Kansas repeals law banning machine guns.

[Ranb]

The Kansas legislature voted to allow civilians to own NFA weapons (machine guns, silencers, short barreled rifles/shotguns) as long as the owners comply with federal law. This means they pay the $200 tax and obtain the tax stamp which amounts to ATF authorization to possess. It seems the law had been so restrictive that even the police could not get the weapons they wanted from dealers in the state.

Bill that amends 21-4201 and 21-4205 http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/46.pdf

Link to stories. http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics/story/585215.html http://www.kansas.com/197/story/379574.html

Lots of ignorant comments to the stories posted. Seems some people are so worried about Kansas being the next murder capital, but have no idea if NFA weapons have ever been used to commit a violent felony in their state at all. Typical of some of the comments that will be posted to this thread I think.

Ranb

 

[madurobob]

I read this story yesterday and thought they did the right thing. Why not simply rely on federal law? It seems to work well enough elsewhere. Not a lot of gang-bangers have $15K+ to purchase a legal automatic, much less the ability to meet licensing requirements. There is and will be a black market, but the prices will continue to be exorbitant.

Plus, its Kansas.

Now, if the feds would just legalize that kewl bump-fire stock...

 

[Cleon]

The Kansas legislature voted to allow civilians to own NFA weapons (machine guns, silencers, short barreled rifles/shotguns) as long as the owners comply with federal law.

So the repeal of this law doesn't mean NFAs will become widely available or anything; it just means that Kansas won't be more restrictive than any other state.

So....No problem on my end.

Typical of some of the comments that will be posted to this thread I think.

Poison the well much?

 

[Dragoonster]

The Kansas legislature voted to allow civilians to own NFA weapons (machine guns, silencers, short barreled rifles/shotguns) as long as the owners comply with federal law. This means they pay the $200 tax and obtain the tax stamp which amounts to ATF authorization to possess. It seems the law had been so restrictive that even the police could not get the weapons they wanted from dealers in the state.

So the only legal way for dealers to sell weapons & accessories to cops is if they also sell them to civilians? And common public dealers are now supposed to stock and freely sell all weapons the police use, to everybody? Why was that the only option in relaxing that law?

Lots of ignorant comments to the stories posted. Seems some people are so worried about Kansas being the next murder capital, but have no idea if NFA weapons have ever been used to commit a violent felony in their state at all. Typical of some of the comments that will be posted to this thread I think.

How could a criminal commit a crime with a SAW or minimi if it didn't exist in the state? The lack of that happening has nothing to do with any trend if that weapon is then introduced. The trend is inapplicable until the opportunity is there.

Plenty of states or national dealers supply local SWAT with speciality weapons including full-auto assault rifles, silenced sniper rifles, larger clips than can be sold by dealers instate, grenades, etc. I fail to see any logic in the reasons given for why this stuff needs to be sold to the public at Kansas dealers in order for Kansas law enforcement to possess them.

As to general gun control, I'm ambivalent. This reasoning just seems bizarre to me.

 

[casebro]

Sounds like Kansas is the 42nd state to go that way. Or 43rd?

Now if congress would just repeal the fed assault weapons ban, the price of full autos would drop to where it belongs.

 

[madurobob]

Sounds like Kansas is the 42nd state to go that way. Or 43rd?

Now if congress would just repeal the fed assault weapons ban, the price of full autos would drop to where it belongs.

Belongs?

 

[fuelair]

So the only legal way for dealers to sell weapons & accessories to cops is if they also sell them to civilians? And common public dealers are now supposed to stock and freely sell all weapons the police use, to everybody? Why was that the only option in relaxing that law?



How could a criminal commit a crime with a SAW or minimi if it didn't exist in the state? The lack of that happening has nothing to do with any trend if that weapon is then introduced. The trend is inapplicable until the opportunity is there.

Plenty of states or national dealers supply local SWAT with speciality weapons including full-auto assault rifles, silenced sniper rifles, larger clips than can be sold by dealers instate, grenades, etc. I fail to see any logic in the reasons given for why this stuff needs to be sold to the public at Kansas dealers in order for Kansas law enforcement to possess them.

As to general gun control, I'm ambivalent. This reasoning just seems bizarre to me.

You are aware, I hope, that silenced weapons are actually not silent by a long shot. Do I assume that by clips you mean magazines (I use clips for some of my revolvers. They hold half a load (mostly three) of cartridges (half-moon clips) ). Also, I would be way more worried about a person with a pistol who is a good shot than the average person using a submachine gun - having seen people shoot with both and noting which target got more hits (often with the smg that was no hits) - it is for crowds/banzai chargers.

 

[DouglasL]

So the only legal way for dealers to sell weapons & accessories to cops is if they also sell them to civilians? And common public dealers are now supposed to stock and freely sell all weapons the police use, to everybody? Why was that the only option in relaxing that law?
.

As I understand the original Law, dealers could not even import these types of weapons into the state regardless of who they intended to sell them to. Even police departments that bought the weapons from a dealer in another state could not legally import, or use them in Kansas. So its not just a matter of making the weapons legal for civilians, it is a matter of making them legal period, police and dealers as well as civilians.

 

[Dragoonster]

You are aware, I hope, that silenced weapons are actually not silent by a long shot. Do I assume that by clips you mean magazines (I use clips for some of my revolvers. They hold half a load (mostly three) of cartridges (half-moon clips) ). Also, I would be way more worried about a person with a pistol who is a good shot than the average person using a submachine gun - having seen people shoot with both and noting which target got more hits (often with the smg that was no hits) - it is for crowds/banzai chargers.

I don't care if Kansans can purchase rocket launchers and AA guns, the reasoning behind the change didn't make much sense to me. Cops' purchases are restricted so to solve that they have to grant cops and citizens the same access to weaponry? Just not seeing the logical leap or why cops' access is even mentioned at all. If the reason is actually "we just feel citizens should be able to buy the same weapons" then I have absolutely no problem with it.

ETA: Maybe I'm just being pedantic but it seemed very illogical. Thanks for the further clarification Doug.

 

[Ranb]

As to general gun control, I'm ambivalent. This reasoning just seems bizarre to me.

I think the state just decided that there was no reason to ban them at all anymore and that the federal rules were plenty restrictive already.

Most people understand that if a criminal wants to use a SAW in Kansas, it does not have to be purchased there; he or she can just bring it in from one of the other many states that allow machine guns to be owned by civilians. So far in the last 70 years, Americans have shown themselves to be very adverse to committing crimes with their registered machine guns.

It is bizarre to me that I should need special permission to own a shotgun with a barrel 17.5 inches long, a rifle with a barrel 15.5 inches long, or a silencer that lowers noise by a factor of 100 to reduce noise pollution.

Ranb

 

[Ranb]

.....Poison the well much?

Sorry, I could not resist. I recently concluded a flame war on a gun forum where a gunsmith said I was intending to do something illegal when I said I wanted to make a silencer for a 1895 Nagant revolver. Even though he was a gunsmith in a state that allows silencer ownership and I said I was using the right ATF form to make it, it did not stop him from saying I was making an illegal device.

Ranb

 

[Ranb]

.....Now if congress would just repeal the fed assault weapons ban, the price of full autos would drop to where it belongs.

If you are talking about the AWB of 1994, it lapsed in 2004. If you are talking about the 1986 ban on registering new machine guns after May 1986, then I would not hold my breath. Ditto on the NFA of 1934.

Ranb

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

The Kansas legislature voted to allow civilians to own NFA weapons (machine guns, silencers, short barreled rifles/shotguns) as long as the owners comply with federal law. This means they pay the $200 tax and obtain the tax stamp which amounts to ATF authorization to possess. It seems the law had been so restrictive that even the police could not get the weapons they wanted from dealers in the state.

Bill that amends 21-4201 and 21-4205 http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/46.pdf

Link to stories. http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics/story/585215.html http://www.kansas.com/197/story/379574.html

Lots of ignorant comments to the stories posted. Seems some people are so worried about Kansas being the next murder capital, but have no idea if NFA weapons have ever been used to commit a violent felony in their state at all. Typical of some of the comments that will be posted to this thread I think.

Ranb

Um, maybe that was because of the ban?

 

[Darth Rotor]

The Kansas legislature voted to allow civilians to own NFA weapons (machine guns, silencers, short barreled rifles/shotguns) as long as the owners comply with federal law. This means they pay the $200 tax and obtain the tax stamp which amounts to ATF authorization to possess. It seems the law had been so restrictive that even the police could not get the weapons they wanted from dealers in the state.

Bill that amends 21-4201 and 21-4205 http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/46.pdf

Link to stories. http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics/story/585215.html http://www.kansas.com/197/story/379574.html

Lots of ignorant comments to the stories posted. Seems some people are so worried about Kansas being the next murder capital, but have no idea if NFA weapons have ever been used to commit a violent felony in their state at all. Typical of some of the comments that will be posted to this thread I think.

Ranb

Way to go Kansas.

DR

 

[geni]

So have they legalised anything that will allow for effective AA cover (stinger missiles say)?

 

[billydkid]

The Kansas legislature voted to allow civilians to own NFA weapons (machine guns, silencers, short barreled rifles/shotguns) as long as the owners comply with federal law. This means they pay the $200 tax and obtain the tax stamp which amounts to ATF authorization to possess. It seems the law had been so restrictive that even the police could not get the weapons they wanted from dealers in the state.

Bill that amends 21-4201 and 21-4205 http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/46.pdf

Link to stories. http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics/story/585215.html http://www.kansas.com/197/story/379574.html

Lots of ignorant comments to the stories posted. Seems some people are so worried about Kansas being the next murder capital, but have no idea if NFA weapons have ever been used to commit a violent felony in their state at all. Typical of some of the comments that will be posted to this thread I think.

Ranb

The thing is - the federal government no longer gives our full auto permits. The only way to get one is to transfer an existing on - for huge amount of money. Also, and this is truly bizarre and idiot - noise suppressors are largely and pointlessly illegal in this country while in NZ, for example, they are often required in certain vicinities in order to avoid excess noise from shooting. "We hate guns and don't want you to have them, but if you're going to have them, you can't be allowed to have them be less noisey."

 

[billydkid]

Um, maybe that was because of the ban?

Yeah, you seriously believe that. Doesn't matter if you think it's actually true or not - it feels righteous to make the argument. Better righteous and self satisfied than actually correct.

 

[Cleon]

Yeah, you seriously believe that. Doesn't matter if you think it's actually true or not - it feels righteous to make the argument. Better righteous and self satisfied than actually correct.

Please note TB's use of the word "maybe" and a question mark.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Yeah, you seriously believe that. Doesn't matter if you think it's actually true or not - it feels righteous to make the argument. Better righteous and self satisfied than actually correct.

Jesus, ad hominem much?

I don't seriously believe it, I was pointing out that the same information could be used to support the opposing argument.

 

[Khonshu]

Class III weapons are legal to own in many states, and have been legal for quite some time, provided one gets local law enforcement to approve the purchase, goes through the required background check & pays for the required tax stamp.

If you belive about 75 years of evidence, legal ownership of Class III weapons does not present a threat to the public at large.