FOP does NOT oppose SHARE Act

Discussion of Firearm Politics & Legislation. This forum is now strictly limited to discussions directly related to firearms.

Moderators: Coordinators, Moderators

FOP does NOT oppose SHARE Act

Postby DontTreadOnMe » Fri Sep 29, 2017 11:13 am

From Politico:
"With respect to the silencer provision, we have taken a position that we do not object to that provision," said Pasco. "The reasoning is because silencers are not — and have not been in the recent past — a law enforcement problem."

Pasco said his organization has pushed for language allowing silencers to be traceable, which has been added to the bill.


That's a powerful quote to help passage. TBH I'm surprised the FOP came out with this statement.
User avatar
DontTreadOnMe
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 1574
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
Location: SW Ohio

Re: FOP does NOT oppose SHARE Act

Postby Tru-Heathen » Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:29 pm

If I recall correctly, the TLDR portion of the bill regarding suppressors would treat them the same as any firearm via Form 4473.

How does one render them traceable and not also add firearms to the "registry" ?

Beware Greeks (or police unions) bearing gifts.
A wayfarer should not walk unarmed,
But have his weapons to hand:
He knows not when he may need a spear,
Or what menace meet on the road.

- Verse 38 from the Havamal, the Wisdom of Odin.
User avatar
Tru-Heathen
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 1:17 pm
Location: Hardin County

Re: FOP does NOT oppose SHARE Act

Postby SMMAssociates » Sun Oct 01, 2017 5:41 am

Tru-Heathen:

Doing a 4473 for a suppressor wouldn't bother me much. The ATF already know that I own a gun (or two), and a serialized suppressor doesn't tell them too much more.

Now, when they demand micro-stamping the projectiles to tell them what suppressor was used.... :( .

Guess the point here is that when given a chance to restrict LAC's to protect Criminals, our congresscritters will nearly always go for the restrictions. Plays better in Pravda. :mrgreen:

Regards,
Stu.

(Why write a quick note when you can write a novel?)

(Why do those who claim to wish to protect me feel that the best way to do that is to disarm me?)

יזכר לא עד פעם
User avatar
SMMAssociates
 
Posts: 9459
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:36 am
Location: Youngstown OH

Re: FOP does NOT oppose SHARE Act

Postby Tru-Heathen » Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:09 am

I've no problem with a Form 4473; filled one out recently as a matter of fact. And if that is the means for the suppressor to be "traceable" then my concerns are unwarranted.

But let's say I'm still suspicious. :| And still do not trust LEO unions spokes-droids. They (the unions) have stood with the gun grabbers all too often. I would hate to think that we gain suppressor removal from the NFA,only to find ourselves holding the dirty end of the stick.

Guess I'd better try to find the text of the amended bill. BTDT, not my first goat roping.

I know I too am likely on any list of firearms owners because of purchases, online ammo buys,and/or credit card history. Doesn't bother me (too) much.I sleep well at night.
A wayfarer should not walk unarmed,
But have his weapons to hand:
He knows not when he may need a spear,
Or what menace meet on the road.

- Verse 38 from the Havamal, the Wisdom of Odin.
User avatar
Tru-Heathen
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 1:17 pm
Location: Hardin County

Re: FOP does NOT oppose SHARE Act

Postby JimE » Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:40 pm

I need to read the bill .
Want to see if self-constructed cans are treated like self constructed firearms.
Be waiting for this to pass so I can try the $5.99 Fram Can.
JimE
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 7:50 pm
Location: Ashland,OH

Re: FOP does NOT oppose SHARE Act

Postby JimE » Wed Oct 04, 2017 5:33 pm

Well, we might not get to see this pass.
Don't know if they are stalling or the rino's had no intention of passing it to begin with.
https://www.stripes.com/news/us/no-plan ... dVg2sZrzIW
JimE
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 7:50 pm
Location: Ashland,OH

Re: FOP does NOT oppose SHARE Act

Postby M-Quigley » Wed Oct 04, 2017 7:56 pm

JimE wrote:Well, we might not get to see this pass.
Don't know if they are stalling or the rino's had no intention of passing it to begin with.
https://www.stripes.com/news/us/no-plan ... dVg2sZrzIW


I think they were looking for a convenient excuse. The concealed carry reciprocity is shelved also, and even gun expert Hillary isn't saying that would've caused more deaths in Vegas.
M-Quigley
 
Posts: 2254
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
Location: Western Ohio

Re: FOP does NOT oppose SHARE Act

Postby Werz » Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:56 pm

I predict that a move to ban bump-fire stocks will succeed. Although I oppose further gun regulations, I must admit that I think bump-fire stocks are stupid novelties not meant for serious shooters, and I would not shoot with someone who used one, legal or not.

Firearms suppressors make perfect sense and actively protect hearing. They are beneficial. If Democrats have enough public influence to pass a bump-fire stock bill, then Republicans need to demand an amendment deregulating suppressors. If the gun control crowd wants to "have a conversation," there's a conversation and a rational comparison.
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
-- Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon
"Remember that protecting our gun rights still boils down to keeping a majority in the electorate, and that our daily activities can have the impact of being ambassadors for the gun culture ..."
-- BobK
Open carry is a First Amendment exercise.
User avatar
Werz
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 5474
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 2:37 am

Re: FOP does NOT oppose SHARE Act

Postby M-Quigley » Thu Oct 05, 2017 2:29 am

Werz wrote:I predict that a move to ban bump-fire stocks will succeed. Although I oppose further gun regulations, I must admit that I think bump-fire stocks are stupid novelties not meant for serious shooters, and I would not shoot with someone who used one, legal or not.

Firearms suppressors make perfect sense and actively protect hearing. They are beneficial. If Democrats have enough public influence to pass a bump-fire stock bill, then Republicans need to demand an amendment deregulating suppressors. If the gun control crowd wants to "have a conversation," there's a conversation and a rational comparison.


Although I agree with you, the usual stuff I've heard from the gun control crowd in the past is mostly emotion based, and anything but rational. Their definition of "having a conversation" is you shut up, listen to them, and don't respond with any facts, because facts mean nothing to them. :( All they know about suppressors they've learned from Hollywood. :roll:
M-Quigley
 
Posts: 2254
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
Location: Western Ohio

Re: FOP does NOT oppose SHARE Act

Postby qmti » Thu Oct 05, 2017 5:09 am

Werz wrote:I predict that a move to ban bump-fire stocks will succeed. Although I oppose further gun regulations, I must admit that I think bump-fire stocks are stupid novelties not meant for serious shooters, and I would not shoot with someone who used one, legal or not.

Firearms suppressors make perfect sense and actively protect hearing. They are beneficial. If Democrats have enough public influence to pass a bump-fire stock bill, then Republicans need to demand an amendment deregulating suppressors. If the gun control crowd wants to "have a conversation," there's a conversation and a rational comparison.

I watched the SEAL TEAM TV show last night. They were on a mission going room to room with suppressors (Hollywood silencers) making little noise. This is where the general public and the anti-gun people get their information on how quiet and deadly the suppressors are. No reality here. If they showed the actual sound it wouldn't be Hollywood TV.
qmti
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 292
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 2:18 pm


Return to National Firearm Politics & Legislation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests