my last trust (SBR) took 11 months. Three people on the trust and e-file was not active. The change to the trust regulations by Obama created a backlog that has since been cleared, though trusts do take longer. Still, cans are it neccessary to shoot and I would like to pass them along to my daughter if she wants them.
Suppressors are really not that hard to get and don't have to be expensive. IMO, they aren't ready for the type of shooting we do but they have come a long way in the last 10 years. IMO, The highpower can would have to be Ti, have a larger thread pitch for the big barrels and be longer with more heat isolation. They most likely wouldn't be top of the chart for noise reduction as they would probably be thinner for anyone wishing to use irons (not really likely) unless they were sized around the length of 338Ultra, which I consider big. I do understand that it could change game, trending toward heavier bullets but F TR is already filthy with 210 shooters. How much heavier you gonna get? I don't see the über-magnums ever taking over in F-O. 300Norma Mag is a wonderful case, for all of 800 rounds. I just don't see somethjng with 70% of the barrel life and double the cost of a 6.5x284 catching on widespread BUT I have been wrong a time or two before.
In the end, so much has changed since Larry submitted the initial rule package, that I wonder why the NRA fights this. Joystick bipod made of un-ubtanium were never conceived. 8 twist barrels with 200-215gr bullets. Hell small primer Palma brass was a game changer.
I want continuity and consistency in the rules and the spirit of the rules. On one hand the NRA supports the change to NFA rules and on the other ban the use of the very item they are fighting for. What message is the NRA sending? Are they not serious in supporting the hearing protection act (long shot legislation but what else do we have?)