illegal in Australia. you see prohibition does not work and makes the worst people in the world very very rich. it has never worked and never will. just as the war on drugs has made the cartel as rich as god. WTF! legalize all drugs and we will reduce crime a lot. when are we going to pull our heads out and smell the democrap. we need to put holder, that will take the fall for obummer, and all those involved with fast and furious and project gun runner and put them in jail for breaking the gun laws. i would explain why it was obummer to you but you would not listen. logic tells us that it was him.

    9. @ art,

      Generally our views seem to align, but I must call you out on your lack of knowledge towards bump fires.

      While my career in law enforcement requires that I know the facts before speaking to the public, I so wish civilians would do the same. Please stop thinking facts are optional when engaging in public discussions, and instead take on a bit more responsibility to know the facts before telling someone else they are wrong about a topic.

      With that said, your statement regarding bump fire stocks is absolutely and unequivocally wrong. That is not based on my personal opinion for you to argue with, but actual years of hardcore documented facts.

      Bump fire stocks are established to be automated mechanized devices because they require absolutely no intervention by the operator other than to start and stop each firing cycle of a desired duration. Once started, a repeated mechanized firing cycle of action is induced by the device itself, without interruption, and without any additional user intervention.

      The result of which is a continuous fully-automatic cyclic rate of fire no different than that observed by a fully-automatic weapon. Thus a bump fire device in fact makes a semi-automatic weapon into a fully-automatic weapon without dispute.

      As for rate of fire – you are also incorrect. Bump fire stocks have been extensively tested against fully-automatic weapons and documented to not only match the same rates of fire, but most often found to exceed the rates of fire by rather large margins.

      Not only do bump fires surpass the rates of fire, but they have also demonstrated to be more accurate with closer groupings than their fully-automatic counterparts.

      Bump fire stocks have not escaped BATFE scrutiny. The only reason they’ve managed to remain legal is a single technical oversight contained in their statutory definition of a “machinegun” established back in 1934, and of which the BATFE cannot overcome.

      Back in 1934 the government determined the trigger group in weapons should be designated, for statutory purposes, to be the firing mechanism of any firearm; and thus made its housing (the receiver) the focus of regulation and serialization. This explains why we can purchase all other parts (uppers, stocks, barrels, grips, etc.) without any regulation.

      So naturally when it came time for Congress to statutorily define a “machinegun”, all their focus went into the trigger group because it was considered the only “machine” part responsible for allowing fully-automatic fire at that time.

      They never considered that future mechanisms would be developed to apply outside forces upon the trigger – which could accomplish the same thing. And thus the law was written to exclusively specify a “machinegun” as being a weapon that is capable of automatically firing more than one shot, but the caveat is their wording which states, “…by a single function of the trigger”.

      So even though bump fires are capable of “automatically firing more than one shot”, it is accomplished external of the trigger group by multiple functions of the trigger rather than “…by a single function of the trigger”. It is these 7 words in the law which staves off the BATFE and allows us to enjoy fully-automatic bliss without waiting on a Tax Stamp.

      As for your “hitman silencer” theory, they’re not just for hitmen anymore. I’ll refer you to one of my previous posts on suppressors…

    10. saying that bump fire can exceed auto is just plain silly. a gun cannot fire any faster whether auto or bump fire then the gun can cycle. so where are you getting this crap from, democraps. a bump fire has to have the stock moved back and forth and yes the shot does help in that action but you have to do the opposite act. while pulling the stock back and forth really makes for accuracy? as the shots go the gun rises which would make everyone that much more safe. neither the bump fire or auto have been used in crime since prohibition. they are big and cannot be concealed. when they were used in the 20’s they came in cars. your claim that they shoot faster then auto’s is just ridiculous. they might be more accurate because they shoot slower, but i doubt it .

    11. @ Art,

      No, what is actually quite silly – is you making a blanket statement without considering the distinct internal differences between the trigger group parts inside full-autos as compared to the trigger group parts inside semi-autos; each of which has distinctly different affects upon the speed in which each type of gun can cycle. That applies even if by identical manufacturers.

      So of course it would never occur to you that adding a bump fire stock to a semi-auto with a trigger group containing half the parts as that of a full-auto, might actually achieve a completely different (or faster) rate of fire.

      I am realizing now that you are guessing your way through your comments and have never actually operated a bump fire equipped weapon. Because if you had, you’d know how silly you sound and we’d never be having this conversation. So now that we know for certain you’ve never handled one, I’ll help clear up a few of your misconceptions…

      The way you have written a few responses leads me to believe you think the operator has to push and pull for each shot to occur, or some other special magic. Nothing could be further from the truth. The operator firmly holds the weapon no differently than any other, and squeezes the trigger. The bump fire automatically does all the rest using the physics of your natural grip on the weapon. That’s it.

      I must iterate once again that I’ve already told you documented testing has been done establishing equivalent and/or exceeding rates of fire and accuracy over full-autos, but you’ve continued to completely ignore such information and instead insist on sticking with your unqualified opinions completely void of actual experience or documentation to back them up.

      And not to add salt to your wounds, but you are overtly wrong: Actually there have been two homicides committed with legally owned fully-automatic weapons since 1934 and hundreds of murders and other crimes committed using illegally acquired or modified fully-automatic weapons. That is assuming by “prohibition” you meant the GCA of 1934. “Prohibition” actually refers to the nationwide ban on alcohol which ended in 1933.

    12. I am sorry to disagree with you but as someone who not only has fired Full Auto weapons (M16, M60, AK47, M2 .50 cal etc.) and owns and fired both an AR15 & an AK47 both with Slide-Fire stocks installed I can tell you that with the Slide-Fire stocks they do not fire at the same rate as a true Full Auto weapon. Also the Slide-Fire and Bumsky(sp) Bump Fire stocks to require the operator to apply forward pressure and maintain that forward pressure to keep the weapon firing, as it uses the recoil and forward pressure to mimic Full Auto fire. That is the reason the ATF allows the sale of those stocks. You can easily go to either companies website for a full explanation on both the operation of the devices and why they are legal along with a copy of the letter from the ATF.

    13. @ Mark,

      There is absolutely no need for you to be sorry.

      Just to clarify, in addition to being in the military reserves, I am a federal law enforcement agent with intimate knowledge of the several internal BATFE memos and public letters generated over the past 12 years regarding bump-fire type stocks; and the recently released FosTech Echo Trigger System.

      However, to my knowledge none of those letters were ever asked to address rates of fire and thus have no bearing on the conversation here.

      I too have been qualified on each of the fully automatic weapons you’ve listed (and more), as well as own every semi-auto you’ve mentioned and then some. I also own a Slidefire Systems for one of my AKs and borrowed my son’s Slidefire and used it extensively on several of my many ARs.

      My point in telling you all this is that even with all my military and law enforcement experience with machineguns – in conjunction with personal ownership and use of two Slidefires – I still could not use that to base my claims. And so it is highly improbable that you could either – without losing credibility.

      The reason I know this is because the fully automatic machine guns I’ve used throughout my careers are so dissimilar that any attempt of a comparison would be absolutely ridiculous to make.

      Furthermore, unless you’ve paid big-bucks to rent all your automatic experience, I must assume you gained it through the military. And you and I both know the regulations would never allow you to conduct such side-by-side comparative testing on the military’s time, dime, or ranges.

      So now that leaves us with the statistical information I’ve garnered from internal law enforcement testing sources. And while I highly doubt you have the same access, you do have access to the many public tests conducted and documented by civilians.

      To make testing as scientific as possible, these trials matched up two very similar platform equivalents; one in a semi-automatic Slidefire configuration and another in a full-auto (tax stamp) configuration – the results of which clearly prove that the Slidefire has matched and/or exceeded a rate of fire over its fully automatic counterpart – and is more accurate to boot.

      All you’ve come here with is your unscientific personal opinions up against hard-core facts. Such information is easily available if you’re willing to conduct a search for it on the Internet. But the bottom line is that it’s real, it’s a thing, and you’re unequivocally wrong.

    14. Ok…
      One: Bump/Slide Fire stocks DO NOT make a gun function as a full-auto.

      Two: Yes, I’m fully aware that there are multiple DIY mods to make semi’s run at full auto.

      Three: I’m not so naive as to think that some criminals don’t already utilize these mods to commit crimes, BUT my original point was that IF full autos are as readily available as a semi-auto, then they’ll surely be used MORE often than not to commit shooting crimes and gang violence. My concern is the collateral fatalities to bystanders per-incident, not necessarily a rise in overall crime incidences.

      Another main concern is the fire control factor with full autos. Let’s set the criminals completely aside for this observation and ponder just how many accidental sprays are going to occur by otherwise good, law abiding people who THINK they could handle a full auto and end up killing bystanders, or even people over the next hill. I’ll admit this is less of a concern with an AR style rifle in an experienced shooters hands, but full auto pistols are a different story. I’ve seen very experienced & strong shooters end up with a muzzle rise of 30-degrees when firing a 5-shot string at the rental range with a converted Glock 17.

    15. @ KN,

      Wrong. Bump/Slide Fire stocks “DO” make a gun function as a full-auto in every conceivable aspect. But rather than re-write a recent post in which I’ve already explained bump fire stocks at length, instead here’s a link to enlighten you:

      As for your “original point”: While you now choose to narrow it down to concerns over availability to criminals – that was not your “original” statement that prompted my replies.

      In your original comment you took all your time to specifically pit the deregulation of suppressors against the deregulation of fully-automatic weapons. You initiated that comparison, not me. So you’ll have to accept the fact that you solicited the ensuing dialoged.

      You even went so far as to claim fully-automatic weaponry has no civilian purpose and that the majority of people at ranges, not criminals, couldn’t handle them.

      It was not until your very last sentence that you briefly mentioned a criminal element which you referenced as “gang bangers”. Therefore, I can only reply based on your actual words and not the thoughts rolling around in your head that never actually made it into your posts.

      Without any doubt, the bulk of your comments espouse that the public at large (criminal or not) can’t handle possessing fully-automatic weaponry; and thus I responded accordingly.

      Without any doubt, the bulk of your comments elicited comparisons between regulated items and disregarded solid facts replaced with your personal preferences over each; and thus I responded accordingly.

      Without any doubt, the bulk of your comments made impossible attempts to eschew the Second Amendment; and thus I responded accordingly.

      So while you’re still figuring out how you’d like to narrow down your point, I on the other hand have remained true in responding with relevant and factual information to address and correct everything you’ve actually written.

    16. you talk a lot of hypothetical situations that have never happened. since semi’s can be made into auto, how come they are not used in crime right now? if they legalize auto those are to big to carry so what you are stating just plain does not make sense. if you change a semi auto pistol into an auto you have limited rounds before you need to reload. even in the 20’s there was little crime with auto’s and that was between different organized crime rings. as auto’s go as it functions the muzzle rises getting everyone including the target out of the picture. where is all this crime from these easily converted semi’s. you just guessing. so, you believe in government control and i believe in freedom. if someone harms someone even if protecting themselves they are responsible. that is the law. perfection in this world does not exist and giving criminals the upper hand seems to be the thing. our country has taken our freedom little by little and i want my freedom back. those that want to be pee ons, that is their choice.

    17. ps. you have not seen a converted g 17 it would be illegal. unless you were with some illegal friends. there are fully auto glocks but the reason auto’s are so much more money is they stop the supply way back when. so where do you get this crap. the mags in the fully auto glocks would make them not concealable. yes every gun needs to be learned and if someone does not take the time to learn what the gun he has does, well who’s fault is that and who is going to get in trouble. where is all of these statistics of people killed and crime with these weapons? i can empty my glock in 2 seconds on target. i do not want a semi for carry but i would like the opportunity to make my own decisions and not have uncle make them for me.

    18. Yes, I have seen a LEGAL converted G17. Ever heard of a Post-’86 Dealer Sample, “Mr. Know it All”?!?
      Since you’re obviously not familiar, a Post-’86 Sample is a legal full-auto conversion of a gun which is modified by a Class3 NFA dealer – in full compliance with ATF rules. They can’t sell or transfer them to anyone other than qualified law enforcement, but they can make and fire them for themselves, or for supervised “demos”. I’m not sure how things are where you’re at, but here in VA, you can go to a gun range that’s owned by a Class 3 dealer and rent and fire full auto weapons. Everyone’s entitled to opinions, but when you call me a f’n liar, that’s a different story.

      Also…WTF makes you think that a mag in a full auto has to be bigger or longer?? Sure, you CAN use 33rnd mags or 50-100round drums in a G17, but you can use a regular flush mount 17 round mag just the same – you’d just run out of ammo quicker. Also, the device to convert a G17 would work just as well on a G26 (Sub-Compact 9mm).


  15. obummer also wanted to use and play the sympathy card with all of the deaths. to bad it was found out. evil evil evil. to them the end justifies the means.

  16. yes, i too would love to OWN a FULL AUTO MACHO MACHINE. i also accept the fact it would be difficult to become GOOD & SAFE with it. i agree, that maybe we might be OK to skip the FULL AUTO option, if WE THE PEOPLE get the CANS free of the unnecessary BS restrictions & fees. maybe that is the best way to PUSH for ALL OF US. at the environment seems to be becoming more GUN FRIENDLY, with the NEW SHERIFF in town. time will tell.

  17. yes. a lot of things COULD have been done to PREVENT this tragedy. your correct,about muzzle chains, restraints or table mounts only. need some qualified ADULTS overseeing ALL GUN EVENTS.

  18. @ Popgun,

    You are absolutely 100% correct. Liberal handlers added that “Fast and Furious” falsehood to their talking points memo right after Obama and Holder got busted. Their mindless minions have run with it ever since and some are conditioned to actually still believe in it.

    Their nefarious intent was to spread a false connection between their unlawful “Fast and Furious” operation by linking it to other past administrations’ operations to make it appear normal. The thing is, these past operations didn’t even use the same codenames or mission goals – and most definitely never murdered anyone.

    The differences are clear in that the Bush administration actually worked with the Mexican Government and embedded transmitters and used air support to track 300 monitored guns. The Bush administration called its operation “Wide Receiver” and immediately had it officially shut down in 2007 after realizing the transmitters had been discovered.

    This makes it impossible to supposedly be the same operation as Obama’s new illegal start-up in 2009. His operation was called “Fast and Furious”. It involved over 2000 guns without any tracking or air support at all, and the Mexican Government was never notified… Oh and did I mention people got murdered?

    Without any tracking, the only purpose for Obama to flood Mexico with 2000 guns (and counting) would either be: He likes helping drug cartels; or he had to invent a gun trafficking problem real quick so he had more evidence to justify signing off on the upcoming “United Nations Gun Ban Treaty” known as ATT.

    Their real thinking behind claiming that “Fast and Furious” was simply nothing other than a continued extension of Bush’s operation – was to sneak Obama’s unlawful operation in under the radar. The goal was to make him appear just as legitimate and routine as other past administrations. But the reality was that Obama’s “Fast and Furious” operation came nowhere close to being legitimate or legal – which is why people died and he got caught.

    Now that it has all been exposed, the only reason useful liberal idiots continue to spread the false narrative that it was one continuous “routine” operation run by several previous administrations is really to somehow make it appear less atrocious that Obama and Holder’s actions directly led to the murder of 2 U.S. Federal Agents and the deaths of hundreds of innocent Mexican citizens.

    At this point it’s really all about re-writing Obama’s history in hopes that 100 years from now middle-schoolers won’t read in textbooks about what a murderer the first black president really was. Sadly some people like Jim are helping re-write that legacy for him.

  19. I’m an absolute advocate of removing suppressors and SBR’s from NFA regulation. However, full-autos are another matter altogether. There’s no use for them in the civilian, hunting, or sporting world except for sheer amusement and the “coolness” factor.
    The solution to eventually loosening some of the NFA regulations is part of the same argument that cans and SBR’s shouldn’t be lumped into the same category as full auto weapons. I myself have fired a few full auto weapons at rental ranges, and can say with full confidence that 80-90% of people couldn’t handle them effectively or safely. So, perhaps if we focus on separating the de-regulation of cans and SBR’s while voluntarily leaving the full-autos under restrictions, it will be a more reasonable and just argument for legitimate users.
    I completely understand the credo that we don’t want to be watched over or babysat, but in reality, I think even the most staunch 2A supporters can see the sense in leaving fully automatic weapons as being restricted. I myself would LOVE to own one, BUT, I’d rather trade the satisfaction of owning a full auto weapon for the peace of mind in knowing that the average gang banger can’t easily obtain the ability to spray out 30 rounds in 3 seconds.

    1. @ KN,

      Actually, truly “staunch 2A supporters” don’t see a bit of “sense in leaving fully automatic weapons as being restricted.”

      On the contrary, the truest of “staunch 2A supporters” understand the Second Amendment was written to instruct the government they have no authority to infringe on anyone’s right to bear arms in any form.

      But these dedicated “staunch 2A supporters” don’t just mindlessly expect this to be followed simply because they are sticklers for the rule of law. They actually demand it for a very important reason, which incidentally hasn’t a thing at all to do with “hunting, or sporting”.

      Instead these “staunch 2A supporters” know the actual intent of the Second Amendment was to ensure citizens had the ability to rise up against a tyrannical government – and the only way to do that is to be free to own matching firepower without infringement.

      The only possible way to fulfill the purpose of the Second Amendment exactly as the framers had intended would logically mean there can be no exclusions on weaponry. And that would have to include “full-autos” just like the government owns.

      All that silly Second Amendment stuff aside, you’ve got much bigger problems if you honestly believe the purchase of an NFA tax stamp is all that stands between your “average gang banger” that really wants to get his hands on some “full-autos”.

      All that silly Second Amendment stuff aside, you’ve got much bigger problems if you honestly believe the purchase of an NFA tax stamp is what actually prevents your “average gang banger” determined to get his hands on some “full-autos”.

    2. I’m not naive, and I understand that a tax stamp isn’t all that’s standing between a street thug and a full-auto weapon. But, if they become as readily available and obtainable as a semi, you’ll see every thug on the block carrying one and spraying the streets.
      Aside from the ATF not wanting to lose the tax stamp $ (which is the main reason), your perspective of the “staunch 2A supporters” is a contributing factor as to why suppressors and SBR’s will always remain lumped into the NFA regulations. If you can’t see the difference in the responsibility required between owning those vs a full-auto weapon, then neither will the regulators or lefties!

    3. @ KN,

      I know you think you have it all figured out, but I can state with certainty that my 35 years (and counting) of federal law enforcement confirms more harm will come by “every thug on the block” using silencers to not draw attention, than they’d ever care to use a spray-and-pray “full-auto”.

      We seize more make-shift and stolen suppressors than any stolen or modified “full-autos”. The reality is – there is an incomprehensibly dark underworld out there that would literally blow your mind if you knew the half of it.

      So no matter how much you suppress the Second Amendment, all the poisons are still easily getting into the hands of the lawless. Meanwhile your nanny-state ideologies do nothing but cripple the law abiding citizens in making choices for obtaining what they need to mount a proper defense against it.

      Between terrorism and increasingly heinous acts of violent crime, the World is becoming deadlier with each day. The only real protection for you and your family is to take personal responsibility by arming up to defend yourself properly; and in a manner of your choosing, not the governments. And the only pure way to ever accomplish that is to allow the true intent of the Second Amendment to prevail without any type of infringements.

      The bad guy already has his – so the only thing you are really doing is preventing the law abiding citizens from getting theirs.

      One final comment: Though originally written in reply to another post, below is a link to my post which obliterates your wayward idea about the “ATF not wanting to lose the tax stamp $ (which is the main reason)”:

  20. suppressors protect your hearing ………….. short barreled rifles and shotguns are in fact the best possible solution for home defence

  21. you need to get REAL POLITICAL & dump most of the DEMOCRATS, wherever possible. do not wait for the BATFE to change its WARTS. good luck.

  22. Will be nice if it’s true, I live in Illinois and anybody knows this state likes
    to restrict just about anything in some parts of the state. What will it do
    at the state level if or when gun regulation does decrease. My state
    restricts suppressers as well as SBR and SBS, hell it was the last to get

  23. It’s probably true that the only hurdle that gov’t and ATF can’t overcome is missing out on their $200 tax. Otherwise, suppressors would likely already be legal. Since it’s all about the money, I say let them charge manufactures the $200 per can and remove the NFA registration requirement.
    Of course, the cost will be passed down to the consumer, but without having to wait 6 months to a year, the manufacturers will surely sell more product than they do now. With the increase in volume, it could eventually offset the cost – not to zero, but instead of having $800 wrapped up in a can with the current wait, perhaps we could look at $700 with no wait. It’s the lesser of two evils. But we may as well s*#t in one hand and wish in the other for the Feds to give up the money incentive.

  24. watched the video of the 9 year old girl, who shot the instructor, with a full auto gun, out in NEVADA somewhere. ugly and dumb. instructor was very poor on technique and maturity.

    1. I think children can experience full auto weapons. Its too bad what happend. But when i shoot with little children ill grip the gun i a way that allows them to still pull the trigger and be behind the gun until they can be safely comfortable with the recoil. For newbies id have the barrel on a type of linkage connected to the table so it cant be dropped or muzzle rize. And that was a bizzare accident. I truly blame that day on the fact that those puny micro uzi’s dont have a rubber backing strip on their folding stock. That the guy couldve aided her in gripping thst gun especially with it being her first full auto shoot. That stock clearly slipped off of her shoulder and flipped upward. Painted metal is very slick.

  25. The QUESTION POSED to start this discussion was; “Are you optimistic about the future of firearm legislation – based upon your ‘take’ after reading the ‘White Paper’ from Assoc. Deputy Director Turk at ATF”??

    As a custom AR platform builder, NRA member, and staunch 2nd Amendment supporter, I sense a definitive political drift or change regarding the over-regulation by BATFE, and hopefully the Attorney General’s Office will follow as well. There’s change in the air folks! I can smell it.

    When the President and his sons are all NRA members, and the sons have their fathers ear, then surely they are saying, “Dad, just because the ATF deregulates – or even mandates the legal use of suppressors on large (or small) caliber weapons – that doesn’t mean that all the “street assassins” in Chicago, Detroit, Philly, and LA are going to immediately increase their “professional hits” and make the new Administration and the ATF look like fools.

    No, quite the opposite. We can leave the Professional Hits to the CIA and military Special Forces, who hopefully implement this type of activity in the interest of National Security, and undermining and crushing ISIS. Deregulating the $200 dollar tax on suppressors in particular, would make a trip to the range much more enjoyable for the WHOLE family, and bring us up to speed with many, many other countries who mandate the use of suppressors as a necessary consideration for the well being of everyone’s ears who might me shooting, or be nearby – not to mention outlying areas where people might have horse or cattle ranches!! In the hunting arena, whether or not to allow legal suppressors could be left to the individual States – just like it is now.

    I guess the sheer length of this leaves no question as to the fact that I have a legal background. But, as Bob Dylan said, “The time they are a changin”…

    Be patient…….. .

  26. First of all I think the ATF should be changed to BCWT, Bureau of Cyber Warfare and Terrorism. Put those ATF agents out there investigating and fighting all these terrorist attacks and Cyber attacks not busting into a gun shop and confiscating hundreds of 80% lower receivers because some idiot said that they were too easy to machine into a weapon. Just to have the whole thing dropped later, but the owner never got back all the receivers that were taken. What a waste of time and manpower when they could be out there trying to prevent more terrorist attacks. That’s just my opinion. But what do I know, I am only 70 yeas old, spent 20 years in the Military and have been there don that.

  27. the BATFE will never volunteer to give up the $200 CASH FLOW. it just is not in their nature. might have to reduce their benefits & you know that will never happen.

    1. @ dave,

      Your several remarks are absolutely ridiculous. The BATFE has no control whatsoever as to how the NFA Tax Stamp revenue is spent.

      Regardless how much they collect, these funds have nothing to do with their “benefits”. They are all federal employees receiving the same pay and benefits as any other federal agency based upon a standardized General or LEO Federal Pay Schedule.

      Where the collection activity funds go is no different than any other revenue collection bureau – such as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) or the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB). You probably think these agencies get paid extra too.

      The reality is that all such revenue goes into a general fund managed primarily by the Department of Treasury to be redistributed throughout the entire federal government and to the States in accordance with annually approved congressional budgets as well as various predesignated Acts and Statutes.

      For example, one Act mandates all federal excise tax collected on guns and ammo sales go back to the States for wildlife conservation and programs to enhance hunter education. A mere 3% of the total revenue collected is limited by law to pay for the administrative expenses of managing the funds to ensure it is being spent properly.

      Generally the only time you will hear about the BATFE voicing concerns over changes to gun laws is not over your goofy fear that it may affect their “benefits”; however, they will speak up when they anticipate it having an adverse effect on their ongoing investigations or future criminal enforcement efforts. Otherwise, they could care less how many Tax Stamps get bought.

  28. the ONLY regulative powers the government has on guns, IS MAKING SURE THEY ARE PROPERLY MANUFACTURED WITHOUT DEFECTS, so that we can shoot them or use them without worry of malfunction, PERIOD…THE R-TARDED LIBS CAN KISS OUR ASSES…

  29. Would be very nice to own a short barreled rifle and suppressor without having to pay an arm and leg to do so. But I doubt we will ever see this come to light as it is a moneymaker for the ATF. It all comes down to money. At two hundred a piece, they can’t afford to back off the taxes. And as for machine guns I don’t think they would ever repeal the national firearms act. It’s a shame as I can remember back in the early eighties I could get a MP-5 sub gun for 375.00 + 200.00 of course. But the last semi auto version Hk-94A3 I sold brought me 5700.00 ten years ago. Can’t imagine what the full autos go for now.

  30. Talk is cheap. Putting things like this out there to ‘generate discussion’ is the cowards way to see which decision is more ‘politically defensible’ rather than just doing it and standing up for what is right.

    1. No. What Bush did was WITH the cooperation and knowledge of the Mexican govt. obama and holder did it to undermine the 2nd amendment.

    2. @ Popgun, I mistakenly posted my comment to you in the general area, so here it is again…

      @ Popgun,

      You are absolutely 100% correct. Liberal handlers added that “Fast and Furious” falsehood to their talking points memo right after Obama and Holder got busted. Their mindless minions have run with it ever since and some are conditioned to actually still believe in it.

      Their nefarious intent was to spread a false connection between their unlawful “Fast and Furious” operation by linking it to other past administrations’ operations to make it appear normal. The thing is, these past operations didn’t even use the same codenames or mission goals – and most definitely never murdered anyone.

      The differences are clear in that the Bush administration actually worked with the Mexican Government and embedded transmitters and used air support to track 300 monitored guns. The Bush administration called its operation “Wide Receiver” and immediately had it officially shut down in 2007 after realizing the transmitters had been discovered.

      This makes it impossible to supposedly be the same operation as Obama’s new illegal start-up in 2009. His operation was called “Fast and Furious”. It involved over 2000 guns without any tracking or air support at all, and the Mexican Government was never notified… Oh and did I mention people got murdered?

      Without any tracking, the only purpose for Obama to flood Mexico with 2000 guns (and counting) would either be: He likes helping drug cartels; or he had to invent a gun trafficking problem real quick so he had more evidence to justify signing off on the upcoming “United Nations Gun Ban Treaty” known as ATT.

      Their real thinking behind claiming that “Fast and Furious” was simply nothing other than a continued extension of Bush’s operation – was to sneak Obama’s unlawful operation in under the radar. The goal was to make him appear just as legitimate and routine as other past administrations. But the reality was that Obama’s “Fast and Furious” operation came nowhere close to being legitimate or legal – which is why people died and he got caught.

      Now that it has all been exposed, the only reason useful liberal idiots continue to spread the false narrative that it was one continuous “routine” operation run by several previous administrations is really to somehow make it appear less atrocious that Obama and Holder’s actions directly led to the murder of 2 U.S. Federal Agents and the deaths of hundreds of innocent Mexican citizens.

      At this point it’s really all about re-writing Obama’s history in hopes that 100 years from now middle-schoolers won’t read in textbooks about what a murderer the first black president really was. Sadly some people like Jim are helping re-write that legacy for him.

  31. yes, it has been 20+ years since RUBY RIDGE & WACO. 2 events of CRIMINAL ACTION by the FEDS. quickly covered up & hidden by the guilty. as i recall, NOT ONE FEDERAL agent was ever charged indicted or punished, for anything. we have to remember it was a time of BILL CLINTON AND JANET RENO. always ABOVE THE LAW. OBAMA learned from the best. always remember the BATFE is not friends of WE THE PEOPLE & never will be.

    1. David,

      I would have to agree with you. The ATF has historically been anti-gun, and they placed their administrative/civil servant duties far behind their political goals. They have gone to great lengths in committing sometimes horrific acts in their pursuit of said agenda (“Fast and Furious” being a more recent example). I have two examples I can give you:

      I was self-employed for thirty years, providing protection by contracting personal security details in Los Angeles. Back in the 1980’s I worked with a team that included an off-duty ATF agent (Law enforcement officers were/are always sought for such details because they come complete with legal badge and gun; CCW’s are difficult to obtain in California…). He was a former Cobra pilot in Vietnam, joined the ATF when he returned home, and was one of the very few ATF agents (Maybe the only!) that was a huge fan of the Second Amendment. So much so that he was a lifetime member of the NRA. He was pushed out of the ATF because he blew the whistle on some of the criminal activity that was occurring in that agency during the George H W Bush administration in 1990 (And the Bush administration did nothing about it). He was glad to leave, though. He said he couldn’t stomach what was going on.

      Another friend of mine was arrested by the ATF (He had a full-auto weapon for which he had never paid his tax stamp nor registered) years later. He had the weapon for ten years with no criminal intention (Never used nor planned to use in a crime), and was a solid citizen with no criminal history whatsoever. Even the ATF admitted that he had it “…for collection purposes only.” But his life was ruined anyway. The point to this anecdote is that one of the eight arresting agents was a woman, who during a discussion (While he was handcuffed), explained to him that she joined the ATF because she hated guns, thought they should all be banned, and wanted to do as much as she could to fulfill that task. My friend was stunned that an ATF agent would admit to it, but there it was.

      So yeah, I don’t trust them as far as I can throw the collective organization.

  32. I will not begin with WELL. I am heartened by the White Paper. Too long when led by Big Government,we know what’s best for you little people types, our Freedoms have been eroded. Adhering to the Constitution is hard for the Nanny State. Having a new boss will make a YOOJ difference and allow the Freedom loving Feds to speak their minds. DRAIN THE SWAMP #MAGA!!!

  33. Perhaps the BATFE, seeing the (ahem) ‘huuuuuuge’ amount of support the Trump Administration received during the election, is concerned that the popular energy – and political organization that used that energy – might be directed against their bureaucracy, which has never enjoyed much support from your typical Trump supporter.

    On the contrary, the BATFE has been vilified by 2A supporters for decades, with good reason. The right circumstances have come into play to finally dismantle this bureaucracy once and for all, and the bureaucrats sense the threat to their rice bowls and seek to mitigate it with floating these proposals, in hopes of staving off extinction.

    But 2A supporters have long, looong memories. Waco. Ruby Ridge. And who knows how many other predations, great and small, that BATFE have committed against the American people. This is one government agency long overdue for budgetary beheading. Gutting the NFA and neutralizing all the other Federal laws springing from it – like the GCA1968 – would go a long way towards doing that.

    1. there is no swamp, it is an F N sewer and needs to be power flushed to get rid of all the crap, i mean democrap….

    2. @Nemo: That was the first thought that came to my mind. He has seen the handwriting on the wall and is looking to jump on the new bandwagon.

  34. Government is still out of control. You have a state and CPS arresting a mother and taking away her kids FOR WEEKS over her decision to home school, now tied up in a ton of red tape and legal maneuvers designed to hide any gov’t fault. The swamp is VERY VERY DEEP my friends, and sometimes even the dredging equipment gets capsized. Not to mention the delicate snowflakes who get whiffs of this talk and immediately start rioting. I’ll believe it when I see it, is what I’m saying, I don’t have much faith.

  35. remember, the FEDS were deep into RUBY RIDGE, WACO & their major cover ups. no FEDS were ever prosecuted for any of those crimes either. i do not have HIGH HOPES for any NEW and IMPROVED attitudes toward the 2nd amendment, suppressors or guns in general.

  36. While I believe any relaxation of the provisions of NFA34 would be welcome, as would be the same sort of relaxation of the provisions of GCA68, I am not holding my breath in anticipation of such actions. Still, being the pragmatic optimist that I am, I do hold out some hope that finally some logic and real common sense may actually exist in our Federal Government that could dispense with the ludicrous, nonsensical laws that do nothing to curtail crime and that do everything to infringe on the Second Amendment rights of We The People.

  37. Full automatics should be allowed to be manufactured and purchased as well without insane costs and taxes. Hopefully if this is repealed the manufacturers will not gouge. Personally I refuse to support those that do. HK

    1. I have never fired a full automatic weapon. I have witness at my local range where the overhead ligbts and ceiling was shot up because the guy thought he could handle it. I feel qualicication should be added to ownership. To operate a forklift you have to be cerified for safety.

  38. Interestingly this is a tale of two high-level government employees: One a conservative ATF Agent and the other a liberal Secret Service Agent.

    The conservative ATF Agent wrote of his duty to uphold the Constitution by easing the unlawful restrictions imposed upon the Second Amendment by the majority of anti-gun liberals.

    The liberal Secret Service Agent wrote of her dereliction of duty in failing to uphold the Constitution by unlawfully refusing to protect the President were he to be duly elected by the majority of conservatives.

    For each of their efforts, one got placed on administrative suspension pending an investigation while the other is still on the job working to fulfill their sworn duties to the American people… Can you guess who is who?

    1. well if you refuse to do your job and up hold the constitution you should not be put on vacation she should be fired. WTF!!the house of cards is about to fall over. 1/2 thew workers are government and 1/2 of those do not do their job. it gets very hard for the other half to support everyone.. pretty soon it just falls over. we are about to see the end game. it is gong to be ugly. then electronic money and then the elites will have full control over everyone.check mate.

  39. WELL,while it is about time and we should not have to do it in the first place. let us get to the bottom of project gun runner and fast and furious. people are still being killed with those guns. no one was charged or demoted even though it was illegal. in fact i would bet by now some have been promoted. we know it came from obummer and holder will take the fall, but even if your boss tells you to do something illegal, should you do it?? no excuses, heads should roll!!!

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.