SHARE Act/ Hearing Protection Act 2017

[Smilez226]

I'm not worried about local either... but them poor suckas down in Philly & Burbs sure should be.

Yea, I wouldn't want to them now let alone ever.

[NShortino]

So, can anyone explain to me what's with the October 22, 2015 cut-off date for refunds on tax stamps? I'm assuming that was the day it was first introduced as a bill, but wouldn't that be irrelevant since it had to be re-introduced?

[Smilez226]

I would think same bill same date?

[bogey1]

Which is absolutely stupid. Different meters will register a sound within a few dB of each other, not to mention as well that meter placement can change the reading as well.

Stupid isn't the word, but I guarantee, something stupid like this
will happen, just to appease the masses. It will be useless if you ask me.

[wanneroo]

All good, but you just will not be able to get one for a long time. If this bill passes which I think it will if it makes it through the Senate, they will fly off of the shelves.

[bluetrane2028]

All good, but you just will not be able to get one for a long time. If this bill passes which I think it will if it makes it through the Senate, they will fly off of the shelves.

Supply and demand. If demand is high enough, companies will step up production I'm sure. Look at how everyone and their mother now makes ARs.

A short period of not much on shelves, followed by having them everywhere? I'll take that.

[Wildbill990]

Bumping and added an update. Bill is now on pop vox. Please read the update and write your reps.

[Sgt.K]

Since 1934, the federal government has treated devices designed to muffle or suppress the report of firearms as Title II devices that required registration under the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record and mandated transfers that included a $200 tax stamp. The Duncan-Carter bill would repeal this requirement and treat suppressors as firearms– which would allow them to be transferred through any regular federal firearms license holders to anyone not prohibited from possessing them after the buyer passes an FBI instant background check

Given your views on National Reciprocity (essentially "f#$% National Reciprocity, kill those bills because they aren't what we need, demand National Constitutional Carry"), are you going to fight this bill because suppressors will still be treated like firearms and instead demand they be regulated/restricted no more severely than a set of 1911 grips?

I only ask because both views make about as much sense...

[RenoV8]

Given your views on National Reciprocity (essentially "f#$% National Reciprocity, kill those bills because they aren't what we need, demand National Constitutional Carry"), are you going to fight this bill because suppressors will still be treated like firearms and instead demand they be regulated/restricted no more severely than a set of 1911 grips?

I only ask because both views make about as much sense...

Well, with that logic, why don't we just go back a little further to say....1968 and do away with the GCA altogether. Heck, don't stop there....1934, get rid of NFA. Or maybe, 1927, when mailing arms was banned by Congress. No, No....1865, when Southern States decided to forbid black people from owning firearms. Almost there....1791, lets just rewrite the 2nd Amendment to say...

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the Individual, the people, to keep, posses, own, mail, manufacture and distribute, shall not be infringed, at any time, now and in the future, regardless of the advancement of firearm and ammunition technologies."

[RockIsland]

Well, with that logic, why don't we just go back a little further to say....1968 and do away with the GCA altogether. Heck, don't stop there....1934, get rid of NFA. Or maybe, 1927, when mailing arms was banned by Congress. No, No....1865, when Southern States decided to forbid black people from owning firearms. Almost there....1791, lets just rewrite the 2nd Amendment to say...

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the Individual, the people, to keep, posses, own, mail, manufacture and distribute, shall not be infringed, at any time, now and in the future, regardless of the advancement of firearm and ammunition technologies."

Now that's what I'd call comprehensive common sense gun control.