I've been hearing some commotion with this, and my boss seems to think suppressors are totally unregulated now. I can't find any conclusive information anywhere saying that anything has changed.

The tax is $0, you still have to register and go through the cucking process with the ATF. Gun groups and companies are going to court to have the registry removed since having a $0 tax is a retarded round about way have an unlawful gun registry but that's up in the air.

>>63969205
The tax will be $0 on January 1st.

>>63969205
Frankly I'm not surprised. Hell I'm shocked they even reduced the tax instead of going "You're right, it did cost as much as a car back then, let's raise it to match inflation." Anyone who really thought we'd get NFA pee pees getting smacked was out of their goddamned mind. Still, the lack an extra 200 bucks tacked on to can sales should open up a low end market for super cheap, fungible silencers

>>63969202 (OP)
Republicans betrayed us yet again

>>63969520
How dare they give us a 0 dollar stamp that is a de facto registry we can challenge, what the fuck cheeto benito and Jeet Dicking Vance.

>>63969528
> Jeet Dicking
You say that like it’s a bad thing…

>>63969202 (OP)
Anton sugar is /k/ personified

>>63969202 (OP)
$0 tax stamp on jan 1st and several lawsuits filed because the NFA says it isn't a gun control bill, it's a tax bill that has a retarded registry requirement to make sure you paid your taxes

>>63969520
shalom
>>63969312
why would the GOP raise the tax? Dems never really went after it because almost no one does crimes with legal NFA guns

>>63970028
Democrats aren’t in the business of reducing crime, only further stigmatizing responsible gun ownership and gun culture. In fact they love creating a situation where the crime is increasing and the people are disarmed, thus voting for more governmental police power. This is why the only education about guns that the Democrat party pushes is how to red flag your parents instead of teaching gun safety and use.

>>63970039
no doubt, but raising the NFA tax wasn't high on their gun control list compared to awbs and red flag laws since suppressors and sbrs weren't really in the news and most cuckstates already ban NFA stuff. it wouldn't shock me if most dem politicians were ill informed about the NFA in the first place

>>63969528
They could have just eliminated the nfa but they cucked and removed it for basically no reason.

>>63969594
ahh it just is ok!

>>63970023
I just joined the goa in case they get an injunction, since the Supreme Court recently put the nix on nation wide ones. Being cautiously optimistic, the tax being lowered was already pretty outside what I had expected.

>>63970086
>They could have just eliminated the nfa but they cucked and removed it for basically no reason.
they didn't have the votes

>>63969312
>Hell I'm shocked they even reduced the tax i

It's a TRAP to get more people registered up and fingerprinted.

>>63970461
I've been a lifetime member for over a decade. Remember it was GOA that filed the lawsuit that allowed their members and people living in the 6th circuit to keep their bumpstocks if they had one.

>>63971366
NRA says shit, GOA files lawsuits.

>>63971480
The NRA were proponents of the NFA at the time, their president even testified that he would support them even requiring licensing in order to own a firearm and that open or concealed carry was pointless.

>>63971518
The NRA in 1934 was way different than the NRA in post revolt in Cincinnati, no gunz

>>63971480
Second Amendment Foundation is also good.

>>63971591
The NRA didn't fight hard against the 1994 AWB.

>>63971761
shalom, is this the part where you claim the republicans all voted for the AWB again?

>>63971799
No. I'm >>63971366
And I'm not a Christ slayer. The NRA is the Bill Ruger of firearm lobbies.

>>63969202 (OP)
>totally unregulated now
Tell him to just build one.

>>63970517
They didn’t need them.

>>63971874
they did need them

>>63971933
They didn't need them to remove a tax law, which is what the NFA is. That only requires a simple majority in reconciliation.

>>63972108
they removed the tax. they didn't have the votes to remove the registration part
>muh nuke the parliamentarian
then some faggots like merkowski would have defected

>>63969202 (OP)
>What is the current status of the suppressor bill?
Got MIGERED to the cucks level, which is deeply satisfy "call the senator" onion cucks

>>63969528
The courts will likely rule in our favor killing off the registration.

Does a favorable ruling remove the registration language from the tax code? If not then the dems or republicucks can always reinstate the tax and thus registration.

If anyone does manufacture or purchase an SBS, SBR or Suppressor during that time and the dems reintroduce a tax does that mean everyone has to register/reregister or destroy them?

>>63973513
>If anyone does manufacture or purchase an SBS, SBR or Suppressor during that time and the dems reintroduce a tax does that mean everyone has to register/reregister or destroy them?
I doubt it. The owner paid the required amount for their stamp. Congress can't just raise the price afterward and demand the difference be paid.

>>63973513
They'll need 2/3 to reinstate it if the NFA is removed. the registry to monitor the tax payment is what would require 2/3 to do. Each state can do their own registry though, but those states already banned NFA items of any sort

>>63971348
t. man whos bought a gun from a gunstore and had to do paperwork

>>63973566
I think we are screwed.

What Happens After a Law is Struck Down

When the Supreme Court declares a federal law unconstitutional, the decision is final and has immediate effect. The law becomes legally invalid and cannot be enforced. This ruling also sets a binding precedent for all lower federal and state courts.

While the law is unenforceable, it is not removed from statute books, as only Congress can formally repeal it. In response, Congress can draft a new version of the law that addresses the Court’s constitutional objections.

Congress can also initiate the process of amending the Constitution. This is the only way to overcome a Supreme Court ruling based on a direct constitutional interpretation. The process requires a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the states.

Basically SCOTUS rules in our favor nullifying registration. Dems later get back into power and vote to increase the tax from $0 to some astronomical value through reconciliation. Everyone will have to pay the tax again and register or destroy their items. Hopefully we can litigate that the tax scheme itself is unconstitutional but who knows.

Without full repeal it’s gonna be a game of uno reverse forever.

>>63973631
That’s not how it works

>>63973813
>Sauce

https://legalclarity.org/can-the-supreme-court-overturn-a-law-passed-by-congress/

>>63972125
>>63973513
shalom

>>63973631
>>63973513
>Everyone will have to pay the tax again and register or destroy their items
they can't retroactively tax you

>>63974213
Orlly? That’s why people got grandfathered in back in 34 when the NFA was passed… NOT!

>>63974343
they would need to pass a whole new law, they can't just up the tax on the current law. If they changed the tax in 2023 to be $9,000 it wouldn't force everyone to retroactively pay the new tax

>>63971348
>It's a TRAP to get more people registered up and fingerprinted.
Anon people buy their guns with credit/debit cards, never mind even the NIX system. Your bank has a gun registry for (You) and unless you just so happen to only ever take cash with you to the local sporting store they very well are making judgments about you behind the curtain.
Let's also not forget, nearly everyone has a smart phone in their pocket nowadays. Google/Apple/Zuckborg/Tencent-Bytedance knows too unless your phone is running a custom OS and you have all that shit turned off.
All's we can hope for here is that they simply don't care and that the worst that comes of it is we get more annoying tailored adds directed toward us, not a problem if you you use ad-block of course but not everyone is tech literate.

The fact that your getting all strung up over gATFy hoops an loops but ignoring the fact that it's ALL A TRAP is kinda silly, yes it's still all bad but still.

Frankly there's a silver lining to this, the more suppressors become less taboo the better in my opinion.

>>63971480
>NRA says shit, GOA files lawsuits.
I'm glad Boomers finally caught onto that, took em fucking long enough.

>>63974363
You really don’t think things through do you.

If SCOTUS rules that the registration is unconstitutional. Part of the registration being unconstitutional would mean the government has to destroy any existing records for SBS SBR Suppressors or AOWs because the registration is only enforceable due to the tax. Let’s assume there is no registration for 3-4 years and then Dems up the tax from $0 to $200 then everyone has to pay and register or reregister since the previous registry no longer exists.

Now there could be an argument that if you were registered prior to the ruling and still have your stamp and registration papers that you would only need to provide proof to the ATF so they could rebuild the registry. It gets even more murky when you consider how many people may get a $0 stamp after Jan 1 2026. The government might be able to successfully argue the registration is valid but only if a tax is paid thus requiring anyone holding a $0 stamp to pay the new tax rate.

We all know the government is not your friend or benevolent and will take the most authoritarian and draconian stance.

>>63974391
the FBI legally has to purge NICS data after so many hours. idk if they are breaking the law and FFLs and the gayTF retain 4473s, but in theory there shouldn't be any NICS data
>>63974456
Article I Section 9 clause 3
>No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
they can't retroactively force you to pay the tax. they would need to pass a new law. it's like the california freedom week thing

>>63974210
Shalom goyum

>>63974524
seem, I was right

>>63974542
seems I was right too

>>63969528
don't underestimate the limp-wristed GOP RINOs sitting on their hands and fumbling a slam-dunk issue. don't underestimate the DNC being so anti-trump bloodlusted that they'll pounce on any and every issue as a matter of principle to obstruct everything for the next 4 years

>>63974524
Imagine the ramifications if he had pulled away the chair.

>>63974666
Thank God we have a leader who will serve the Chosen People first

>>63974213
>back taxes

>>63974483
You're not a slave to the government. They can't legislate your rights away.

Do not register anything with the government.
Do not apply for anything with the government.
Do not talk to the government.
Do not contract with the government.
Do not tell the government what you are doing about anything.

They're hostile to you and your rights. Start treating them as such.

Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137
The Constitution for these united States is the Supreme Law of the Land. Any law that is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void of law and effect from its inception.

Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 US 105
No state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it.

"A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by Federal constitution". at 113, (1943).

Shuttlesworth v.Birmingham , 373 US 262
If a State converts a liberty into a privilege the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.

Miller v. US, 230 F 486: "The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime."

"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional rights." Sherer v. Cullen, 481 F 946

Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22: "The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice."

Bennett v. Boggs, 1 Baldw 60: "Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void."

None of the above is even necessary. Gun grabbers are treasonous hypocrites and liars, swearing an oath to the constitution and then turning right around and violating it at every turn.

>>63974937
>They can't legislate your rights away
assuming the supreme court upholds it, yes they absolutely can. That's in the Constitution, btw.

>>63974725
Israel's greatest ally would be promising them a few billion more.

>>63975302
It isn't, the Supreme Court gave themselves the power to declare something unconstitutional in Madison v Marbury, the constitution didn't give specific authority or penalties for it's enforcement unfortunately.

>>63969202 (OP)
>my boss seems to think suppressors are totally unregulated now
It's this kind of retarded magical thinking that's fucked America (and by extension anyone else who's had anything to do with the US government).
Tell him to wake up and realise the US government fucking hates goyim.

>>63969528
Exactly. Byrd rule made removing the registry outright impossible. This is a great start as there’s a fair chance the $0 registry is struck down by the courts

>>63972113
Murkowski represents me in the senate. I've been trying to vote her out of office the last 4 reelections.

>>63970086
>they could have just eliminated the nfa
You fell for the GOA slop, didn’t you…
Would have taken 60 votes

>>63974937
>quoting Marbury like Chief Justice Marshall wasn't instrumental in giving the feds actual legal muscle

>>63975573
>the scotus totally gave themself the power
>in 1803
>when most of the guys who wrote and ratified the constitution were still alive
>and the founders did nothing
sounds like that power is in the constitution

>>63974456
>common use
>The government might be able to successfully argue the registration is valid but only if a tax is paid thus requiring anyone holding a $0 stamp to pay the new tax rate.
You are legally ignorant and need to lurk.

>>63975942
As a practical matter, yes, but there are still conceptual difficulties. After all, if you can't point to a place in the document that says "and X shall have the power to do" whatever you want done, it could be taken away as easily as it was created. The constitutional right to abortion makes an excellent example, but its not the only one. There used to be very little Congress could do under the Commerce Clause, and then the New Deal happened and suddenly there was very little Congress couldn't do.

The truth about The Law is that none of it actually means anything, and none of it matters, beyond the extent to which enough people agree that it should mean something or that it should matter. The Law exists because the alternative is the strongest guy with the biggest club taking what he wants, until he has to sleep and someone knifes him. All the various high-minded legal theories boil down to so much hocus-pocus. All that really matters in the end is buy-in from enough people to keep any particular system running. No right is ever truly secure beyond your ability to personally enforce it as it regards you. In the end, no legal victory matters for us. If we can't persuade a majority of Americans that the right, as we see it, is worthwhile, it won't survive. Statutes can be rewritten, Constitutions can be reinterpreted, and if worst comes to worst naked force can be resorted to and you'll be left to decide if this is worth dying for.

>>63976092
>As a practical matter, yes, but there are still conceptual difficulties. After all, if you can't point to a place in the document that says "and X shall have the power to do" whatever you want done, it could be taken away as easily as it was created. The constitutional right to abortion makes an excellent example, but its not the only one. There used to be very little Congress could do under the Commerce Clause, and then the New Deal happened and suddenly there was very little Congress couldn't do.
Article III sections 1 and 2

>>63974456
> then Dems up the tax from $0 to $200 then everyone has to pay
Except they can’t. If SCOTUS strikes down the registry portion, then there’s no way the dem# can just add it back in without passing a whole new law. Which, while I doubt there will be any movement towards progun legislation (that is, actual legislation not budget fuckery) anytime soon there also won’t be any movement towards anti-gun legislation at the federal level either. The Dems just straight up don’t have the votes, and unless the republicans do something really really stupid at a large scale, the Dems won’t have the votes for a long time either.

>>63976720
You really need to learn to troll harder faggot.

>When the Supreme Court declares a federal law unconstitutional, the decision is final and has immediate effect. The law becomes legally invalid and cannot be enforced. This ruling also sets a binding precedent for all lower federal and state courts.

>While the law is unenforceable, it is not removed from statute books, as only Congress can formally repeal it. In response, Congress can draft a new version of the law that addresses the Court’s constitutional objections.

https://legalclarity.org/can-the-supreme-court-overturn-a-law-passed-by-congress/

The SCOTUS should rule in our favor that the registry is in violation now that there is no tax. The statute remains on the books but can be put back into law should the Congress comply with the SCOTUS ruling by simply reinstating the tax. As part of the SCOTUS ruling the current registry would also have to be destroyed and would thus require new registration as well should the tax be reinstated.

Now fuck off and get some brain cells.

>>63969296
That was like 7 months ago.

>>63969312
You want to know something funny? Gun stores are planning to increase the price of all suppressors by $100, so that they can make some money off the $200 stamp being reduced to $0.

>>63977270
You keep arguing the same point and you are wrong.

>>63977274

>>63977270
>>63974456
>>63973631
not only are you wrong and retarded, dems aren't going to get 50 senators until 2030 at the earliest

>>63977283
the stores? I've driven 2 hours each way to a gun store to pay like $20 less in gun store fees on general principal

>>63974483
Laws are for the feds to enforce not for the feds to follow.

>>63979423
>SCOTUS rules in our favor nullifying NFA registration
>no tax and no registration but the statute remains in the US Code
>some point in the future Dems get the House Senate and Presidency and use reconciliation to increase the $0 tax to something above $1
>Because the Congress made the NFA now compliant with the SCOTUS ruling it becomes active law again.
Congrats we got fucked by the republicans in the long run because they didn’t actually repeal the NFA law. Idk how else to spell it out. The republicans cucked out and used a half measure instead of a full measure.

There is a prayer that maybe the treasury secretary will announce a 90 amnesty period but the glowbois really don’t like to do this.

>>63974391
It's the NICS system, stands for National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
>>63974483
FFLs are required to retain 4473s indefinitely. It's supremely gay, but it's how the ATF traces crime guns.
>>63974937
What are you, a sovereign citizen? Feel free to risk felonies, hope you don't get caught because you will 100% get convicted and thrown in federal prison because the courts have repeatedly and completely rejected the justifications you're using in your post.

>>63979947
What part of "we didn't have the votes" do you nor understand? The bill barely squeaked by as it is, do you think somehow that nuking the Parliamentarian would've increased our chances that enough Republicans would vote yes?

>>63974937
>they can't legislate your rights away

And yet, they do.

>>63980001
>FFLs are required to retain 4473s indefinitely.
it's not indefinitely, it's 20 years, but they need to turn over the 4473s to the gayTF if they change addresses or go out of business

>>63980016
he's a dem or a yuro trying to stir shit

>>63969202 (OP)
>my boss seems to think suppressors are totally unregulated now

They are, and they always were.
Check the constitution, says nothing there about suppressors.
All it says is SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is that REALLY that hard to understand?

>>63980105
It changed in the frame or receiver rule, they can't burn them anymore.

>>63980201
that is gay and retarded

>>63980228
The whole thing was pretty bad. Whoever was puppeting Biden got some digs in. The lawsuits against it were also poorly planned.

>>63980117
silencers are not arms, therefore regulating them is fair game.

>>63980809
nfa items are considered firearms.

>>63980842
and the NFA is retarded for classifying safety equipment as firearms. we could argue this in circles

>>63980016
“We didn’t have the votes” is BS. There was no need to rush the bill through Congress to please Trump. It was a completely arbitrary decision to do that.

Per the senate rules the Majority leader has the right to over rule the parliamentarian. Just because that rule has never been exercised doesn’t make it invalid.

Only nogs and criminals are allowed to use/own them you silly fucks. That's why they make it so hard for law abiding citizens to get one and criminals to be given military grade suppressors by the government 2 times a month with their ebt bonus

>>63981368
The rule is: NEVER TRUST POLITICIANS
The good, the bad, the ugly, even if they say and do everything right, never trust them. Never trust them. Never trust them. That being said you have to pester them and try to get what you can from them. It's a game no one wants to play but it's the sad reality. Very frog and scorpion. NEVER TRUST THEM.

>>63977283
Oh? And you heard this at the weekly All Gunstores Everywhere conference call, I presume?

>>63970461
Injunction is not likely because the change doesn't make anyone a criminal who wasn't one before, so no one is at risk while it goes through the courts
Also, Gun shops are not going to sell you a silencer without going through NFA just because you show them the GOA membership, because they still have to go though the NFA to sell it

>>63983725
Maybe they'll make some headway with the argument that a registry to keep track of a nonexistent tax is just an unlawful gun registry, worst case scenario I get some stickers and more junk mail. I also don't buy anything from ffls, if it were legal I'd be looking at diy options.

>>63980809
>>63980856
>silencers are not arms,
18 U.S. Code § 921(a)(3)
>(3)The term “firearm” means (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon; (C) any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or (D) any destructive device. Such term does not include an antique firearm.
suppressors are guns

>>63981368
>>63982665
they couldn't. if vance fired the parliamentarian someone like murkowski would have been a faggot and defected. They literally had to give murkowski the moon to get her on board in the first place

>>63980001
>It's the NICS system, stands for National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
Again never said it wasn't a problem but even if that's ever done away with the near zero laws in regards to data privacy would make that null and void because then the government would just buy that data in the '''free market''' and what-do-ya-know we've got a national gun registry all over again.
>just carry cash
Good advice until you realize civil fortitude is a thing and certain guns can be very expensive depending on what you want.

>>63981368
And you think more votes would've magically appeared if it had more time on the floor?
>>63986044
I was simply pedantically correcting your wrong acronym.

>>63986240
>I was simply pedantically correcting your wrong acronym.
Oh okay, fair enough.

>>63969528
The youth of today are spoiled. I remember when there were real fears of a second assault weapons ban and the gun lobby were far more fuddy.

>>63986423
Alright gramps let's get you back to the nursing home.

>>63986427

>>63986423
If you're feeling nostalgic move to Canada, we have plenty of that retarded shit here and the retarded faggots are winning

>>63986044
>civil fortitude

>>63969202 (OP)
The red Israel First Shylock pawns capitulated to the blue Bolshevik gay nigger communism Shylock pawns. With the tax eliminated, a decade of fighting in the courts might do something.

>>63973631
>Hopefully we can litigate that the tax scheme itself is unconstitutional
any faithful application of existing precedent already does this
and just the 2nd itself
but yea
for some reason STILL, the 2nd is treated as a "second class right", something SCOTUS specifically outlined as being incompatible with the constitution

>>63990762
I really feel the entire BBB was a sham. It had just enough things in it to kind of justify the BS but then they pulled some shenanigans watering down the positives. It was all a dog and pony show to get us hyped to put pressure on our reps to vote for this bill.

>>63970039
Reagan started gun control.

>>63993880
Shit I didn’t know he was a politician in 1932.

>>63986423
I deserve more than boomers ever had, let fucking alone what they’ve deigned to hand down to us

>>63993861
>really feel the entire BBB was a sham. It had just enough things in it to kind of justify the BS but then they pulled some shenanigans watering down the positives.
like what?
>>63993880
Reagan wrote the NFA in 1932 when he was 23?

>>63969205
It's a good argument, but I reckon they're more likely to do something gay like make the price $1 so they can still say it raises revenue than to get rid of their unconstitutional gaynigger commiefag kike bullshit. Pardon my French.

>>63994393
the scotus doesn't have the power to tax