HPA folded into bigger, better omnibus bill - SHARE Act

[Hoffsoft]

The Hearing Protection Act has been incorporated into the SHARE Act, a sportsman's omnibus bill that, among other things, repeals the sporting purpose clause.

 

Check it: https://naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/discussion_draft_--_share_act.pdf

 

Coverage from Shall Not Be Questioned (good analysis)

http://www.pagunblog.com/2017/06/13/hearing-protection-act-loaded-onto-omnibus/

 

 

Politico Coverage: (wash your hands afterwards, they let the Moms have the last quote)

 

http://http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/12/gun-silencer-restrictions-house-jeff-duncan-239440

 

No state preemption, but it's a start. ETA: Sorry, I don't know why it's formatting the links wonky.

[InterestedBystander]

Suppressor association release (full story at link...):

 

http://americansuppressorassociation.com/hearing-protection-act-language-incorporated-into-comprehensive-sportsmens-package/

 

Since the re-introduction of the Hearing Protection Act by Rep. Duncan and Senator Mike Crapo (R-ID) in January (H.R. 367, S. 59) the American Suppressor Association (ASA) has met with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) on multiple occasions to discuss technical amendments to the language. As a result, we were able to create several technical amendments that were incorporated into the current draft of the SHARE Act. These include:

 

Sec. 1702: Removing suppressors from the National Firearms Act, subjecting them to the same instant NICS background check as long guns, and issuing a refundable tax credit to anyone who has purchased a suppressor since the HPAs original date of introduction

Sec. 1703: Ensuring that suppressors will remain legal in all 42 states where they are currently legal, after suppressors are removed from the National Firearms Act

Sec. 1704: Preempting states from levying taxes or registration requirements on suppressors. However, this will not make suppressors legal in any state where state law currently prohibits them.

Sec. 1705: Granting the ATF 365 days to destroy all suppressor related records from the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR)

Sec. 1706: Developing a keystone part definition, and requiring that such keystone part is serialized on every suppressor. This will ensure that individual suppressor parts, like pistons and endcaps, will not require serialization.

Sec. 1707: Imposing a 10% Pittman-Robertson excise tax on the manufacture of each new suppressor, a tax that is currently imposed on all Title I firearms

[Hoffsoft]

Suppressor association release:

 

http://americansuppressorassociation.com/hearing-protection-act-language-incorporated-into-comprehensive-sportsmens-package/

 

Since the re-introduction of the Hearing Protection Act by Rep. Duncan and Senator Mike Crapo (R-ID) in January (H.R. 367, S. 59) the American Suppressor Association (ASA) has met with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) on multiple occasions to discuss technical amendments to the language. As a result, we were able to create several technical amendments that were incorporated into the current draft of the SHARE Act. These include:

 

Sec. 1702: Removing suppressors from the National Firearms Act, subjecting them to the same instant NICS background check as long guns, and issuing a refundable tax credit to anyone who has purchased a suppressor since the HPA’s original date of introduction

Sec. 1703: Ensuring that suppressors will remain legal in all 42 states where they are currently legal, after suppressors are removed from the National Firearms Act

Sec. 1704: Preempting states from levying taxes or registration requirements on suppressors. However, this will not make suppressors legal in any state where state law currently prohibits them.

Sec. 1705: Granting the ATF 365 days to destroy all suppressor related records from the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR)

Sec. 1706: Developing a “keystone part” definition, and requiring that such keystone part is serialized on every suppressor. This will ensure that individual suppressor parts, like pistons and endcaps, will not require serialization.

Sec. 1707: Imposing a 10% Pittman-Robertson excise tax on the manufacture of each new suppressor, a tax that is currently imposed on all Title I firearms

 

Wow, if ATF has agreed to not oppose....

[InterestedBystander]

But...

 

"However, this will not make suppressors legal in any state where state law currently prohibits them."

 

Hope IL still gets on board some time if the antis can get over the CCL butthurt and not expect extreme compromise in return.

[bmyers]

Well, that stinks by not forcing all states to make them legal.

[InterestedBystander]

..."A House Natural Resources committee hearing, scheduled for 10 a.m. yesterday, was postponed because of the shooting. Members were set to consider a bill that would make it easier for gun owners to obtain silencers. The measure, strongly supported by Donald Trump Jr., amends the National Firearms Act of 1934 to remove any reference to silencers. It has been rolled into a larger “sportsmen’s package” and is expected to pass."...

[MrTriple]

But...

"However, this will not make suppressors legal in any state where state law currently prohibits them."

Hope IL still gets on board some time if the antis can get over the CCL butthurt and not expect extreme compromise in return.

Honestly they need to learn that their proposals are unpopular and unwanted, as they are as a movement. They're such a sad, pathetic bunch when you think about it. All that effort and for what?

[MrTriple]

Well, that stinks by not forcing all states to make them legal.

Yes, but imagine the precedent it would set and how it would be abused if the antis came back into power.

[skinnyb82]

Full Faith and Credit Clause only applies to Amendments 1-27, with the exception of the Second and 19th Amendments. The latter only because it was repealed by the 21st. Oh and it also applies to privileges, since marriage is NOT a right (find the words "marry" or "marriage" or any mention of something resembling marriage in the Constitution...you won't, it's not there), driving is NOT a right (as we're constantly reminded), health insurance is NOT a right (saying it is doesn't make it a right), abortion is a right (according to the idiots on the Burger Court, simply an extension of the uber-liberal Warren Court) that, in my own opinion, appears to have the least restrictions placed on exercising it (which is sickening). They're too busy making up new rights that they refuse to uphold the exercise of rights within the Bill of Rights and so on. I mean, we've now got federal judges who believe, and have no problem conferring Due Process rights on terrorists who have never set foot on the North American Continent. It doesn't get any nuttier than conferring rights on individuals who cannot have rights as they have never stepped within our borders.

 

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk