What would you do?

I was listening to Vicious Circle #25 (again!), and a thought's been whirling around in my brain, having to do with Title II/Class III NFA items.

Since the purported reason the NFA exists is to raise revenue (the only way it's legal), I suggest a strategy that rests on increasing revenues actually collected. I have a couple of scenarios.

First, the Hughes amendment of 1986 must go. There is no difference between an imported semi-automatic and one that has the requisite # of domestic parts to qualify as 'not imported'. And here is where the increased revenues come in.

We must, as a free country, be allowed to make new fully automatic weapons and engage in trade, thereby increasing revenues. Along with that, the tax amounts should be adjusted downward, to encourage more traffic in class III weapons, as such:

1. Destructive devices tax to remain $200.
2. Full auto weapons to come down to $50-75
3. Supressors need to come down to $20
4. Short-barrel weapons need to come off the NFA list

Or maybe tax amount equal to a % of the purchase price up to a maximum of a small amount (smaller than is currently the case).

Or cank the Hughes amendment, allow the making (or purchase) of new full auto weapons, and take SBR's and suppressors out of the NFA (these items would still be subject to the normal excise tax, and you can make an OSHA/environmental health argument for supressors).

I've seen select-fire FN FAL's available (new to qualified law enforcement) for around $2000. This will be a plain-jane model, typically carbine length. And you can get an M-16/4 style for around the same.

But a transferrable FAL will be upwards of 5 grand. And due to the Hughes amendment, the supply has been fixed; an economists' nightmare.

And there would not be any shortage of economists who will make it known that allowing free trade in these weapons will generate much more in tax revenue than they are currently generating.

And when the BATFE balks, then we can start asking pointy questions, like 'You only want revenue, not a de facto ban on a class of weapons, do you?'. Especially since there are only (I think) 2 instances of legal full auto weapons ever being used in a crime.

And ammo manufacturers should get on the boat as well, because there's no greater need for ammo than with full auto weapons!

And I think that it's time for the NRA, GOA, JPFO, and SAF to get their asses in gear and make this happen. Someone needs to generate rational talking points that are quick (sound-bitey) and make sense. They also need to have rebuttal arguments ready for the inevitable shit-storm the Left will unleash. And have designated congresscritters to speak to the media ...... ones who can make the arguments and not do anything stupid on camera.

You know, do the things you'd expect advocacy groups to do.

Input, please! Expand, revise and extend these remarks!

pm