The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

View Poll Results: What do you believe will happen with the Hearing Protection Act
It will pass this calendar year 1 1.67%
It will pass within the next 12 months 10 16.67%
Not dead but on life support 38 63.33%
It's dead after the Steve Scaliese incident 13 21.67%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 60. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 27, 2017, 10:13 AM   #1
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 3,343
Hearing Protection Act - will it pass?

I've tried to keep up with the Hearing Protection Act (H.R.367 - 115th Congress (2017-2018), but it appears to gain interest, then lose interest, someone does something stupid wiith a weapon that endangers it, it gets a boost from someone, etc.

Hearing Protection Act Congressional site

If you're keeping up with it, or have good contacts in the area, what say you?
An anonymous poll is attached.
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابياً
TXAZ is offline  
Old August 27, 2017, 10:20 AM   #2
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,049
I wanna believe.

I know It would really boost the sales of them I wouldn't mind owning a few but have avoided them due to the loops and money.

And Honestly it should be considered a safety device not some super dangerous regulated item.

But that's too logical.. and I bet it goes no where If I had put money on it.
I know we would see more guns coming with factory threaded barrels.. right now it's fairly rare.
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old August 27, 2017, 11:04 AM   #3
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 7,611
Not 60 votes in the Senate, so it will get filibustered and die there should it pass the House. At this point, this appears to be more of a symbolic effort than a serious one. However, if it makes it out of the House committee (extremely iffy IMO), it will pass the House since a recorded floor vote on an NRA priority is going to pass the current House easily.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old August 27, 2017, 11:11 AM   #4
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 19,560
IMHO, we will see no proactive firearms legislation in the foreseeable future. The GOP leadership is distracted or not interested. The bills are put forward as fund raising bait and switch for contributors and sops to the NRA to support its funding raising.

Sorry to be a downer but that's the way I see it. Bart is correct that it may not make it out of committee. That's a way to keep it from a floor vote and then a stall in the Senate. That would be evidence that all the hype and promises of gun heaven arriving are empty.

The NRA magazines are admitting this on the Supreme Court. They acknowledge the court is a flop on gun cases but try to make a victory out of Gorsuch being on it and his dissents. True, but he just keeps steady state.

So staying in place is seen as a victory. I got an funding raising e-mail that the UN Treaty is coming again - SEND MONEY. Yawn.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old August 27, 2017, 11:51 AM   #5
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,049
With republicans in power if we're ever gonna see progress the time is now.
That's not to say all democrats are anti gun or all republicans are pro gun.

But if standing still under these circumstances is a victory we maybe in for a very dark future in 4-8.. maybe sooner depending on how the midterms go.
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old August 27, 2017, 12:06 PM   #6
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 19,560
Standing still is a victory for some because:

1. It doesn't demonstrate that you are an overt political and/or organizational failure. You did your best.

2. It keeps hope alive in those who buy the bait and switch to keep sending in money.

If one saw an organizational statement that said that their beloved elected leaders better pass something proactive or kiss the bucks good bye, you might see some action.

However, then the cry would be if you don't support the do nothings, the do something bad folks will get in.

One problem for gun rights is the strict identification of gun rights with one party and its baggage. In the past you can find strong support for gun rights from both parties when the parties didn't dichotomize in two sets of extreme nuts.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old August 28, 2017, 01:11 AM   #7
DaleA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 2002
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 4,143
I do NOT have any inside information on this but am very glad folks are pushing for it and keeping up the interest in the issue.

I do see more guns with threaded barrels and I thought the manufacturers were pushing hard to repeal the restrictions. Ruger is the main one I am thinking of but others are doing it too. I still hope this is the case and that the manufacturers will bring some pressure to bear.

Quote:
And Honestly it should be considered a safety device not some super dangerous regulated item.
I think JoeSixpack nailed the "technical" side of the issue but I guess the political side is probably what will count most.

Still, I never thought I'd see the day Minnesota had allowable concealed carry and we've had it now for several years. So maybe things might get better.
DaleA is offline  
Old August 28, 2017, 08:34 AM   #8
steve4102
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,884
I thought it was attached to a Sprtsmans omnibus bill called the SHARE Act.

http://www.pagunblog.com/2017/06/13/...-onto-omnibus/
steve4102 is offline  
Old August 28, 2017, 09:39 AM   #9
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve4102
I thought it was attached to a Sprtsmans omnibus bill called the SHARE Act.
Perhaps, but as one of the commentators on the linked website sagely phrased it:
Quote:
Sincere question: Will an Omnibus bill have a better chance of passage than any of its sub-provisions would have individually? If not, pessimist-me thinks it could be the place where nice ideas go to die.
This summarizes my thoughts as well.

Pessimist-me will get my hopes up when the bill is attached to a major omnibus bill that is NOT concerned primarily with gun and hunting stuff—something like a defense appropriations bill. This is how potentially controversial legislation usually gets rammed through when there are not enough votes in the Senate to get it through on its own merits. This gives opposing senators some political cover. ("I didn't like X, but I had to vote for it because the USAF base and Army fort in my state need funding, and that foul and nasty opposition party slipped X into the bill. I will be heading up an effort to repeal X in my next term, so make sure you contribute to my campaign...")
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak
carguychris is offline  
Old August 28, 2017, 10:26 AM   #10
brian33x51
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: Denver area
Posts: 194
The GOP has proven itself totally incompetent this cycle (like any other cycle). I truly believe the vast majority in congress are more interested in getting reelected than actually doing anything, and for some stupid reason look to the mainstream media for their policy guidance.

Paul Ryan looks to be an anti-gunner worst case, and totally indifferent otherwise. McConnell? Well there's isn't much to say about him.

If the congress was serious and had a clue they would be spending all their time and effort striking stupid laws from the books, not making new ones. That felony for firearms possession 1000ft from a school is a screaming example.
brian33x51 is offline  
Old August 28, 2017, 12:58 PM   #11
ATN082268
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 2, 2013
Posts: 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer View Post
IMHO, we will see no proactive firearms legislation in the foreseeable future. The GOP leadership is distracted or not interested. The bills are put forward as fund raising bait and switch for contributors and sops to the NRA to support its funding raising.
Unfortunately that is probably true. Hopefully there won't be any backsliding by the bureaucracies and the courts...
ATN082268 is offline  
Old August 28, 2017, 05:42 PM   #12
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 6,797
Anything that's a political talking point will not get completely solved. Basically the puck will get passed back and forth, pushed here or there but never across the goal line. The representatives only want to get elected and re-elected not solve issues. Problem solvers get shown the door on Election Day.

Keeping social issues alive keeps political figures in the game. Staying in government office makes them multimillionaires. Really they try to keep the balance of fence sitters in their favor; making drastic changes will alienate some fence sitting voters.

Hardcore republicans didn't elect our current cadre of officials, fence sitting moderates made the difference.
rickyrick is offline  
Old August 28, 2017, 06:17 PM   #13
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 2,309
No option for: "It was dead before the Steve Scalise shooting".

No one in Congress really cares about silencers. It's such a tiny percentage of firearm sales that even the NSSF doesn't give it more than a casual glance.
__________________
Need a FFL in Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me. $20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)

Plano, Texas...........the Gun Nut Capitol of Gun Culture, USA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE
dogtown tom is offline  
Old August 28, 2017, 06:26 PM   #14
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,049
Dogtown, True, But don't you think the overall cost and paperwork hassle is part of why they're not more popular? It's a catch 22.

If it was legal without the legal hassle sells would go up, prices would come down.
You could make your own if you wanted.

Commonality would increase.

Same thing for "machine guns" can't argue common use cause they're expensive so ownership is low, But if they reopened the registry, I don't mean abolished but just reopened it you would see so much money flow thru the gun market and companies trying to get their product over here it would be embarrassing.
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old August 28, 2017, 07:14 PM   #15
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 3,343
Joe,
you left out "it's a Federal Jobs Program".
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابياً
TXAZ is offline  
Old August 28, 2017, 08:02 PM   #16
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,049
Sure you're right, That was just a quick draft I'll work that into the next revision
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old August 29, 2017, 06:18 PM   #17
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 2,309
Quote:
JoeSixpack Dogtown, True, But don't you think the overall cost and paperwork hassle is part of why they're not more popular? It's a catch 22.
Sure, drop $200 from the cost of any firearm and you'll almost always increase sales. But the lack of popularity of NFA firearms is the result of the decades old myth that such firearms are illegal. In 1934 the $200 tax was intended to be prohibitively expensive, effectively stopping the average gun owner from buying. How many people would buy a silencer today if the ATF tax stamp was $3,653? That's what it would be if the tax stamp kept pace with inflation.

Not a day goes by that I don't get a call about silencers, at least 1 in 4 says "I thought they were illegal but a friend/relative/coworker has one".

Sadly, there is a not so insignificant segment of gun owners that view NFA firearms as guns only criminals would use. This owner has never used a silencer and neither did his father, grandfather or great grandfather.....so why should he? When a guy only hunts ducks or doves or shoots sporting clays he doesn't see the need for silencers, AR15's, 30 round magazines, concealed carry or any other 2nd Amendment right. That's sad and shortsighted.



Quote:
If it was legal without the legal hassle sells would go up, prices would come down.
The tax stamp has nothing to do with the price of a silencer. There already is a competitive market. Manufacturers, distributors and dealers don't pay a tax stamp for each silencer......only the end buyer does.

The regulatory oversight by ATF for a manufacturer/distributor/dealer of NFA firearms is the same as for Title I guns.

All that is required to manufacture a silencer is an 07FFL, Special Occupational Tax and ITAR registration.....less than $3,000 per year.





Quote:
You could make your own if you wanted.
Already can.



Quote:
Commonality would increase.
I don't know what this means, sorry.



Quote:
Same thing for "machine guns" can't argue common use cause they're expensive so ownership is low, But if they reopened the registry, I don't mean abolished but just reopened it you would see so much money flow thru the gun market and companies trying to get their product over here it would be embarrassing.
Machine guns are only expensive because the registry for "fully transferrables" closed in 1986. If the registry was reopened a machine gun would likely cost the same as a semi auto of the same model.
__________________
Need a FFL in Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me. $20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)

Plano, Texas...........the Gun Nut Capitol of Gun Culture, USA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE
dogtown tom is offline  
Old August 29, 2017, 07:49 PM   #18
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 6,797
I think that the difficulty in owning one directly relates to the price. If legal and unfettered, every person with a lathe in their garage would be turning them out and the price would go down. I don't see anything about them that brings such a handsome price in these current times. If the price was still high but the suppressor were unrestricted, I'd buy one. I just don't feel like giving the Feds any of my money for something that shouldn't be restricted in the first place.
rickyrick is offline  
Old August 29, 2017, 07:50 PM   #19
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by dogtown tom View Post
Sure, drop $200 from the cost of any firearm and you'll almost always increase sales. But the lack of popularity of NFA firearms is the result of the decades old myth that such firearms are illegal. In 1934 the $200 tax was intended to be prohibitively expensive,
I guess I can only speak for my self when I say the hassle of the paper work, the wait, and ya 200 dollars is still a tidy sum for me on top of 100's for the suppressor it self is the reason I don't own any.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dogtown tom View Post
The tax stamp has nothing to do with the price of a silencer. There already is a competitive market. Manufacturers, distributors and dealers don't pay a tax stamp for each silencer......only the end buyer does.
Sure it does, the smaller the market the more niche the item the higher the unit cost. economics of scale.. google it.

If they was deregulated market would expand, production would go up, unit price would come down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dogtown tom View Post
Already can.
Not without paper work and fee.. I mean unless you wanna goto prison.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dogtown tom View Post
I don't know what this means, sorry.
It means if it was more accessible more would own one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dogtown tom View Post
Machine guns are only expensive because the registry for "fully transferrables" closed in 1986. If the registry was reopened a machine gun would likely cost the same as a semi auto of the same model.
That was sort of my point, You don't need the registry reopened if you're ok with stuff made before 86 and are willing to pay wads of cash.
But that's a limited market, there is no "new" supply to meet demand.

Even if the they just reopened, the registry how many people would jump at the chance to pony up that 200 dollars, do the paperwork, and wait so they could land that full auto?

What do you think would happen if the registry was reopened?
Run your scenario out and see how far it is from what I already said.
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old August 29, 2017, 09:00 PM   #20
rwilson452
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 10, 2004
Location: Tioga co. PA
Posts: 2,605
I don't know if it will ever get to be law. I do think it will not happen in this session of congress. As to price, If it does become law, prices will not drop for some time as demand will rise. Manufacturers will take some time to ramp up to demand. As the demand will will be greater than supply, prices will not go down and may even rise.
__________________
USNRET '61-'81
rwilson452 is offline  
Old August 29, 2017, 09:19 PM   #21
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 6,797
I'd gladly walk in and pay for the item and get it on the spot, whatever the market price be. But I don't know, I don't have one anyway so I could just go through the motions and wait... I'd probably get one sooner than this one will pass.
rickyrick is offline  
Old August 29, 2017, 09:39 PM   #22
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,049
Rwilson but for how long? with the increased demand there would not just be the existing mfg's but new ones coming into the market to compete.

I grant you could find a lot of OOS and jacked up prices as the market expands and demand explodes but it would not last, not without some sort of collusion.
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old August 29, 2017, 10:20 PM   #23
rwilson452
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 10, 2004
Location: Tioga co. PA
Posts: 2,605
Quote:
Rwilson but for how long? with the increased demand there would not just be the existing mfg's but new ones coming into the market to compete.
Darned if I know. Way to many variables.
__________________
USNRET '61-'81
rwilson452 is offline  
Old August 29, 2017, 10:26 PM   #24
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 2,309
Quote:
JoeSixpack I guess I can only speak for my self when I say the hassle of the paper work, the wait, and ya 200 dollars is still a tidy sum for me on top of 100's for the suppressor it self is the reason I don't own any.
The "hassle of the paperwork"? What hassle? Your dealer/SOT will fill that out, not you.

I have more than one customer that doesn't want to wait......guess what? A year from now they still won't have a silencer. If you want one, waiting for the HPA is silly......'cause your going to have to wait on that as well. I guess I'm too practical....wait six to eight months and get a silencer or wait until whenever for the HPA to pass.


I agree $200 isn't peanuts.........but it isn't $3,600+ either is it?
If the manufacturer paid for your stamp at the time of manufacture would you complain? That's how Federal Excise Taxes are paid on Title I firearms and ammunition.....10-11% of the sales price. Does FAET cause you to not acquire new firearms? After all YOU ARE PAYING TAX IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.



Quote:
the smaller the market the more niche the item the higher the unit cost. economics of scale.. google it.
You make it sound like there are only 5 or 6 silencer manufacturers, when in reality there are 20-30 major ones and hundreds of small ones. Heck, there's a guy here in Plano that makes them in his garage.

If you think the price will go down when there are hundreds if not thousands of silencer manufacturers.........then why do Glocks cost the same as they did fifteen years ago? When S&W, Walther, Sig, etc came in with polymer framed pistols did Glock suddenly drop their price? No, they didn't. "Economy of scale" isn't the only factor in production or manufacturing.



Quote:
If they was deregulated market would expand, production would go up, unit price would come down.
How much do you really know about silencer pricing, manufacturing costs and the firearms industry? I ask because you think that "deregulation" would have a significant impact.........so tell me what needs to be deregulated to lower the current cost of a silencer. And I'm not talking about the tax.
As I wrote above ANYONE can get an FFL, SOT, register for ITAR for less than $3000. If $3000 is too darn much for a manufacturer.....they aren't really much of a manufacturer.

Manufacturers DON'T PAY for a tax stamp. They pay a yearly SOT and can manufacturer a billion silencers for that $1000 fee.

Could you produce a silencer for less? THEN KNOCK YOURSELF OUT. There are a number of rimfire silencers with a retail of $99.......can you make a better one for that? I'm not talking about a one off, but manufacture them AS A BUSINESS?

What gets me in these types of threads is guys assume cost of raw materials are the only expense. That sheer volume will pay for employees, CNC machines, advertising, etc. Sure you could make 'em in your garage by yourself from Maglite tubes and freeze plugs.....but who wants to buy that? Not many.



Quote:
It means if it was more accessible more would own one.
Can you pass a background check? Then they are as "accessible" as a Glock.
If by "accessible" you mean less expensive? Well of course....but accessable and affordable aren't the same thing.


Quote:
What do you think would happen if the registry was reopened?
People would Form 1 machine guns, manufacturers would manufacture machine guns.........and that $200 tax would be the least of their worries and not in any way shape or form a hindrance to the process. But it's a pipe dream.
__________________
Need a FFL in Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me. $20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)

Plano, Texas...........the Gun Nut Capitol of Gun Culture, USA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE
dogtown tom is offline  
Old August 29, 2017, 10:32 PM   #25
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 2,309
Quote:
rwilson452..... As to price, If it does become law, prices will not drop for some time as demand will rise. Manufacturers will take some time to ramp up to demand. As the demand will will be greater than supply, prices will not go down and may even rise.
Several manufacturers have warned dealers and distributors of this. If the HPA passes, you'll see a run on factory made silencers that will deplete inventories for as much as two years. With limited supply prices will skyrocket. If you really want the latest and best technology then expect to pay through the nose.

And no, the Form 1 home made silencer will have little effect on the market. Just like the homemade 80% guns have little real impact on the gun market now.
__________________
Need a FFL in Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me. $20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)

Plano, Texas...........the Gun Nut Capitol of Gun Culture, USA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE
dogtown tom is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10415 seconds with 9 queries