[mack59]

I disagree somewhat on the idea that it is a fight that is an inevitable loser with public opinion.

True it is/would be difficult - but there are some points that could be argued very effectively in regard to the 1986 hughes amendment and parts of the 1934 NFA.

For overturning the 1986 hughes amendemnt.

1. cast it as merely seeking to restore the law to pre-1986 and point out that the controls for all the thousands of legally owned machine guns will still be in place for any new ones.

2. point out the arbitrary nature of it

3. point out the fact that legally owned machine guns have not been used in crime or murder, except for 1x by a police officer, since 1934

4. imply it might be overturned in court as unconstitutional due to it's arbitrary nature and due to the ATF's aknowleged faulty record keeping.

5. educate the public on the NFA 1934 and hurdles and safegards to own a machine gun and wage an education campaign.

6. then get it attached to some must pass liberal supported legislation as a revision of existing rules.


In regards to reforming the 1934 NFA -

1. shall issue type sign off of local law enforcement if all requirements are met - otherwise it could be held to be a discriminatory process - unfair to minorities ect....

2. surpressors as hearing safety devices - identifying their acceptance in many other countries as normal nonregulated safety devices as in many countries in europe - educating people on how they really work - not like the movies

3. getting rid of the barrel length crap - this one could easily go down in the courts anyway.

4. redefining full auto so that tri-round burst is not full auto.

I believe the above are all doable or possible with time and effort and luck.