80% suppressors?

Yes, it can be legal to make a silencer. For everything Form-1, from silencer designs that are easily made, to filing forms with the BATF, to 3D modeling. Remember, you must have an approved BATF Form-1 to make a silencer. All NFA laws apply.

Moderators: mpallett, bakerjw

Iansstud
Silent Operator
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 1:20 pm
Location: Classified

80% suppressors?

Post by Iansstud » Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:16 pm

I have always wondered if someone could make 80% complete suppressor and sell them to people wanting a DIY form 1 suppressor.

Much like you can do with firearms... Would this be legal?

You could buy a tube with the ends threaded, and end caps, and a solid core that would fit in the core... after you get your form 1 stamp, You could then take a drill press to it and Presto Chango!!!!!!

ranb
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1996
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 6:53 pm
Location: WA, USA

Post by ranb » Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:30 pm

You could write a letter to the ATF and find out, but it would only be worth the paper with is printed on. The only sure way to find out is to do it and see if you indicted for manufacturing without a license. Not worth it in my opinion.

Ranb
SilencerTalk was a place I could disccuss making registered silencers without being told I was a criminal. That is no longer true. http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=132&t=99273

User avatar
PTK
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2161
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 12:36 am
Location: Bozeman, Montana

Post by PTK » Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:42 pm

Wouldn't fly. They took all of those off the market decades ago.

jim c 351
Member
Posts: 45
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 10:59 am
Location: ohio

Post by jim c 351 » Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:45 pm

I believe the ATF considers any one part of a suppressor as a violation, so possesion would be count 1 and dealing would be count 2.
Jim C

User avatar
YugoRPK
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 6289
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 3:56 am
Location: South Carolina

Post by YugoRPK » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:00 pm

intent

midcountygunshop
Silent Operator
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:52 pm
Location: Preston, MD

Post by midcountygunshop » Mon Feb 08, 2010 11:50 pm

Definitely won't fly on the threaded tube. I know that for sure. I out source my engraving for my cans to an engraver who doesn't hold a FFL. The tubes can't be trimmed to length or threaded when they go to him. Once any machining has been started on them, the ATF considers it a suppressor part and all restrictions apply. I did a bunch of checking into this to see what I could outsource on my cans, and the engraving on a raw steel tube is it.

dincote
Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 11:28 am

Post by dincote » Tue Feb 09, 2010 11:42 am


jim c 351
Member
Posts: 45
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 10:59 am
Location: ohio

Post by jim c 351 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 3:19 pm

dincote wrote:so what about this??

http://www.spikestactical.com/z/index.p ... cts_id=110


retrofitting.
I think that would be considered a barrel extension, which would be legal.
Flash hiders and muzzle breaks would also be legal.
Jim C

midcountygunshop
Silent Operator
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:52 pm
Location: Preston, MD

Post by midcountygunshop » Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:34 pm

dincote wrote:so what about this??

http://www.spikestactical.com/z/index.p ... cts_id=110


retrofitting.
Like other fake cans it is just a solid block of aluminum, which would serve no purpose in making a suppressor.

User avatar
dustingaunder
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 429
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 9:31 pm
Location: Where the wind sweeps down the plains.
Contact:

Post by dustingaunder » Wed Feb 10, 2010 6:20 pm

A tube that is threaded inside on each end and a handful of aluminum or steel cylinders that need finish machining and the hole bored to form an actual baffle?

ATF probably wouldn't like it but it is interesting.
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus

User avatar
LavaRed
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1830
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 8:11 pm
Location: CA

Post by LavaRed » Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:47 pm

dustingaunder wrote:A tube that is threaded inside on each end and a handful of aluminum or steel cylinders that need finish machining and the hole bored to form an actual baffle?

ATF probably wouldn't like it but it is interesting.
The trick would be for them to be produced only by an authorized class III manufacturer, and for them to only be sold to people who present their authorized copy of a form 1.
"There are no stupid questions, only stupid people". -MAJ MALFUNCTION

GlockBuyer
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:31 am

Post by GlockBuyer » Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:41 am

Once upon a time, the outer tube was the registered part - like a firearm reciever and you could buy baffles & kits & crap in Shotgun News - but as stated above - that don't fly anymore and all parts are restricted.

The question that must be asked to the entire industry is WHY isn't anyone working to change the NFA? Suppressors are safety devices in Europe. Even FRANCE allows suppressors sold without restrictions. NFA is a Tax collecting scheme - and the Government would benefit greatly if suppressors were treated like Title I firearms instead of Title II.

The firearms industry is unlike any other - in that all other industries constantly pressure the Government to deregulate and loosen laws that restrict business. The firearms industry does nothing offensive - only focusing on defensive responses to crazy legistlation and wimpy compromises (thank you very little NRA) for something based on a Constitutional Right. If the Government required a $200 tax and 4 month wait on books or a church service, the Country would revolt citing the 1st Amendment. Crap on the 2nd and no one cares.........

User avatar
YugoRPK
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 6289
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 3:56 am
Location: South Carolina

Post by YugoRPK » Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:19 am

GlockBuyer wrote:Once upon a time, the outer tube was the registered part - like a firearm reciever and you could buy baffles & kits & crap in Shotgun News - but as stated above - that don't fly anymore and all parts are restricted.

The question that must be asked to the entire industry is WHY isn't anyone working to change the NFA? Suppressors are safety devices in Europe. Even FRANCE allows suppressors sold without restrictions. NFA is a Tax collecting scheme - and the Government would benefit greatly if suppressors were treated like Title I firearms instead of Title II.

The firearms industry is unlike any other - in that all other industries constantly pressure the Government to deregulate and loosen laws that restrict business. The firearms industry does nothing offensive - only focusing on defensive responses to crazy legistlation and wimpy compromises (thank you very little NRA) for something based on a Constitutional Right. If the Government required a $200 tax and 4 month wait on books or a church service, the Country would revolt citing the 1st Amendment. Crap on the 2nd and no one cares.........
The NFA has never been a tax collecting scheme. When it began it was a slam dunk prohibition. $200 was a big chunk of change to anyone but the rich in 1934. There were no transfers and it shut the market down cold. Now the government probably pays more to maintain the NFA than they probably get from tax stamps. Its a money losing proposition. Changing the NFA cant result in good I'm afraid.
Putting the laughter in manslaughter

Calibur6918
Silent Operator
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 9:43 pm

Post by Calibur6918 » Wed Feb 17, 2010 2:00 am

what about a super long muzzle brake that could be sold as a muzzle brake. but fit a certain tubes ID for welding? kind of a mono-core without a tube.

LawBob
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 387
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:23 am

Post by LawBob » Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:38 pm

GlockBuyer wrote:Once upon a time, the outer tube was the registered part - like a firearm reciever and you could buy baffles & kits & crap in Shotgun News - but as stated above - that don't fly anymore and all parts are restricted.

The question that must be asked to the entire industry is WHY isn't anyone working to change the NFA? Suppressors are safety devices in Europe. Even FRANCE allows suppressors sold without restrictions. NFA is a Tax collecting scheme - and the Government would benefit greatly if suppressors were treated like Title I firearms instead of Title II.

The firearms industry is unlike any other - in that all other industries constantly pressure the Government to deregulate and loosen laws that restrict business. The firearms industry does nothing offensive - only focusing on defensive responses to crazy legistlation and wimpy compromises (thank you very little NRA) for something based on a Constitutional Right. If the Government required a $200 tax and 4 month wait on books or a church service, the Country would revolt citing the 1st Amendment. Crap on the 2nd and no one cares.........
no one wants to upset the apple card, dude. if we start bitching, the tax could go to $1000 per, etc.

User avatar
dustingaunder
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 429
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 9:31 pm
Location: Where the wind sweeps down the plains.
Contact:

Post by dustingaunder » Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:58 pm

LawBob wrote:
GlockBuyer wrote:Once upon a time, the outer tube was the registered part - like a firearm reciever and you could buy baffles & kits & crap in Shotgun News - but as stated above - that don't fly anymore and all parts are restricted.

The question that must be asked to the entire industry is WHY isn't anyone working to change the NFA? Suppressors are safety devices in Europe. Even FRANCE allows suppressors sold without restrictions. NFA is a Tax collecting scheme - and the Government would benefit greatly if suppressors were treated like Title I firearms instead of Title II.

The firearms industry is unlike any other - in that all other industries constantly pressure the Government to deregulate and loosen laws that restrict business. The firearms industry does nothing offensive - only focusing on defensive responses to crazy legistlation and wimpy compromises (thank you very little NRA) for something based on a Constitutional Right. If the Government required a $200 tax and 4 month wait on books or a church service, the Country would revolt citing the 1st Amendment. Crap on the 2nd and no one cares.........
no one wants to upset the apple card, dude. if we start bitching, the tax could go to $1000 per, etc.
Maybe if it did, the firearms industry would really push the supreme court on the constitutionality of the NFA.
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus

User avatar
3 weelin geezer
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 630
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:20 pm

Post by 3 weelin geezer » Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:53 am

YugoRPK wrote: Changing the NFA cant result in good I'm afraid.
Its funny how when a failed law gets enacted, there are many supporters that rally against it repeal. I beleive there would be much good if it was trashed. One could go buy a machine gun for a reasonable price again or at least what the government pays for them. For example, an m-16 type would run around $700 or so. Any increase in crime is unsupported as criminals don't get their guns at the store and leave a paper trail. Those come from the black market and the streets. They also do not worry about breaking any gun laws as that is the last thing that crosses their minds.

jlwilliams
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2076
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:15 am
Location: NC

Post by jlwilliams » Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:01 am

Unfinished silencers were all over Shotgun News and Firepower magazine in the '80s. Those were the days. The Feds have made it pretty clear that you just can't do that anymore.

If you'd like some sort of no paperwork- suppressor related business, write a book.

User avatar
3 weelin geezer
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 630
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:20 pm

Post by 3 weelin geezer » Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:01 am

GlockBuyer wrote:
The question that must be asked to the entire industry is WHY isn't anyone working to change the NFA? Suppressors are safety devices in Europe. Even FRANCE allows suppressors sold without restrictions. NFA is a Tax collecting scheme - and the Government would benefit greatly if suppressors were treated like Title I firearms instead of Title II.
Crap on the 2nd and no one cares.........
Lemme tell you why:

Someone claims that a new law will benefit the citizens. Hey, who doesn't want THAT? As more and more people hawk it and hawk it louder, the undecided or those near the pivot point, are swayed into beleiving it will be beneficial simply out of fear of becoming the minority. (You ever notice how polls have those that agree with their issue in BIG GREEN NUMBERS while the 'losers' are depicted in small red numbers ?) Even if it means giving up a right or freedom---in the name of security. Once its there, removing it is next to impossible (like a government bureau) which is the closest thing to eternal life you will see as no elected official wants to incur the anger of those paying his salary even if its the right thing to do.
Last edited by 3 weelin geezer on Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
YugoRPK
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 6289
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 3:56 am
Location: South Carolina

Post by YugoRPK » Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:03 am

3 weelin geezer wrote:
YugoRPK wrote: Changing the NFA cant result in good I'm afraid.
Its funny how when a failed law gets enacted, there are many supporters that rally against it repeal. I beleive there would be much good if it was trashed. One could go buy a machine gun for a reasonable price again or at least what the government pays for them. For example, an m-16 type would run around $700 or so. Any increase in crime is unsupported as criminals don't get their guns at the store and leave a paper trail. Those come from the black market and the streets. They also do not worry about breaking any gun laws as that is the last thing that crosses their minds.
I would argue that the NFA in and of itself is not a failed law. It was intended to STOP the sales of NFA specified devices by imposing a $200 tax on their transfer. In depression era 1934 that was a LOT of money. Now it probably does not cover the administrative costs of the program. I am not against requiring people who purchase machine guns and grenades and launchers and missiles and silencers...stuff like that ... to undergo a background check , fingerprinting etc. Pretty much what the NFA requires. As much as we would like to pretend that everyone is an upstanding citizen I like to err on the side of reality. A lot of people are scum. The NFA process does a lot of weeding out of people who shouldnt own go fast goodies. That being said its not the NFA law that is preventing you from building a new Machinegun or buying a new Machinegun. Its the 1986 FOPA signed into law by Ronald Reagan that stopped new machinegun productions and thats the law that is unconstitutional and needs to be repealed.
Putting the laughter in manslaughter

User avatar
3 weelin geezer
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 630
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:20 pm

Post by 3 weelin geezer » Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:15 am

Agreed thats where the idea that was sneaked in the FOPA came from. It came out of someone's fear that new guns = crime, crime, and more crime. It came from the idea that banning things will fix crime. The reality is that most are not scum. I would like to think I am not scum so I must disagree with you there. The few ruin it for the many. Take nice neighborhoods plastered in grafitti. Not everyone belongs to the gang doing the pimpin, drug dealin, killin and all that but it sure seems that way.

User avatar
YugoRPK
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 6289
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 3:56 am
Location: South Carolina

Post by YugoRPK » Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:39 am

3 weelin geezer wrote:Agreed thats where the idea that was sneaked in the FOPA came from. It came out of someone's fear that new guns = crime, crime, and more crime. It came from the idea that banning things will fix crime. The reality is that most are not scum. I would like to think I am not scum so I must disagree with you there. The few ruin it for the many. Take nice neighborhoods plastered in grafitti. Not everyone belongs to the gang doing the pimpin, drug dealin, killin and all that but it sure seems that way.

What are you disagreeing withe about. No one said you were scum. The whole background check process etc is to try to weed out those who are.
Putting the laughter in manslaughter

User avatar
silverbulletexpress
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 797
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 5:36 pm
Location: on the Buffalo

Post by silverbulletexpress » Thu Apr 29, 2010 3:34 pm

If you spend much time at a public shooting range.....well you may well see that not everyone in the gun culture has all four tires touching the ground.

My understanding of the NFA laws are that they came about because of the gangsters making so much use of the Thompson and the BAR. The tax stamp part came about when the govt wanted to ban marijuana, back then they respected the constitution a little more and didn't believe a ban would stand so they came up with a tax stamp scheme, they just didn't ever print any marijuana tax stamps effectively getting their ban. With the NFA they adapted the same tax stamp strategy only they did print out and sell tax stamps, I guess the Second Amendment had something to do with that decision. Then the slippery slope. This is just a synopsis of what I remember reading.
"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks." --Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, 1785

User avatar
DorikinGTSt
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 433
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 9:30 am
Contact:

Post by DorikinGTSt » Mon May 03, 2010 2:02 am

The closest you're gonna get is a golf ball launcher. 1.75 od 1.65 id threaded 1/2x28. Steel.

I've got a NIB NC Star launcher i'll sell to you for $20 shipped priority. I ordered 2 by mistake.

gvotuc
Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:49 pm

Post by gvotuc » Mon May 03, 2010 2:08 pm

jim c 351 wrote:I believe the ATF considers any one part of a suppressor as a violation, so possesion would be count 1 and dealing would be count 2.
Jim C
Lots of suppressor companies selling mounts by themselves. No stamp needed.

Post Reply