Posted on 12/11/2011 7:30:47 PM PST by neverdem
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Montana’s Congressman, Denny Rehberg, today announced that legislation he introduced, the Veterans’ Firearms Heritage Act, has gained the support and co-sponsorship of 219 members of the House – from both parties. A majority vote in the House requires 218 votes. Rehberg’s legislation corrects a law that currently treats World War II and Korean War-era veterans like criminals for not registering war relic firearms with the federal government.
“This common sense bill has more than enough bipartisan support in the House to move it forward today,” said Rehberg, a member of the Second Amendment Task Force. “It’s time for the House to act quickly and decisively. These American heroes have been forced into the shadow of a poorly executed law for long enough. In this case, justice delayed is truly justice denied.”
During WWII and the Korean War, many veterans acquired war relic firearms, which was a lawful practice at the time. Under current law, if the firearms were not registered with the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record during a single 30-day registration period in the 1970s, the veteran or their heir may be convicted of illegally possessing the firearm.
The Veterans’ Heritage Firearms Act will provide a limited amnesty for veterans who served overseas between 1934 and 1968. During the amnesty period, veterans will be able to register war relic firearms without fear of prosecution. This amnesty also extends to the veteran’s lawful heirs who inherited these weapons. If the veteran or heir chooses not to keep the weapon, the law would allow them to transfer the relic to a museum or collection without penalty in an effort to preserve these valuable pieces of America’s military history.
"Veterans have risked life and limb for our country and our freedom and they have earned the right to keep these trophies from their service. It is only proper that these veterans and their families be given the opportunity to register these historic firearms without penalty,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. “We are grateful for the tireless efforts of Congressman Rehberg in securing a bi-partisan majority of 219 co-sponsors for H.R. 420 to date.”
Is this concerning full-auto weapons?
That being said. It was legal. The window to register them to comply with the stamp act was criminally short, and they should get to keep them.
In fact, the entire '33 and '68 laws should be repealed, with amnesty for those that were convicted under them.
Evil, freedom stealing laws....
/johnny
Will it be like the '68 amnesty? Will or will not the veterans have to pay the $200 tax on applicable NFA items?
Will the NFA weapons become transferable, or will be be ineligible for transfer since they were registered after May 19, 1986 (end of machine gun manufacture for civilians in US)?
What is there to keep Holder and his minions from accosting any veteran who registers a bringback?
Does it matter? Free people had, and will again have the right to own full-auto weapons. Federal government has no business in firearms, unless to buy them for the military, or specify what the un-organized militia uses for caliber.
/johnny
Those, and the other categories of weapons that fall under the National Firearms Act of 1934, as amended (notably) in 1968 and 1986. Short-barreled rifles, "destructive devices", and "any other weapons" like pen guns. But for the veterans' "bringbacks", yes, they will mostly be full-auto rifles, possibly with short (under 16") barrels.
Contrary to what the media would have you believe, these are the only weapons that are required to be registered on the federal level.
Totally agree. But not likely to happen.
Laws that essentially make law-abiding citizens retroactively into criminals is... well - criminal. The law was pretty simple back then... they could bring home (some even mailed them) the firearms, bayonets and other relics without having to “register” or pay any taxes. Then along comes the government deciding that those old folks need to register those goodies or face prosecution.
While this act scratches at the scab - it really does nothing to protect the 2nd Amendment rights of those vets or their families (or other transferees). IN fact, this could actually make more criminals out of folks if they later buy one of these guns and don’t realize someone (either out of ignorance of distrust of the government) never registered and paid for their RIGHT...
We just have to push to get back to the Constitution.
/johnny
No, that would never happen. There's an incredible amount of paperwork involved in transferring ("buying") a full-auto weapon. The ATF is currently running on about a 4-month backlog. POSSESSION of a non-registered or non-transferable NFA item is illegal, and people have been murdered by the federal government for it. That's essentially the position these vets are in. Bringbacks were allowed, but they didn't register them, so they are now contraband.
Are you saying that this ONLY applies to FULL AUTO firearms? It reads as though it applies to all... I must have missed something.
No gun killed JFK.
The generally accepted story (which I believe, and this is wrong place to debate otherwise) is that the man who killed JFK used a $16 mail-order piece.
Other theories notwithstanding, the only thing any of the guns in Dealey Plaza that day (including the holstered police revolvers and whatever the Secret Service were carrying) ever did was function in accordance with the will of their users.
Here is THE reference site for NFA information and history.
http://www.nfaoa.org/
For recent post on this topic go to.
http://www.nfaoa.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7483
For those who are seriously interested in the topic, you can look up post on prior introductions of this bill.
It has slowly been gaining acceptance, too bad BATFE (ATF) has drug their feet in implementing this without the necessity of new legislation.
The could do so at any time, were it not for their anti-RKBA bias.
The original ‘68 “Amnesty” was in fact criminally poorly done, deliberately.
The ‘68 “Amnesty” only happened because ATF LOST a court case, the “Amnesty” was their cover to continue prosecuting American citizens for exercising their constitutional RIGHT.
Look around NFAOA and you can learn a LOT about the NFA Act, and it’s consequences.
As a battlefield veteran, I'm not a big fan of plunder, which I define as "stealing the personal property of the citizens of the enemy nation, including that of dead soldiers which rightfully belongs to their heirs".
I draw a distinction between that and "taking trophies", which I define as "capturing for ones self the enemy's military equipment".
I have a small box of stuff I brought back from Iraq in 1991. No weapons, no personal items, probably very little intrinsic value. I wish it had been legal to bring back a weapon...
My Uncle brought home a Luger from Italy after WW2. Since he was in a combat unit for nearly 2 yeras, I couldn’t care less if you consider it “plunder”. He wasn’t stealing art objects or personal property like some did.
I understand the place of war trophies. And difference between loot and trophies. And trust me, as a veteran myself, I'd grab an AK-47 or AK-74 and put it into use if required, in the field. And I have the training to do that.
And I wouldn't mind owning one. Especially one captured. But personally, I wouldn't carry it home. Even if authorized.
Just my weirdness. I wouldn't take a flag home from the field.
I actually purchased the CCCP shoulder patch that adorns my 'love me' wall.
No reflection on the good men that did well and brought home trophies.
/johnny
I have no problem with what your uncle did. And I'm grateful for his service.
/johnny
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.