Republicans' tax bill would water down a century-old gun law

[douglas9]

Tucked into the more than 1,000 pages of the GOP domestic policy bill winding its way through Congress is a provision that would water down a nearly century-old firearms law — changes that the gun industry has sought for years but that gun-control advocates warn would come at the expense of public safety.

The legislation would ease restrictions established by the 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA) on suppressors — often called silencers — and certain long guns such as short-barreled rifles and sawed-off shotguns. The change would eliminate the $200 federal tax on suppressors and the requirement that owners register them with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

Republicans, including Rep. Andrew Clyde (Georgia), who took credit for the provision, said it would relieve citizens of burdensome taxes on their Second Amendment rights. But partially repealing the NFA would dismantle one of the few — and one of the most effective — federal gun laws ever enacted, according to Robert Spitzer, chair emeritus of the political science department at the State University of New York at Cortland and the author of “The Gun Dilemma: How History is Against Expanded Gun Rights.”

“This bill illustrates the muscle of the gun rights people in Congress to pull out provisions that have been in place for 90 years while sort of turning a blind eye to the history of why these things were restricted in the first place,” Spitzer said. He noted that the 1934 law regulated the weapons of choice for Prohibition-era gangsters and criminals. “It was a problem that was essentially solved — or at least addressed effectively.”

Clyde, a vocal opponent of gun control, called the taxes in the NFA “draconian” during a May 21 House debate on the tax and spending bill.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2025/06/27/budget-bill-silencers-short-barreled-guns/

[markodochartaigh]

1. How often do we hear survivors of mass shootings say

"I heard shots so I ran"?
One of the worst of modern American life's experiences must be to be near a mass shooting and hear those shots.
But it is better than being near a mass shooting and not hearing the shots until it was too late to run.

[Happy Hoosier]

4. "silencers" is misnomer. They do not make guns silent....

I use suppressors for some of my guns when shooting recreationally. I doi so for 2 reasons:

1) To protect my hearing.
2) To annoy the neighbors less.

Even with a "silencer," most guns are not hearing safe. They are still very loud. But suppressors make the sound easier to protect against. And the sound isn't as loud the next farm over (I usually shoot at a friend of a friend's farm).

Most modern guns shoot bullet that are supersonic. They will still make a distinctive CRACK that a suppressor cannot quiet. Some guns can fire special "sub-sonic" ammo, but that's not all that common.

FWIW, I'm fine with the paperwork and the $200 tax stamp. But some people have the impression that suppressors are illegal. They are not. There is just a hassle factor to get one.

[newdeal2]

2. Give me my silencers like our forefathers envisioned

[spanone]

3. Gun humpers.

The legislation would ease restrictions established by the 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA) on suppressors — often called silencers — and certain long guns such as short-barreled rifles and sawed-off shotguns.

EVERYONE NEEDS A SILENCER, DON'T THEY?

CRAZY SHIT FROM REPUBLICANS.

[Happy Hoosier]

5. Please see my post 4.

They are not what you think they are.

They are actually available over the counter in many European countries that restrict actual firearms far more than we do. They are just mufflers.