• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Suppressors Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Scooty Puff Sr.</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: idahoshooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think it would be cool if the 86 bill banning the creation of new full autos would go away, but I dont think it ever will. Shoot, if they taxed it at 5k a pop they would still make a ton of money. </div></div>

I don't think I would play at $5K a pop, but I'm with you. It would be great to be able to by new ones. </div></div>

Are you kidding me? Think about it. If you are talking about quality MG's, other then MAC's or tube guns. Say an M16. Even in the last year, with the prices as low as they have gotten, lowest I've seen is low $8000's. So if I could pay a $5000 tax, and build a new M16? Are you kidding me? Oh hell yeah. Call up colt, get an M4A3 for $1200, and $5k tax? I'm all over it. Call up FN, order a 240B, what are they, $13k? $5k tax, so $18k and I have a 240B that right now when you see one come up for sale is $130k??? What's not to like?
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mtmisfit</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
it is nearly a clone of Montana's law.

Salt Lake Tribune Article </div></div>

Except the BATF has told us Montanans basically "good luck with your little law there, it doesn't supersede anything federal" You can look it up.
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

It will be interesting to see if the BATFE decides to act on these state laws. It sets up a paradox if they do as they turn a blind eye to med dope in states like mine.


Good luck
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: larbhills</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mtmisfit</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
it is nearly a clone of Montana's law.

Salt Lake Tribune Article </div></div>

Except the BATF has told us Montanans basically "good luck with your little law there, it doesn't supersede anything federal" You can look it up. </div></div>

That's what they said and that is why they are in court. What the ATF said to FFL holders is Montana's law didn't apply to them. Those are the only ones at the moment they have authority over because as an FFL holder you agreed to play by their rules.

The statement that Fed law automatically takes precedence over state law is a fed pipe dream. The only authority they have is the commerce clause which is what's being challenged.

There are now 25 states that have passed or intgroduced this legislation.
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: orkan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">People are so afraid.

I'm not afraid of the crack head, nor what he's able to buy. I'd venture to say hardly anyone else on here is either.

Its illegal to kill people. The end.

It was rocks, then it was spears, then it was swords, and now its guns. Ray guns next? Those without respect for life will continue to kill regardless of what weapon is available. Law has nothing to do with it.

Having a suppressor for a gun that you already have, is hardly any more risk than already exists. Its just a mechanism for the government to track us, and tax us. Why else would you need to do it EVERY time, instead of just buy a permit/license to own as many as you want.

The masses want to be safe, but they don't realize that its only an illusion of safety. Notice the shootings are usually in "gun safe zones." Reverse the situation and force all teachers to carry and qualify with a gun. How many of those shootings happened with suppressors?

</div></div>

Here's a guy who "gets it".

Great post.I agree completely.
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Arevalosocom</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a guy who "gets it".

Great post.I agree completely. </div></div>

Its amazing to me the number of people that <span style="text-decoration: underline">don't</span> get it. They want to disown the responsibility for their own safety, and instead rely on the govnerment, police, or others to keep them safe. Most likely so they have someone to blame when it goes south. So they want to have "registration" and "regulation" to keep the "bad people" from having guns. All the while trusting implicitly in the government to provide that registration and regulation, and ignoring one of the most important founding principles of this country: That of the PEOPLES right to keep and bear arms. Not CERTAIN arms, and in CERTAIN places.

<span style="font-style: italic">"Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry." – Thomas Jefferson</span>

I don't know the validity of that quote, but I certainly know it holds true, absolutely. The very act of forced registration and taxation on any firearm or firearm accessories is unconstitutional. Its simply a game of baby steps. They want too much, so the good folks compromise, and they take a little. Over and over again, until our freedom is gone.

I have spent $1800 in "tax stamps" so far. Who knows how much more in FFL transfer fees over the years. All for nothing but to keep the sheep fully immersed in their illusion of safety. The criminals, do not register, or pay taxes. It seems so basically logical that I cannot fathom how anyone can't grasp the concept that criminals do not obey the law, yet they keep making more laws. Sounds a lot like the loss of freedom to me.

Suppressors are no more dangerous than a piece of steel bar stock unless they are attached to a gun... which is ALREADY regulated and illegal for a felon to own. If the gun laws in place worked in the slightest, then violent crime would be at a minimum.

So, I am 100% supporting this legislation and talking to anyone that will listen about its benefits. Be that as it may, most people have their minds made up already. After all, silencers are dangerous... right?
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

I agree, if adjusted for inflation $200 in 1936 money would equal $3,129.70 in 2010 money.
shocked.gif
Lets not give them any ideas!
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: decodeddiesel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I agree, if adjusted for inflation $200 in 1936 money would equal $3,129.70 in 2010 money.
shocked.gif
Lets not give them any ideas! </div></div>

I guarantee you its been thought of, and is in the plans. Its the shell game. If they can't ban it, they will tax it.

You'll notice, a suppressor is "illegal" to own. UNLESS you pay a tax.

hmm.
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

I have no problem with the 200 dollar stamp. I just want it now don't make the paperwork take 6 months.
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Russ257</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have no problem with the 200 dollar stamp. I just want it now don't make the paperwork take 6 months. </div></div>
exactly what i was thinking its not the 200 stamp. Its the nightly sadness when i think the atf is acting like scenes from office space.
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: idahoshooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think it would be cool if the 86 bill banning the creation of new full autos would go away, but I dont think it ever will. Shoot, if they taxed it at 5k a pop they would still make a ton of money.</div></div>

IMHO, the .gov does not really care about the piddly amount of money they make from transfer taxes; it's a drop in the bucket.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: silverphoenix</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Suppressors are pretty expensive--even one for a .22 is at least $400 at the very cheapest I've seen.</div></div>

I know of several .22lr suppressors which you can purchase new for around $100...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Russ257</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have no problem with the 200 dollar stamp. I just want it now don't make the paperwork take 6 months.</div></div>

The majority of transfers now are taking half that time...
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

Orkan I'm glad someone "gets it". It seems that the meaning and purpose of the 2nd amendment is lost on many people today, including gun owners and pro gun people. The simple fact of the matter is that the men that founded this nation would be horrified and deeply saddened if they saw the current state of this country.

As for the question at hand it really is simple. No politician has the balls to introduce such progressive legislation that would make such big waves. You have to remember that ALL the politicians in Washington these days are career politicians. And they have no intention of starting a new career. IF we could get our representatives to remember their true role in Washington, which is to uphold the constitution while representing their constituents, then we could make some progress. So if we really wanted to accomplish some lofty goals such as a major reform of NFA rules then we must first create a MAJOR change in leadership. By major change I mean getting rid of every current politician in Washington. Then replace them with NOT other politicians but with red blooded patriots who have no previous political ties.
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

Suppressed spears and rock tax?
the gov't "needs" the $$$ for something else. they don't like ro repeal anything, unless it benefits them
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: silverphoenix</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So why isn't there a greater movement to get the rediculous NFA rules changed on suppressors? There's absolutely no reason we should have to jump through hoops for suppressors as we have to do now.

They're a courtesy to fellow marksmen at the range, a courtesy to fellow hunters (won't scare off all the deer for a mile around, thereby ruining the hunting for your neighbors), and it makes things much easier on your own ears.

They obviously only have a bad stigma because of hollywood bullshit where they make it look like a suppressor completely eliminates the sound. Shooting someone and the person in the next room not knowing about it--hollywood bullshit. Shooting a suppressed .308 and it sounds like a bb gun, pure BS and nothing more.

So the fact of the matter is that only .22's can be fully suppressed (silenced I guess). So why the NFA? Is this just another one of those gun laws that has no actual basis in reality other than the "scary" factor for uninformed individuals? </div></div>

I've thought the exact same thing for SBRs... the NFA rules don't make any real sense.
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

If I could use my ccl at time of purchase like I do for any other firearm I buy so I could get it then I don't think I'd mind paying the tax stamp
it's the 4 month wait and prints and asking mr police man very nicely if he will let you buy something that gets me


"Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry." – Thomas Jefferson
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lone_soldier</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i dont like the tax, but at the same time do you really want to just be able to walk in a store and buy one.
<span style="font-style: italic">snip</span>
i think if they were readily available at low cost, they would be illegal soon because of all the illegal activities they would be involved in. poaching, shootings, that sort of shit, the people who own them now know that the penalties are heavy. </div></div>
Yes. That is exactly what I want.

Outlawing something because it can be used illegally is exactly where gun control started.
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Levi B.</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lone_soldier</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i dont like the tax, but at the same time do you really want to just be able to walk in a store and buy one.
<span style="font-style: italic">snip</span>
i think if they were readily available at low cost, they would be illegal soon because of all the illegal activities they would be involved in. poaching, shootings, that sort of shit, the people who own them now know that the penalties are heavy. </div></div>
Yes. That is exactly what I want.

Outlawing something because it can be used illegally is exactly where gun control started. </div></div>

yeahh just think if you could by guns and ammo at walmart how many peaple would just start killing peaple GOD help us...lol
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lone_soldier</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i dont like the tax, but at the same time do you really want to just be able to walk in a store and buy one......but most people think you have to have a class three license to own a suppressor and .....i think if they were readily available at low cost, they would be illegal soon because of all the illegal activities they would be involved in. poaching, shootings, that sort of shit,.....</div></div>

This is one of the most inane posts I have ever read on a gun forum. Of course I want to be able to go into a store and buy a gun muffler! Most people are wrong if they really think a license is required to make or buy a silencer. Silencers are readily available at low cost to anyone who can own a gun in the USA. I make them as a hobby for $30-50 plus the tax. Making them is very easy.

So you have any evidence to support your accusation that making silencers more readily available leads to more crime? Maybe you would support this lame claim with data?

Ranb
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Trigg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
90 guns per 100 people, does not mean 90 out of 100 people are armed. </div></div>

That's true. Though I have no way of substantiating, I would guess that only 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 people are armed. Most, if not all of us here on this board own multiple firearms. All but one gun owner I personally know owns at least 3.
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

I think 90 per 100 people leaves you with like an average of 3 guns per household..
 
Re: Why not repeal the NFA tax on suppressors?

A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

"regulated" meant well equipped/trained
"militia" meant armed citizenry
"bear" meant carry
"infringed" meant violated

Let's try it in modern english (just one possible translation, I hope you all don't mind)

A well armed and trained citizenry being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to have and use weapons shall not be violated.

One has to decide whether machine gun bans and weapon taxes are a "violation" of the right to keep and bear arms. The Framers hoped a tyrannical centralized government could be held in check by an armed citizenry.
It is interesting to note that the despotic government during the time of the revolution was less well equipped arms wise than the colonials who fought them. Federal law supersedes state law as per the constitution but the supreme law of the land that trumps them all is the constitution. If the standing army has access to a weapon platform that is denied to the citizenry either through heavy taxation or outright banning then the citizens have had their rights violated or infringed. To oppress and violate a people's rights it is best to convince them that it is for their own good as evidenced by the Nazi disarmament of Austria after it was annexed. The Nazis also knew that it was best to chip away at these rights one piece at a time. It is hard to believe but he Austrians voted for their annexation by Germany. They were suffering economically and it was seen as a way out. They gave up liberty for temporary security which lead to incredible suffering on their part.
In this country firearms rights have been gradually eroded starting with unconstitutional taxation and leading to the machine gun ban and in some cases assault rifle and handgun bans.
The best part about this whole thing is when we think these laws are for our own good, that they will keep us safe. Here is a video that helps underline the importance and potential of a well regulated militia: http://tiny.cc/u3s0u

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ArmyJerry
good read
Replies
33
Views
2K
Gunfighter14e2
Gunfighter14e2
Performify
shot worse than expected with a pretty good setup -- please help with weakest link
Replies
20
Views
2K
Baron26
Baron26
A
Suppressors trying to become involved
Replies
0
Views
711
Awesymoto
A
Maggot
Why Newton? Read this.
Replies
19
Views
2K
Aftermath
Aftermath
daybreak1199
Maggie’s Funniest thing I've read in a long time...Gecko45
Replies
48
Views
7K
maximusdecimusmeridius
maximusdecimusmeridius
Top Bottom
Back