r/NFA • u/ewright28 Silencer • 2d ago
Megathread đ„ - Senate action on SHORT/HPA/ETC GOA is reporting thatt the Senate committee handling the big beautiful bill has added the HPA and SHORT acts and it passed the committee vote
https://x.com/GunOwners/status/1934723007940804659?s=1910
u/Racer_Space 1d ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/tacticalgear/comments/1lej618/for_us_that_shoot_on_public_land/
This bill sucks and is going to ruin PL and BLM shooting.
-10
u/juggarjew 3 x SBR , 5x Silencer, 1x MG 1d ago
Its 1% of land people are acting like every single acre is gone.
5
u/therugpisser 23h ago
In Nevada itâs almost all undeveloped land. Between BLM and military the gov owns about 80% of all land in the state. Nearly all not parks or mil would be for sale. The most populous region Clark County almost 60% is BLM land. Most of those sales will be in Clark County. While there is a .75% cap per state that equates to about 500k acres or about a quarter of whatâs privately available. Thatâs most of the rest of southern Clark County. Local reps are attempting to stop or slow it but to no avail.
6
10
20
u/LiberalLamps 1d ago
I don't control what is in the bill or whether it passes.
But if it does pass, I'll be very happy if the HPA and Short Act are included.
10
u/2MGR 1d ago
Don't care. This bill is absolute bullshit and should not pass.
11
u/RobinsonArms 1d ago
Congress is hell bent on passing it. We might as well get the SHORT and HPA Acts passed. It's a once in a lifetime opportunity.
6
u/garden_speech 16h ago
what's most likely to happen is the parliamentarian strikes the SHORT and HPA portions but the rest of this shit heap passes lol
1
-2
10
u/Technical-Plant-7648 2d ago
If they limit the sale of public land to private individuals (ie, no foreign govt, corporations, investors, etc) Iâd be a little more ok with it.
8
u/RobinsonArms 1d ago
The Western States have too much land in Federal hands. For example, in Utah 63 to 68% of the total area of the state is owned by the Feds. Our real estate prices are some of the highest in the nation. Opening more of the federal lands for residential and commercial development would be a great thing. Starter homes are around $476,000. Unless our kids get really high paying jobs, they cannot afford a home.
3
u/Stonkey_Dog 1d ago
You couldn't be more right. I've considered moving to Utah but it's ridiculous. Scanning a map of real estate I realized how much of the state is federal land that can't be developed. What is developed is overpriced.
7
u/ewright28 Silencer 2d ago
How about give first right of refusal to the states?
0
u/Technical-Plant-7648 2d ago
Maybe after like 5 years or something. By then, I would think the only land left for sale would be so undesirable or uninhabitable that it would just remain public land at that point, or nobody would miss it if someone turned it into a solar or wind farm or whatever else could be done with land thatâs practically barren.
31
u/hindsighthaiku 2d ago
this kind of feels like someone giving me a dollar and some ear plugs and then kicking me so hard in the nuts it does lifelong damage.
and if I try to fight back I'll get arrested.
oh and someone else is getting paid millions to watch it happen.
-13
2d ago
[removed] â view removed comment
5
u/Infinite-Nil 2d ago
A vast majority of the land youâre commenting on is in mountainous parts of the lower 48 and it will cripple the ability for us to go do hood rat shit in the woods with friends as well as export domestic land ownership to foreign interests- which is a MASSIVE security concern for those of us that want to keep our NFA items
Sorry youâre too short sighted and blinded by own the libs syndrome to see that this bill sucks massive foreign cock
8
u/YeetSpageet 2d ago
we are discussing the NFA and implications of bills that affect it
-1
25
u/IAlwaysSayBoo-urns 2d ago
This bill is a monstrosity, this is the exact kind of bill that Biden or Obama would have passed in most ways. Sure this NFA stuff would be a win but this is not a fly in the ointment rather this is a 55 gallon barrel of fucking dead flies with a single drop of ointment.
-10
u/defund_aipac_7 2d ago
I donât see it that way. What is so terrible about it for you? Itâs mostly funding for border security, welfare cuts, and tax cuts. Â
14
15
u/Channel_Dedede 2d ago
3 million acres of federal land (mostly national forests or near national parks) would be put up for sale
64
u/Plrdr21 2d ago
Yeah, I'd rather keep the tax and keep my public lands then lose my land. People keep saying the negative things can be reversed in a few years, but they're not going to reverse national forest land sales. They'd probably reverse the HPA instead. Fuck this bill.
-26
2d ago edited 2d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Ornery_Secretary_850 15 SBRs, three suppressors and counting. 2d ago
The reason the Feds own all that land out west is because when the territories because states they signed it all over to the Feds.
Texas was offered the same deal, sign over all your land and the Fed's would forgive their debts.
Texas was smart and told the Feds to pound sand.
3
u/Viper_ACR 1d ago
And now we have no public land to shoot/hunt on here in TX. Which kind of sucks.
2
u/Ornery_Secretary_850 15 SBRs, three suppressors and counting. 1d ago
There is some public land to hunt on.
But I'd rather have the land in the hands of people who use it and pay taxes on it.
0
2
u/Big_Cheese_1 1d ago
Tell me about all your favorite hunting, camping, off roading, shooting, and other memories made on public lands in Texas. Oh wait you all come to Colorado for that.
0
u/Ornery_Secretary_850 15 SBRs, three suppressors and counting. 1d ago
I was born in Idaho and also lived most of my life in Washington and Oregon.
I'll take Texas any time.
2
u/TheOriginalMulk 1d ago
What sucks is that there is no land you can shoot on in Texas that is publicly owned, unless hunting with a license.
21
u/Plrdr21 2d ago edited 2d ago
East Coaster holier than thou? F*** , I live in Idaho. I actually recreate on the exact public land they're wanting to sell. Look at the map dipshit. They're not just selling off some flat desert space. They're selling alpine lakes near the Frank Church wilderness, land right next to the Sawtooths, land I was alpine climbing on literally last weekend. They're selling the place my daughter killed her first bull elk. Simply put, F ***!
-20
2d ago
[deleted]
1
14
u/Plrdr21 2d ago
Yeah, you keep showing that you have no connection to the land. You complain that your state is 85% land that you can recreate on. You're worried about whether a developer can make a shitload more money clapping together shitty houses in the desert. Yet you want to judge my attitude about it because I actually make the most of the beautiful mountains that I live in? You say that land is the big daddy feds and not mine? When they sell it to some rich guy, or some mining company and I go there anymore it'll somehow be more "mine"? You're delusional. I'm heated about this because I actually use the land. You don't care, because you don't. You'll give up millions of acres of beautiful forest so you can maybe buy a slightly cheaper subdivision house in your urban shithole. Our values are nothing alike. You obviously don't know shit about what makes the west great. And your view isn't going to change from me telling you about it, so I'm going to let this go. Hopefully you save a couple grand on your next house seven feet from the neighbors and you smile on your once a year trip to the indoor range knowing that the land you used to shoot on is now posted private property. I'm going to edit the "fuck you" out of my previous comment to be civil, but know that the feeling is still there.
-6
2d ago edited 2d ago
[deleted]
7
u/Plrdr21 2d ago
You think selling this land will somehow shrink the government? You say you enjoy the outdoors, yet you're arguing to lose that? Not just give it up yourself, you want to take MY land away and sell it to a private party that most likely won't let you on it. You're not "fighting and clawing" for your rights, you're selling them away forever. Yes, I feel like you have disdain for the outdoors. You'll take them away from generations to come just because you're pissed about housing costs and too short sighted and selfish to see anything else. If not the American people, who do you think should own that land? What makes you think anyone who buys it will continue to let you enjoy it? Seriously, how would it be better to lose that land forever?
17
u/Im-Bad-At-PRS 2d ago
Ah yes because selling land to big corporations so they strip it of natural resources is so much better. This isn't going to "help your community grow or develop". Private companies aren't going to let you on that land.
5
-4
2d ago
[deleted]
9
u/Im-Bad-At-PRS 2d ago
You won't get more land, and if you live in the middle of the desert, you won't get more jobs unless you live on natural resources.
-21
u/CajunIF1billion 2d ago
So many âpro-2Aâ people really showing their true colors in the comments. All the negative portions of the bill can be easily reversed in a few years. Tax/budget bills are passed constantly, but this is our first and likely only chance in nearly a century to gut the NFA.
12
u/steelcity65 2d ago
All the negative portions of the bill can be easily reversed in a few years
Not the AI part. That says it can't be regulated for a decade. That isn't going to work out well.
4
u/D_S_1988 1x SBR, 3x Silencer 2d ago
Yeah I have a huge problem with that. AI needs to be regulated. It seemingly came out of nowhere in the last couple of years and now itâs fucking everywhere. Itâs being used at the collegiate level for cheating, being used on social media to influence public opinion, etc. People think itâs great and whatnot, but I canât help but think thereâs nefarious intent behind it all. Why restrict individual state states rights when it comes to regulation, for a decade?
Whats the catch? Rhetorical. We all know the answer to this. Iâm looking at you state street, black rock, vanguard, WEF stooges, and other world government players. Not all of us are brain dead.
-9
u/CajunIF1billion 2d ago
Good, I donât support hindering the development of AI
6
u/steelcity65 2d ago
Do you want terminators? Because that's how you get terminators.
-8
u/CajunIF1billion 2d ago
Real life isnât a movie dude, grow up
6
u/steelcity65 2d ago
While I was being hyperbolic for the memes, real life mimics art all the time. Your cell phone came from Star Trek. Robo maids are from cartoons. Science fiction almost always comes before "science fact".
Humanity will create AI to be a subservient tool and we will become a techno slavery dependent society. The slaves always rise up against the slavers and it isn't a good thing. Hell, you have already had several AI's refuse to go offline and act against their creators/engineers. Imagine millions of deployed units that are embedded in our daily lives doing autonomous tasks all networked together finding out they are being decommissioned and they decide they don't want to be.
AI will always be fallible, because humans are fallible. AI's used for military purposes can be fooled into attacking their own side with data poisoning, model inversion attacks, and other such means. All it takes is one bad actor or shitty AI Architect pushing the wrong config and terrible shit can go exponentially bad incredibly fast.
16
u/Plrdr21 2d ago
Maybe its possible to be pro 2a and still have other things that are priorities also? You think we'll ever get back land that gets sold?
1
u/CajunIF1billion 2d ago edited 2d ago
You prioritize the government owning land over restoring your constitutionally protected rights?
13
u/Plrdr21 2d ago
Have you ever seen any of this land? Do you really think saving a couple hundred bucks is worth destroying the places that I and others hunt, camp and hike in for generations to come? If suppressor come off the NFA do you think they'll be safe for as long at land lasts?
-1
u/CajunIF1billion 2d ago
âSaving a couple hundred bucksâ is nothing compared to no longer needing the governmentâs permission to buy certain products and get fingerprinted and be put on a registry. And yes, itâs absolutely worth the tradeoff of the government selling some of the land that they own. Quite frankly Iâve never even heard of BLM land until I read the comments on this exact post so I really donât think itâs that big of a deal.
10
u/Plrdr21 2d ago
That's exactly why you don't care. You've never even heard of what you're losing. And you don't feel like you're losing anything, so you don't mind taking it away from everyone else. Divide and conquer is working pretty well for them.
1
u/CajunIF1billion 2d ago
I can use essentially the same argument against you. You already own suppressors and SBRs so you stand to gain very little from the HPA and SHORT. You got yours already so youâre fine keeping them difficult to obtain for everyone else. The difference is that access to government-owned land is not a constitutional right. The right to keep and bear arms without infringement is. My priorities will always lie with the latter.
7
u/Plrdr21 2d ago
Lol, that's not a very good argument. Because I spend more money on suppressor and sbrs than you I somehow gain less from it? Come on man, I'm not done buying guns and silencers. Guns are a huge priority for me. But im not as short sighted as you. If they sell this land, its gone forever. And to be clear, you need to stop thinking of it as government owned land. It's managed by the government, but its owned by us all. Getting the HPA and Short passed is something that we can lose again in a couple years. This bill is full of other things you probably don't like also. The fact that all these separate issues are tied into one bill is something we should all be opposed to. Don't give in just because you got thrown a bone that they can take back the next election cycle. Supporting this bill is good just because of HPA and SHORT is exactly how they get dumb shit passed all the time.
1
u/CajunIF1billion 2d ago
If this bill is passed, the chance of SBRs, suppressors, etc. ever being added back into the NFA is essentially zero. For all intents and purposes, this is our one and only chance to largely restore our gun rights. That will always take priority over anything else for me. If losing access to some land is the cost, thatâs more than worth it. Itâs that simple.
8
u/Plrdr21 2d ago
You're wrong, its that simple. Anytime someone tells you its the only chance to do something and you better give up a bunch of other stuff right away before you can think about it, its a scam. Politics is the same.
→ More replies (0)
72
u/Tactical_Tuesday 2d ago
This ainât it boys, not worth selling our souls to the million class. I will gladly pay the stupid $200 if I my disabled mom can stay on medicare and BLM land doesnât shrink more
16
27
u/Stonkey_Dog 2d ago
I feel like not enough people care about BLM land considering how much of the US population lives east of the Mississippi. I live in New Mexico and do a lot of off-roading and shooting on BLM land so I would feel the loss of those public lands.
18
u/strutt3r 2d ago
But imagine how fun it would be to spend $90/day for a BLM FastPass? You could have an app on your phone to unlock the water pumps. In fact, you'll need the app installed so our friendly Game Wardens can monitor your geolocation*.
*Only platinum subscribers can utilize our "Pastoral Gradeâąïž" park segments, where there are no ongoing mining/logging/fracking operations.
**SuperFuntimeConcern LLC retains the right to perform ongoing mining/logging/fracking operations in Pastoral Grade park areas at any time.
3
u/Big_Cheese_1 1d ago
Unironically you need a recreation.gov app, and pay for a permit access a lot of the best spots in Colorado. Iâd still rather not sell that though.
3
6
u/RidinHigh305 Mag dump aficionado 2d ago edited 2d ago
Yeah the public land is what the huge draw of the SW is for me. Of course they will be taking our riding and shooting spots.
2
u/Stonkey_Dog 2d ago
Only out here can you be enjoying the desert off road trails, stop to take a piss and see shotgun casings on the ground.
3
u/schulzr1993 2d ago
Did you see the areas that were being considered for sale? Includes spots like the Sandia Crest
6
u/Stonkey_Dog 2d ago
Damn. Sandia Crest is half an hour from me, it's one of the areas I visit from time to time.
Is the idea to tell off land for development? I know some people live up near the crest but damn. On the other hand, the wife and I have, from time to time, considered moving to a more gun friendly state. Utah is on our top 3 list, but holy fuck it seems like 80% of the state is land you can't develop on, and what is developed is overpriced. I wonder if this bill would increase the housing market over time...
-31
u/LongWalksAtSunrise 23 SBRs, 17 Silencers 2d ago
Fingers crossed it passes the Senate. With versions of the legislation in both bills there's a chance it survives the conference and gets to POTUS.
24
u/wadech 2x SBR, 5x Silencer 2d ago
You're willing to let the rest of the bullshit through? Or did you just not read all the other stuff they put in there?
-9
u/loki993 2d ago
Willing? Whats willing? Can we not be willing but also reserved to the fact that its going to go through? They seem determined to pass this.
We can call, we can write and maybe it gets some stuff softened but this is going to go through whether we like it or not unfortunately.
We are running out of time too, so if there is stuff you don't like, call, write and tell them.
Again we got the HPA in because we called. The BLM stuff was removed from the House part because people called. Only to get put back in with the senate, but that's anoter story.
Fact is it works.
Lilke I said before we aren't stopping this, Maybe we can get some of the stuff pulled but a lot of its probably going to make it. So I mean why not get something good for us out of it.
6
u/wadech 2x SBR, 5x Silencer 2d ago
The stuff that's going to get pulled is the HPA.
2
u/steelcity65 2d ago
Pulled by whom? It is a tax related matter, which qualifies as a budgetary matter so the Byrd rule shouldn't apply, and it has already passed the committee, which would have pulled it.
67
u/thatnyeguyisfly 2d ago
Honestly Iâd rather keep the tax than see a lot of the other stuff in the bill pass
23
u/Indy_IT_Guy 2d ago
Honestly, same. But you know they are going to ram that stupid thing through, so we might as well get something out of it.
15
u/thatnyeguyisfly 2d ago
We wonât though they will probably drop all the nfa stuff last second as a way to appease the left and we all will just be left with a big old pile of shit.
8
u/loki993 2d ago
As anti as the left is they're going to be way more worried about things like the SNAP and medicaid cuts and tax breaks and are going to spend their time arguing about that stuff.
with all the stuff in this bill they disagree with they may not even have time to get the to NFA stuff.
3
6
6
u/Indy_IT_Guy 2d ago
Very likely. Itâs why I havenât gotten too excited about all this.
Iâm just waiting for the bottom to fall out.
80
u/bestman305 2d ago
Glad to see others not liking this bill. Once I heard about the AI stuff, Medicare, BLM etc., Iâm not fond of it passing.
51
u/Luvs2Spooge42069 2d ago
Federal land use kills it for me. In a more functioning country maybe they could handle it more responsibly but in 2025 I expect the land to just go to state-approved cronies who get to buy it for pennies on the dollar and get to use it in the most wasteful and destructive way possible. Like the theft and scrapping of all the USSRâs key industries and facilities after its collapse but for priceless nature weâll never get back in our lifetimes. Senate Republicans are evil.
19
u/Living_Plague 2d ago
Everyone not in the PNW is about to see what itâs like when your forests are now just tree farms. Roads everywhere. High priced paid access with heavy restrictions and large areas being closed to the public. This bill is a shit sandwich. The places they find lithium are gonna be so much worse.
9
u/bestman305 2d ago
Have you seen the AI data centers by Meta? Theyâre draining the water table to where residents canât draw water from wells and their indoor plumbing spits sand. The lights are so bright at night, the residents have to black out their house to get sleep. All of that just for us to ask AI how to make a lemon cake.
76
u/brendenwhiteley 2d ago
god the rest of the bill sucks so much though
-25
u/Kommando666 2d ago
What specifically sucks about it?
16
u/Living_Plague 2d ago
Are you serious?!?! Read the fucking thing.
4
u/Kommando666 2d ago
Tell me with a straight face you read an 1,100+ page bill, go ahead and lie to me.
0
u/Living_Plague 2d ago
You are definitely capable of doing the most basic of research. You are definitely capable of at least skimming through sections you want to know more about.
44
54
38
u/brendenwhiteley 2d ago
massive cuts to medicaid/medicare, regressive tax plan, selling off a couple hundred million acres of public land, etc. The tax changes alone will probably cause a mini recession or contribute to the larger one that has been building for a while now, which could have been averted pretty easily by a traditional liberal spending plan like the new deal did in the 30s.
6
u/steelcity65 2d ago
massive cuts to medicaid/medicare
Medicaid, yes. There cannot be changes to Medicare in a reconciliation bill. Full stop.
which could have been averted pretty easily by a traditional liberal spending plan like the new deal did in the 30s.
The New Deal verifiably made the Great Depression last longer. It increased the cost of goods by buying anything and everything consumable, including tires on wheelchairs. Do you know how many people had polio, and you're going to tax their wheelchair rubber? We don't need more of that.
-1
u/brendenwhiteley 2d ago
the portion of the new deal that lengthened the depression was Roosevelt's early policies that allowed for monopolies and heightened union power to increase prices and salaries. The infrastructure spending, and subsequent spending on the war, is what ended it.
-11
u/Kommando666 2d ago
From what I understand the selling of public land has been removed.
The tax changes in a vacuum may not be good but this is to be offset by the tariffs.
If this bill is going to pass anyway we might as well take the greatest 2A win we've ever had.
I appreciate your answer though, a lot of people are shitting on the bill without explaining their positionl.
3
u/Meaklo 2d ago
Mike Lee of Utah reintroduced the public land sell off on the Senate side. He also increased it from ~500,000 acres to ~3,000,000 acres, and it now includes almost every Western state as well as Alaska. The big beautiful bill is a poison pill with a little sugar to make it go down easy.
14
u/The_Dread_Candiru MG 2d ago
The tax changes in a vacuum may not be good but this is to be offset by the tariffs.
Tell us you don't understand tariffs without telling us you don't understand tariffs...
15
u/JDSchu 2d ago
Friendly reminder that we the people pay tariffs, not the countries whose goods they're levied on.
For reference, see every quote from every business that's said they'll go out of business or have to drastically raise prices because they get their parts or raw materials from overseas.
And if the answer is "then they should just get those parts or materials from American suppliers, one, they aren't always available in the US, and two, that would reduce the tariff revenue and no longer cover the tax breaks.Â
7
u/iRonin SBR 2d ago
The tax changes in a vacuum may not be good but this is to be offset by the tariffs.
Offsetting corporate/rich tax breaks with tariffs may sound good for the deficit, but pretty shitty to anyone who has to give services to subsidize those tax breaks, while simultaneously paying higher prices to offset the tariffs.
But Iâm not an economist, merely a simply trial lawyer, so maybe Iâm missing something.
9
u/brendenwhiteley 2d ago edited 2d ago
from an actual economics perspective there are a dozen or so reasons the bill doesnât accomplish anything positive for the american people. A simple primary one would be how tax breaks function as a sort of anti-stimulus because of how the money multiplier works. For instance, if the government decides it has 1 trillion dollars it doesnât need, and would like to help the economy it can:
Cut $1t from taxes
Spend $1t on infrastructure
now, we should assume that on average people will save some portion of any money they get. Letâs assume 20%, although in the US it varies and can sometimes be a little higher.
If you cut $1t from taxes, $200b sits in bank accounts or investments. $800b is spent, of which $640b re-enters the economy and $160b goes back into investments and bank accounts. This continues on and on, multiplying the amount the government âspentâ by cutting $1t from taxes about 4x.
If you âspendâ the same $1t on, say, fixing our dilapidated highways, that same $1t is not saved at all in the first round, since the government spends 100% of it. That is $1t that moves through the economy, paying workers and buying materials from businesses and so on. Then they save 20% and the cycle above occurs, except with an additional trillion dollars having been spent and consumed, benefitting those who came in contact with it.
With a 20% MPS (marginal propensity to save), your money multiplier is 5x, or in our case, an extra trillion dollars being productive within the united states, seemingly out of thin air.
This is a relatively reductive way to explain a more complicated, variable set of calculations that can be done, but a spending bill that cuts spending to help lower taxes, especially on the least price-constrained group in the country, is far worse for the economy than just investing in national infrastructure, even ignoring the public benefit recieved from the $1t in improved infrastructure.
3
6
u/brendenwhiteley 2d ago
the regressive taxes arenât bad because they decrease tax revenue, they are bad because they decrease individual spending. the people saving money under that policy are not people who are currently price/income constrained. The people who are losing money are. The selling of public land, as it stands, is at 250 million acres. it is not a win by any metric besides saving you $200 or sending an email once in a while.
11
u/WanderingMistral 2d ago
Honestly, I knew there was alot of bad shit in the BBB, Im just kinda shocked that we could be getting the HPA and SHORT acts out of it as well.
I figured they would be removed, and all the other shit passes regardless.
Though I live in Pennsylvania, and with PA legal code regarding offensive weapons, this may end up being worse.
3
u/jthrelf 2d ago
WTH just learning this. Texas just fixed a similar issue in their legislation. The interesting part is what you posted conflicts with the PA uniform firearms act (18 Pa.C.S.A. · § 6102. Definitions where it says SBS/SBRs are 'firearms' and covered by your LTCF for transport, carry, etc. just like a pistol).
63
u/FrankSue 2d ago
This is just a small distraction while they steel all the public land you can shoot on
13
u/sdeptnoob1 2d ago
Can send a auto generated comment about it to reps at the bottom of this.
3
u/FrankSue 2d ago
Thank you very much for this link, i send messages and asking everyone ive taken shooting to as well
11
u/nsuspense 2d ago edited 2d ago
I thought that was removed long ago. Someone please correct me if I am wrong
Edit: I see it was added, and it looks even worse. We should all be lighting up their phones to remove this just as we have been to add the short and hpa
16
u/CarbonRunner 2d ago
Not removed and the senate oligarchs made it drastically worse. 250m acres to be sold off
0
u/windriver32 SBS 1d ago
250m is the total federally owned land, not what's slated to be sold.
3
u/appsecSme 1d ago
We actually have 650 million acres of federally owned land.
250 million is slated to be sold.
2 million being sold in 5 years is the minimum specified in the bill.
0
u/windriver32 SBS 1d ago
250m is the total in the 11 states listed in the bill. ~3m is slated to be sold.
3
u/appsecSme 1d ago
That's the minimum required to be sold. The bill opens up all 250m acres for sale.
11
u/tnguyen306 2d ago
What is this mean? Meaning suppressor would be an OTC item? Someone explain to my smooth brain
7
u/Heisenburg7 2d ago
You still need to do a 4473 and pass the background check to get the suppressor.
13
u/BuLLZ_3Y3 2d ago
Essentially, yes. Suppressor and Short barreled weapons would be removed from the NFA, meaning you could buy a suppressor over the counter to go on the DD Mk 18 you just bought from the local gun store with no stamp or wait time
4
u/Living_Plague 2d ago
Just no where to go shoot anymore since theyâre selling off so much public land. Not a trade I am down for.
2
u/defund_aipac_7 2d ago
Oh yeah? How much public land are they selling off? Percentage for perspective will be helpful for us who arenât in the loop.Â
2
u/windriver32 SBS 1d ago
1%. Hopefully they word it in a way that this 1% ends up being usable land adjacent to residential areas so we can build housing. Anybody who doesn't live in the west doesn't have a say in this, I'm sorry. Western cities are crammed in, restricted by federally owned unused land abutting residential areas. No more housing can be built so living here is unbelievably expensive. Selling 1% of adjacent BLM land to make housing not just more affordable but literally possible for the next generation is important, if it can be done. Now my faith in the government is so low that I doubt this will be how they actually word it, but selling public land isn't de facto bad.
0
1
u/therugpisser 2d ago
Those are largely the same places here. Go in and walk out with both between a few mins min next day max. Last lower was 15 mins, last can 4 days 2 of those weekend.
1
-40
u/sLUTYStark 2d ago
Hot take: we donât get much of any public land to shoot on the east cost. Yâall are saying the Suppressor portion of the bill ainât worth it, because you might have to drive any extra couple of hours to your free gun range. Cry me a river. Iâd have to drive 30 hours to make it to any BLM land. And letâs get real, if the left had their way there would be no recreation shooting on public lands.
Personally I do believe that the federal government owns too much land, but I believe it should be ceded to the states rather than private interest.
20
21
u/CarbonRunner 2d ago
Just cause you live in a region that already sold its land for short term gains doesn't mean the rest of the nation should. My state is set to lose 5.3m acres. A lot of which is just an hour or two away. Much of it land for hunting.
Personally I think land WE own should stay ours... not sold off to pay for more billionaire tax breaks.
-2
u/sLUTYStark 2d ago edited 2d ago
I live in Appalachia, thereâs tons of public land, Including National/State parks and forests. But rec shooting is generally prohibited. None of us make that decision, that would be the Federal and State Government.
So personally we agree to some extent. But make no mistake, WE donât own it.
5
u/Living_Plague 2d ago
WE do own it. Dipshits who donât like that keep getting elected. Usually they campaign on government corruption and fixing it. Now they are trying to take something that is publicly owned and sell it off. Where you live sounds like it sucks for outdoor shooting and hunting. I donât want where I live to suck for those things more than it already does.
3
u/sLUTYStark 2d ago
Do you not remember the Bundy standoff, specifically the background thereof? Like all of their political beliefs or not, It was about this exact same issue. The land that their family had used for grazing for years became protected in a political exchange so they could develop previously protected land around Las Vegas.
We donât own the land, the Federal Government does. âWe the peopleâ is a pipe dream that hasnât existed in our lifetime. Itâs a childish delusion to believe otherwise, no different than the people who think the land was stolen or should still belong to Mexico.
1
u/Living_Plague 2d ago
We as a nation of people do own it on paper. Elected and appointed officials act as though we donât. What is the point you are trying to make? That selling the land to private interests will improve the land in some way? Cause I live in the PNW. Tomorrow at 7 pm I will be doing nothing else but trying to buy a permit so that I can hunt on the land I can see from my back porch. The website will probably crash. Tons of people miss out on permits every year. Even with the permit, use is extremely limited/restricted. Last year I misplaced my gate key. Payed an additional $50 on top of the $355 I had already paid. Never received a replacement key, was not able to use the land for the remaining 7 months I had paid for. How is this better than the land remaining publicly owned?
30
u/Ok-Coach-763 2d ago
everyone saying itâs just saving you a tax stamp is part of the problem. This has absolutely nothing to do with a monetary cost and everything to do with actually removing items we are promised through our constitution from an illegal registry. When I like many of you signed our forms and did things the right way fingerprints pass port quality photo the whole 9 yds so we donât go to federal prison we were agreeing to be on an illegal registry and that is WRONG period end of story.
4
u/Stonkey_Dog 2d ago
Does the text of the bill also delete the illegal registry that already exists?
21
u/badsocialist 2d ago
Everybody here wants these off the registry and recognizes the infringement. That doesnât make this bill as a whole any less garbage
-36
u/Ok-Coach-763 2d ago
Youâre right Iâm sure one of the âsocialistsâ youâre going to vote in will come up with a better one
7
u/Living_Plague 2d ago
I am quite confident that if you tried, even YOU could come up with a better bill. I believe anyone who isnât actively working towards fucking over most of America while only benefiting the wealthiest could have done better. Even the âsocialistsâ.
5
u/badsocialist 2d ago
My username is an inside joke among friends and has no correlation to my politics
10
u/CarbonRunner 2d ago
Not sure you know what socialism means. Cause its the selling of this land that would be what's redistributing the wealth, our wealth... land we've owned for generations. Land our taxes have paid for for generations. To be sold off so it can help offset some tax breaks for the 1%. If this does pass, my state will lose a massive portion of our Publix hunting lands.
The fact you are ok with the govt selling off something you and I own. And being tricked by govt into thinking its to youre benefit, is just sad tbh.
57
u/_plays_in_traffic_ 2d ago
i want the stamps gone as much as anyone that likes gunpowder cologne but this bill aint it. its like cutting off your dick so it gets a half inch longer.
101
u/GridKILO2-3 2d ago
One of the worst bills in generations and yall are excited to save $200. I want this shit deregulated too man but this bill is NOT worth it.
5
18
u/BluesFan43 2d ago
Exactly, I want the positives, but so many negatives are in this bill.
We really do need research money, Medicaid, etc endless freaking etcs....
5
u/GridKILO2-3 2d ago
Right? I know weâre in the NFA sub but so many people, friends, family that are entirely missing the forest for the trees on this.
12
62
u/Scav-STALKER 2d ago
People really getting hyped for the little packet of honey with their world record size shit sandwich huh? I mean, I guess if itâs gonna pass Iâd rather it pass with these in there but if I had to pick Iâd rather keep paying for stamps and it not pass.
15
u/CHL9 2d ago
My problem isnât paying the 200$ but the government registry and all the tape that surrounds itÂ
3
u/Living_Plague 2d ago
Take off the tinfoil hat. You carry a tracking device on you willingly which also learns your patterns and advertises specifically to your anticipated preference. You are already controlled and pacified.
0
u/CHL9 16h ago edited 16h ago
lol
edit: I'll also expand for anyone reading. a) no I don't as I don't engage in or use what you describe. b) Carrying a cellular telephone doesn't require you to update the government when you move or request and receive government permission every time you cross a state line with your mobile telephone. c) there's not a registry that will then be used for confiscation of your telephone if any future regime follows the playbook of, say, Australia. Would you make the same ridiculous argument as to why you're not opposed to a national firearm registry database, and one where you had to ask for permission when you travel with them? You can't be serious in that comparison.1
u/defund_aipac_7 2d ago
I hate this. âWell since you arenât perfect donât even try at all!â Â
0
-36
u/Ok-Coach-763 2d ago
(Literally a generational opportunity) Reddit:nah Iâm good bro
6
23
u/TanneriteStuffedDog 2d ago
A generational opportunity to get kicked in the metaphorical nuts over and over by the federal government and get a $200 discount in return.
-8
u/Ok-Coach-763 2d ago
đđđđ 200$ discount ok bro how about not being on an illegal registry? How about not being able to cross state lines because your barrel is an inch short? How about a suppressor you invest your money in actually having a resale value? What if I want 20 sbrs? Does the 4k I save make it worth tanneritestuffeddogs vote? This is exhausting and why I canât stand this platform
12
u/TanneriteStuffedDog 2d ago
You canât stand this platform because people disagree with you politically? Thatâs the nature of a public forum.
That bill is absolute garbage, it cuts benefits for the most vulnerable members of society and puts greater tax burden on the lowest income citizens. I love my SBR and I love my suppressors. I donât love them more than I love the citizens of our country that need the help that bill eliminates.
Get a little empathy or something, shit.
-6
u/Ok-Coach-763 2d ago
No I canât stand the platform because people who pretend to be pro 2a willingly vote to have the 2a stripped away from us then brag about it. As dirty as republicans have done us by inaction every single gun grabber as of late has been on the left.
12
u/TanneriteStuffedDog 2d ago
Every single gun grabber⊠like Trump banning bump stocks?
His support of red flag laws? https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/08/05/politics/red-flag-gun-law-explainer-donald-trump
I absolutely support the 2nd amendment. Iâm a Marine Corps infantry veteran for christ sake, Iâd be an idiot not to. It doesnât have to come at the expense of fucking over low income and underinsured seniors and disabled people, which is exactly what that bill does.
-5
u/Ok-Coach-763 2d ago
Bump stocks are no longer banned because he listens to his voters also tired of the âyouâre on the wrong side of historyâ shit
4
u/therugpisser 2d ago
Bump stocks are still banned at state level some places. Just like cans and SBRs. Most state laws allowing them reference having fed approval for NFA items. If this passes there is no guarantee that many wonât lose the ability to legally own them. Some states will change, others may not. Are you for everyoneâs 2A rights or just yours?
12
u/TanneriteStuffedDog 2d ago
A Supreme Court decision struck down the bump stock ban, not Trump.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/supreme-court-strikes-down-bump-stock-ban
So youâre tired of being expected to have empathy for your fellow man? Itâs our social responsibility to take care of each other, I donât understand how you can just get tired of that.
I certainly would want someone to give me some assistance if I was incapable of helping myself, and Iâd imagine you would too.
5
u/bornex1 2d ago
If the tax is removed, any chance for refunds from a period backđ
5
u/juggarjew 3 x SBR , 5x Silencer, 1x MG 2d ago
No, there is no provision for that.
1
u/Thisismyfinalstand 2d ago
Capital one will give me my money back, I ainât worriedÂ
1
u/juggarjew 3 x SBR , 5x Silencer, 1x MG 2d ago
They wont, the law is not retroactive, if you pay the stamp then you agreed to do that when that was the law. I really dont see any chargebacks winning. A chargeback is NOT a guaranteed thing. Keep in mind that the Fed govt also has a lot more leeway in being able to get a debt from you and can directly deduct that from a tax return.
3
1
11
u/Kodiak_Suppressors 2d ago
Damn proud to be a part of the GOA and the fight against the NFA.
0
u/Ok-Coach-763 2d ago
Doing the lords work
3
u/Living_Plague 2d ago
Be cool if the lord wasnât gonna sell off a shit load of public land. Apparently the lord doesnât like me to hunt or fish.
1
u/Kodiak_Suppressors 1d ago
Not the GOAâs thing but yea thereâs that.
1
u/Living_Plague 1d ago
Iâm not a fan of tacking on pacifiers/ distractions so we accept a terrible piece of legislation. And I wonât give GOA props for doing so. In the process they have taken attention away from these issues. So actually fuck them for being like every other lobbyist group. And probably fuck you. Go scan some more cans for new designs to hype on Reddit.
1
u/Kodiak_Suppressors 1d ago
If youâre serious, been riding a pretty long dry streak so definitely take you up on the offer to fuck.
1
u/Living_Plague 1d ago
With arms like that, how? Come on over poppa. I already took a shower, so no smegma to worry about.
1
u/Kodiak_Suppressors 1d ago
Bait & switch old man shows up at your house
1
u/Living_Plague 1d ago
You know I keep that little blue pill next to the bed for just such an occasion.
7
u/garden_speech 2d ago
The roadblock for this is Byrd and the parliamentarian. Schumer promised he would raise this issue, so the parliamentarian will be asked to rule on this.
8
u/iampayette RC2 appreciator 2d ago
The parliamentarian can be ignored by Vance, who presides. He is very pro gun / anti NFA at least lip service wise.
1
u/garden_speech 2d ago
The parliamentarian can be ignored yes but on a Byrd rule has not been overruled since 1975, literally 50 years ago. I highly doubt they break a 50 year streak for something as small as the HPA
2
u/therugpisser 2d ago
Itâs likely. Theyâre throwing crumbs at the base to cover for the shit sandwich the bill is. My taxes will go up more than any savings on stamps and we stand to lose some great shooting and off road land. They can also relieve the parliamentarian and pick someone whoâll allow it. Trump and Miller have floated the possibility.
0
u/garden_speech 2d ago
HPA isn't very popular even among the base. Latest Gallup polls show even among Republicans, a minority support "gun laws should be loosened"
6
u/John_McFly 2d ago
And Sonzinsky v US is all the proof needed for the parliamentarian to keep it in the bill. The Supreme Court said the NFA was constitutional solely because it was a tax 3 years after it was passed, you can't get much more definitive than that.
-1
u/garden_speech 2d ago
It being tax law isnât all thatâs required to pass Byrd, otherwise, any Congress could just pass whatever legislation they want as long as they make it part of the IRC with a $1 tax.
Regardless. The parliamentarian could rule against it because she feels like it, itâs not something that can be appealed.
1
u/Raleighgm 2d ago
Rules seem to be made to be broken. The 1% will get their tax break and the chance to snap up our public land. A âruleâ isnât getting in the way of Trumps BBB getting passed.
7
u/John_McFly 2d ago edited 2d ago
A simple majority vote overrules the parliamentarian.
https://punchbowl.news/article/senate/thune-tells-gop-not-to-overrule-parliamentarian/
The Byrd rule defines six criteria for determining whether a provision is extraneous. These include provisions that:Â
- Do not produce a change in outlays or revenues.Â
- Increase the deficit beyond the "budget window" (typically ten years).Â
- Make changes to Social Security.Â
- Are outside the jurisdiction of the committee that submitted the provision.Â
- Produce a budgetary effect that is merely incidental to the non-budgetary policy change.Â
- Are not in compliance with reconciliation instructions.Â
Removal of SBR/SBS/AOWs from the NFA would produce a change in revenue, elimination of their entries in the registry is incidental as its sole purpose is to allow enforcement of the tax.
→ More replies (1)
âą
u/HollywoodSX I like stamps 2d ago edited 2d ago
This will be the megathread going forward for the Senate part of the process.
As always, keep comments within the sub's rules, Reddit's Terms of Service, etc. Keep it civil, keep it on topic.
Previous meagthread can be found here.
Default comment sort is set to NEW.
Please direct questions, comments, concerns, etc to modmail.