Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 79

Thread: Bill to remove suppressors from NFA

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    9,209
    Feedback Score
    47 (100%)
    Initially, most likely yes.

    Eventually price would come down, due to economy of scale.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    3,799
    Feedback Score
    19 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryno12 View Post
    If suppressors were removed from the NFA, any thoughts on the impact this would have to the price of them?
    I wonder if the prices would increase due to higher demand.
    I think you mean decrease due to larger potential market. And it would happen fast. Most suppressors made and sold here are made to a premium level because of the major cost and hassle of buying one. There's no reason you can't make a cheap, lower quality suppressor for about the price of a car muffler. I wouldn't want to wait 6 months and pay a $200 stamp tax to get a $50 suppressor, but if my total outlay is $50 and cash-and-carry, why not? And I think that would very quickly drive down prices on premium suppressors.
    ____________________________________________________________________________________
    Use InfoGalactic instead of Wikipedia - avoid Wikipedia's left bias

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Main_Page
    ____________________________________________________________________________________

    Product reviews stating "Only 4 stars because I haven't used it yet" are an idiot's signature.
    ____________________________________________________________________________________

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,533
    Feedback Score
    16 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Outlander Systems View Post
    Ugh. I hate Isakson. He's like political herpes...won't...go...away.
    Fair enough...but his voting record regarding 2A rights is strong:

    Strongly support the 2nd Amendment. (Aug 2004)
    We need criminal control not gun control. (Aug 2004)
    Voted NO on banning high-capacity magazines of over 10 bullets. (Apr 2013)
    Voted YES on allowing firearms in checked baggage on Amtrak trains. (Apr 2009)
    Voted YES on prohibiting foreign & UN aid that restricts US gun ownership. (Sep 2007)
    Voted YES on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
    Voted YES on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse. (Apr 2003)
    Voted YES on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1. (Jun 1999)
    No lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jan 2001)
    Rated A by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record. (Dec 2003)
    No United Nations taxation on firearms. (Sep 2003)
    National cross-state standard for concealed carry. (Jan 2009)
    Rated A by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record. (Aug 2010)
    Oppose the United Nations' Arms Trade Treaty. (Sep 2013)
    Ban gun registration & trigger lock law in Washington DC. (Mar 2007)
    Allow firearms in National Parks. (Feb 2008)
    Apply concealed carry permit to all other states where legal. (Feb 2009)
    Politician's Prefer Unarmed Peasants

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    5,155
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by SomeOtherGuy View Post
    I think you mean decrease due to larger potential market.
    I could see it going either way but I tend to agree with Outlander. I see with the initial rush, there's no reason for manufacturers to lower the cost. Likely they'd go up. Once the market becomes saturated, prices would stabilize and/or start to decrease until it finds its equilibrium.
    Quote Originally Posted by JSantoro View Post
    Stop dicking the dog, please. It's gross.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    9,209
    Feedback Score
    47 (100%)
    I suppose that could be the silver lining.

    Quote Originally Posted by FlyingHunter View Post
    Fair enough...but his voting record regarding 2A rights is strong:

    Strongly support the 2nd Amendment. (Aug 2004)
    We need criminal control not gun control. (Aug 2004)
    Voted NO on banning high-capacity magazines of over 10 bullets. (Apr 2013)
    Voted YES on allowing firearms in checked baggage on Amtrak trains. (Apr 2009)
    Voted YES on prohibiting foreign & UN aid that restricts US gun ownership. (Sep 2007)
    Voted YES on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
    Voted YES on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse. (Apr 2003)
    Voted YES on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1. (Jun 1999)
    No lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jan 2001)
    Rated A by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record. (Dec 2003)
    No United Nations taxation on firearms. (Sep 2003)
    National cross-state standard for concealed carry. (Jan 2009)
    Rated A by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record. (Aug 2010)
    Oppose the United Nations' Arms Trade Treaty. (Sep 2013)
    Ban gun registration & trigger lock law in Washington DC. (Mar 2007)
    Allow firearms in National Parks. (Feb 2008)
    Apply concealed carry permit to all other states where legal. (Feb 2009)

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,533
    Feedback Score
    16 (100%)
    He's been a politician since first elected in 1976. Diagnosed with Parkinson's in June of 2015 declaring it would not deter him from running for re-election in 2016. Enough already. Retire.

    Back on thread OP...

    I'll contact my legislators. I'd probably add more suppressors if it became an over the counter opportunity. We also risk awaking a wolverine whereby the gubmint looks closely at the $200 stamp, adjust for inflation and we have a tax that becomes ginormous to pay for "safety and regulation" and the $750 can becomes the $1500+ can.
    Politician's Prefer Unarmed Peasants

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    514
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SomeOtherGuy View Post
    I think you mean decrease due to larger potential market. And it would happen fast. Most suppressors made and sold here are made to a premium level because of the major cost and hassle of buying one. There's no reason you can't make a cheap, lower quality suppressor for about the price of a car muffler. I wouldn't want to wait 6 months and pay a $200 stamp tax to get a $50 suppressor, but if my total outlay is $50 and cash-and-carry, why not? And I think that would very quickly drive down prices on premium suppressors.
    Initially, the price would go up as the demand would far outweigh the available supply. As suppressor manufacturers add capacity to meet demand, the price would reach equilibrium. Simple economics says prices would have to go up unless manufacturers have unused capacity we dont know about.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    25,596
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryno12 View Post
    If suppressors were removed from the NFA, any thoughts on the impact this would have to the price of them?
    I wonder if the prices would increase due to higher demand.
    One would think prices would go the other way given the increased market.
    It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.

    Chuck, we miss ya man.

    كافر

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    12,718
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    I'll gladly pay more provided I don't need a permission slip from a revenue agency.

    DHS was a horrible idea. ATF really weren't meant to be police, but tax collectors. Which made the whole Waco thing extra sickening.

    If I may paraphrase River from Serenity "People don't like us because we are meddlesome. We meddle. We don't leave people be."

    ETA yes, Waco was way before 9/11...and now a Treasury agency is on par with the CIA and FBI? Yeah...I'm feeling pretty free right now.
    Last edited by Firefly; 10-22-15 at 22:36.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    3,799
    Feedback Score
    19 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by FlyingHunter View Post
    I'll contact my legislators. I'd probably add more suppressors if it became an over the counter opportunity. We also risk awaking a wolverine whereby the gubmint looks closely at the $200 stamp, adjust for inflation and we have a tax that becomes ginormous to pay for "safety and regulation" and the $750 can becomes the $1500+ can.
    Think $3500+ if the ridiculous tax was adjusted for inflation. It was meant to be totally prohibitive in 1934, but they didn't figure in the massive devaluation in the dollar that was coming.

    From dollartimes.com:

    $200.00 in 1934 had the same buying power as $3,557.76 in 2015.
    Annual inflation over this period was 3.62%.

    I agree that there is risk in trying to get this passed, but there's always risks, and it's better if the RKBA side is on the offensive rather than being silent and waiting for the next incremental loss of freedom.
    ____________________________________________________________________________________
    Use InfoGalactic instead of Wikipedia - avoid Wikipedia's left bias

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Main_Page
    ____________________________________________________________________________________

    Product reviews stating "Only 4 stars because I haven't used it yet" are an idiot's signature.
    ____________________________________________________________________________________

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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