Silencers

Getting the facts straight and knowing the laws would help clear up alot of confusion and the misinformation that is so prevalent. I do however agree that referring to these items with words like LDC, Shroud, etc, should continue as drawing attention is not going to do anyone any good.

Alan the reason it is done is because there is no need to get unwarranted attention brought on them, OK so most of us agree they are legal but it only takes one person working for some government bureau to feel like making a test case out of this and it could bring about changes we do not need or want. So why risk doing this just for the sake of using a name you know might antagonize, to me that is not a good attitude to take, call a spade a spade if you wish, but to test someone in authority and possibly bring about changes for all of us just because of a name you use is kind of a selfish attitude if you ask me, Neil.

NT

Can we please just let this go! I don't want this place to get like other forums where you can't even talk about them. Let's please forget about nomenclatures and be sensible about this. We are all adults here. Can we at least try to act like it. Not trying to offend but enough already.

Keith.

AJ as someone who has taken a big risk and started to make these years ago when a lot of others were afraid to I just do not see the point in bringing more attention to them than they already get. I believe 100% that they are perfectly legal but I do not want to have to pay to defend myself for making them and end up with a $100,000 attorneys bill to prove what I do is legal. The government has unlimited funds to pursue trivial cases and it only takes one person in authority to want to try and alter the way they are being controlled, We all know what is meant by silencer, moderator, LDC, muffler etc so what does it matter what we call them. We are not trying to hide what we make we are just using some common sense and not trying to attract unwanted attention to them. Maybe the people who want to call them silencers should think about the consequences their actions might bring to makers like myself who have a lot to lose if someone decides they want to test the waters in court, Neil.

I agree with Keith, why keep bringing this up, you already stated it will most likely be deleted so why bother posting it!

I mean its already been called all those things on different forums. I don't see a need to chastise someone for calling a LDC a certain way. Its really no big deal, the feds can already push for a test case. Lets all just call it whatever we want. Whats the mods opinion on them? We can get a clear answer and put it in the "rules" section on the sticky threads.

A bit off topic, but IMO worth noting. In MI a surpressed weapon is illegal for hunting. So if you're using your Marauder for squirrel or a Bulldog for deer. You are a violator. 

If nothing else this illustrates the absurdity of the legal system. All points here are valid, but do you want to put your trust in a system with so much documented failings and abuse? 

Any lawyer worth their salt will tell you to shut the heck up. That advice is prudent on this topic as well.

And to the person who said "I don't have anything positive to contribute to the forums", don't hide. Be upfront about it.

Keith.

"KzooRichie"In MI a surpressed weapon is illegal for hunting. So if you're using your Marauder for squirrel or a Bulldog for deer. You are a violator.

Click to expand...

I wonder if that applies to the little tuffs of cloth or material that is placed in the strings of bows to silence the snap or twang of the bow string? It is a wepon and its being suppressed, . . . . . . . . . . . . interesting.

The concern, or "fear" to use your terminology, is completely rational. Not difficult to understand at all. What is legal, and what is widely recognized as legal, are often not the same. And in many states, the legal issues are not clear. 

Best to keep this issue well below the radar.

R

"NeilClague"AJ as someone who has taken a big risk and started to make these years ago when a lot of others were afraid to I just do not see the point in bringing more attention to them than they already get. I believe 100% that they are perfectly legal but I do not want to have to pay to defend myself for making them and end up with a $100,000 attorneys bill to prove what I do is legal. The government has unlimited funds to pursue trivial cases and it only takes one person in authority to want to try and alter the way they are being controlled, We all know what is meant by silencer, moderator, LDC, muffler etc so what does it matter what we call them. We are not trying to hide what we make we are just using some common sense and not trying to attract unwanted attention to them. Maybe the people who want to call them silencers should think about the consequences their actions might bring to makers like myself who have a lot to lose if someone decides they want to test the waters in court, Neil.

I agree with Keith, why keep bringing this up, you already stated it will most likely be deleted so why bother posting it!

Click to expand...

agreed 100%

My vote is to continue to stay below the radar and use the already in use nomenclature (shroud, LDC, air stripper, etc.) There are already enough anti's that are searching for a reason to increase restricion on projectile hurling machines. Why would we "willingly" give them more ability to restrict our rights?

Alan what is your goal? I am not trying to be a dick, but what do you gain to start calling these devices any other name than their currently "socially" acceptable names?

I think the British got it right. They have everything setup around energy. Go over some set level, and it's a firearm with the same requirements as a powder burner.

Anyone who thinks an Air Force Texan putting out twice the energy into a 45 caliber "pellet" that weighs twice as much as my .45 ACP ammo is a 'bb gun' needs help. A .22 rimfire CCI CB Long and its colleagues are in the 45 to 50 ft lb class. Somewhere around that region should be a firearm classification in my mind. If not, let's call slow .22 LRs BB guns so we can shoot them in our back yard.

I have no issue with certain levels of FPE being called a firearm and treated like what they are. (A) If you cant buy a .22LR you shouldn't be able to get a .22 .25 or .30 "bb gun" that's even more powerful than a .22 LR. (B) We should then be able take our air rifles hunting like the British.

But this is the US and our federal government is so (cough) highly functional.....then each state has it's own laws...and each city has its own laws...and each township has it's own laws...

"Mr.Gadgets"

"KzooRichie"In MI a surpressed weapon is illegal for hunting. So if you're using your Marauder for squirrel or a Bulldog for deer. You are a violator.

Click to expand...

I wonder if that applies to the little tuffs of cloth or material that is placed in the strings of bows to silence the snap or twang of the bow string? It is a wepon and its being suppressed, . . . . . . . . . . . . interesting.

Click to expand...

I was thinking about the Airbow when I phrased it that way. Airbow is no go in MI.

Quieting a bow with strings is ok as far as I know.

I would say airgun silencers are "tolerated" by the BATF. I don't think it would take much for them to press the issue on ldc s. Let sleeping dogs lie.

scrane,

Not sure I'm on the sleeping dogs page. The problem with a sleeping dog is it is going to wake up at some point. And at that point the dog can wake up and be familiar or unfamiliar with whats sitting infront of it and react accordingly. I don't like groggy unfamiliar angry dogs.

One of these days someone is going to take a high powered airgun (probably with a silencer) and use it to end someone. At which point it will make the evening news and everyone not familiar will jump up in outrage on how a person that is a (insert reason for shooting someone) can legally buy a silenced gun capable of killing someone. Never mind the fact that murder is already illegal and carries the harshest penalties - that's not part of the discussion. Then the republicans are going to go one way the democrats the other,CNN one way and MSNBC the other, and we are going to be watching one of the aforementioned parties drafting legislation that looks alot like what is going on in Massachusetts right now. IE, how would you like to have the last inch of your air rifle permanently plugged and painted orange unless you are making a movie or putting on a play?

Guess we'll all have to become registered movie production companies and always shoot though scope cams as the answer to that problem. Then they will limit the licenses for movie companies to those that go though a background check, and so on and so on. Or we can do what the British did.

One of the big reasons for trying to keep a low profile is due to a particular opinion letter by the Alphabet org. In that letter a silencer that could be attached to a firearm by threading onto a barrel was an NFA (National Firearms Act) firearm (namely a silencer). This stemmed from a paintball device. 

Given that the 1/2--20 thread size is common for both firearms and airguns, a silencer (even though it is marked for airgun use only) could easily be construed by the Alphabet org as being an NFA taxable item. The Alphabet org, also does not differentiate between thread sizes or shapes. It has only said a screw on device that can be fitted to a firearm is the NFA device.

To further complicate matters, the Alphabet org has prosecuted individuals for constructive intent (though mostly for machine guns). The individuals had both parts for a machine gun and a legal semi-auto rifle that the parts could be put into making it a machine gun. The parts or rifle by themselves were not illegal to possess. But having them together showed intent. 

Now if you want to be perfectly legal, and make one, you can first file an Alphabet org form 1, pay the $200 tax, submit fingerprints, etc., and wait for approval and your tax stamp. This silencer can then be put on anything you want. However, your state may not allow it, in which case the Alphabet org will not approve it anyway. 

One more thing to add. From the Alphabet org website: https://www.Alphabet org.gov/firearms/qa/are-paintball-andor-airgun-sound-suppressers-nfa-firearms

The terms “firearm silencer” and “firearm muffler” mean any device for silencing, muffling, or diminishing the report of a portable firearm, including any combination of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling or fabricating a firearm silencer or firearm muffler, and any part intended only for use in such assembly or fabrication.

Numerous paintball and airgun silencers tested by Alphabet org’s Firearms Technology Branch have been determined to be, by nature of their design and function, firearm silencers. Because silencers are NFA weapons, an individual wishing to manufacture or transfer such a silencer must receive prior approval from Alphabet org and pay the required tax.

[26 U.S.C. 5845; 27 CFR 479.11]

Click to expand...