Removal of Silencers from NFA?

[eddiememphis]

Doesn’t look like we need to be concerned whether it was a good idea or not. Grrrr

If you are referring to this- "...the parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, determined the measure did not comply with the Senate’s Byrd Rule... ", there are ways around it. The bill can be rewritten or it can be voted on as-is but there are not enough votes for it to pass.

This provision was probably included as a bargaining chip. It's common for bills to contain elements that one side is willing to drop in exchange for keeping other priorities intact.

[Eric P]

A rule, not a law...

And why does this person have any say in what is in a bill? Is that job defined in the constitution?

[FoxtArt]

A rule, not a law...

And why does this person have any say in what is in a bill? Is that job defined in the constitution?

I mean... this is shoved into a budget bill along with e.g. the land sale and all sorts of other pork.

This wouldn't be a problem if a bill was restricted to it's purpose, and we didn't have to worry about injected line items turning over your firstborn to the government.

I support the concept of this, but it really should be its own bill. The budget bill should strictly be budget. But, pigs flying and all that, so it's all gone to heck.

[Oscar77]

I mean... this is shoved into a budget bill along with e.g. the land sale and all sorts of other pork.

This wouldn't be a problem if a bill was restricted to it's purpose, and we didn't have to worry about injected line items turning over your firstborn to the government.

I support the concept of this, but it really should be its own bill. The budget bill should strictly be budget. But, pigs flying and all that, so it's all gone to heck.

This sort of "lumping" of bills has been going on for decades now, if not centuries.
I agree, not saying it's right, and it is an example of pork- in the sense of an unrelated bill being lumped into others.
But it also is a finance and tax question and so it has atleast some connection to the budget.

I'm more stunned by the responses here and I'm not pointing you out in particular.
I understand that some posters here are Democrats and some clearly support gun control.
This bill would've had little impact on gun ownership or, in other words, was really just a token gesture.
But the level of nonsense in opposing it was pretty impressive.
In a way I do sympathize with Politicians who do actually try to support us and are met with this whiny, and honestly mostly ignorant, mistrust from "gun owners."

[Doc45]

Yes, referred to the parliamentarian. I spent enough years in the state house to watch good bills go down in flames or bad ones succeed (at least good/bad to my way of thinking lol). I know things can change prior to passage but unfortunately I’m not too optimistic about these provisions surviving if the bill passes. I hope I’m wrong.

[O2HeN2]

So, anyone else expecting the price of suppressors to jump by up to $200?

After all, "It's what the market will bear!"

No, I have nothing against capitalism, just a prediction.

O2

[Oscar77]

So, anyone else expecting the price of suppressors to jump by up to $200?

After all, "It's what the market will bear!"

No, I have nothing against capitalism, just a prediction.

O2

No, that money was never collected or kept by the dealers.
It was a tax collected by the Govt.
I doubt this will have much effect on prices or availability...............if I understand the final version correctly.

[Hoser]

The glass half empty part of me is concerned that down the road the tax might come back. And it could be ugly. Like 1934 ugly.

[eddiememphis]

Here is what I found online-

$200 excise‑style NFA tax dropped to $0 for specific items:
Suppressors (silencers)
Short‑barreled rifles (SBRs)
Short‑barreled shotguns (SBSs)
Any Other Weapons (AOWs)
Machine guns and destructive devices remain taxed at $200

NFA regulation remains intact:
Registration (Forms 1 & 4)
Fingerprints
Background checks
ATF oversight

So while the tax is gone, the regulatory and time barriers are not.

Look for an implementation of a "filing fee" or something similar that isn't a "tax"- ask Colorado DMV how to do that one.
Also, the tax on the remaining items will jump, probably about 10x, to cover the missing revenue.

Of course the usual suspects- Brady, Anytown, Giffords- will all be filing lawsuits in blue states to get a friendly judge.

Another thing- look for the same legislation to be proposed in Democrat majority states, written by Everytown lawyers, to end the nightmare of "Silent Deaths".

Watch for state-level tax, mental health screening, waiting periods, registries and outright bans.

Guaranteed that dumb fucker Tom Sullivan will try to push one through next session.

[kidicarus13]

Look for an implementation of a "filing fee" or something similar that isn't a "tax"- ask Colorado DMV how to do that one.
Also, the tax on the remaining items will jump, probably about 10x, to cover the missing revenue.

You mean this nonsense?