poll for silencers.

[Walkingwolf]

I pick choice number 5, they are not dumb, but I just don't want one. At least at this time, hearing protection works fine for me. Our guns are all carry guns, and a suppressor would make them too long for that purpose.

They should be unregulated IMO.

[mcdaniel.mac]

Artful - in regards to the passing of it on in a Trust . . .

I'm assuming that is only able to be done if the Trust is continued on? In the case of many Trusts, they are "closed" and a final tax return done. The Trust allows the estate and assets to avoid Probate.

While the silencer may be able to be passed on in regards to the Trust, the Trust, which is treated like an individual, will have to continue to file tax returns both Federal and in most states until it is closed. While the individual Trust maybe continued on for other benefits of those involved,I would hope that no one would do it just to avoid the expense/paperwork in regards to the silencer if there is any? I'm not a lawyer but I have had experience with Trusts as a Trustee.

So, if an individual had a Trust and all their assets were in the Trust - and say they had more than one son/daughter . . . could the silencer be "passed on" to a selected heir through the individual's "Will"?

Not trying to e confrontational at all - I saw you post in regards to passing it on and it peaked my curiosity. I have a hard time thinking that the guvment would have some way of squeezing a tax out of it somehow upon the death of the original owner who chooses to "pass it on"?

Thanks!

In regards to my post about silencers seeming (to me) to be a thing for the younger crowd - I meant no offense by that at all. It just seems to me that when I have heard conversations in person in regards to them, it has been younger folks. Personally, I have no need for one due to what and how I shoot but everyone's circumstances are different - regardless of age. I can see how one would be handy to have for those who have to keep the noise down or say, those who hunt prairie dogs and such - just two examples of many I'm sure.

Jim

Trusts used are generally what's called a revocable living trust, which does live past the original trustee with named trustees beyond that. Failing that, you can also have your inheritor file an ATF Form 5 (5320.5) within (IIRC) 90 days of your death to pass on NFA items without an additional tax.

[FISH4BUGS]

the suppressor only really works when you use subsonic bullets and they are not truly quiet.

Maybe you are doing something wrong but my Uzi SBR (closed bolt) is so quiet with subsonic ammo I can shoot it without ear muffs. Ditto on the Ruger 22 pistol and subsonic ammo.
However, the open bolt guns are not as quiet There is a lot of gas that blows back. I have to use muffs with those guns.
People, I think, are used to the movies - Hollywood Quiet is what I call it.
Most suppressors are not that way.
Some are. Depends on ammo (trans sonic, subsonic, supersonic), bolt configuration (bolt rifle, open bolt semi/subgun vs. vs. closed bolt semi/subgun) etc.
With some effort you can get them to be VERY quiet.

[PerpetualStudent]

I'd be happy if they're just treated as firearms - so same restrictions apply. Technically the BATFE does already classify them as firearms. So if we remove them from NFA status then we should be able to build them ourselves (so long as you're allowed firearms). Which is the route I'd take. It'd make a dandy little project and help keep my hearing in tact. I don't have the loss some on this board do but the little loss I have is annoying and at times a source of friction with my family.

Basically, it's the paperwork (and 200 bucks) that keep me from having silencers/suppressors/moderators. I don't feel strongly enough to deal with the hassle as it stands.

[mozeppa]

If they didn't interfere with accuracy ....sure!....why not?

i'm 63 and my hearing is rapidly going south...one shot from a .22 long rifle cartridge without muffs, and my ears ring for days!

[elmacgyver0]

I already knew about the trusts but don't want to deal with the hassle for a little benign piece of metal.
If you could just pay the lousy 200 bucks and that would be the end of it I would be happy.
I don't want to jack around with trusts or form 5s or any other kind of malarkey for a stupid little muffler.

[Artful]

If they didn't interfere with accuracy ....sure!....why not?

What are you talking about???? I shoot 1000 yard targets with my suppressed 308, it (or me) is worse without the can on...

[dragon813gt]

What are you talking about???? I shoot 1000 yard targets with my suppressed 308, it (or me) is worse without the can on...

Best to just ignore those that have no idea what they're talking about. I wish I could say I'm surprised by gun owners that don't support every aspect of the sport. But I'm not and it's what makes us a weak easy target.

[rking22]

For me it's 4473 and no tax. I am interested in the design and engineering. I would build me an integral for my Charger first, then a Browning SA22 and then a 44mag Contender barrel. They dont have to adversely effect the handling quality of the host. That is the main design aspect I'm interested in!

[SSGOldfart]

Yep if it was the same as buying a gun I'd pick up a few

[Walkingwolf]

A person should not even have to do a background check, fill out a 4473. They are nothing more than a thin tube with baffles, some laws are really a joke, though not funny. I have no desire for a suppressor, at least at this time, from my understanding the sound is still close to ear damaging levels. The idea that if I build a house with sound suppression, and my neighbors might not hear an argument so they can call police is ridicules. Criminals are rarely going to use a silencer even if they are easy to buy, they are just too cumbersome, and criminals do not obey laws. That is why they are criminals.

I can see a lot of 80% kits in the future if they can be bought with a BGC. But actually I think there popularity will wane with a change.

[HATCH]

And they would need to be much more affordable.

if/once it passes and in enacted then they will be.

If it is enacted at the time of passage then the price on suppressors will be higher then it is now because the demand would go thru the roof.
But if there is several months between passing and being enacted, then they will be dirt cheap.

Look at AR15 receivers. Before the big rush they were over $100 for one. Now you can buy one (a metal one at that) on sale for around $30. Saw that last week.

Even right now there is a company that produces and sells a $100 22lr suppressor.

I built a titanium 22 lr/22mag/22hornet/22tcm rated can late last year.
All said and done I have $200 in it not including stamp which I hope to get back when this passes.

[dragon813gt]

People either don't know or forgetting that if removed from the NFA there would be a lot in integrally suppressed firearms being made. This alleviates the poor handling characteristics. I sure wouldn't mind an integrally suppressed Marlin lever action. It would allow me to keep the barrels at standard length instead of cutting one short so it's not "as unwieldy".

[NoAngel]

I own a couple. Will own several more as time and money allows. 99% of the naysayers have never shot one. If they had, they wouldn't be a naysayer.

Thank you Hiram Maxim for giving us the greatest firearm accessory ever.

[Walkingwolf]

Let's be clear here, because someone does not want to buy a suppressor, or use one does not make them a naysayer. I do not want a Corvette, but I don't want them outlawed, or have anything against others owning one. I also do not want a grill on my teeth, but have no problem with you having bling on your teeth.

[Artful]

Maxim 9


Gemtech Oasis 22LR built around Ruger


Contender SBR - Suppressed


Own a Heavy Barrel Ruger 10/22 - make it suppressed

Gemtech Mist 22 barrel/suppressor assembly

Isreali's think it cool deal


Ruger 77/22 suppressed


Marlin Camp Carbine suppressed


300 Blackout AR


Take your pick
Savage

Remington

[308Jeff]

A person should not even have to do a background check, fill out a 4473. They are nothing more than a thin tube with baffles, some laws are really a joke, though not funny. I have no desire for a suppressor, at least at this time, from my understanding the sound is still close to ear damaging levels. The idea that if I build a house with sound suppression, and my neighbors might not hear an argument so they can call police is ridicules. Criminals are rarely going to use a silencer even if they are easy to buy, they are just too cumbersome, and criminals do not obey laws. That is why they are criminals.

I can see a lot of 80% kits in the future if they can be bought with a BGC. But actually I think there popularity will wane with a change.

Agree with all of this.

[AbitNutz]

If this passes and silencers are freed from the NFA...what kind of media storm will arise when the first person is murdered with one? I hope it's not a murder but justified shooting, like a home owner protecting his castle.

The poor guy will probably get sued because the "victim" didn't hear it coming...I just crack myself up sometimes.

[Artful]

Hmm, same kind of media storm when Florida, Arizona, and other states loosened concealed carry laws.
I still remember all the "shoot outs" in the streets that never happened - only thing I've seen more
of is mass shootings (usually by Muslims) where concealed carry holds can't carry.

[Walkingwolf]

Being against cans is like not being an NRA member. Might as well register as a Democrat.

Keep in mind that the NRA played a large hand in the writing, and supporting of the NFA, GCA, and GFSZA.