Remove suppressors as an NFA regulated item.(Whitehouse Petition)

[tommyrp12]

It needs 100,000 signatures. I understand its just a petition but I would be interested in what they have to say about it.

Remove suppressors as an NFA regulated item.

we petition the obama administration to:

Remove suppressors as an NFA regulated item.

Removal of suppressors as an NFA regulated item would eliminate the $200 tax stamp, eliminate legality and travel issues between states, reduce hearing safety concerns related to discharging firearms, and would help people be courteous neighbors when discharging firearms.

[Anti Federalist]

I'm all for it.

No-brainer AFAIC.

In some European countries it is required that you supress high power rifles.

While we're at it, removed the McClure/Volkmer, (Reagan approved) ban on the production, sale and possession of newly manufactured full auto firearms.

[Cleaner44]

This could be fun.

[TheTexan]

but I would be interested in what they have to say about it.

You won't get any answers. You'll just get a "No, because $#@! you" in 500 words or less.

[tangent4ronpaul]

I'm all for it.

No-brainer AFAIC.

In some European countries it is required that you supress high power rifles.

While we're at it, removed the McClure/Volkmer, (Reagan approved) ban on the production, sale and possession of newly manufactured full auto firearms.

Thank you for volunteering. Pease start that petition and I will help spread the word. I doubt I'll have any problem finding signers.

-t

[tangent4ronpaul]

Requires e-mail verification or it doesn't count...

waiting...

waiting...

waiting...

still waiting...

yawn!

is this F'n intentional...

PISSED!

-t

[Matt Collins]

Why would you want to intentionally put yourself on a government gun list?

[Matt Collins]

[robertwerden]

So by signing this, you admit that the White House has the authority to change legislation on gun laws?

[tangent4ronpaul]

Laws are about what you have to do or you can't do. They never give you more freedom. Nullification from anywhere is good.

Besides sir golfs a lot nullifies parts of everything crossing his desk via signing statements.

http://insidejbs.wordpress.com/2014/...s-catching-on/

As is customary among federal officials, Holder relied on only a portion of this clause, the part stating that laws of the United States “shall be the supreme law of the land” binding all the states. But a more complete look at this clause shows that federal laws are legitimate only if “made in pursuance thereof” of the Constitution. In other words, if a federal law is not in keeping with, or exceeds, the powers granted in the Constitution, it can rightly be declared illegitimate and not obeyed.

Besides, actually having Obama do that isn't the point, the point is to draw pubic attention to the issue and push back against the gun grabbers.

-t

[pcosmar]

Why would you want to intentionally put yourself on a government gun list?

The fact that such exists indicates a huge problem.

[jtap]

It needs 100,000 signatures. I understand its just a petition but I would be interested in what they have to say about it.

Remove suppressors as an NFA regulated item.

For the children['s ears]!!!!

[Acala]

So by signing this, you admit that the White House has the authority to change legislation on gun laws?

The President absolutely has the authority, indeed the duty, to refuse to enforce unconstitutional laws such as, for pertinent example, the NFA.

[mello]

In Milwaukee County, in order to get a suppressor, you need to get a form signed by the sheriff. Unfortunately, he never signs the form.

[robertwerden]

The President absolutely has the authority, indeed the duty, to refuse to enforce unconstitutional laws such as, for pertinent example, the NFA.

Ok lol

[kcchiefs6465]

In Milwaukee County, in order to get a suppressor, you need to get a form signed by the sheriff. Unfortunately, he never signs the form.

That's every county, I believe.

It's like a year waiting period here, last I heard.

[kcchiefs6465]

Ok lol

You disagree with that?

Congress also has the duty not to enact unconstitutional laws. The president is indeed supposed to be a check against unbridled tyranny. It doesn't actually work that way, of course, and arguably has never worked that way, but as far as Constitutionalism is concerned, I'd say Acala got it right.

[Czolgosz]

If you can get 100k people to sign, just get that same 100k to make/use/buy/sell them. Stop asking for permission.

[robertwerden]

You disagree with that?

Congress also has the duty not to enact unconstitutional laws. The president is indeed supposed to be a check against unbridled tyranny. It doesn't actually work that way, of course, and arguably has never worked that way, but as far as Constitutionalism is concerned, I'd say Acala got it right.

Ya I disagree. Obama will never do what is right