Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mylife

Thank you for your response but what is a Class III weapon?


53 posted on 07/07/2012 11:06:23 AM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]


To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
Full auto weapons are class 3. So are suppressors.

Both of these are easily obtained here in a free state.

60 posted on 07/07/2012 11:13:28 AM PDT by LouAvul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS

full auto.

I think you can still own them if you bought them prior to a certain date.

Problem is, if you bought something like that back before they started keeping records (which is a violation of our rights) How can you prove when you bought it?

I bought stiff legally with cash in Ca before all this horseshit that could get me in trouble in Ca now as I have no receipts to prove when I bought them.


61 posted on 07/07/2012 11:13:36 AM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
There is not such a thing as a Class 3 weapon. This is a misnomer in gun parlance. The class 3 term is the correct term for a (Federal Firearm License) FFL holder that pays a Special Occupational Tax (SOT) in addition to their FFL to give them legal access to deal, sell, transfer, repair, mfg, etc Ntional Firearm Act of 1934 (NFA) Title 1 or Title 2 firearms.

An FFL with a class III SOT is usually a retail gun store that can deal in NFA items. Title 1 firearms are typically non Title 2 firearms. Title 2 of the NFA are either fully automatic firearms, suppressors, destructive devices, short barrel rifles, short barrel shotguns, or any other weapons (AOW).

I am a Type 7 FFL, Class 02 SOT. I can not only sell Title 2 firearms, I can mfg them.

Anyways, there is no such thing s a class 3 firearm. However there is a SOT tax FFL holders can pay to deal in them. The correct term is Title 2 Firearms under the NFA of 1934.

. it's kinda like breaking gun enthusiasts from using the term "bullet" rather than the term "ammunition" or "cartridge". Everyone knows what you are trying to say, but technically it is incorrect.

It may seem petty or insipid, but if you are going to debate gun grabbers, liberals, or ignorant people to pro gun arguments, you might as well get it right. Gungraboids purposely used firearm terms to misconstrue full auto/select fire ASSAULT RIFLES with the made up political term of "assault weapon" in order to make ignorant voters think they were lumping in their semi auto clones into the ban.

99 posted on 07/07/2012 2:19:09 PM PDT by DCBryan1 (I'll take over the Mormon over the Moron any day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson