Now onto SBR's and SBS's?

[dgansen]

It's been made fairly obvious throughout the 'net that suppressors are now legal, but should we start pushing for SBR's and SBS's too? There are probably people who feel that we should cut some slack, seeing as they just gave us cans... but at the same time, wouldn't it be beneficial to keep up the pressure? It just seems to me that suppressors are only a battle, albeit a major battle, in the long haul to keep gun rights.

Personal opinion; maybe my views are skewed, maybe I have no idea what I'm talking about. Just thought I'd throw that out there as a flame retardant suit.

[Jailer]

Suppressors was actually a fairly easy battle to win. Only needed an opinion letter from the AG and that path was already paved by Cox with the MG letter. SBR and SBS will require a re write of existing law. That is a harder battle to win.

But if ever there was a time to tackle it now is the time. I don't know when we'll have a completely republican controlled legislature again. Odds are in our favor, I think we should go for it.

[collector5401]

:yeahthat:

[Chorkie]

Suppressors was actually a fairly easy battle to win. Only needed an opinion letter from the AG and that path was already paved by Cox with the MG letter. SBR and SBS will require a re write of existing law. That is a harder battle to win.

But if ever there was a time to tackle it now is the time. I don't know when we'll have a completely republican controlled legislature again. Odds are in our favor, I think we should go for it.


This pretty much sums it up -IMHO anyways.

[forrest0872]

Time to start writing our represenatives!!!!!!

forrest -

[Ken1973]

I agree now is a good time to start.

[JYogi]

Im glad we finally got it so we can purchase a silencer but a SBR (10.5 LRWC to be exact) is what I really would LOVE

[Quaamik]

No better time than now.

[noob5,000,000]

http://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?t=147758

[misuppression]

It's been made fairly obvious throughout the 'net that suppressors are now legal, but should we start pushing for SBR's and SBS's too? There are probably people who feel that we should cut some slack, seeing as they just gave us cans... but at the same time, wouldn't it be beneficial to keep up the pressure? It just seems to me that suppressors are only a battle, albeit a major battle, in the long haul to keep gun rights.

Personal opinion; maybe my views are skewed, maybe I have no idea what I'm talking about. Just thought I'd throw that out there as a flame retardant suit.
Seriously no offense meant but they did not "GIVE" us cans, they were always ours. One thing that is often lost is that government WORKS for US. We are their bosses and they are ONLY in power to do as WE wish. We will continue to demand our rights until they are all restored. Do not be afraid to demand what you want bceause it is literally their JOB to get it for you. This is what lobbyist do for corporate interests, they continue to annoy and request what their clients want, so be your OWN lobbyist. Sign the petition and keep sharing it because when the voices get loud enough they can't ignore it.

[kevins_garage]

Sign the petition and keep sharing it because when the voices get loud enough they can't ignore it.
I hate to Debbie downer, but there are many issues that go ignored regardless of how many signatures you have on a petition.

If the amount of time it took to get suppressors changed is any indication, it could be twenty years before the sbr/sbsn law is changed... remember, all suppressors needed was an opinion letter clarification, not legislative action... also remember that Snyder has said he is not interested in pushing any gun legislation (cpl pfz's), so why would he be interested in pushing for sbr/sbs legislation?

If you want to answer seriously, I'm all ears...

[Quaamik]

No politician is ever really interested in passing pro gun legislation. They do it because they think it will gain them (or keep them from losing) votes they need.

Snyder is a businessman. The big fault of businesman as politician is that they seldom have a good attachment to the non money related end of things. There are two ways to address that:

One) We make it obvious that he needs our votes and can't take them for granted. As he personaly stated is isn't interested in a second term, that means we have to put a lot of pressure on the legislature to put it in front of him in a manner that makes him realise he needs to sign it to get his projects through.

Two) We can relate the issue to money. Just as a start, I assume that SBRs and SBSs would be subect to the same 4% sales tax everything else is. How much per year do ou think that would amount to on SBRs/SBSs in Mi? I'm going to gues right about $1000 per transfeer ($40 in tax). Think there would be 100 sales a year? 500? 1000? 10,000? Personally I'd guess around 2000 - 5000 per year. That's $80,000 - $200,000 in taxes or the state. Then roll it out 10 years (like they do with all the budget / revenue estinmations) and figure $800,000 to $2,000,000 in additional revenue for the state without imposing any new fees or taxes. Hopefully that will get a little attention.

[kevins_garage]

No politician is ever really interested in passing pro gun legislation. They do it because they think it will gain them (or keep them from losing) votes they need.

Snyder is a businessman. The big fault of businesman as politician is that they seldom have a good attachment to the non money related end of things. There are two ways to address that:

One) We make it obvious that he needs our votes and can't take them for granted. As he personaly stated is isn't interested in a second term, that means we have to put a lot of pressure on the legislature to put it in front of him in a manner that makes him realise he needs to sign it to get his projects through.

Two) We can relate the issue to money. Just as a start, I assume that SBRs and SBSs would be subect to the same 4% sales tax everything else is. How much per year do ou think that would amount to on SBRs/SBSs in Mi? I'm going to gues right about $1000 per transfeer ($40 in tax). Think there would be 100 sales a year? 500? 1000? 10,000? Personally I'd guess around 2000 - 5000 per year. That's $80,000 - $200,000 in taxes or the state. Then roll it out 10 years (like they do with all the budget / revenue estinmations) and figure $800,000 to $2,000,000 in additional revenue for the state without imposing any new fees or taxes. Hopefully that will get a little attention.
Your numbers may not add up as you think as you seem to be assuming everyone that wants an sbr/sbs is going to buy a new one at $1k a pop. I am sure most of the folks that want an sbr/sbs will already have something in their collection to modify at a much reduced cost - i.e. cut the barrel for a couple of hundred. Or, in the case of an ar, buying a shortie upper for $500 or a $200 barrel to swap out of their upper - or just adding a stock to their existing ar pistol...

In the end though, no one really knows how many folks will pony up for one or more sbr/sbs guns. But, if the petition responses are any indicator,it will be far fewer than 2000-5000 each and every year for the next 10 years...

Fyi- we haven't had a 4% sales tax rate for a long time now...

[misuppression]

Your numbers may not add up as you think as you seem to be assuming everyone that wants an sbr/sbs is going to buy a new one at $1k a pop. I am sure most of the folks that want an sbr/sbs will already have something in their collection to modify at a much reduced cost - i.e. cut the barrel for a couple of hundred. Or, in the case of an ar, buying a shortie upper for $500 or a $200 barrel to swap out of their upper - or just adding a stock to their existing ar pistol...

In the end though, no one really knows how many folks will pony up for one or more sbr/sbs guns. But, if the petition responses are any indicator,it will be far fewer than 2000-5000 each and every year for the next 10 years...

Fyi- we haven't had a 4% sales tax rate for a long time now...
Yes, sales tax is 6% but that just makes the number even higher. While the petition may not yet have 5,000 signatures there are many that don't know it exists. With the petition on suppressors we got over 1,200 signatures. But look at EVERYONE that came out of the woodwork when they found out suppressors were now legal but never signed the petition. I personally have talked to nearly a hundred people at gun shops and gun shows that were getting suppressors but didn't even know the petition existed. I am sure there are thousands that want SBR's.

[motorhead148]

Your numbers may not add up as you think as you seem to be assuming everyone that wants an sbr/sbs is going to buy a new one at $1k a pop. I am sure most of the folks that want an sbr/sbs will already have something in their collection to modify at a much reduced cost - i.e. cut the barrel for a couple of hundred. Or, in the case of an ar, buying a shortie upper for $500 or a $200 barrel to swap out of their upper - or just adding a stock to their existing ar pistol...
This probably hits the nail on the head.I know that i wouldn't be dropping 2000+on a new sbr. I would want to put a stock on a Draco or get a sbr upper for a ar.I'm sure there are allot of like minded people

[northkid]

Easy sell to Lansing, just tell them people will be using a TON more Gun sales, ammo, gun parts, barrels. Which in return they make the 6% sales tax. Win , Win deal....:thumbup:

[HemiChallenger]

Seen 2 SBR's at the gun show today. Dont know how or why but they were there.

[GarrettJ]

Seen 2 SBR's at the gun show today. Dont know how or why but they were there.
You sure they weren't machine guns? No length restrictions on those.

[HemiChallenger]

You sure they weren't machine guns? No length restrictions on those.

100% positive they were SBR's. One was a class 3 dealer (mec-tec upper for a glock), the other was a private seller. IDK if private seller didnt know what he had or if the gun didnt fire. I asked him if it fired and he didnt have much to say. Weird.

[Eyeball]

Has anyone discussed the fact that SBRs are for the most part stupidly inaccurate? And for most rifle rounds, a SBR is crippling as far as the round's FPS and terminal velocity are concerned.

It's like taking a skyrocket and turning it into one of those little plastic "champagne party poppers" that we've all pulled the string on.

Maybe you could check out a book at the library a little easier with one stuffed down your pants and hidden, but an SBR for the most part doesn't provide any benefit in terms of accuracy or usability.

Note that the Israeli Army abandoned the Uzi (the classic SBR) for ARs.

[Quaamik]

As to the thought that most won't buy a SBR at 1k a pop, instead cutting down an existing gun (or building an existing AR into one) - it doesn't much matter. Budget numbers are always estimates. For something like this, any estimate may be inaccurate, so try to push the figures that help us. BTW - most AR builds will wind up as an additional rifle (few people are going to want to ditch thier old, perfectly good AR setup, in favor of a registered version that can't cross state lines).

As for SBRs being innaccurate - says who?

Yes, in rifle rounds they lose some velocity (in some cases a significant amount) and their effective range decreases. If you need the extra range, don't use / make you rifle into and SBR. But at close rnges (200 - 300 meters or less) an SBR can be just as accurate.

As for pistol caliber SBRs, the deciding fator fro accuracy is not the barrel length. It's the action. Open bolt guns (such as the full auto Uzi) had mediocer accuracy - pratially because of the loose machining tolerances and prtially because of the bolt slamming home as it fired disturbed the aim. Closed bolt pistol caliber "carbines" (the semi auto Uzi, the semi ato Thompson) are quite accurate. If you want proof, I'll meet you at the range one day and you can try a 16" bbl Thompson. I doubt installling a 10.5" barrel is going to change the accuracy any noticable amount.

[HemiChallenger]

Thank you^.

The point is to be able to own an SBR or SBS if you want one. Not weather they are practical or more or less accurate. Many other states allow it, why not us? It doesnt matter if 10,000 pay the tax to get one or only 10.

Some of the guys on the AK forums with SBR's experience excellent accuracy @ 100yds. Some do not. It's all about how well it's put together.

If we ever can own SBR's here I will own an AKS-74U clone.


Has anyone discussed the fact that SBRs are for the most part stupidly inaccurate? And for most rifle rounds, a SBR is crippling as far as the round's FPS and terminal velocity are concerned.

It's like taking a skyrocket and turning it into one of those little plastic "champagne party poppers" that we've all pulled the string on.

Maybe you could check out a book at the library a little easier with one stuffed down your pants and hidden, but an SBR for the most part doesn't provide any benefit in terms of accuracy or usability.

Note that the Israeli Army abandoned the Uzi (the classic SBR) for ARs.

You sir are on the wrong forum and a FUDD

[rjrivero]

Has anyone discussed the fact that SBRs are for the most part stupidly inaccurate? And for most rifle rounds, a SBR is crippling as far as the round's FPS and terminal velocity are concerned.

It's like taking a skyrocket and turning it into one of those little plastic "champagne party poppers" that we've all pulled the string on.

Maybe you could check out a book at the library a little easier with one stuffed down your pants and hidden, but an SBR for the most part doesn't provide any benefit in terms of accuracy or usability.

Note that the Israeli Army abandoned the Uzi (the classic SBR) for ARs.
There is no doubt that your velocity is compromised. If you're looking to engage at 300 yards, an SBR isn't the right platform. However, inside about 100-150 yards or so (depending on caliber), it's a different story.

There was a writeup in SWAT magazine November of 2010 in which they showed an SBR in 5.56 was punching holes through and through Class 3 body armor at 50 yards with accuracy at the 1 moa mark (or there about). For 0 to 100 yards, a SBR gives up precious little. For instance, a Nosler Partition still maintains mushroom velocity out to 120 yards or so in .223 in a 7" barrel.

For 300 BLACKOUT, similar to the 300 Whisper, you'll find that it's an optimal SBR Round. Running subsonic 220gr ammo in a 8" barrel is pretty freaking fun.

To compare an OPEN BOLT firing UZI to an AR platform is a no brainer. Open bolt guns are just plain less accurate. Comparing 9mm Uzi's to .223 out of a 7-10 inch barrel is just silly. The .223 has MUCH more energy even out of a sbr compared to ANY 9mm.

However, the entire Personal Defense Weapon category is dominated by rounds that are LESS EFFECTIVE than .223 is out of a 7" barrel.

Lets just talk about Pistol Caliber Carbine SBR's. Most shooters will find a pistol cartridge fired through a shoulder mounted weapon will be MUCH more accurate, and much faster for follow up shots, as well as target transitions. ANY amount of barrel on a SBR is going to increase your pistol caliber velocity and INCREASE your effective range.

If you don't want a SBR, that's fine. But for those who DO, you'll have A LOT of fun with them. Especially if you decide to put a suppressor on it!

[Roundballer]

Why do you guys continue to argue, call out a troll that has already been banned.


Eyeball
Banned
Forum Member

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 7

[HemiChallenger]

Why do you guys continue to argue, call out a troll that has already been banned.

Didnt notice the ban earlier when I made my post.

[Eggroid]

How much per year do ou think that would amount to on SBRs/SBSs in Mi? I'm going to gues right about $1000 per transfeer ($40 in tax). Think there would be 100 sales a year? 500? 1000? 10,000? Personally I'd guess around 2000 - 5000 per year. That's $80,000 - $200,000 in taxes or the state. Then roll it out 10 years (like they do with all the budget / revenue estinmations) and figure $800,000 to $2,000,000 in additional revenue for the state without imposing any new fees or taxes. Hopefully that will get a little attention.

These revenue numbers assume those of us who would like to buy a SBR but can't have taken that money and stuck it under our mattress. More likely, we're spending it on something else, and the gov is getting their cut. So legalizing SBRs only increases revenue if a) it shifts savings to consumption buy one, b) people come from out of state to buy them here, or c) there is an additional tax.

(a) seems unlikely, as an SBR isn't exactly a necessity. I don't think (b) is possible, given all the paperwork. That leaves more taxes, which I guess is better than not being allowed to purchase one at all... but not by much!

Best chance is probably to convince Reps that they will lose votes & campaign contributions by opposing pro-gun legislation.

[harry]

Dear Mike:



Thank you for your e-mail. Currently legislation is being drafted that will clarify the legality of short-barreled rifles and shotguns under Michigan Law as it is constitutionally allowed under Federal law. When there is a bill number assigned, I will let you know so you can track its progress on the Michigan Legislature website.

I appreciate hearing from you regarding this issue.



Sincerely,





Tom Casperson

State Senator

District 38

got this e-mail today.

[collector5401]

Dear Mike:



Thank you for your e-mail. Currently legislation is being drafted that will clarify the legality of short-barreled rifles and shotguns under Michigan Law as it is constitutionally allowed under Federal law. When there is a bill number assigned, I will let you know so you can track its progress on the Michigan Legislature website.

I appreciate hearing from you regarding this issue.



Sincerely,





Tom Casperson

State Senator

District 38

got this e-mail today.

received same e-mail