Reports of Mass Disapprovals of eForm 1 Silencers

[Biggfoot44]

Since it came up , $200 in 1934 is aprox $4,200 today .

If you can afford a $20K machine gun , it's not out of the question that you could swing $4K tax on that . But $4K tax would make 98% of legal suppressor go away .

 

[bcr229]

Interesting...

 

[lazarus]

Interesting...

And there it is.

Pretty much exactly where I thought the ATF was going.

Don’t expect solvent traps to be approved at a guess.

 

[Bertfish]

Fvck the ATF

 

[teratos]

I don’t understand how they can say the incomplete parts are not legal.

 

[traveller]

I don’t understand how they can say the incomplete parts are not legal.

'Congress with the best of intentions wrote a law'. It says that parts intended to be used for a silencer are a silencer. For a while, the agency played along with the game that if there is any other explanation of what else it could be (oh look a 'solvent trap') they didn't go after the maker unless they turned it into an actual silencer.

It's not right, but it is internally consistent as a matter of regulation and law.

 

[teratos]

'Congress with the best of intentions wrote a law'. It says that parts intended to be used for a silencer are a silencer. For a while, the agency played along with the game that if there is any other explanation of what else it could be they didn't go after the maker.

Crazy stuff. So every piece of lead is a bullet, and DC will soon arrest you for wheel weights.

 

[camo556]

 

[Alea Jacta Est]

They’re mining for info they may suspect but likely dint have.

They’ll stick what they learn up our collective butts.

This is ignorant and unconstitutional tyranny at its best. Over reach any way you look at it.

Frankly, I believe they think they’ve given themselves a win win. They’ll uncover ALL the parts and processes out there to make your own silencer. Bonus: they’ll make it so hard and or intrusive that folks will ILLEGALLY FORGO the process and make themselves a textbook right wing nationalist and domestic terrorist.

 

[Bob A]

Constructive possession; if you could possibly do something, you're guilty of having done it.

Hard to believe a court would go along with that, but here we are.

 

[teratos]

Constructive possession; if you could possibly do something, you're guilty of having done it.

Hard to believe a court would go along with that, but here we are.

By their logic, having barstock and a lathe is constructive intent. In fact, having internet access is constructive intent. You can order everything.

 

[Alea Jacta Est]

By their logic their wives and daughters are whores and they are murdering rapists

 

[lazarus]

Crazy stuff. So every piece of lead is a bullet, and DC will soon arrest you for wheel weights.

Only if a law were written as such. The national firearms act specifically calls out silencer parts. GCA doesn’t. So you are luck if you are a prohibited person and have chunks of lead and not a complete cartridge.

Like it or not, in the case of silencers, the law is on the ATFs side on this one. It isn’t one of their stupid regulations. The NFA controls silencer parts. If anything, the ATF is somewhat lenient in how they’ve been treating stuff. For example please, recently and finally allowing wipes to not be controlled parts.

As for the comparisons to soda bottles and stuff, there has to be an intent. An oil filter is just an oil filter. But if you are making oil filters for conversion to silencers, then they are silencer parts. If solvent traps were really just a solvent trap, you’d be cool. But no one is making solvent traps to catch solvents.

You could buy pipe and freeze plugs and make a can and the ATF would probably be cool with it. A company wasn’t making that stuff to be machined or converted in to silencers. Kits for conversion in to silencers? Guess what those are for?

 

[IMBLITZVT]

True, but you can't lie on a .gov form, even if it is inconsequential. ....

Yes, that goes without saying that you should never lie on a Government form. My point was that there is no enforcement mechanism short of you admitting it to the Government. They do not come and check on your suppressor once its done. They do not list how you made it on your form to compare with. Even if you did build it as you said you would, you could also rework it later to a different design.

Yes you are correct, some moron will post a video about doing something like that and get in trouble. However for those not so stupid, there is almost nothing that can be done here that I can see.

Since it came up , $200 in 1934 is aprox $4,200 today .

If you can afford a $20K machine gun , it's not out of the question that you could swing $4K tax on that . But $4K tax would make 98% of legal suppressor go away .

I can tell you have not bought a $20K machine gun. When you are scraping ever dime you have together to get to that $20K mark, adding 20% more to the price often puts it out of reach.

$4k tax stamp would likely drop all NFA prices considerably and would have a lot more trusts being formed. I do agree, Suppressors would go away to a large extent.

I don't see the $200 tax stamp as changing since they managed to stop further registration of MGs. I think this is designed to do exactly what they want and drastically reduce the number of Form 1 Suppressors being made. If this does not work, they can always just ban further registration like they did to MGs. Thats why my worthless old suppressor sits in the safe waiting to become worth doing something with one day.

Constructive possession; if you could possibly do something, you're guilty of having done it.
....

Constructive Possession is a lot more complex then usually given credit for on the internet. How many people have you heard charged with it?

 

[lazarus]

Yes, that goes without saying that you should never lie on a Government form. My point was that there is no enforcement mechanism short of you admitting it to the Government. They do not come and check on your suppressor once its done. They do not list how you made it on your form to compare with. Even if you did build it as you said you would, you could also rework it later to a different design.

Yes you are correct, some moron will post a video about doing something like that and get in trouble. However for those not so stupid, there is almost nothing that can be done here that I can see.



I can tell you have not bought a $20K machine gun. When you are scraping ever dime you have together to get to that $20K mark, adding 20% more to the price often puts it out of reach.

$4k tax stamp would likely drop all NFA prices considerably and would have a lot more trusts being formed. I do agree, Suppressors would go away to a large extent.

I don't see the $200 tax stamp as changing since they managed to stop further registration of MGs. I think this is designed to do exactly what they want and drastically reduce the number of Form 1 Suppressors being made. If this does not work, they can always just ban further registration like they did to MGs. Thats why my worthless old suppressor sits in the safe waiting to become worth doing something with one day.



Constructive Possession is a lot more complex then usually given credit for on the internet. How many people have you heard charged with it?

They might ban suppressors some day. But I don’t see it happening on a federal level.

I doubt the ATF’s new mass disapproval has anything to do with them agitating for anything other than better compliance with the law. And unfortunately, as shitty as it is, silencer parts are controlled under the NFA. So if the ATF is following the law and doing their job, they’d be going after silencer part manufacturers who are no properly licensed as well as their sales to non-licensees and makers who are using said parts to build a silencer.

Yes, it sucks donkey cock. And I am sure it is as much about pushing some of the administrations BS/attitudes. But they are for sure not inventing some bogus administrative law here. It’s right in the national firearms act. Their enforcement recently has just been lax.

All along, to follow the law, everyone should have been buying parts and machining a can. Not buying parts from someone selling them for the express purpose of making a silencer. And that’s exactly what has been going on with the solvent trap makers like diversified.

Like the judge said in Larry Flynt vs the state. I know it when I see it.

In a SANE world, you could form 1 a silencer and order whatever the hell you want to build one. Hell you can do that for an AOW, SBR or SBS to make one (so long as you aren’t buying an already manufactured one. Because then it would be a form 4). But the ATF’s argument here, based on what the NFA says, those form 1 makers have been mostly (not everyone of course) been ordering silencer parts that they’ve been doing a few operations on and assembling a silencer, rather than making one. Which the NFA says no can do.

 

[Biggfoot44]

" I know it when I see it " has been subsequently discredited .

Never mind Solvent Traps , ( I won't repeat them on the internet ) , but Traditional home built suppressor components are Extremely common , present in every home , available in millions of retail and wholesale establishments , and all have very common mundane uses .

In light of the above , " suppressor parts " is undefinable , unenforceable , and unconstitutionally Vague .

See cumulatively above as to absurdity of " just encourage to follow the law " . The real ( implied , but predominance of logic ) motive is to meaningfully and substantially increase the net expense of ( legal) suppressors . The USA marketplace is significantly and artificially different from the world marketplace. Where Suppressor are either unregulated , or no more regulated than regular firearms , they are equivalent to $100- 200 .

Nope . I missed the window when machineguns were $1500 to $3000. 20/ 20 hindsight . I'm not alone in thinking there is Big Difference between $500 to $ 1,000 and $4,500 to $ 5,000 . To me and many people the difference between $20K and $25 for a range toy is minor ie both are well beyond consideration . IF I had a $20K toy budget , I could probably swing to carry another $5K . Think price of yachts vs price of designer boat shoes .

 

[bcr229]

In a SANE world, you could form 1 a silencer...

In a SANE world a silencer wouldn't be a firearm any more than a car muffler is a vehicle.

 

[IMBLITZVT]

...I doubt the ATF’s new mass disapproval has anything to do with them agitating for anything other than better compliance with the law. And unfortunately, as shitty as it is, silencer parts are controlled under the NFA. So if the ATF is following the law and doing their job, they’d be going after silencer part manufacturers who are no properly licensed as well as their sales to non-licensees and makers who are using said parts to build a silencer. ....
All along, to follow the law, everyone should have been buying parts and machining a can. Not buying parts from someone selling them for the express purpose of making a silencer. And that’s exactly what has been going on with the solvent trap makers like diversified. .....

I do not agree. The only reason ATF is doing something here is specifically to make it harder and so reduce the amount of people trying to make suppressors. You are naïve to think anything different.

Per the ATF's NFA Guide, page 15 https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/guide/atf-national-firearms-act-handbook-atf-p-53208/download

The definition of a silencer also includes any combination of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling or fabricating a firearm silencer or firearm muffler. The following illustration depicts parts that are designed and intended for use in assembling a firearm silencer. Another example of parts redesigned and intended for use in assembling or fabricating a firearm silencer are automotive engine freeze plugs that have been modified by drilling a hole through their center to permit passage of a bullet.

So here we have a car part that clearly can be redesigned to make a suppressor part. HOWEVER its not a suppressor part UNTIL it is drilled. Does it mean that using this part in the making of a suppressor is illegal? I don't think so. You just have to wait until they approve the design to drill them. They are not going to start raiding Car shops, I hope.

So what the ATF is saying is that a solvent trap is not a legitimate product. That also seems to be what you are saying. While I don't use one, I don't think I would agree to this. A solvent trap must be redesigned and modified to become work as a suppressor. While you might agree with the ATF, the fact that they took years to come to this determination is not a good sign. If they had first seen a Solvent trap and said it was a Suppressor, that is one thing. However just figuring this out at some time down the road is everyone's issue. They redefine the game when and how they want. Who gives them the right to decide Solvent traps are not a legitimate product? I guess a court will have to figure it out now.

I would also note that in the gun world, its been a long practice to sell incomplete gun kits for people to finish on their own. This is legal, at least for now. As these kits have gotten better, they now get called Ghost guns and everyone want to ban them. However they still follow the same law. I do not consider these loopholes.

One should also note that the NFA is a loop hole around 2A. That somehow a Tax is different than an unconstitutional ban, which is what the Government argued in court. So if people are following the letter of the law, not the spirt of the NFA, I think that is only correct, since the NFA follows the letter of the law and not the Spirt of 2A. In other words a loophole around a loophole is hardly something to look down on.

 

[lazarus]

I do not agree. The only reason ATF is doing something here is specifically to make it harder and so reduce the amount of people trying to make suppressors. You are naïve to think anything different.

Per the ATF's NFA Guide, page 15 https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/guide/atf-national-firearms-act-handbook-atf-p-53208/download


So here we have a car part that clearly can be redesigned to make a suppressor part. HOWEVER its not a suppressor part UNTIL it is drilled. Does it mean that using this part in the making of a suppressor is illegal? I don't think so. You just have to wait until they approve the design to drill them. They are not going to start raiding Car shops, I hope.

So what the ATF is saying is that a solvent trap is not a legitimate product. That also seems to be what you are saying. While I don't use one, I don't think I would agree to this. A solvent trap must be redesigned and modified to become work as a suppressor. While you might agree with the ATF, the fact that they took years to come to this determination is not a good sign. If they had first seen a Solvent trap and said it was a Suppressor, that is one thing. However just figuring this out at some time down the road is everyone's issue. They redefine the game when and how they want. Who gives them the right to decide Solvent traps are not a legitimate product? I guess a court will have to figure it out now.

I would also note that in the gun world, its been a long practice to sell incomplete gun kits for people to finish on their own. This is legal, at least for now. As these kits have gotten better, they now get called Ghost guns and everyone want to ban them. However they still follow the same law. I do not consider these loopholes.

One should also note that the NFA is a loop hole around 2A. That somehow a Tax is different than an unconstitutional ban, which is what the Government argued in court. So if people are following the letter of the law, not the spirt of the NFA, I think that is only correct, since the NFA follows the letter of the law and not the Spirt of 2A. In other words a loophole around a loophole is hardly something to look down on.

It does need to be redesigned to work as one, yes. However, in this case, they are being intended to be modified as a silencer by the manufacturers from the get go.

We know. The ATF obviously knows it. Automotive freeze plug makers aren't making their product with the intention that it'll be modified to make a silencer.

I'd bet a lot that is what the ATF is keying in on. And I'd bet a lot that a jury and judges would also likely be swayed that way too.

 

[IMBLITZVT]

It does need to be redesigned to work as one, yes. However, in this case, they are being intended to be modified as a silencer by the manufacturers from the get go.

We know. The ATF obviously knows it. Automotive freeze plug makers aren't making their product with the intention that it'll be modified to make a silencer.

I'd bet a lot that is what the ATF is keying in on. And I'd bet a lot that a jury and judges would also likely be swayed that way too.

No I don't know they are intended solely or even partially as suppressor parts. I also don't know if that matters. They are certainly not completed suppressor parts. At best you have partially completed suppressor parts. I don't see in the law where they say that incomplete parts that could be used in a suppressor are illegal? Do you?

If they are not completed suppressor parts, then are they regulated? We know when it comes to firearm receivers you can do about 80% of the work to the final part and still sell it legally. Does the same hold true for suppressor parts?

Following the letter of the law, I don't see where the ATF has a case.

If you wish to follow the spirt of the law, lets look at the XM177 moderator from Colt. Its clearly not a Suppressor/silencer however it might take a dB or 3 off and so ATF screams its regulated! Clearly this does not follow the sprit of the law but they don't care and the letter of the law agrees, so it gets stuck in the NFA. Solvent Traps might be the other side of that coin but you can't have it both ways!

The way you write it, its so clear cut. If its that clear, why has it taken them years to enforce the law? Who should get fired for allowing all these illegal suppressor to be sold?

I frankly don't understand people that argue the way you to. You could say the semi auto AR15 today is a loop hole to get around the ban of these firearms. The original AR15s and M16s are full auto and illegal to produce today for the modern market. I guess its just a loop hole in the law that we can make them semi auto and so legal? Clearly that gun was designed as a Machine gun. So the ATF is just being lax in not collecting up all AR15 semi auto Machine guns out there because with drilling one hole you can turn it into a Machine gun. At least you had to drill a few in solvent traps! Clearly this is just a loop hole in the Machine gun ban. I don't see how your argument is any different.