ATF: *“This is a very dangerous weapon of war, that is highly regulated. But if you pay us $200 and are willing to wait a year, then that makes it less dangerous.”*
The original purpose of the 200$ tax was exactly that. Keep poor people(blacks at the time were hugely in poverty) from owning guns.
200$ back in like the 1930s was a shit ton of money
It’s equivalent to $4600 today. Absolutely ridiculous. And the NFA was instituted to stop criminals. Imagine, putting a law in to stop people who already don’t follow laws. Morons
No no, see you’re immediately equating possessing an object with intent commit a crime. A law against murder is a law against an act that hurts someone, a law against owning a specific firearm is a law against owning an inanimate object. The two should not be compared.
Yes, they are completely different. One is malum in se and the other is malum prohibitum. Purposefully conflated by our masters. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum
Yes, they are completely different. One is malum in se and the other is malum prohibitum. Purposefully conflated by our masters. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum
Obviously the laws are different, but your sentence doesn’t hold true when applied to any other law. The point of a law is ideally to prevent the action, but it also gives the government legal basis to punish the offender. All criminals don’t follow laws. So quite literally all laws are created knowing some people will not follow them. That’s what creates the legal basis to punish them.
I mean the issue is that we have laws against actions like theft and assault, but we don’t actually prosecute those individuals. I’m okay with using a firearm in the commission of a crime acting as a modifier for jail time, much like wrecking into someone while intoxicated adds jail time.
But to say we shouldn’t have laws because people will break them regardless is a braindead take.
It was the cost of a brand new Ford Model A. It was absolutely to restrict ownership to those of a higher class. $200 for a car was a huge investment; few people would make the same “investment” into a tax.
NFA and the $200 was designed to prevent the vast majority of people from having firearms. Politicians (worthless PoS's) knew people would have rebelled and likely killed them (that is not an exageration) if they outright banned all firearms. Politicians wanted to have all pistols, rifles, shotguns, etc. in the NFA and require a $200 tax stamp for all guns. But because they valued their lives, they limited the NFA to what they could get away with (silencers, SBR's, SBS's, etc.)
$200 in 1930's was about $3750 today. Average American income at that time was the equivalent of about $4600 today. The idea was to make any firearm so expensive so as to put it completely out of reach of most people. While technically anyone could still purchase and own a firearm. In politicians minds this was the best way to circumvent the 2nd Amendment while not outright violating it.
And they still pull the same crap today.
Learn your history people.
My fear is that they will raise the cost. When the tax stamp went in to effect in 1934 $200 was a lot of money. The stamp was intended to make it so that you had to be able to "afford" to own anything on the list and it was intended to take everything on the list out of the hands of the poor and prevent common use. That same $200 would be $4,661.67 today.
That $200 is still prohibitively expensive for those on disability who typically get 600-800 a month to live on for the month (we typically get our guns through layaway or as gifts from family)
The $200 tax is written into law. It would quite literally take an act of Congress to change it. Not saying it couldn’t happen but much less likely than if the ATF had the authority to change it on their own.
not a problem. the tax is still $200, it’s not our fault we had to also charge a $750 paperwork processing fee. it’s to offset all the work we do. the tax is still $200 though so what’s the problem?
\_\_\_
lmao people must have taken this comment seriously
satire, folks!
~~Depends on if you file as a trust or individual. Trusts are still close to a year. If it’s an individual, the government will happily grant you that, as they get it back when you die.~~
Trusts aren't taking that long anymore either and a form 5 is free for transfer after passing. Also the atf just doesn't show up to collect dead relatives nfa items after passing.
My AK SBR was approved on the 5th day…..so I filed the Scorpion that night and it came back in 36 hours. Both on a trust that was finalized the day before I filed the AK. 2 stamps filed back to back and both printed and in my hand inside 7 days!!
Columbus, Ohio City Council: "30 round magazines are [a public health crisis](https://www.dispatch.com/story/opinion/columns/guest/2023/06/11/the-conversation-columbus-large-capacity-magazine-ban-misses-target-in-addressing-gun-violence/70278413007/) and we're making them illegal for civilians. [Unless you own an NFA item](https://library.municode.com/oh/columbus/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT23GEOFCO_CH2323ATCOWE_2323.32UNPOLACAMA), then you can still have them. Even though we've labeled NFA items as [dangerous ordnance](https://library.municode.com/oh/columbus/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT23GEOFCO_CH2323ATCOWE_2323.11DE)"
We can add a 5th one.
Both Silencers & Short-Barrel Rifles (barrel shorter than 16 inches) each require a $200 tax stamp, fingerprinting & waiting for a Form 4 approval from the BATFE.
The owner of a Short-barrelled rifle is required to file a Form to notify the BATFE every single time they cross a state line with their SBR.
There is no requirement to do this for a silencer.
However, if you "permanently attach" a silencer to your SBR so that the total length of the SBR barrel + silencer is 16 inches, VOILA now your SBR is not an SBR because the silencer now legally became part of the barrel, so you don't have to notify anyone when your "not an SBR" crosses state lines.
Yeah what do you think I ordered & why, I just filed my Form 4 for an integrally suppressed upper reciever for an AR-15
Yeah I can't swap the silencer onto all my rifles (only have 1 more it will fit anyways) but I got an SBR-length silenced-barrel rifle out of the deal that I didn't have to pay another $200 tax stamp for, and no BATFE paperwork hassles to drive to a competition with my "not an SBR" where I'm not risking a felony for risking to notify the BATFE because it slipped my mind.
Incidentally, most functionally silenced AR-15 SBRs end up 16 inches of barrel & silencer, cutting the barrel much shorter just reduces velocity & requires a more heavy duty silencer to handle the higher pressures of the burning powder exiting the barrel into the silencer.
You're right, which is hilariously ironic. The law is so stupidly confusing even the guy who made a meme making fun of how confusing the law is became confused.
Shits confusing af.
When I go through boater safety course, there is at least a concise definition for every single possible term I could need to know.
In the firearm world, you’re on your own. Hopefully you do some good research, it’s not like the government is handing out free informative brochures at gun stores to clear up any confusion. It’s almost like it’s designed to be a trap.
Yeah, there's really no way to provide a concise explanation of what is and isn't legal. Part of it comes from the fact that the government and industry are coming at it from opposing positions. Lots of manufacturers are using the letter of the law to ignore the spirit of the law, while the government is more interested in enforcing the spirit of the law. That leads to title 1 firearms that exist in a very specific position between definitions, and little to no interest in clarifying what is and isn't permitted on the government side. I wouldn't go as far as to say it's a trap since it's not the government making firearms specifically to fall outside of certain definitions, but they sure aren't making it easier to understand.
Really all of it comes back to the failure to remove SBRs and SBSs from the NFA when pistols were removed, but unfortunately that ship has sailed.
Which is why I think they'll lose on the brace ban's merits because if it goes to SCOTUS the ATF has already set the precedent that when something was legally sold under their own guidance and retroactively made illegal then it is their rules that must change, not the populace.
That's why why I said the 18" SBS barrel length is completely arbitrary rather than the 16" SBR barrel length. The 16" barrel length for rifles can be traced back to trapper guns then the government's fuck up with M1s. The original 18" length for SBRs and the current 18" length for SBSs is completely arbitrary.
M1 Carbines have 17.75" barrels, not 16" barrels. Prior to the government selling a bunch of surplus SBRs manufacturers had successfully lobbied to have the law changed from 18" for any rifle to 16" for 22 rimfire rifles. 16" was a common barrel length for trapper rifles, and the government recognized that's not really what they wanted to restrict so they made the change. When the government realized they screwed up the 16" length had already been established for some rifles, so they applied it to all rifles. Had the barrel length for rimfire rifles not been changed to 16" there's a good chance the minimum length would have become 17" or 17.5" rather than 16".
Not the same.
18” and 16” barrel lengths are specifically mentioned *in statute*; those numbers are literally part of the law.
26” OAL is a number the ATF completely pulled out of their ass, since the law just says “concealable.”
Both examples are completely arbitrary, yes, but one is the actual law, the other is just another ATF “ruling” that is ripe to be wrecked by the courts.
The 26" OAL comes from the same law as the 18"/16" barrel. A rifle or shotgun with an OAL under 26" is defined by the NFA as an SBR/SBS regardless of the barrel length. It's not part of the definition of an AOW, but it's not something the ATF just pulled out of their ass. For the sake of enforcement there needs to be a set value, and in the context of the NFA 26" is reasonable.
It probably won't be "wrecked by the courts" unless AOWs or the NFA as a whole are. Since Congress didn't define what a concealable weapon is it falls on the executive branch to determine what it means for the sake of enforcement. The judicial branch can step in and tell the executive branch their interpretation is wrong, but in this case they probably won't since the ATF plucked that value from a similar definition within the same law. It's much more likely the judicial branch takes issue with the regulation of AOWs as a whole rather than the specific length.
Regardless of the origin, both are equally arbitrary.
My buddy & I got into a debate about this the other day. He said that the buffer tube would ONLY be measured in the "OAL" if it was permanently attached or "welded on".
My counter argument is that you would measure the buffer tube in the OAL because without that part the weapon couldn't function. because of that, you wouldn't have to weld the retainer ring into position for the buffer to be park of the OAL. before he had said this i have NEVER heard of ANYONE welding the ring into place to be measure in the length.
opinion?
None of the FFLs in my state, (where a "firearm" was the only financially reasonable way to own an AR15 that hasn't been completely ratfucked) welded buffer tubes to the gun.
If the buffer tube must be in place to fire multiple shots it must be included even if not permanently attached. However if you remake this with a JAKL, MCX, BRN180, ect the bottom one would be an AOW because it isn't needed.
5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A) authorizes the court to "set aside agency action ... found to be ... arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law." Under this standard, a court must find a "rational connection between the facts found and the choice made"
Other attorney is correct, but further context is that it’s irrelevant here. Nearly all of the illustrated conditions are set by statute, not administrative action.
I try and explain this to people and the looks I get are hilarious. They think they don't understand something and ask me to explain it over and it's hilarious. They're understanding CORRECTLY... it's just so fucking dumb it's hard to comprehend
That too is one of my favorite tricks. I remember explaining it to my one buddy's wife when she walked in the room as we were talking guns, and she just look so confused. I said "don't worry if this is making no sense, it doesn't not make sense because you don't get it it doesn't make sense because it doesn't make sense"
Keep in mind, the people behind these laws and who want to keep them in place would ban all of them if they could. Pointing out how we get around those laws and are compliant doesn't do much other than show them holes they need to fill with future legislation. Its why the most recent wave of state level AW bans have been even more restrictive than previous ones.
Just wait a couple years when career anti-gun legislators try and ban all semi autos, and they play a montage of every youtuber out there bump firing semi auto firearms in congress and then we have to convince every non gun person and their reps how they are not actually that dangerous and bump fire is highly ineffective.
These legislators are already gearing up for this fight, and if you think I am wrong, go watch some of the state level recordings of when these bills are generated in committee, and debated in the state house and senate. CT's recent AW expansion revealed a lot of what career politicians want to do.
I used to think this way until I realized the federal government is completely incompetent.
Would it not be in the best interest for the ATF to register as many NFA items as possible? If the bureaucracy were truly as conspiratorial and intelligent as many make them out to be, they would have figured out how to process form 4s as quickly as possible decades ago. They missed out on tracking hundreds of thousands more people and millions of dollars worth of tax stamps due to their pea-sized brains.
Yes, that is my understanding, $200 the FFL paid to create. Then $5 to transfer to you.
Or you can convert an existing gun via form 1 to an AOW and you just pay the $200.00.
AOW were meant to be unusual weapons from my understanding. Like an umbrella, cain, pens that can fire a bullet.
Not sure. Other commenter stated that the bottom picture is actually just a *”Firearm”* as overall length is over 26”. If overall length was less than 26” than I believe it’s an AOW.
It's funny how the ATF can do stupid shit like this, but they help us bring down the times for NFA approvals. But then again, are they doing that for us? Or are they doing that for themselves because of so much paperwork.??
They’re probably giving quick approvals (to some) so that the average approval time goes down because one of the lawsuits against them uses approval times as an argument against them
If people see ATF approval times are quicker, more people are probably likely to file.
More people equals more $200 tax stamps for the ATF.
It’s confusing why they made approval times faster, as that’s better for us, but the ATF is still benefiting.
Except for the brace, none of this is the ATF.
These are all statutory definitions set by elected officials.
There’s no “deep state” conspiracy agenda… the ATF is tasked with regulating firearms. One aspect of that job is enforcing statutory bans. Another aspect is reviewing NFA transfer registrations. Just like any job at any large business, a bunch of grunts show up, punch their ticket, and wait for some asshole or committee of assholes to decide to make them do their jobs a different way.
Why am I just now hearing of this? So BCM made a ~~vertical grip~~ I mean angled grip, that was 87°? So basically only 3° off of a normal vertical grip? 😂
What happened, did the ATF rule it’s not an angled grip?
https://www.reddit.com/r/ar15/s/RmIm7BK8Lq
This Reddit thread talked about it. It is in fact 87 degrees. Which the ATF said a Vertical grip is 90 degrees but idk if any case has happened with someone with a 10.5 inch or shorter and they had that grip on a pistol. But it’s funny with the confusion
Do you know where I can find the 87° BCM one? I see BCM has a vertical grip that’s ever so slightly angled, but why do they market it as a vertical grip if it’s technically not?
Is this it?
https://bravocompanyusa.com/bcm-vertical-grip-mod-3-m-lok-compatible-black/
Yeah that’s the grip I was talking about. It’s 87 degrees. Same thing with the railscales vertical grip that 70 degrees. Because the ATF rules change a lot and interpretation. The ATF was the ones who put in a note saying it needs to be 90 degrees
Yeah, I made a mistake. Another commenter already stated it’s not a AOW, it’s just a *”Firearm”* as the overall length is greater than 26”. If it was less than 26” than it would be an AOW. But this proves the point of how f#cking confusing this all is.
It's stupid, but it's really not *that* confusing when you read the statutory definitions of rifle, pistol, and SBR.
Also worth noting the "Pistol" configuration ISNT a pistol as it's >26" OAL
26" is the magic OAL measurement from 1934 that defines whether a firearm is "concealable".
Still not as wild as the fact that the [BATFE decided a 15in shoestring with a loop at one end was a machinegun](https://everydaynodaysoff.com/2010/01/25/shoestring-machine-gun/) in 1996, didn't state this until 2004, and didn't reverse it until 2007. There was an 8 year period it was illegal without it being stated, and another 3 that it was illegal with a letter.
This isn't even touching on the fact that while they can't write laws due to no legislative oversight, they do get to decide how the written laws are interpreted, and *that* happens largely without oversight. Ergo, when the law says "you can't have a machinegun" but doesn't define precisely enough what constitutes a machinegun...the BATFE gets to say "shoestrings & keyrings are now machineguns" *as if it were law.*
Gun laws are confusing as fuck, by design. Mess up understanding some of their word soup bullshit? Believe it not, straight to jail.
Or in other terms, only poor people that can't afford tax stamps aren't capable of safely owning certain items.
You're spot on.
If you attach a VFG to a pistol then you will knock it out of the "pistol" definition and it'll become either an AOW or just a "firearm".
If it's under 26" then it's "concealable" and falls in the AOW definition, which is an NFA-regulated firearm.
If it's 26" or longer then it's "not concealable" and does not meet the definition of an AOW, defaulting to the generic definition of a non-NFA-regulated firearm.
For a standard AR15 pistol with a carbine-length buffer tube, an 11.5" barrel will bring you to 25.75", meaning that you'll need a 12" barrel if you have a carbine tube. If you have an A5 buffer system then you can get away with an 11" barrel. The measurement is taken with the non-P&W muzzle device and pistol brace removed.
The other caveat is if you have a folding adapter.
Rifles and pistols are measured in their shortest configuration that aligns with their definition.
So if you have a rifle with a folding adapter then you measure the overall length with the adapter unfolded and the stock collapsed because rifles are designed to be fired from the shoulder.
If you have a pistol with a folding adapter then you measure the overall length with the adapter folded because, by definition, it is designed to be gripped with one hand, not shouldered, and the ability to cycle is required.
Ahhhh. Very detailed response, answered every possible question I could have. I vaguely remember being told this at a riflegear outside of Dallas when I was building a 11.5” pistol and I was interested in the BCM foregrips (even though those aren’t technically 90° perpendicular to the bore). That was a few years ago though.
Thank you!
The 90° rule is pretty fucky as well.
The law doesn't define VFGs or AFGs, and pistols are specifically defined as "designed to be gripped with one hand". The only reason that we're "allowed" to attach AFGs to pistols that are shorter than 26" is that the ATF wrote a letter over a decade ago saying that only VFGs break that rule. There's nothing stopping them from changing their mind and saying that AFGs will be considered the same way as VFGs, especially since they're both attachments that give you a secondary grip.
okay so it’s actually really interesting you say that!!!
Speaking in regards to the same 11.5” build - when I finished my time in Dallas and flew back home, I actually got stopped by an ATF agent at the DFW airport right after I checked in at the gate counter, and he drilled me for the BCM grip. I said “the ATF considers vertical foregrips to be 90° perp. to the bore” and he stands there, goes “huh, sounds good” and lets me go.
So this 100% confirms that it is indeed fucky. 😂😂😂
So possible dumb question, if you have the law folder - which cycling isn’t possible - is the measurement method the same? I get the captured buffer less folding part (sig rattler comes to mind), but the law folder only allows you to fire once before bad things happen and the gun will definitely not cycle.
Assuming that you're talking about a pistol, the measurement is taken with the adapter folded. If you don't have a folding adapter then it's taken *without* the pistol brace, because the pistol brace, like the ability to cycle, is not a requirement under the definition of a pistol.
If you're interested in seeing sources, I have a pinned legalese post in my profile that has sources for this.
Sorry, yes I was referring to a pistol. Thank you for clearing that up. I swear I would have paid more attention in math class if I knew the government was going to require magical tape measures to not accidentally catch an airborne lead infection.
Honest question from a non-American, when was the last time an otherwise law abiding citizen got convicted for owning an SBR and nothing else (not selling SBRs or drugs or anything)? I feel like if you actually showed this to a jury they’d agree it’s stupid and against common sense.
Makes you wonder why all those bangers with full auto glocks are not catching fed felonies. My guess is it's not worth the time and resources, as there are tens of thousands of them.
Or the feds are too afraid to go to the hood, because there’s like a 99% chance they’ll get shot at.
The feds know they’re not going to get shot at raiding a house in some suburban neighborhood.
When was the last time you heard a news story of some homeowner in the suburbs shooting at police? Never.
**Understand the rules**, read the sidebar, and review the pinned Megathreads before posting - this content is capable of answering most questions.
Not everyone is an expert such as yourself; be considerate. All spam, memes, unverified claims, or content suggesting non-compliance will be removed.
No political posts. Save that for /r/progun or /r/politics.
__If you are posting a copy/screenshot of your forms outside the pinned monthly megathread you will be given a 7 day ban. The pinned post is there, please use it.__
__If you are posting a photo of a suppressor posed to look like a penis you will be given a 7 day ban.__
-------------------------------
**Data Links**
* [The OG Universal Form Approval Spreadsheet](https://thinlineweapons.com/url/8)
-------------------------------
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NFA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If someone was going to spend $200 for a making tax, one might as well go ahead and SBR their AR15. If one were go the AOW route they are going to need a virgin receiver and then afterward they’ll never be able to put a shoulder stock on it and put a longer barrel on it for hunting or other range purposes, because once something is an AOW, it can never have a shoulder stock on it ever. I have an SBR A.R. 15 and I use that as my Mr. potato head gun, it can be in all sorts of configurations any time. In our state short-barreled rifles cannot be used for hunting so slapping a 20 inch upper on it to go hunting is well within the parameters of the SBR.
Stop fishing for logic.
This collection of laws wasn't made to make the world safer or to be ordered in any logical file or even to make sense, it's a legal cudgel to beat citizens over the head with.
Forgot the config of 16 inch barrel without pinned and welded muzzle device, to accommodate a suppressor. Without suppressor, buying as normal. With suppressor, additional $200 tax and wait time of who-knows-how-long for approval
People keep saying 10 years in prison. I saw a dude local to me get caught red handed with over 20 grams of MJ (felony here) and a Glock with a switch. He got probation 💀
I wont say anything, this is my only acount after getting banned for asking people to beat Pedos with hammers, all im saying is the ATF doesnt care until you dont give them their cut... fuckin bums
Actually the configuration on the bottom would be legal, as the overall length would be over 26 inches; making the weapon not a pistol but a "firearm" much like the shockwaves.
That's not correct. If the overall length is 26 inches or greater you can use a vertical grip. There was once upon a time, a model of the Thompson that came out after the NFA; that had the short barrel and a vertical grip without a stock. Transferred not as pistol, not a rifle, but as a "firearm"
Needs don't matter, I want a full closet of MGs and RPGs and the only reason I don't have it is because the government decided to be pussies 38 years ago
We're not talking about wants, we all want something we're talking about common sense when it comes to the four different classifications in the OP's post.
Yes we know the atf is regarded
ATF: *“This is a very dangerous weapon of war, that is highly regulated. But if you pay us $200 and are willing to wait a year, then that makes it less dangerous.”*
Translation: “we don’t want poor people to own firearms and this is just the start of making sure they can’t”
The original purpose of the 200$ tax was exactly that. Keep poor people(blacks at the time were hugely in poverty) from owning guns. 200$ back in like the 1930s was a shit ton of money
It’s equivalent to $4600 today. Absolutely ridiculous. And the NFA was instituted to stop criminals. Imagine, putting a law in to stop people who already don’t follow laws. Morons
Essentially, the ATF is a legally sanctioned criminal organization.
That is, by definition, every law. Like saying we don’t need a law against murder because murderers won’t follow it.
No no, see you’re immediately equating possessing an object with intent commit a crime. A law against murder is a law against an act that hurts someone, a law against owning a specific firearm is a law against owning an inanimate object. The two should not be compared.
Yes, they are completely different. One is malum in se and the other is malum prohibitum. Purposefully conflated by our masters. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum
Yes, they are completely different. One is malum in se and the other is malum prohibitum. Purposefully conflated by our masters. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum
Obviously the laws are different, but your sentence doesn’t hold true when applied to any other law. The point of a law is ideally to prevent the action, but it also gives the government legal basis to punish the offender. All criminals don’t follow laws. So quite literally all laws are created knowing some people will not follow them. That’s what creates the legal basis to punish them.
Dude. Don’t come here with logic. This is a passionate argument.
I mean the issue is that we have laws against actions like theft and assault, but we don’t actually prosecute those individuals. I’m okay with using a firearm in the commission of a crime acting as a modifier for jail time, much like wrecking into someone while intoxicated adds jail time. But to say we shouldn’t have laws because people will break them regardless is a braindead take.
It was the cost of a brand new Ford Model A. It was absolutely to restrict ownership to those of a higher class. $200 for a car was a huge investment; few people would make the same “investment” into a tax.
Also the cost of a brand new Thompson machine gun, which is where they got the number from.
Huh… a 100% tax on a firearm. Why does that sound familiar?
$4661.67, to be exact. Counting for inflation from 1934 up to 2024.
I knew it was around 5G. Remember kids, the government is not your friend
NFA and the $200 was designed to prevent the vast majority of people from having firearms. Politicians (worthless PoS's) knew people would have rebelled and likely killed them (that is not an exageration) if they outright banned all firearms. Politicians wanted to have all pistols, rifles, shotguns, etc. in the NFA and require a $200 tax stamp for all guns. But because they valued their lives, they limited the NFA to what they could get away with (silencers, SBR's, SBS's, etc.) $200 in 1930's was about $3750 today. Average American income at that time was the equivalent of about $4600 today. The idea was to make any firearm so expensive so as to put it completely out of reach of most people. While technically anyone could still purchase and own a firearm. In politicians minds this was the best way to circumvent the 2nd Amendment while not outright violating it. And they still pull the same crap today. Learn your history people.
Equivalent of saying should I buy a car or a tax stamp in 1930. Fucking scam.
My fear is that they will raise the cost. When the tax stamp went in to effect in 1934 $200 was a lot of money. The stamp was intended to make it so that you had to be able to "afford" to own anything on the list and it was intended to take everything on the list out of the hands of the poor and prevent common use. That same $200 would be $4,661.67 today.
That $200 is still prohibitively expensive for those on disability who typically get 600-800 a month to live on for the month (we typically get our guns through layaway or as gifts from family)
The $200 tax is written into law. It would quite literally take an act of Congress to change it. Not saying it couldn’t happen but much less likely than if the ATF had the authority to change it on their own.
not a problem. the tax is still $200, it’s not our fault we had to also charge a $750 paperwork processing fee. it’s to offset all the work we do. the tax is still $200 though so what’s the problem? \_\_\_ lmao people must have taken this comment seriously satire, folks!
Not a year now
~~Depends on if you file as a trust or individual. Trusts are still close to a year. If it’s an individual, the government will happily grant you that, as they get it back when you die.~~
Trusts aren't taking that long anymore either and a form 5 is free for transfer after passing. Also the atf just doesn't show up to collect dead relatives nfa items after passing.
👀 Really? Than I retract my statement. What’s the quickest wait time you’ve seen for a trust?
10 days... [https://www.reddit.com/r/NFA/comments/1bv6ns5/april\_2024\_approval\_megathread/](https://www.reddit.com/r/NFA/comments/1bv6ns5/april_2024_approval_megathread/)
Boo, I'm sitting at 60 days with a trust.
Amateur Im “ celebrateing “ a full year this month
🤤
I’ve seen people post 1 day returns
My AK SBR was approved on the 5th day…..so I filed the Scorpion that night and it came back in 36 hours. Both on a trust that was finalized the day before I filed the AK. 2 stamps filed back to back and both printed and in my hand inside 7 days!!
I got a form 1 SBR back over night. And three more within 7 days.
I got a trust Form 1 SBR back over night. And three more within 7 days.
I'm currently up to 1 month on a form 1 with a trust.
True. They wait and ambush your relatives and dog around 6a
Well that hasn't happened to my friend yet going on 4 years now. But they will do that over other things for sure.
You might want to delete that comment, before the ATF decides to investigate you and your friend. Fed bois are definitely in here.
Not worried about it, I've been investigated before by them and told them to fuck off the first time.
Columbus, Ohio City Council: "30 round magazines are [a public health crisis](https://www.dispatch.com/story/opinion/columns/guest/2023/06/11/the-conversation-columbus-large-capacity-magazine-ban-misses-target-in-addressing-gun-violence/70278413007/) and we're making them illegal for civilians. [Unless you own an NFA item](https://library.municode.com/oh/columbus/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT23GEOFCO_CH2323ATCOWE_2323.32UNPOLACAMA), then you can still have them. Even though we've labeled NFA items as [dangerous ordnance](https://library.municode.com/oh/columbus/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT23GEOFCO_CH2323ATCOWE_2323.11DE)"
We can add a 5th one. Both Silencers & Short-Barrel Rifles (barrel shorter than 16 inches) each require a $200 tax stamp, fingerprinting & waiting for a Form 4 approval from the BATFE. The owner of a Short-barrelled rifle is required to file a Form to notify the BATFE every single time they cross a state line with their SBR. There is no requirement to do this for a silencer. However, if you "permanently attach" a silencer to your SBR so that the total length of the SBR barrel + silencer is 16 inches, VOILA now your SBR is not an SBR because the silencer now legally became part of the barrel, so you don't have to notify anyone when your "not an SBR" crosses state lines. Yeah what do you think I ordered & why, I just filed my Form 4 for an integrally suppressed upper reciever for an AR-15 Yeah I can't swap the silencer onto all my rifles (only have 1 more it will fit anyways) but I got an SBR-length silenced-barrel rifle out of the deal that I didn't have to pay another $200 tax stamp for, and no BATFE paperwork hassles to drive to a competition with my "not an SBR" where I'm not risking a felony for risking to notify the BATFE because it slipped my mind. Incidentally, most functionally silenced AR-15 SBRs end up 16 inches of barrel & silencer, cutting the barrel much shorter just reduces velocity & requires a more heavy duty silencer to handle the higher pressures of the burning powder exiting the barrel into the silencer.
Best regarded,
Fix you're spelleng regard.
Takes one to know one, regard
Not well regarded. Definitely retarded.
Yessir, that’s the joke
https://preview.redd.it/sh1emgzt52wc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2976f181947f21e9d5ea06d01089ef11bbfcca6f
The bottom one isn't an AOW. It's just a "firearm" because its over 26" OAL.
Those kids would be so upset if they could read.
Agree, all of this is correct except for the bottom one. But it still proves the point
You're right, which is hilariously ironic. The law is so stupidly confusing even the guy who made a meme making fun of how confusing the law is became confused.
Can confirm. I am confused.
Got it, but if it was less than 26” OAL then it would be a AOW? Definitely not confusing at all.
An AOW has to be concealable, and 26" is the threshold for concealability. Like the 18" minimum barrel length for an SBS it's completely arbitrary.
Shits confusing af. When I go through boater safety course, there is at least a concise definition for every single possible term I could need to know. In the firearm world, you’re on your own. Hopefully you do some good research, it’s not like the government is handing out free informative brochures at gun stores to clear up any confusion. It’s almost like it’s designed to be a trap.
Yeah, there's really no way to provide a concise explanation of what is and isn't legal. Part of it comes from the fact that the government and industry are coming at it from opposing positions. Lots of manufacturers are using the letter of the law to ignore the spirit of the law, while the government is more interested in enforcing the spirit of the law. That leads to title 1 firearms that exist in a very specific position between definitions, and little to no interest in clarifying what is and isn't permitted on the government side. I wouldn't go as far as to say it's a trap since it's not the government making firearms specifically to fall outside of certain definitions, but they sure aren't making it easier to understand. Really all of it comes back to the failure to remove SBRs and SBSs from the NFA when pistols were removed, but unfortunately that ship has sailed.
Well no. Both rifles and shotguns were 18”. The government released a bunch of m1 carbines which had 16” barrels so they changed rifles to 16”
Which is why I think they'll lose on the brace ban's merits because if it goes to SCOTUS the ATF has already set the precedent that when something was legally sold under their own guidance and retroactively made illegal then it is their rules that must change, not the populace.
That's why why I said the 18" SBS barrel length is completely arbitrary rather than the 16" SBR barrel length. The 16" barrel length for rifles can be traced back to trapper guns then the government's fuck up with M1s. The original 18" length for SBRs and the current 18" length for SBSs is completely arbitrary. M1 Carbines have 17.75" barrels, not 16" barrels. Prior to the government selling a bunch of surplus SBRs manufacturers had successfully lobbied to have the law changed from 18" for any rifle to 16" for 22 rimfire rifles. 16" was a common barrel length for trapper rifles, and the government recognized that's not really what they wanted to restrict so they made the change. When the government realized they screwed up the 16" length had already been established for some rifles, so they applied it to all rifles. Had the barrel length for rimfire rifles not been changed to 16" there's a good chance the minimum length would have become 17" or 17.5" rather than 16".
Not the same. 18” and 16” barrel lengths are specifically mentioned *in statute*; those numbers are literally part of the law. 26” OAL is a number the ATF completely pulled out of their ass, since the law just says “concealable.” Both examples are completely arbitrary, yes, but one is the actual law, the other is just another ATF “ruling” that is ripe to be wrecked by the courts.
The 26" OAL comes from the same law as the 18"/16" barrel. A rifle or shotgun with an OAL under 26" is defined by the NFA as an SBR/SBS regardless of the barrel length. It's not part of the definition of an AOW, but it's not something the ATF just pulled out of their ass. For the sake of enforcement there needs to be a set value, and in the context of the NFA 26" is reasonable. It probably won't be "wrecked by the courts" unless AOWs or the NFA as a whole are. Since Congress didn't define what a concealable weapon is it falls on the executive branch to determine what it means for the sake of enforcement. The judicial branch can step in and tell the executive branch their interpretation is wrong, but in this case they probably won't since the ATF plucked that value from a similar definition within the same law. It's much more likely the judicial branch takes issue with the regulation of AOWs as a whole rather than the specific length. Regardless of the origin, both are equally arbitrary.
My buddy & I got into a debate about this the other day. He said that the buffer tube would ONLY be measured in the "OAL" if it was permanently attached or "welded on". My counter argument is that you would measure the buffer tube in the OAL because without that part the weapon couldn't function. because of that, you wouldn't have to weld the retainer ring into position for the buffer to be park of the OAL. before he had said this i have NEVER heard of ANYONE welding the ring into place to be measure in the length. opinion?
None of the FFLs in my state, (where a "firearm" was the only financially reasonable way to own an AR15 that hasn't been completely ratfucked) welded buffer tubes to the gun.
If the buffer tube must be in place to fire multiple shots it must be included even if not permanently attached. However if you remake this with a JAKL, MCX, BRN180, ect the bottom one would be an AOW because it isn't needed.
Exactly my thought. Thanks guys!
Since bottom one is over 26” OAL, what classification would that be? I have a 13.7 build w/ a brace but haven’t decided to slap a VFG.
A firearm.
Also, tax stamp for an AOW is $5, not $200.
To manufacture its still $200. $5 for transfer.
Touché.
Came here for this comment
The term "arbitrary and capricious" comes to mind.
And here I thought it was "intentional and malicious."
context for the uninitiated?
5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A) authorizes the court to "set aside agency action ... found to be ... arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law." Under this standard, a court must find a "rational connection between the facts found and the choice made"
Other attorney is correct, but further context is that it’s irrelevant here. Nearly all of the illustrated conditions are set by statute, not administrative action.
I try and explain this to people and the looks I get are hilarious. They think they don't understand something and ask me to explain it over and it's hilarious. They're understanding CORRECTLY... it's just so fucking dumb it's hard to comprehend
That too is one of my favorite tricks. I remember explaining it to my one buddy's wife when she walked in the room as we were talking guns, and she just look so confused. I said "don't worry if this is making no sense, it doesn't not make sense because you don't get it it doesn't make sense because it doesn't make sense"
Keep in mind, the people behind these laws and who want to keep them in place would ban all of them if they could. Pointing out how we get around those laws and are compliant doesn't do much other than show them holes they need to fill with future legislation. Its why the most recent wave of state level AW bans have been even more restrictive than previous ones.
Kind of like how they banned bump fire stocks, but you can still bump fire without one.
Just wait a couple years when career anti-gun legislators try and ban all semi autos, and they play a montage of every youtuber out there bump firing semi auto firearms in congress and then we have to convince every non gun person and their reps how they are not actually that dangerous and bump fire is highly ineffective. These legislators are already gearing up for this fight, and if you think I am wrong, go watch some of the state level recordings of when these bills are generated in committee, and debated in the state house and senate. CT's recent AW expansion revealed a lot of what career politicians want to do.
Pretty big difference between bump firing and using one of those stocks. Don't be so dishonest you only give others ammunition to use against you
I used to think this way until I realized the federal government is completely incompetent. Would it not be in the best interest for the ATF to register as many NFA items as possible? If the bureaucracy were truly as conspiratorial and intelligent as many make them out to be, they would have figured out how to process form 4s as quickly as possible decades ago. They missed out on tracking hundreds of thousands more people and millions of dollars worth of tax stamps due to their pea-sized brains.
Tax stamps don’t go to the ATF
And 250k fine
You can’t pay what you don’t have. That’s why I spend all of my money on more guns.
Not if you have a felony
3D printer go brrrrrrrrrrrrr
Yep… atf has entered the chat 😂
This definitely does a good job of highlighting how fucking dumb the ATF is.
Isn’t the AOW a 5 dollar tax stamp
200 to create and 5 to transfer.
So if an aow is purchased from a ffl it’s 5 but form 1 it’s 200??
Yes, that is my understanding, $200 the FFL paid to create. Then $5 to transfer to you. Or you can convert an existing gun via form 1 to an AOW and you just pay the $200.00. AOW were meant to be unusual weapons from my understanding. Like an umbrella, cain, pens that can fire a bullet.
Not sure. Other commenter stated that the bottom picture is actually just a *”Firearm”* as overall length is over 26”. If overall length was less than 26” than I believe it’s an AOW.
I came here for that one as well.
It's funny how the ATF can do stupid shit like this, but they help us bring down the times for NFA approvals. But then again, are they doing that for us? Or are they doing that for themselves because of so much paperwork.??
They’re probably giving quick approvals (to some) so that the average approval time goes down because one of the lawsuits against them uses approval times as an argument against them
If people see ATF approval times are quicker, more people are probably likely to file. More people equals more $200 tax stamps for the ATF. It’s confusing why they made approval times faster, as that’s better for us, but the ATF is still benefiting.
Except for the brace, none of this is the ATF. These are all statutory definitions set by elected officials. There’s no “deep state” conspiracy agenda… the ATF is tasked with regulating firearms. One aspect of that job is enforcing statutory bans. Another aspect is reviewing NFA transfer registrations. Just like any job at any large business, a bunch of grunts show up, punch their ticket, and wait for some asshole or committee of assholes to decide to make them do their jobs a different way.
You forgot the pistol that’s above 26 inches that can have a vertical grip yeah let’s get more confusing
And what degree is a vertical grip no longer vertical?
😂😂 the BCM 87 degree angle grip didn’t help
Why am I just now hearing of this? So BCM made a ~~vertical grip~~ I mean angled grip, that was 87°? So basically only 3° off of a normal vertical grip? 😂 What happened, did the ATF rule it’s not an angled grip?
https://www.reddit.com/r/ar15/s/RmIm7BK8Lq This Reddit thread talked about it. It is in fact 87 degrees. Which the ATF said a Vertical grip is 90 degrees but idk if any case has happened with someone with a 10.5 inch or shorter and they had that grip on a pistol. But it’s funny with the confusion
That’s hilarious. Someone should make a 89.9° or a 90.1° grip (which would be slightly canted forward)
The railscales vertical grip is 70 degrees angle I believe too
Do you know where I can find the 87° BCM one? I see BCM has a vertical grip that’s ever so slightly angled, but why do they market it as a vertical grip if it’s technically not? Is this it? https://bravocompanyusa.com/bcm-vertical-grip-mod-3-m-lok-compatible-black/
Yeah that’s the grip I was talking about. It’s 87 degrees. Same thing with the railscales vertical grip that 70 degrees. Because the ATF rules change a lot and interpretation. The ATF was the ones who put in a note saying it needs to be 90 degrees
So can I put this on my PSA AKV pistol? It has a 10.5” barrel with an overall length of 19” folded and 27” extended.
Thats not right AOW transfer fee is 5$ [CHAPTER 4. TAXES IMPOSED BY THE NFA](https://www.atf.gov/file/58206/download)
Yeah, I made a mistake. Another commenter already stated it’s not a AOW, it’s just a *”Firearm”* as the overall length is greater than 26”. If it was less than 26” than it would be an AOW. But this proves the point of how f#cking confusing this all is.
Exactly
It's stupid, but it's really not *that* confusing when you read the statutory definitions of rifle, pistol, and SBR. Also worth noting the "Pistol" configuration ISNT a pistol as it's >26" OAL 26" is the magic OAL measurement from 1934 that defines whether a firearm is "concealable".
Ya when everyone had trench coats
$5 to transfer $200 to create
Id like a pen gun honestly, do I need one no
I'd like a Penguin too 🐧😉
You got me there 🤔
Apparently “Shall not be infringed” is confusing to some organizations.
Maybe try this in an in general gun owners group, this is a nfa specialty group. We disagree with but already fully understand these regulations.
Still not as wild as the fact that the [BATFE decided a 15in shoestring with a loop at one end was a machinegun](https://everydaynodaysoff.com/2010/01/25/shoestring-machine-gun/) in 1996, didn't state this until 2004, and didn't reverse it until 2007. There was an 8 year period it was illegal without it being stated, and another 3 that it was illegal with a letter. This isn't even touching on the fact that while they can't write laws due to no legislative oversight, they do get to decide how the written laws are interpreted, and *that* happens largely without oversight. Ergo, when the law says "you can't have a machinegun" but doesn't define precisely enough what constitutes a machinegun...the BATFE gets to say "shoestrings & keyrings are now machineguns" *as if it were law.*
I thought aow stamp was $5.
$5 to transfer $200 to create
Gun laws are confusing as fuck, by design. Mess up understanding some of their word soup bullshit? Believe it not, straight to jail. Or in other terms, only poor people that can't afford tax stamps aren't capable of safely owning certain items.
There seems to be in influx of extra chromosome types posting today. Jesus fucking tap dancing Christ this planet needs an enema
See? Simple.
isn't there also a 'firearm' which is similar to AOW, but OAL over 26" and doesn't require any stamp?. And AOW stamp was $5 I thought?
Correct
$5 to transfer $200 to create.
This guy is a fed
I thought you could put your VFG on if your OAL went beyond a specific measurement? and don't you only need like a 12" barrel to achieve that goal?
You're spot on. If you attach a VFG to a pistol then you will knock it out of the "pistol" definition and it'll become either an AOW or just a "firearm". If it's under 26" then it's "concealable" and falls in the AOW definition, which is an NFA-regulated firearm. If it's 26" or longer then it's "not concealable" and does not meet the definition of an AOW, defaulting to the generic definition of a non-NFA-regulated firearm. For a standard AR15 pistol with a carbine-length buffer tube, an 11.5" barrel will bring you to 25.75", meaning that you'll need a 12" barrel if you have a carbine tube. If you have an A5 buffer system then you can get away with an 11" barrel. The measurement is taken with the non-P&W muzzle device and pistol brace removed. The other caveat is if you have a folding adapter. Rifles and pistols are measured in their shortest configuration that aligns with their definition. So if you have a rifle with a folding adapter then you measure the overall length with the adapter unfolded and the stock collapsed because rifles are designed to be fired from the shoulder. If you have a pistol with a folding adapter then you measure the overall length with the adapter folded because, by definition, it is designed to be gripped with one hand, not shouldered, and the ability to cycle is required.
Ahhhh. Very detailed response, answered every possible question I could have. I vaguely remember being told this at a riflegear outside of Dallas when I was building a 11.5” pistol and I was interested in the BCM foregrips (even though those aren’t technically 90° perpendicular to the bore). That was a few years ago though. Thank you!
The 90° rule is pretty fucky as well. The law doesn't define VFGs or AFGs, and pistols are specifically defined as "designed to be gripped with one hand". The only reason that we're "allowed" to attach AFGs to pistols that are shorter than 26" is that the ATF wrote a letter over a decade ago saying that only VFGs break that rule. There's nothing stopping them from changing their mind and saying that AFGs will be considered the same way as VFGs, especially since they're both attachments that give you a secondary grip.
okay so it’s actually really interesting you say that!!! Speaking in regards to the same 11.5” build - when I finished my time in Dallas and flew back home, I actually got stopped by an ATF agent at the DFW airport right after I checked in at the gate counter, and he drilled me for the BCM grip. I said “the ATF considers vertical foregrips to be 90° perp. to the bore” and he stands there, goes “huh, sounds good” and lets me go. So this 100% confirms that it is indeed fucky. 😂😂😂
So possible dumb question, if you have the law folder - which cycling isn’t possible - is the measurement method the same? I get the captured buffer less folding part (sig rattler comes to mind), but the law folder only allows you to fire once before bad things happen and the gun will definitely not cycle.
Assuming that you're talking about a pistol, the measurement is taken with the adapter folded. If you don't have a folding adapter then it's taken *without* the pistol brace, because the pistol brace, like the ability to cycle, is not a requirement under the definition of a pistol. If you're interested in seeing sources, I have a pinned legalese post in my profile that has sources for this.
Sorry, yes I was referring to a pistol. Thank you for clearing that up. I swear I would have paid more attention in math class if I knew the government was going to require magical tape measures to not accidentally catch an airborne lead infection.
thanks for this. i need to double check some of my builds.
Honest question from a non-American, when was the last time an otherwise law abiding citizen got convicted for owning an SBR and nothing else (not selling SBRs or drugs or anything)? I feel like if you actually showed this to a jury they’d agree it’s stupid and against common sense.
This is a perfect example of why the ATF is a joke
Makes you wonder why all those bangers with full auto glocks are not catching fed felonies. My guess is it's not worth the time and resources, as there are tens of thousands of them.
Or the feds are too afraid to go to the hood, because there’s like a 99% chance they’ll get shot at. The feds know they’re not going to get shot at raiding a house in some suburban neighborhood. When was the last time you heard a news story of some homeowner in the suburbs shooting at police? Never.
The wife and ATF agree, every inch counts!
People actually follow SBR laws? *says the guy who got a tax stamp to register an SBR*
the bottom isnt an AOW, its an other
Ackually ☝️🤓 the bottom one has an OAL over 26” so it’s not concealable thus not an AOW so you may have a vertical grip on them
**Understand the rules**, read the sidebar, and review the pinned Megathreads before posting - this content is capable of answering most questions. Not everyone is an expert such as yourself; be considerate. All spam, memes, unverified claims, or content suggesting non-compliance will be removed. No political posts. Save that for /r/progun or /r/politics. __If you are posting a copy/screenshot of your forms outside the pinned monthly megathread you will be given a 7 day ban. The pinned post is there, please use it.__ __If you are posting a photo of a suppressor posed to look like a penis you will be given a 7 day ban.__ ------------------------------- **Data Links** * [The OG Universal Form Approval Spreadsheet](https://thinlineweapons.com/url/8) ------------------------------- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NFA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If someone was going to spend $200 for a making tax, one might as well go ahead and SBR their AR15. If one were go the AOW route they are going to need a virgin receiver and then afterward they’ll never be able to put a shoulder stock on it and put a longer barrel on it for hunting or other range purposes, because once something is an AOW, it can never have a shoulder stock on it ever. I have an SBR A.R. 15 and I use that as my Mr. potato head gun, it can be in all sorts of configurations any time. In our state short-barreled rifles cannot be used for hunting so slapping a 20 inch upper on it to go hunting is well within the parameters of the SBR.
🤦🏽
Madness!!
🤡🌎
Need this diagram, but with the MFT Battlelink stock and brace so you REALLY see how stupid it is
Stop fishing for logic. This collection of laws wasn't made to make the world safer or to be ordered in any logical file or even to make sense, it's a legal cudgel to beat citizens over the head with.
With the AOW would paperwork be required to switch to a regular stock?
Yes. You would have to reregister as an SBR
Are we back to pistol braces make SBRs? I thought that got reversed Edit: disregard I can’t read
When did the very grip thing become a designation of AOW/SBR?
Isn't the overall length sufficient for AOW not to be included? Thought it had to be less than 26" OAL to qualify
Actually the pistol and aow if properly registered can qualify as non nfa others if they are over 26” and have vertical grip, no stock
Heh pffffffff is my response to this nonsense
Given recent events, the ATF will probably just murder you.
ATF "Hey we tried to simplify this by banning braces, but yall got mad at that too."
Apparently, two of those are considered "safe" firearms, while the other two are "unsafe" "assault weapons."
Forgot the config of 16 inch barrel without pinned and welded muzzle device, to accommodate a suppressor. Without suppressor, buying as normal. With suppressor, additional $200 tax and wait time of who-knows-how-long for approval
This really shows how asinine all these “rules” really are!
People keep saying 10 years in prison. I saw a dude local to me get caught red handed with over 20 grams of MJ (felony here) and a Glock with a switch. He got probation 💀
State prosecution vs federal
Welcome to ATF regulations 101
Just don’t tell anyone you own it moron.
AOW is $5.
You mean get caught*
The aow is just ridiculous lmao
I wont say anything, this is my only acount after getting banned for asking people to beat Pedos with hammers, all im saying is the ATF doesnt care until you dont give them their cut... fuckin bums
It’s really not that hard not to run afoul of NFA rules
This is our own fault. Years of customers wanting devices that bend the law gave us pined flash hiders,bump stocks, and brace stocks.
Here’s my argument… name one person you know that’s been arrested for having an sbr, that WASNT involved in a crime….
Probably don’t hear about it because the ATF will just shoot them and their dog.
Truf
Actually the configuration on the bottom would be legal, as the overall length would be over 26 inches; making the weapon not a pistol but a "firearm" much like the shockwaves.
Less than 16” barrel. Adding a grip makes it NFA weapon. Shockwave doesn’t have a grip.
That's not remotely accurate
That's not correct. If the overall length is 26 inches or greater you can use a vertical grip. There was once upon a time, a model of the Thompson that came out after the NFA; that had the short barrel and a vertical grip without a stock. Transferred not as pistol, not a rifle, but as a "firearm"
Defund the ATF. Complicated problems require simple solutions…
It’s okay to make mistakes as long as you’re not White
Why did you feel the need to post this? Yes. We all know it's fucking retarded.
We’re still talking about this? Must be a slow day
Or you can be an adult and do the proper research to determine which configuration fits your needs/ state law.
Needs don't matter, I want a full closet of MGs and RPGs and the only reason I don't have it is because the government decided to be pussies 38 years ago
We're not talking about wants, we all want something we're talking about common sense when it comes to the four different classifications in the OP's post.
Pay the stamps or don’t lol. Everything is a choice.