What's the chance of suppressors/silencers coming off of Class 3 Status?

[Midwest]

If the original intent for the law is already being addressed by other laws in place. Then the law should be repealed as redundant and outdated and thus no longer needed. It is not even a weapon, it fires nothing, projects nothing. It is an inert device to reduce sound.
.

 

[Ed Ames]

If the original intent for the law is already being addressed by other laws in place. Then the law should be repealed as redundant and outdated and thus no longer needed.

Oh if only that's how it worked....

You say redundant, a prosecutor says, "additional charge".

 

[joem1945]

Follow the money. The pass laws to generate a revenue source like select fire arms, silencers, destructine devices and a long list of other money making ventures. Tax stamps for everything and pay to play.

 

[Ed Ames]

Tax stamps aren't the only path to revenue. If eliminating the tax stamp kick starts the market businesses start making big money manufacturing silencers for the US market, that will likely result in even more revenue. It is the Laffer Curve all over again.

 

[BSA1]

Well in today's dollars a one time fee of $200.00 is not expensive. Look at the cost of hunting & fishing licenses and factory ammo. There a large number of ways to cut the budget such as brown bagging lunch, etc.

The real effect of the NFA is it has created a restricted market that allows manufacturers to overcharge for their product.

 

[Thermactor]

Nothing in this life is for certain and that includes the 'zero percent' chance of having suppressors delisted from the NFA.

However, the odds are greatly against it because the Feds want to have every tool available to them to aid in prosecuting someone that they want to get locked up.
For example, in another entrapment case recently, they are charging someone with receiving a suppressor from an undercover informant without the NFA tax stamp as part of a terrorism investigation.

So the national security angle gets played and that would stop a lot of typically pro-2A congressmen from supporting the NFA repeal. So while the chances of suppressor decriminalization (heh) are not zero, they are very near to that number in the current political environment and for the forseeable future. IMO.

Citation:
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/north...ide-material-support-isil-and-weapon-offenses

The criminal complaint was filed today in federal court, charging Justin Nojan Sullivan, 19, of Morganton, North Carolina, with [...], one count of transporting and receiving a silencer in interstate commerce with intent to commit a felony, and one count of receipt and possession of an unregistered silencer, unidentified by a serial number. Sullivan was arrested in his home on Friday, June 19, 2015, without incident.
...
According to the criminal complaint, an FBI undercover employee (UC) made contact with Sullivan beginning on or about June 6, 2015
...
According to the complaint, on or about June 9, 2015, Sullivan discussed with the UC the possibility of making homemade silencers and asked the UC whether he would be able to make one. When the UC said that he thought he could, Sullivan told the UC “Ill need to have one built by next week.” The complaint alleges that Sullivan also told the UC “Yeah ill let u mail me…I plan on using it this mont[h].

 

[Midwest]

So what are the chances of getting the tax stamp for suppressors/silencers reduced from $200 to $5 like someone suggested earlier?
.

 

[R.W.Dale]

Well in today's dollars a one time fee of $200.00 is not expensive. Look at the cost of hunting & fishing licenses and factory ammo. There a large number of ways to cut the budget such as brown bagging lunch, etc.

The real effect of the NFA is it has created a restricted market that allows manufacturers to overcharge for their product.

The $200 wouldn't be a big deal if you lived somewhere law enforcement would sign off.

But $200 + the trust is absolutely a burden

 

[Ed Ames]

The $200 wouldn't be a big deal if you lived somewhere law enforcement would sign off.

But $200 + the trust is absolutely a burden

Don't worry. They want to add the CLEO sign-off to trusts too so that won't be a burden either soon.