Re: reasons for a suppressor
Also, if one is hunting here with dogs very near and not using silencer...well, common opinion is that he must be complete idiot.
Dogs have sensitive ears. Imagine muzzle blast and multiply it by 10. Thats how it feels. Dogs just cant tell it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Blade_Zero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Restriction of suppressors came in at the same time as the other $200 tax stamp items, just after the roaring thirties. An outright ban failed on constitutional grounds, so the powers that be, circumvented it via taxation, $200 dollars was the equivilent of twos years average wage at the time. Only for the fact that they neglected to index the tax stamp for inflation, none of you would own anything fun.
The reason suppressors were restricted was over poaching concerns, people were starving at the time.</div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold">"On the Control of Silencers in the United States"</span>
by Mark White
<span style="font-weight: bold">A Bit of Historical Background</span>
<span style="font-style: italic">In 1909 Hiram P. Maxim invented one of the first metal silencers for reducing sound levels in firearms. Silencers were innovatively marketed as the gentleman's way of target shooting. They turned out to be quite popular, and sold quite well through the 1920s, and into the early '30s. The Great Depression of the 1930s left many people out of work, leading some to poach game in order to keep their families from starving. Concurrently, crime in the 1930s rose dramatically. It was in this context that attempts were made at passing legislation prohibiting handguns and machine guns. The Second Amendment to the U.S. constitution, however, prevented such legislation, and the courts struck it down. Eventually the concept of taxation was used to evade the wording in the Second Amendment.</span>
<span style="font-weight: bold">"Can't Ban - Tax It!"</span>
<span style="font-style: italic">In 1934 a bill was passed levying a tax of $200 (4 times the price of a Thompson submachine gun at the time. For more info see Kickback link "Lex Morgenthau".) on future sales of machine guns. Short-barreled rifles and shotguns, cane guns and silencers were also thrown into the bill, almost as an afterthought. The BATF was set up, and one of its functions today is to collect such a tax. So much of the controversy dealing with Title II weapons is not that they are illegal, but that a tax will be levied on their ownership. Owning one which is not properly registered and taxed is a violation of federal tax code (tax evasion) a felony punishable by large fines and up to ten years in prison.
In the interim, included in that tax collection effort has been the process of fingerprinting, photo identification, and a background check for evidence of criminal activity and/or mental defectiveness. Typically, the most populated states (CA, NY, & NJ) are very restrictive and have their own laws preventing the ownership of firearm silencers. Today 33 states allow the possession or use of firearm silencers or suppressors. Seventeen do not. Title II weapons are tightly regulated and controlled by the federal government and its agents in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. In general, state, county and municipal entities may own and use machine guns, silencers and destructive devices in any state.
Each weapon or device will carry its own model, make and serial number, as an aid to identification and tracking of the piece. For identification purposes a silencer is considered to be a weapon by BATF, even though its purpose is to reduce the sound of a firearm's report, not to discharge a projectile. We are not here to issue a moral or fairness judgement, but merely to report what exists in today's bureaucratic world.</span>
----clip----
<span style="font-weight: bold">Lex Morgenthau</span>
by PT Kekkonen
<span style="font-style: italic">That American "Lex Morgenthau" (F.F.A. in 1934) was a crime itself, because it was just a trick for collection of some extra tax-money for the financing of the New Deal of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Henry "Shylock" Morgenthau was a counsellor of F.D.R. in all of the financial matters, including taxation already before the presidency of F.D.R. Later he was rewarded by installment in the office of US Secretary of the Treasury. The New Deal was not a crime itself, but continuation of F.F.A. '34 was it, because there was no more need to collect extra taxation, when the Great Depression was over in the late 1930s.
I have mentioned many times that the skill to handload subsonic or transsonic rifle cartridges may be more useful to those shooters who are unable to acquire, possess or use the suppressor or silencer than to us lucky devils, who can buy a "sordino" more easity than a pack of cicarettes or bottle of low-proof beer. Every American gun-owner is, however, still under obligation to contact his Senator or other influential politician, and tell to him or her a message: "Revoke Lex Morgenthau and F.F.A. '68 !"
It is a funny trick to guide some supporter of silencer-ban to the shooting range, and shoot... not him or her, but... some shots with silencer / suppressor mounted with full-power cartridges, and then some shots without suppressor, using subsonic handloads, and then ask from the listener: "Which shots sounded to be less noisy ? Where is the common sense of Lex Morgenthau, which is so easy to evade by skilful handloading ??"
There was a partial ban of suppressors even in Finland since 1983 until 1993 by the Game Act: Use of the suppressor for game hunting was forbidden. That ban was, however, shown to be ridiculous by shooting trials like this, described above, and it was revoked silently by the general renovation of Finnish Game Legislature in 1st August 1993.</span>
a 308 whisper is in my future!
