Registration of Home-Made Sound Suppressor

[carnaby]

I know I have to register the thing, but my question is: can I register it, destroy it, make a new one and not have to register the new one and pay the tax? Seems like perfecting a home-made suppressor would be awfully expensive otherwise.

That, and I live in Washington State, so I'd have to go to Oregon or Idaho to try it out.

Lastly, does the shooter even hear the ballistic crack from a super sonic round? The shock wave should be conical and never pass the shooter's ears. Or is it the reflections after the wave hits the ground and other objects? Either way, it should be quieter than standing anywhere in front of the muzzle. Anyone know?

 

[wdlsguy]

There is a sticky thread titled "Homemade can... FORM 1" in the Suppressors forum at ar15.com that might be useful.

 

[carnaby]

Good fracking grief! One of those guys got a letter from the BATFEXYZLMNOP which states in part (emphases mine):

As you are aware, 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. Thus, certain internal
components, intended only for use in a silencer, are silencers as defined.

If an individual made one of these parts, even for use as a
replacement part, the individual would be making a silencer. Under
the provisions of the National Firearms Act, any person must apply
for and receive permission to make a silencer and pay the making
tax for each silencer made. This would require the individual
owner to file an ATF Form 1 application for each silencer part to
be made with the payment of $200.00 for each application prior to
making any replacement part.

So if I clip one of my fingernails just right to help with the assembly of a certain part of a suppressor, does my finger magically become a "silencer"? This bureaucrat is full of bureaucrap, trying to cover all possible bases. I think being such an idiot should null and void his entire letter.

Even Finland doesn't regulate suppressors any more. They've come into the modern era and realized that there aren't any drawbacks and only benefits to suppressors. Argh!

 

[carnaby]

Here's the Finnish study which also concludes that suppressors are not effective for poaching since they do NOT SILENCE a weapon.

 

[gezzer]

If you have made it before you have a an approved form 1 it you are in DEEP Crap. You cannot make it until you have an approved form 1.

Get a form 1 approved and then make it. You are then the manufacture of the item. If you need to repair it you may as long as the bad parts are destroyed first and no extras are made.

If you are serious go to Subguns.com the folks there are more knowledgeable about NFA than here.

 

[carnaby]

If you need to repair it you may as long as the bad parts are destroyed first and no extras are made.

In the letter in the sticky at arfcom, the guy (idiot?) at batfe states clearly that you must get a new form1 for EACH part you replace, since each part is in itself a silencer. It is a complete non-sequitor, but that's what he stated.

 

[DMF]

If you have a complaint about the legal definition of a silencer blame the guys who wrote the definition, which is NOT the ATF.

18USC921(a)(24):

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.

 

[carnaby]

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.

Which idiots wrote that? Anyway, there it seems to be all about INTENT, but in the ATF bureacrat letter, they don't seem to give a ratt's butt about intent. Heck, I've got a roll of tape that I "designed" into a wad with the INTENTION of using it to diminish the report of my portable firearm. Is it a silencer? Do I need to pay $200? Am I going to jail for 10 years and do I have to pay a $250k fine?

It boggles the mind.

 

[Futuristic]

carnaby wrote:

In the letter in the sticky at arfcom, the guy (idiot?) at batfe states clearly that you must get a new form1 for EACH part you replace, since each part is in itself a silencer. It is a complete non-sequitor, but that's what he stated.

That is the interpretation that BATFE has of the law. Based on my reading they are probably right, the Suppressor legislation is one of the more precise pieces of legislation I have seen passed by the Congress.

The reason that Suppressor Manufacturers can make replacement parts is that they are treated slightly differently since they have a Type 07 FFL with SOT (Special Occupational Tax) paid for manufacturing Suppressors. This means that they don't pay an individual Tax on each part they make, they pay an overall yearly tax that covers all parts made. Otherwise they would also have to pay Tax on each part made.

It is highly impractical to make your own Suppressor (legally) AND make replacement parts as needed (legally). It works out much cheaper and easier in the long run to just buy the things (legally!).

Futuristic

 

[carnaby]

I just "made" a silencer without a form 1. What do you think?

I can hear the AFT pulling up out front as we speak!

 

[DMF]

Heck, I've got a roll of tape that I "designed" into a wad with the INTENTION of using it to diminish the report of my portable firearm. Is it a silencer?

Yes. The roll of tape itself, or even the wad of tape are not silencers unless they are "designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling or fabricating a firearm silencer or firearm muffler," which you have confessed to doing. If the item is not "intended only for use in such assembly or fabrication" of a silencer, then the government would need to prove it's intended use. Not an easy thing to do sometimes, very easy to do other times.

BTW, the people you are calling "idiots" are the US Congress.

 

[carnaby]

BTW, the people you are calling "idiots" are the US Congress.

Yeah, I know, it was a rhetorical question, they are largely idiots. What about that bunk about cutting the integral muffled barrel off of a paintball gun? They say that just cutting the barrel off constitutes making a silencer whether you intend it for that reason or not. Did I say idiots? That's the ATF talking there, "interpreting" things in the most general possible way.

 

[carnaby]

The reason that Suppressor Manufacturers can make replacement parts is that they are treated slightly differently since they have a Type 07 FFL with SOT (Special Occupational Tax) paid for manufacturing Suppressors. This means that they don't pay an individual Tax on each part they make, they pay an overall yearly tax that covers all parts made. Otherwise they would also have to pay Tax on each part made.

It is highly impractical to make your own Suppressor (legally) AND make replacement parts as needed (legally). It works out much cheaper and easier in the long run to just buy the things (legally!).

Yeah, but you can, with one Form 1, make a complete "silencer", no? So why do you then need a new Form 1 for EACH replacement part. If ever there were cause for a "duh" moment, that was it.

 

[GunnySkox]

BTW, the people you are calling "idiots" are the US Congress.

And? Sounds pretty accurate to me.

~GnSx

 

[Derby FALs]

BTW, the people you are calling "idiots" are the US Congress.

Too polite...

 

[bogie]

The way I read that, one has to register their lathe/mill in order to make a silencer.

 

[Harry Tuttle]

http://www.corin.com/bill/paintball/silencer.html

So can you believe it? I need to pay a $200 making tax, just to legally send them a 6" piece of PVC pipe, and a wad of toilet paper, to even find out if they are legal to posess.

 

[carnaby]

I sent the following message to my state senator and my two representatives. I wonder if it has any hope?

Dear Representative _______,

I am an avid hunter and outdoorsman, and I have a concern with current Washington State law pertaining to the use of sound suppressors on firearms in the state.

In Washington State, a resident may *possess* a firearm sound suppressor, often inaccurately known as a "silencer," but the device may not in fact be *used*. This is as near a non-sequitur as I've seen in any legislation. If a person was intent on using the device in an otherwise unlawful manner, I can't see how the law prohibiting the otherwise legal use of the device would act as a deterrent.

Combining the above with the general European notion that use of firearms *without* a sound suppressor is impolite, and we see that Washington State law on the matter could fairly be changed. Finland recently changed their laws regarding possession and use of sound suppressors after conducting a study that found only benefits to their use. They found that

"Suppressors do not decisively favor poaching or other criminal activity since they do not affect the bullet noise. The bass tuned 130 - 140 dB sound of the suppressed muzzle blast is also heard quite far, yet is not so disturbing. (Complete suppressors only exist in cinema). "

http://www.guns.connect.fi/rs/suppress.html

In addition, the encroachement of urban areas on once rural places is leading to dissagreements between residents and shooting facilities. This could be addressed in part by allowing sporting persons to use sound suppressors to mitigate the unpleasant noises associated with shooting ranges. All aspects of legal hunting and enjoying the outdoors are enhanced by the use of suppressors, since the report of shots fired, while still heard for a significant distance, is less disturbing, as indicated in the Finnish study.

Finally, my greatest concern is in respect to hearing preservation of all persons involved in hunting and shooting sports. I have permanent tinnitus and I am bothered tremendously by loud noises. I hunt with hearing protection, but I would certainly appreciate being able to further protect my hearing by reducing the muzzle blast of my rifle by an additional 20dB or so.

I am hoping that you and your colleagues will sponsor new legislation to allow the use of legally owned firearm sound suppressors, in line with federal law (which requires registration and a $200 tax per device) in order to protect the hearing of hunters and sports persons, and improve the sound environment of our outdoors.

Thank you very much for your consideration,

 

[molonlabe]

As you are aware, 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. Thus, certain internal components, intended only for use in a silencer, are silencers as defined.

So, I keep my S&W in my bedroom next to the bed. We have 4 pillows on the bed. Does this mean we need to register each pillow? What about the pillows in the other bed rooms? heck what about the potatoes in the potato bins?

 

[ceetee]

BTW, the people you are calling "idiots" are the US Congress.

This is not the first time this fact has been noticed:


"Suppose I was a Congressman. Suppose I was an idiot.

But I repeat myself..."


--Mark Twain

 

[MD_Willington]

Man to think we used to use "tall boy" beer cans on the end of our Marlins when we were teenagers back home in Canada... Of course the evidence of our evil doings was destroyed at the recyclers

I guess we better start registering beer cans here in the States, the cans were somewhat registered in Canada as you had to put down a 10 cent deposit on each can...

Crazy laws!

 

[Sniper X]

Crazy laws indeed

I wonder when the US beaurcrats will notice it is beneficial to their re-election to grandfather these cheesy laws? If The Republik of California had not adopted such assonine laws about firearms I may still live there paying idiotic amounts of money each year in taxes! I moved away from there because of their politics. I now live in New MExico where gun laws are at least fair.

 

[Flintlock Tom]

Since the BAFTE insists on a strictly literal interpretation of the law; why do they not consider earmuffs as sound suppressors since they, very definately, are designed for "muffling, or diminishing the report of a portable firearm"?

 

[ctdonath]

Here's the Finnish study which also concludes that suppressors are not effective for poaching since they do NOT SILENCE a weapon.

Don't need Finland for that. Just fire 1 supersonic round from my "silenced" .223 - it's quieter than usual, yes, but hardly "silenced". Still friggin' loud.

 

[Ranb]

I also live in WA. So far the local sheriff has signed 8 ATF form 1's for me. It sure does suck that I can only use them I leave the state. If there is a policeman at the range, I will let him/her give them a try as the AG has exempted the police from prosecution for using a silencer.

Ranb