Suppressor On A Break Barrel Air Rifle

[jcwit]

Let's hope this settled this.

At the present time they are legal for use on air guns!

[jh45gun]

I agree with jcwit

[Black Beard]

To the original poster, one of the best ways of reducing airgun noise is to cut down the spring (make sure you fix up the ends and it has some tension when in the gun). This will reduce the energy in the air blast and so its noise. If you are only back yard plinking then 6ftlb/500fps is good enough for targets.

[HollowPoint]

To the original poster, one of the best ways of reducing airgun noise is to cut down the spring (make sure you fix up the ends and it has some tension when in the gun). This will reduce the energy in the air blast and so its noise. If you are only back yard plinking then 6ftlb/500fps is good enough for targets.

I hear what you're saying and it makes sense but, the air gun in question is a Umarex Octane in .22 caliber. I bought it to use as a back yard plinker in order to get some trigger time during those long stretches of time that I can't get to the shooting range to shoot my center fire guns.

I also use it to reduce the local feral pigeon population and on occasion I've taken it out to the sticks for rabbit hunting; although I have yet to be successful in shooting any rabbits. Not because it isn't accurate enough or powerful enough; it's mainly because the areas I hunted either held very few rabbits or very smart rabbits. Either way; no luck on the rabbit front.

This air rifle is a Gas-Piston/Spring powered air gun. If anything, I'd like to maintain the mods I've done to it to give it More Power.

HollowPoint

[Black Beard]

Nice gun. If it was a spring gun then it just wouldn't work well if you detuned it from 20ftlb to 6ftlb.

You could also counterbore and cap the barrel to make a mini-expansion chamber in the end (say, 1/2" internal diameter by 2" long). This isn't a removable silencer as the body is the barrel. It should make a bit of a difference to the noise level.

[PerpetualStudent]

So Gaylord's stuff is outdated though we don't quite have a "go build your own airgun silencers free from fear"! And even Gaylord mentions (if you read through it all) that it's a gray area and offers the normally wise "avoid gray areas" advice.

This seems a good place to put the "THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE/ I'M NOT A LAWYER" caveat.

That said we do have a test case.
United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. MICHAEL CROOKER, Defendant, Appellant.
No. 07-1964
Decided: June 18, 2010
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-1st-circuit/1527670.html

And a doozy of a test case. A prohibited possessor fooling with top end (power wise) PCP airguns with supressors to get around the fact that he couldn't own firearms. Also did a sideline of shipping chemicals that when mixed could be explosive. He wasn't just in the gray area - he was trying to find the border between it and black.

The appeals court held that the suppressors he had were not readily affixed to firearms, and even though he had documents which showed how they could function (briefly) as silencers, that they failed to meet the legal definition of silencer.

We conclude, however, that the statute by its terms requires something more than a potential for adaptation and knowledge of it.   The statute does not refer either to capability or adaptation;  it speaks of a device “for” silencing or muffling.   The ordinary connotation of the word is one of purpose.

The government does not argue that the evidence proved that either Crooker or the maker of the airgun silencer intended that it be used to silence a firearm, but rather that “for” does not entail purpose but only knowledge of capability.

They even finally addressed the 2 liter soda bottle example so often brought up by gun owners in siding against the government's case of "doesn't matter if it was a silencer it could be and that makes it one"

the use of a “capability” and “knowledge” definition-as applied to a home-made silencer-could also extend to a soda bottle or even a potato.   The peculiar problem of silencers is that many objects, including relatively innocent ones, have some capacity to muffle the sound of a shot.

So what does all that mean? Ultimately (and again I'm not a lawyer this isn't legal advice) I think airgun silencers are on the gov's "do not attempt to prosecute for". Remember that if they can prove intent for you to use an "airgun silencer" on a real gun, that'd make it a real silencer and you'd be up a certain creek without a paddle. But I'm tentatively convinced that it'd be a minor risk to fabricate an airgun silencer.

[jh45gun]

Will be a moot issue if Congress passes the hearing protection act.

[elmacgyver0]

Will be a moot issue if Congress passes the hearing protection act.

I wouldn't hold my breath on this one.

[HollowPoint]

In my line of work I interact with others of nearly every profession imaginable; from rocket scientists to garbage men. (sanitation engineers)

I mention this because I've recently started to ask my customers if they know anyone who works for the ATF. I'm hoping to find someone that can give me a specific set of guide lines as to what exactly needs to be included into a design of an Air-Gun-Specific suppressor that would be legally acceptable to the ATF.

I don't want any room left for "Grey-Areas". If I design an Air-Gun-Specific Suppressor that can be Home-Made and still function with maximum efficiency in suppressing an Air-Gun's muzzle blast, I want to be able to submit it to the ATF for their approval knowing that I followed their guidelines as to what they're looking for.

I don't want internet-expert opinions, assumptions or hearsay. I don't want long winded cut and pastes of obscure court judgments or assumptions based on those past judicial proceedings. (although I have appreciated those given on this posts because they tended to give credence to my own confusion on the matter)

I want specific design parameters that will pinpoint design elements that will constitute legality and no more. Any more than that serves only to get us back into "Grey-Areas." And I want it straight from the horse's mouth; the ATF.

HollowPoint

[DCP]

Air-Gun-Specific Suppressor that can be Home-Made and still function with maximum efficiency in suppressing an Air-Gun's muzzle blast

Air-Gun-Specific Suppressor are not regulated

[PerpetualStudent]

Unfortunately Hollow Point you'll be waiting for ATF specifications about as long as for the Hearing Protection Act to pass.

The ATF's FAQ on this subject is...overly aggressive (in my layman's view) and that gives some indication on their friendliness to this. The Airgun manufacturers are living in the gray with the rest of us, they've just reached a tacit understanding with the ATF. The ATF could make a European-like argument that past a certain energy level you're a firearm. The airgunners want to avoid that. The airgunners have a decent legal case that airgun supressors are unregulated even on airguns with the same diameter as real firearms, which could (effectively) make supressors much more normative. The ATF wants to avoid that. Hence their tacit understanding and allowing affixed suppressors. Again that's my view.

The third option is a separate court of appeals makes a ruling that conflicts with the 1st circuit, which then gets appealed to the Supreme Court. Supreme Court agrees to hear the case to settle the case law, and a favorable ruling forces the ATF to give guidelines.

I ain't holding my breath for any of the above. This will stay a legal gray (grey) area indefinitely.

[HollowPoint]

You're probably right; and I too will not be holding my breath BUT, I'm still going to try. I'll still keep looking for specific answers and/or input right from the horse's mouth.

HollowPoint

[coyotewacker]

You're probably right; and I too will not be holding my breath BUT, I'm still going to try. I'll still keep looking for specific answers and/or input right from the horse's mouth.

HollowPoint

The big problem is the BATFE makes "rulings" not "laws" its how they want to interpret the "law" at that time ....

They have made at least 3 different "rulings" on the "Sig Brace"....and just changed recently the "ruling" it can be "use from your shoulder as long as you don't do it all the time"....but remember its on a "firearm" they can "rule" on it....

Airguns are not a "firearm" so they can't "rule" on it....."suppressors" are "firearms" they can "rule on them....

Myself if a "airgun manufacture" installs a "suppresser permanently" to the barrel its there responsibility of proof of being legal....you attach anything yourself that reduces the sound its a "suppresser".....just pay the $200 do a Form 1 then build it....

A good example of a "ruling".......http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/201...g-machine-gun/

[DCP]

The big problem is the BATFE makes "rulings" not "laws" its how they want to interpret the "law" at that time ....

They have made at least 3 different "rulings" on the "Sig Brace"....and just changed recently the "ruling" it can be "use from your shoulder as long as you don't do it all the time"....but remember its on a "firearm" they can "rule" on it....

Airguns are not a "firearm" so they can't "rule" on it....."suppressors" are "firearms" they can "rule on them....

Myself if a "airgun manufacture" installs a "suppresser permanently" to the barrel its there responsibility of proof of being legal....you attach anything yourself that reduces the sound its a "suppresser".....just pay the $200 do a Form 1 then build it....

A good example of a "ruling".......http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/201...g-machine-gun/

Air-Gun-Specific Suppressor are not regulated

http://www.airforceairguns.com/AirFo...it-p/kitsl.htm

[jcwit]

And the beat goes on and on!

[DCP]

And the beat goes on and on!

Yes the Never Ending Story!

[melloairman]

Good info. Marvin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKWK...em-uploademail

[tech54K]

thinking about the same thing.

[Multigunner]

Remember to do any muzzle attachment experiments onboard your private yacht outside US territorial waters.

[HollowPoint]

I thought I'd post this final reply in an attempt to put this thread out of its misery. I ended up just buying a new replacement barrel from Umarex USA. The replacement barrel comes with a factory suppressor in place. Problem solved; no further suggestions, cautions, warnings or encouragement needed. Many thanks to everyone who took the time to post a reply.

HollowPoint