Wargaming the NFA Supressor Freedom case

I spent about an hour on Monday wargaming AI to see how all this plays out.

Here are my theories. Both Grok and Genesis agree.

1. Supressors will get more expensive for a while. There will be a run on them. I think prices will drop initially. Here is how I and AI beleive it will play out.
a. Machine made aluminum silencers will be $300-600
b. 3D printed titanium silencers will be similar, if not $100 more
c. Iconel and other more indestructible full auto silencers will hang in that $1000 mark for at least a year. Until sales prove they need to be priced like the cheaper cans.
d. machined made titanium silences should hold $600-1200 for a while.

2. 3-25 months from now a ton of new companies will come out. They will innovate, they will challenge pricing models, and they will put them in the hands of tons of shooters. This will ultimately lead to the situation we have in Europe.
a. The hard bottom is probably around $250-300, big production companies like Ruger, Savage, SIG and others will cut and 3D print suppressors by the train car load. This will lead to the eventual huge market chop in cost. And it should as someone with a big commercial metal 3D printer can print 30 in a night, and run them through a CNC machine in the morning. 30x$300+$9000 in one night time evolution on $300 worth of material, $100 in electricity and 12-14 hours worth of production time. 3D print, CNC, bead blast, Cerakote and laser print the serial and information them.
b. Everyone will own one, at some point it will become the normal thing like it is here in Europe. All this happened in a 10 year period in Germany. It has been ongoing in Scandinavia and the UK for 15-20 years. People will have one for each rifle.

3. Now that everyone owns one, they will become a consumable at $300-500, you can manage to have more than one. At least one per rifle.

They have to get to the consumable stage.

Early predictions are that the market will be flooded, but prices will go up and then fall hard.

If you need one destroyed you walk out to the garage and smash it with a sledgehammer. No one would ever consider that with the ATF licensing problems before.

They have been treated like a golden goose in America for too long.

Here they are an expensive consumable. One breaks or you screw it up, you have to pay to get it off your license and turn it in. Kind of a pain.

In America that won't be a problem for those 27 free states. About time.

If suppressors get defined as a non firearm, anyone can produce and sell.
This may be the end result.

DB

In Netherlands litigation is slowly. New Benelux Treaty is a step in the good direction. Hopefully within the next decade, things work really slowly here, we can buy them and we have the same situation as in Germany.

Crazy is they are already legal for airguns..

Happy for the American hunter that they have this option available now.

DieJager said:

In Netherlands litigation is slowly. New Benelux Treaty is a step in the good direction. Hopefully within the next decade, things work really slowly here, we can buy them and we have the same situation as in Germany.

Crazy is they are already legal for airguns..

Happy for the American hunter that they have this option available now.

Click to expand...

Airguns are a very gray area for suppressors.

I've discussed this at length with several attorneys that specialize in firearms law, including Ken Hansen who passed away several years ago, along with Ted Cruz were the lead attorneys in the Heller v DC case.

If it is a screw on type that is possible to remove from an airgun and install on a firearm, it is a Federally Regulated Suppressor. If it's a shrouded barre/integral frame type that is not possible to remove, it does not fall under the jurisdiction of the ATF.

Airguns are not firearms, so Federal law does not apply and therefore the ATF has no jurisdiction. The ATF does have jurisdiction over suppressors.

Daggaboy375 said:

If suppressors get defined as a non firearm, anyone can produce and sell.
This may be the end result.

DB

Click to expand...

If they remain classified as a firearm, they remain protected by the 2A in states that would otherwise ban them.

I’m in the SHALL NOT crowd, but the reality of the legal shenanigans never makes anything straightforward for those wishing to comply.

If this is spawned by the decision in the US, don’t get your hopes up. The NFA is an IRS tax code. The tax requirement created de facto regulation. When the tax was removed, the processes/regulation became unconstitutional because the regulation was tax based, not legislation. If any Congress raises the tax, the NFA becomes constitutional again. If Democrats sweep the mid-terms, they may have the votes to override Presidential veto. They will certainly have the presidency in 2029.

What I predict, at least in states that aren’t 2A friendly, firearm excise taxes in excess of $5000 per firearm will be passed to help ease the “pain of senseless gun violence”. Why $5000? That’s what $200 tax stamps cost in 1934.

Unknown territory for sure.

It will be interesting to see how this actually shapes out in the next year.

I can't get on the Silencer Co website as it doesn't allow foreign traffic. What is the cheapest and most expensive silencer options in America?

Here are ours (well approximately).

Jaki and Stalons are 300 Euro on the bottom end for an Aluminum model.

ERATAC has an AR model in Iconel for 1200 Euros


Sauer has some Titanium full barrel suppressors that are non-3D printed models that are CNC machined for 1000 Euros.



Here in Germany they don't sell the silencer with the gun on integrally suppressed rifles. The guns are generally the same cost as a standard model, then you add the suppressor.

AI is missing a critical issue for consideration.

The foundation for the arguments for legitimacy of the NFA is/was that it is a tax and part of the US tax code.

The basis for the court’s decision is there no longer is a tax imposed by the NFA.

What happens to this ruling whenever Democrats are in control of Congress and the White House and reimpose taxes, and probably at some nose bleed amount?

Going to be a lot of interesting outcomes.

We are heavily considering how much Weinergrinder politicians are going to screw up states in America before we move back to the USA. We were supposed to move back this year, but this is the kind of thing that makes us reconsider New Mexico.

I turned down a job in California because I couldn't figure out how to clear my California firearm registry firearms and I have not lived in California in 10 years. The state told me that I could send them a letter from my lawyer and they would consider it.

World is getting enschitifiecated.

Tex .416 said:

AI is missing a critical issue for consideration.

The foundation for the arguments for legitimacy of the NFA is/was that it is a tax and part of the US tax code.

The basis for the court’s decision is there no longer is a tax imposed by the NFA.

What happens to this ruling whenever Democrats are in control of Congress and the White House and reimpose taxes, and probably at some nose bleed amount?

Click to expand...

By then I’ll have all the suppressors I will ever need

mdwest said:

By then I’ll have all the suppressors I will ever need

Click to expand...

But as happened when the NFA was created, all of those items may have to be registered and pay the tax for the registration.

I doubt it. This could not be implemented through congressional action for three or four years at the earliest. By then, I suspect millions will have been sold nationwide. They may restrict future sales, but like the "assault weapons ban," existing ones likely would be grandfathered.

Another aspect of the decision that is of interest to me is with respect to short barrelled rifles. My repel boarders is my suppressed DDM4. I would love to finally replace that brace with a real buttstock.

Muskox said:

Going to be a lot of interesting outcomes.

We are heavily considering how much Weinergrinder politicians are going to screw up states in America before we move back to the USA. We were supposed to move back this year, but this is the kind of thing that makes us reconsider New Mexico.

I turned down a job in California because I couldn't figure out how to clear my California firearm registry firearms and I have not lived in California in 10 years. The state told me that I could send them a letter from my lawyer and they would consider it.

World is getting enschitifiecated.

Click to expand...

Where and why New Mexico. I love going to NM to visit, but really the only place livable is Santa Fe. But the housing market is just crazy there. Cedar Crest outside of Albuquerque is nice but you have to drive around the mountain to get to Albuquerque.

Red Leg said:

I doubt it. This could not be implemented through congressional action for three or four years at the earliest. By then, I suspect millions will have been sold nationwide. They may restrict future sales, but like the "assault weapons ban," existing ones likely would be grandfathered.

Another aspect of the decision that is of interest to me is with respect to short barrelled rifles. My repel boarders is my suppressed DDM4. I would love to finally replace that brace with a real buttstock.

Click to expand...

Until the Democrats at the federal level can get their act together, the states will impose their own taxes or their own bans. This most recent ruling specifically states it was not based on 2A grounds, which means it’s purely based on regulation that exists through a tax that no longer exists.

I bet every state on the west coast, other than Alaska, will have bans or excise taxes passed in their next legislative session. Add New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and Colorado.

Gomer said:

Until the Democrats at the federal level can get their act together, the states will impose their own taxes or their own bans. This most recent ruling specifically states it was not based on 2A grounds, which means it’s purely based on regulation that exists through a tax that no longer exists.

I bet every state on the west coast, other than Alaska, will have bans or excise taxes passed in their next legislative session. Add New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and Colorado.

Click to expand...

I understand. However, I live in Texas, and for the immediate future, any such restrictions would require congressional action.

Red Leg said:

I understand. However, I live in Texas, and for the immediate future, any such restrictions would require congressional action.

Click to expand...

You should be good for a little while, at least. I live in WA and I guarantee it’s going to get grim here.