ASA Introduces Bill to remove suppressors from the NFA

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 4, 2014
Messages
109
Likes
23
Location
Seacoast NH
http://americansuppressorassociatio...ct-a-bill-to-remove-suppressors-from-the-nfa/

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The American Suppressor Association (ASA) is pleased to announce the introduction of the Hearing Protection Act (HPA) by Rep. Matt Salmon (AZ-05). This historic piece of legislation will remove suppressors from the purview of the National Firearms Act (NFA), replacing the antiquated federal transfer process with an instantaneous NICS background check. The HPA also includes a provision to refund the $200 transfer tax to applicants who purchase a suppressor after October 22, 2015.

“The American Suppressor Association believes that citizens should not have to pay a tax to protect their hearing while exercising their Second Amendment rights,” said Knox Williams, President and Executive Director of the ASA. “The removal of suppressors from the National Firearms Act has been our ultimate goal since day one. For months, we have worked alongside Rep. Salmon’s office and the National Rifle Association to craft this legislation. Although we recognize that introducing this bill is the first step in what will be a lengthy process to change federal law, we look forward to working with Rep. Salmon and the NRA to advance and ultimately enact this common-sense legislation.”


Also known as silencers, suppressors are the hearing protection of the 21st century sportsman. Despite common Hollywood-based misconceptions, the laws of physics dictate that no suppressor will ever be able to render gunfire silent. Suppressors are simply mufflers for firearms, which function by trapping the expanding gasses at the muzzle, allowing them to slowly cool in a controlled environment. On average, suppressors reduce the noise of a gunshot by 20 – 35 decibels (dB), roughly the same sound reduction as earplugs or earmuffs. In addition to hearing protection, suppressors also mitigate noise complaints from those who live near shooting ranges and hunting lands.


Unfortunately, suppressors have been federally regulated since the passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934. The NFA regulates the transfer and possession of certain types of firearms and devices, including suppressors. Currently, prospective buyers must send in a Form 4 application to the ATF, pay a $200 transfer tax per suppressor, undergo the same background check that is required to purchase a machine gun, and wait months for the ATF to process and approve the paperwork. In stark contrast, many countries in Europe place no regulations on their purchase, possession, or use.


Rep. Salmon’s Hearing Protection Act will fix the flawed federal treatment of suppressors, making it easier for hunters and sportsmen to protect their hearing in the 41 states where private suppressor ownership is currently legal, and the 37 states where hunting with a suppressor is legal. This legislation will remove suppressors from the onerous requirements of the NFA, and instead require purchasers to pass an instant NICS check, the same background check that is used during the sale of long guns. In doing so, law-abiding citizens will remain free to purchase suppressors, while prohibited persons will continue to be barred from purchasing or possessing these accessories.

Contact your legislators and ask them to support this.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
55   0   0
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Messages
30,705
Likes
8,671
Location
free hampshire
they'd still never give it up because it's free money, they get to keep the ATF, and they can remain fat and bloated while collecting $200/transaction.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
194
Likes
19
Location
NH
Might not go anywhere, but I would rather more pro-gun bills be going through congress even if they don't succeed.
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Messages
13,326
Likes
6,629
They would still be illegal in MA under state law.

I know, that's why I put the face.


they'd still never give it up because it's free money, they get to keep the ATF, and they can remain fat and bloated while collecting $200/transaction.

I doubt they profit per transaction. The $200 fee back in 1934 was substantial and they definitely made money per can but in today's dollars, i bet it costs the gov't more than $200. How many cans are sold per year and how many gov't employees making $100k in pay and benefits are doing the transaction work with the necessary computers, phone lines, etc.


Hold your breath......

There isn't a chance with obama as POTUS but with a decent POTUS, there would be enough support to get through congress and a normal POTUS would sign it. Would it be a priority and pushed throu, that would be the only questiion with a decent POTUS.

We've seen a lot of pro 2a stuff passed in states, that is filtering up to congress. I think cans and SBR's can be had in the next 5 yrs.
 
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
12,146
Likes
3,057
Location
SC
I'll let you guys in on something I have observed: Most legislation never passes on the first attempt (unless there are shenanigans or it is attached to another bill). As a result, it means that bills are repeatedly introduced and debated. They fail but they keep the topic on the minds of the reps. Eventually the legislation does pass if it is not bonkers crazy (like the AWB stuff).
 
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
2,353
Likes
440
Location
Southern NH
I'll let you guys in on something I have observed: Most legislation never passes on the first attempt (unless there are shenanigans or it is attached to another bill). As a result, it means that bills are repeatedly introduced and debated. They fail but they keep the topic on the minds of the reps. Eventually the legislation does pass if it is not bonkers crazy (like the AWB stuff).

Exactly. Just keep ramming it into Congress' face session after session.
 

rudiewhitebwoy

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
4,816
Likes
3,852
Location
60% Essex & 40% Coös Counties, for now.

Da_lucche

NES Member
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
2,556
Likes
991
Location
Demokratic People's Republik of Massachusux
They would still be illegal in MA under state law.

I couldn't care less about MA law regarding suppressors.

I just don't want to risk losing $200 applying for a stamp that the ATF might reject cuz of Mass law and because I don't want to do time in Club Fed without a stamp.

If at some point, suppressors are no longer restricted by federal law, I might play rebel regardless.


That would suck for everyone with one be awesome fit for everyone too cheap to pay 3k to chop 4in off their ar

Wut?
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
9,999
Likes
4,381
Location
WNW of MHT
BATFE collected over $100 million in transfer fees last year just for suppressors

I doubt they profit per transaction. The $200 fee back in 1934 was substantial and they definitely made money per can but in today's dollars, i bet it costs the gov't more than $200. How many cans are sold per year and how many gov't employees making $100k in pay and benefits are doing the transaction work with the necessary computers, phone lines, etc.
Should be easy enough to get the statistics, ATF publishes the numbers, including how many NFA examiners are on staff (approximately 30?)

ATF says 1,383,677 National Firearms Act Firearms were processed in 2014. If all of those were sales to end users, that's 276 million dollars a year in NFA fees. Approximately half a million of those "firearms" were suppressors, so that's $100 million a year in tax revenue that would stay in Americans pockets if suppressors were taken out of the NFA purview.
 
Rating - 100%
55   0   0
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Messages
30,705
Likes
8,671
Location
free hampshire
Doubt it. That probably includes the categories of tax-exempt transfers (such as sales to local governments).

yeah, hard to get an accurate figure of how much tax actually was paid. you could add up the folks who submit data on NFA tracker, but not everyone does it. of my three transactions i totally spaced the last one but i'm tracking the stamp i currently have in progress.
 
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
9,999
Likes
4,381
Location
WNW of MHT
All NFA tax revenue goes into federal "general fund".

Lots of data starting on page 12 of this report, says BATFE collected $22M for "transfer and making tax" in 2014 and $4.8M in SOT.

Transfer and makings tax came from 107,921 tax paid transfers (Form 4), and 22,380 Form-1s.
 
Top Bottom