....
That doesn’t matter one whit. Technology marches on. All that does is play into the hands of those who try to parse words and define what the meaning of “is” is
Apt analogy with "is," per President Clinton, but the real problem is the constant morphing with time and viewpoint of so many words in the firearms discussion.
"Control the language, and you control the issue."
Consider "assault weapon." How did that morph semantically,
and then technically, from full-auto individual "walking fire" battle weapons to any AR-style "ugly" black rifle?
And I, for only one native English speaker, do not understand how "registration" is not an infringement. Even if it is supposedly only for taxation purposes. I sometimes wish they'd added "or abridged," as in the First Amendment.
So, after constant use and misuse, the terms "registered," etc., have become normalized in the firearms discussions. I still cringe when I hear "registered" or "registration" with respect to firearms in TV and movie scripts... as if it were a normal and expected thing everywhere in the US.
Truly: "Control the language, and you control the issue."
Terry, 230RN
NOTE: The $200 tax stamp of 1934 would be equivalent to somewhere between $2600 and $4,100 nowadays. You think you'd buy a suppressor if you had to buy a $2600 tax stamp for it? Let alone $4100?
That, my friend, is proscriptive taxation... therefore prohibition.... I call that an infringement. What would you call it?
3% overall annual inflation, 88 years = $2696
3.5% overall annual inflation, 88 years =$4128
Pick your favorite overall annual inflation (OAI) rate.
Present cost = ((1+OAI as a decimal)^88) X $200