A couple of questions about the HPA and the NFA regulation of suppressors

FN Forum

Google Search
Results 1 to 8 of 8
Thanks Tree29Thanks
  • 4 Post By HK SD9 Tactical
  • 2 Post By CPTdaz
  • 5 Post By sldcountry
  • 1 Post By 17heavy
  • 5 Post By HK SD9 Tactical
  • 6 Post By street doctor
  • 6 Post By Jeremy M.

Thread: A couple of questions about the HPA and the NFA regulation of suppressors

  1. #1
    Senior Member 17heavy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    A short drive from the center of the universe
    Posts
    4,487
    Thanked
    5360 times

    A couple of questions about the HPA and the NFA regulation of suppressors

    So we all remember seeing a few weeks back a senior ATF official put out a document questioning whether the ATF should reconsider its position on having suppressors remain regulated. My first question is can the ATF make this change on their own or would it require statutory change by congress to amend the NFA. My other thought that occurred to me was if they can make this change at the regulatory level on their own then there may be something else in play here. If the ATF has concluded that the Hearing Protection Act has a good chance of making it in to law then maybe they want to get out ahead of it and preempt the law from being necessary. The reason I think this is a possibility is that in the HPA there is a provision that says the ATF would have to refund the $200 stamp tax for any suppressor purchased after a certain date (offhand I do not recall that specific date). If they deregulate them on their own then the HPA becomes moot, HOWEVER there would then be no requirement to refund any tax stamps.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.



    Demons run when a good man goes to war


  2. #2
    Administrator
    FN Supporter
    HK SD9 Tactical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    9,422
    Thanked
    6420 times
    Requires Congress to remove the suppressors from the NFA. Not something the ATF can do unilaterally.
    17heavy, CPTdaz, Mntsnow and 1 others thanked this.
    "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop

  3. #3
    Senior Member CPTdaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    3,567
    Thanked
    4229 times
    ATF is just enforcer of the law, they can choose to interpret the letter of the law with degree of flexibility (since no law are written specifically enough to account for every possible scenario). For example, things like braces on pistols or binary/response triggers were never specifically address by the law therefore, it's up to the ATF to utilize their interpretation on the spirit of the law. However suppressors were explicitly stated in the NFA as requiring the tax stamp process, so as HK already stated, it's not something ATF can do away with without changing the letter of the law.
    bwhiz and Mntsnow thanked this.
    "And here remain with your uncertainty! Let every feeble rumor shake your hearts! Your enemies, with nodding of their plumes, fan you into despair! Have the power still to banish your defenders; till at length your ignorance, which finds not till it feels, making but reservation of yourselves, still your own foes, deliver you, as most abated captives to some nation that won you without blows!"

  4. Remove Advertisements
    FNForum.net
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Senior Member sldcountry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,179
    Thanked
    2125 times
    We need 6o votes with only 52 republicans, this thing has a snow balls chance in hell of passing but I'm still doing my part by signing petitions etc... I think it's a stride in the right direction
    Troublesx10, bwhiz, Mntsnow and 2 others thanked this.

  6. #5
    Senior Member 17heavy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    A short drive from the center of the universe
    Posts
    4,487
    Thanked
    5360 times
    Quote Originally Posted by sldcountry View Post
    We need 6o votes with only 52 republicans, this thing has a snow balls chance in hell of passing but I'm still doing my part by signing petitions etc... I think it's a stride in the right direction
    While this is accurate I am not so sure that the Dems would want to spend a lot of effort fighting this especially if the ATF is on board with the idea. I'm not saying it's a done deal. Just think it is not the long shot everyone seems to think it is. There are a few Dem Senators from gun friendly states that might not want to put up much of a fight over this.

    Hearing Protection Act pushes past 100 sponsors in House
    Smurky thanked this.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.



    Demons run when a good man goes to war

  7. #6
    Administrator
    FN Supporter
    HK SD9 Tactical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    9,422
    Thanked
    6420 times
    Quote Originally Posted by 17heavy View Post
    While this is accurate I am not so sure that the Dems would want to spend a lot of effort fighting this especially if the ATF is on board with the idea. I'm not saying it's a done deal. Just think it is not the long shot everyone seems to think it is. There are a few Dem Senators from gun friendly states that might not want to put up much of a fight over this.

    Hearing Protection Act pushes past 100 sponsors in House
    The Dems will boycot it just to make the Repubs fail and claim "well, you did it to Obama".

    Nothing in Congress is a done deal until it is signed by the President.

    I do not think the Dems will be too happy to give up and estimated $1 million per year in tax money that easily.
    Smurky, sldcountry, Jeremy M. and 2 others thanked this.
    "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop

  8. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    761
    Thanked
    1224 times
    This was posted earlier today from a TX Attorney on another board i frequent. he is a firearms attorney from what i understand and follows this stuff very closely.

    again.....not MY work

    The State of the HPA


    The truth about the HPA and 41F? Can we, as Gun Culture 3.0, handle the truth? Its not as done a deal as we were led to believe! Kel said it. Now I'm saying it

    What is the truth? The truth is that it is unlikeky that the HPA will reach the President's desk anytime soon.

    Gemtech's CEO, Ron Martinez, a member of the ASA board, has been saying that HPA isn't a done deal for several months.

    Now that Silencerco has laid off a large percentage of its workforce, it looks like Mr. Waldron is finally admitting that the HPA isnt as done a deal as they led us to believe. Maybe they should have fought to defund 41F before it was implemented on July 13, 2016 instead of telling everyone the Hearing Protection Act was a done deal.

    The reports I have received from across the industry, both on the manufacturer and retail level since July 13th is that suppressor sales are way down. It's my understanding that SHOT show, while heavily attended, did not result in the usual number of orders.

    Kel Whelan commented that "41F is the true killer of sales from the existing customer base. "Waiting for HPA" is a lot of noise from potential new customers that weren't going to buy anyway, but might if things got cheaper. The one-two punch of both of these factors make it look like the sky is falling, but you have to discount a lot of the newbie HPA wishers. They weren't going to factor into normal sales velocity regardless."

    The increased demand for silencers in the months preceeding the implementation of 41F coupled with the irrational exuberence of the imminent passage of the HPA likely spurred some manufacturers to take on additional debt to expand their production capacity. The apparent bet was that the HPA would pass in the first 100 days, which would have lead to a second surge in demand as new buyers entered the newly deregulated market. When this didn't happen, all that debt still had to be repaid. Repaying the additional debt may be hard with sales slow as they are.

    All of us want the Hearing Protection Act to reach the President's desk and be signed into law. However, those who are waiting to purchase a suppressor are going to be waiting a long time.

    If you have friends who are waiting purchase their first suppressor, tell them they need to start the purchase process. This waiting for the HPA coupled with the additional impediments imposed on the purchaser by 41F is killing the industry.

    We, the owners, retailers and manufacturers should have fought to defund 41 before July 13 and then we could have worked on the HPA without the pressure that the industry faces. Its not to late to kill 41F. Congress can defund it. We can work on HPA concurrently.

    www.TexasGunTrust.com

    http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...t-a-done-deal/

    http://www.ar15news.com/2017/02/13/s...s-perspective/


  9. #8
    Sponsor
    FN Supporter
    Jeremy M.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    1,207
    Thanked
    2615 times
    I would agree with most of this.

    The odds of HPA passing are less than 1%, doesn't mean we should stop fighting thought. The louder our voice the better the odds of getting it passed in the next couple of years.

    I disagree that HPA isn't factoring into buying decisions. After 41F sales were coming back up until HPA started being talked about so much. However there are also several people that are using it as an excuse not to buy and wouldn't buy even if it passed. So it makes it hard to tell exactly how much it is affecting things.

    As far are manufactures taking on additional debt to expand production during 41F. I can say the the companies that we carry made modest investments to capitalize on the increased demand with the understanding that sales would drop off after July. Sean Lindsay the lawyer that wrote the article is referring to SilencerCo in this statement.
    Silencer Shop
    Stocking distributor for AAC, Bowers, Gemtech, Griffin Armament, Knight's Armament, Rugged Suppressors, SIG SAUER Silencers, SureFire, Tactical Solutions, Thompson Machine, Thunder Beast Arms, Yankee Hill Machine

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    /
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    /
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

    512-931-4556

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Couple Questions
    By BigBuckeye in forum FN SCAR 17S
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-19-2016, 11:42 AM
  2. Bill Introduced to Remove Suppressors from NFA
    By peterlemonjello in forum SBR, Suppressors and NFA Items
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 11-13-2015, 04:45 PM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-18-2014, 08:46 PM
  4. Remove suppressors as an NFA regulated item.
    By TheGunner in forum 2nd Amendment and General Gun News
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-18-2014, 04:43 PM
  5. My FNX-9 (couple pics, couple questions)
    By aaron_c in forum FN FNX
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-20-2011, 05:48 PM