Why can't we repeal the Hughes amendment?

>>34651114
'Cause that would take Republicans actually doing their jobs instead of just paying enough lip service to their platforms to get reelected.

what exactly is needed to repeal it?
Does it have a expiration date?

>>34651114
cus you touch yourself at night

File: UncleTed.jpg (134KB, 652x755px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 652x755px

>>34651114

>>34651122
/thread
if I don't see real improvement in the next 4 years I'm not voting republican ever again

File: merchant~04.png (228KB, 658x768px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 658x768px

>>34651917
>do you know where you are?

File: IMG_6699.jpg (33KB, 202x267px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 202x267px

>>34651941
>voting at all
>not realizing elections are rigged from the start

>>34651957
>implying the deep state would have allowed Trump to win if they could stop it

>>34651174
There's no expiration date. To get rid of 922(o) you would need a new bill that would specifically repeal that section of the FOPA or a major court case that rules the ban was illegal (or illegally passed back in 86 but that's harder).

Here's the thing, not only are the Republicans not making any headway at the federal level but it's a complete political non-starter for the time being. All the democrats have to do is say "OMG the NRA and the Republicans want rednecks to own full-auto baby killers". There's a reason actual firearms laws are never brought up by the anti-gunners/regressives. Chances are 99% of Americans have no idea what GCA, NFA, or FOPA even are or how they work. This is how media manipulation works when you're target demographics are so hopelessly ignorant on the subject.

I'm going to bet (metaphorically, I'm broke as hell) that by the end of Trump's first term there will be zero progress on firearms rights excluding the roiling back of some of Obama's executive actions including Operation Chokehold.

As for the courts, we're talking a multi-year process, and recent cases in the 9th, 2nd, 4th, and 5th circuits have all shown the judges flagrantly and openly flaunt Heller and other case law when it comes to 2A/Firearms. That leaves SCOTUS, which means at bare minimum one if not 2 of the existing anti-gun justices will have to die or retire. Peruta (San Diego, CCW "good cause") IIRC represented a 3-way circuit split on this paticular issue and the anti-gun justices refused to grant cert because they know they only really have 2 options; make complete asses of themselves or evaluate the issues under actual scrutiny and not just bullshit.

>>34651957
>2016 election
whatre you fucking gay?

>>34651983
>continued

Currently the main 2A cases coming up for SCOTUS are the 5th circuit Maryland AW ban, and an open carry case coming out of Florida's Supreme court, and at some point you might see the DefDist case out of the 5th circuit, but that's truly a first amendment case that just happens to be about guns. Expect all of them to be denied cert barring a change in the lineup.

The Maryland case is particularly egregious in completely disregarding Heller, in which they argue that banning the AR-15 is totally constitutional despite being the most popular rifle in America full stop. Every single anti-gun circuit court (which is most of them) does a few specific legal tricks when it comes to firearm cases: Avoiding strict scrutiny, and avoiding arguing the actual merits. In the same way all the feds do now in big cases is say "muh national security" the states say "muh public safety". This leads to increasingly stupid and infuriating court transcripts, like how one court (I don't remember which one) literally said if banning something makes the public feel safer, even if there's literally no safety benefit, it's ok to ban it.

The best we can hope for under Trump is the same thing South Korea, China and Japan hopes for with regards to North Korea, maintain the status quo. I'm going to predict that there will be no major 2A SCOTUS cases no any legislative rollbacks or pro-2A victories. In the same way you have anti and pro-abortion states you will have a fine dividing line between pro and anti-gun states. California (I fucking hate it here) in 2018 will most likely elect Gavin Newsome who will push as much anti-gun bullshit as he possibly can as soon as he's in office. CA CT NY NJ HI MD WA DC and others will continue violating Heller and 2A with Oregon Nevada and possibly Arizona being majorly fucked up by Bloomberg's lobbying efforts

All we can hope for is Status quo in pro-gun states under Trump, and possibly well into 2020 if the Dems throw it again.

>>34651983
>I'm going to bet (metaphorically, I'm broke as hell) that by the end of Trump's first term there will be zero progress on firearms rights excluding the roiling back of some of Obama's executive actions including Operation Chokehold.


Assuming we do not have a pro gun faction in the Republican Senate who want to do something rather then be cucks.

>>34651114
One thing preventing this from happening believe it or not is that the value of transferable machine guns would plummet. This factor alone is probably what keeps the big wigs at the NRA (an organization which only cares about firearms for the purposes of hunting and collecting) from even mentioning it

File: 1500435324582.jpg (3MB, 4937x4966px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4937x4966px

>>34651945
no

>>34652127
>One thing preventing this from happening believe it or not is that the value of transferable machine guns would plummet. This factor alone is probably what keeps the big wigs at the NRA (an organization which only cares about firearms for the purposes of hunting and collecting) from even mentioning it

If that was the case you would see the companies that make machine guns pushing it as it means more busienss.

>>34651957
It's less likely that they're rigged, more likely that most people who vote just disagree with you.

>>34652315
No not at all. Companies that make machine guns for government contracts are doing just fine selling semi-auto versions to civilians. People who want military style rifles will buy them whether they have an extra stop on the safety selector or not. The owners of these companies (at least the ones who are actually shooters) probably have collections of machine guns worth 10's of thousands of dollars. If the Hughes amendment was repealed their collection might be worth 1/4 of that in a couple years

>>34652406
Of course, the denser cities teeming with illegal hordes.

>>34651122
When the only other alternative has gun control becoming (become?) part of its core policies, you don't have to do anything to claim to be "pro-gun."

>>34651957
Just because the game is rigged doesn't mean you can't win anyways.

>>34651114
Public opinion won't allow it to happen unfortunately. There are other reasons, but that's the main one

Our best hope for the death of those things that shouldn't be on the NFA or a part of US firearms law is for Ginsberg and another anti-gun judge or two to croak and be replaced by pro-gun as fuck judges. Moment this happens will be the time to start pushing the supreme court and for the next 10+ years we will see a golden age of firearms rights depending on how long they live and if Republicans get to replace them later.

Even with the magic of the internet getting rid of the Hughes amendment probably won't happen through congress. Too many people still willing to believe CNN and NBC on guns to have public support to get it through. We might see suppressors off the NFA with the HPA or SHUSH and maybe even SBRs down the road but it's entirely possible they won't without the supreme court on our side.

>>34652022
This sucks because there's a big push in new York to repeal the safe act and it's in committee now but who knows if it'll make it past the senate. Guaranteed the house will pass with a major of Republicans but even if it passes senate Cuomo probably won't pass it since he wrote the fuckin thing

>>34652439
Literal fuddlore. If you consider machineguns, which are artificially scarce simply due to legislation, a solid investment you're pants on head retarded. These gun companies would leap at the chance to repeal the Hughes amendment were it perceived to be tenable. Gun owners would buy full auto versions of guns they already own, shit like the kriss vector and the SAW would make sense to own, and gun R&D would advance strongly. .gov sales are a fraction of what the civilian market makes up. Hell, most of the optics progress the military enjoys is thanks to civilian consumers.

>>34652986
>and gun R&D would advance strongly
Why on earth would it?

>If you consider machineguns, which are artificially scarce simply due to legislation
Select fire weapons are scarce because no one bought them, which was why they were easy to restrict in the first place. It was an attractive piece of legislation.

If select fire weapons were put on an equal legal footing with semi auto tomorrow, you'd have a short spike of a few people buying them and that's about it. Very few people purchased select fire weapons prior to 1986.

>>>>34652986
I'm the guy you replied to. I don't own any, or feel the need to, but some decision makers in the firearms industry do, and I'm sure they'd like for them to stay valuable. Gun companies won't sell as many machine guns to civilians as you think. Ever been through the NFA bullshit? It's not like they'll be able to grab one off the shelf at Academy. Like I said, they're doing just fine releasing new semi-auto guns. Definitely not worth risking a PR shitstorm for pushing for the repeal, but you mentioned that. Your point about new innovation is a good point, and probably true, but it's not enough to spur anyone into action. I think you lack insight; sorry

>>34651963
>>34651994
>They don't know who is behind the (((Trump))) campaign

>>34652910
Being stuck in Albany for a while longer I am not getting my hopes up but were that to pass and override veto it would save a bit in conversion costs. Still need to move out to a more rural county though

>>34651114
because Hughes going to vote for that bill in Congress?

>>34652455
>Of course, the denser cities teeming with illegal hordes.
ICE and the Voter integ commiteee will fix that.

>>34652806
>Just because the game is rigged doesn't mean you can't win anyways.
True, we need to fight to win, not by the "rules"

>>34651963
>he thinks (((Trump))) is the "rebel" option
>he thinks last year wasn't a win/win for the jews
Someone's been drinking too much of Reddit's koolaid.