Legislative Alert - Sound Suppressor Bill Hearing July 14

dcmdon said:
Its not that bad. You register the tube. Then you can switch out end caps and baffle stacks.

If you google "solvent trap" you will find many many sources.

I frankly think this whole solvent trap is of dubious legality. But the risk is to the seller of these traps. If you buy it then immediately Form 1 it (and pay the tax) and engrave it, then you are 100% squeaky clean. Legally speaking you have made a solvent trap into a silencer. So you are good.

These DIY cans are also useful for testing muzzle threading and ammunition because if you have a baffle strike, you just replace the baffles and maybe the end cap with the exit aperture and you are good to go.

I know that in my testing of very heavy, very slow .300 blackout loads out of my 8" SBR, its dubious whether it will stabilize adequately to be used in a can. A home made $150+stamp can provides a low risk way to test things for someone who likes to tinker.
Click to expand...


The other advantage is that once you pay for the stamp on an adapter, you can build a can for every application whether it is one of the solvent trap, flashlight, or oil can.
 
dcmdon said:
What do you mean by adaptor?

Do you mean register the end cap that screws onto the muzzle? I'm not sure if that is or isn't acceptable.

Please explain.

Even if that is the case, and it is legal, it introduces one disadvantage. You are locked to one set of muzzle threads. If you register an adaptor, you can hang any can you want off of it. But you are locked to one set of threads.

If you register the tube, you can hang it on any firearm you want by changing end caps (adaptors). But you are locked into an external dimension for the can.

Don
Click to expand...
There's a wealth of info on this at the Silencertalk forum. Lots of posts re: solvent traps. Jack.
 
dcmdon said:
What do you mean by adaptor?

Do you mean register the end cap that screws onto the muzzle? I'm not sure if that is or isn't acceptable.

Please explain.

Even if that is the case, and it is legal, it introduces one disadvantage. You are locked to one set of muzzle threads. If you register an adaptor, you can hang any can you want off of it. But you are locked to one set of threads.

If you register the tube, you can hang it on any firearm you want by changing end caps (adaptors). But you are locked into an external dimension for the can.

Don
Click to expand...


Yes, there are serialized adapters that thread onto the muzzle. You register that serialized part as the suppressor then would put whatever tube you need on it.

ETA: e.g. https://cadizgunworks.com/store/index.php?route=product/category&path=20_26_69
 
Last edited:
Individualist said:
This is great news. Fingers crossed. Is it just a straight up vote or is there testimony regarding medical research or endorsements from professional and organizations? I'm thinking AMA, Hearing Loss Assoc, Amer Hearing Research Assoc, or youth organizations that have shooting sports like Boy Scouts of America, YMCA, etc.
Click to expand...

I gave some expert testimony , along with ASA, and local manufacturers to the subcommittee. They were all recorded, so likely they are on record with the bill. There could be another call for testimony , but I have no idea at this stage.
 
dcmdon said:
Its not that bad. You register the tube. Then you can switch out end caps and baffle stacks.

If you google "solvent trap" you will find many many sources.

I frankly think this whole solvent trap is of dubious legality. But the risk is to the seller of these traps. If you buy it then immediately Form 1 it (and pay the tax) and engrave it, then you are 100% squeaky clean. Legally speaking you have made a solvent trap into a silencer. So you are good.

These DIY cans are also useful for testing muzzle threading and ammunition because if you have a baffle strike, you just replace the baffles and maybe the end cap with the exit aperture and you are good to go.

I know that in my testing of very heavy, very slow .300 blackout loads out of my 8" SBR, its dubious whether it will stabilize adequately to be used in a can. A home made $150+stamp can provides a low risk way to test things for someone who likes to tinker.
Click to expand...

You should definitely do some research before you try this or tell other folks it's ok because it is 100% inaccurate. You may not replace end caps or any of the internal parts yourself even if you built it yourself on a form 1. The tube is the serialized part but each individual part that makes up your registered homemade suppressor may not be replaced by yourself legally unless you file another form 1. You may send it to a class 3 manufacturer and they can fabricate a new baffle stack for you. You also can't switch out the end caps for different threaded firearms yourself. Yes it's legal on some commercially available supressors but they have special approval from the ATF to classify the mount or end cap as an accessory
 
squirrel slayer said:
You should definitely do some research before you try this or tell other folks it's ok because it is 100% inaccurate. You may not replace end caps or any of the internal parts yourself even if you built it yourself on a form 1. The tube is the serialized part but each individual part that makes up your registered homemade suppressor may not be replaced by yourself legally unless you file another form 1. You may send it to a class 3 manufacturer and they can fabricate a new baffle stack for you. You also can't switch out the end caps for different threaded firearms yourself. Yes it's legal on some commercially available supressors but they have special approval from the ATF to classify the mount or end cap as an accessory
Click to expand...
This. Finally! Jack.
 
squirrel slayer said:
You should definitely do some research before you try this or tell other folks it's ok because it is 100% inaccurate. You may not replace end caps or any of the internal parts yourself even if you built it yourself on a form 1. The tube is the serialized part but each individual part that makes up your registered homemade suppressor may not be replaced by yourself legally unless you file another form 1. You may send it to a class 3 manufacturer and they can fabricate a new baffle stack for you. You also can't switch out the end caps for different threaded firearms yourself. Yes it's legal on some commercially available supressors but they have special approval from the ATF to classify the mount or end cap as an accessory
Click to expand...

^I second this... I also design cans for a living.
 
squirrel slayer said:
You should definitely do some research before you try this or tell other folks it's ok because it is 100% inaccurate. You may not replace end caps or any of the internal parts yourself even if you built it yourself on a form 1. The tube is the serialized part but each individual part that makes up your registered homemade suppressor may not be replaced by yourself legally unless you file another form 1. You may send it to a class 3 manufacturer and they can fabricate a new baffle stack for you. You also can't switch out the end caps for different threaded firearms yourself. Yes it's legal on some commercially available supressors but they have special approval from the ATF to classify the mount or end cap as an accessory
Click to expand...


You mean don't do it and post about it on the interweb or Al Gore will catch you. right?
 
What about the disposable "suppressors", such as oil filters? I'd think you could just register the adapter, right? That in itself is ridiculous, and hopefully all this registration would just end soon.
 
I've not paid any attention to the suppressor regs prior to this, never thought I'd need to know until I got out of MA. Now that there's some movement on this, I started reading. It all seems so familiar to an MA gun owner: an almost incomprehensible mess caused by overregulating the innocuous.

More reading to go.....in case I end up in free America.
 
KMM696 said:
I've not paid any attention to the suppressor regs prior to this, never thought I'd need to know until I got out of MA. Now that there's some movement on this, I started reading. It all seems so familiar to an MA gun owner: an almost incomprehensible mess caused by overregulating the innocuous.

More reading to go.....in case I end up in free America.
Click to expand...
Give this a listen, it will save you some reading.
http://goalpodcast.libsyn.com/the-p...an-suppressor-association#3vkYVIvK85hI9XU2.99
 
I deleted my post. I apologize. Thanks for calling me out. I did not believe that if a non-licensee replaced a baffle stack in a registered silencer that they built, it required a new stamp. I know that as an 07/Class 2 that is not necessary.

Re end caps. There was a huge uproar 7 or 8 years ago when the ATF arbitrarily decreed that the swappable end caps on a YHM Cobra II were silencers in their own right if YHM sold you more than one when you purchased the can. But here we see lately that convertible silencers are all the rage these days.

Liberty has the mystic.

Silencerco has launched several cans in the last year that allow you to replace the end caps. (Omega, Harvester, and OmegaK. Especially the Hybrid)

How does the ATF justify this discrepancy?
 
Last edited:
Stupidity?
The ATF has never been intelligent enough to remain consistent: The organization is too political.
 
dcmdon said:
I deleted my post. I apologize. Thanks for calling me out. I did not believe that if a non-licensee replaced a baffle stack in a registered silencer that they built, it required a new stamp. I know that as an 07/Class 2 that is not necessary.

Re end caps. There was a huge uproar 7 or 8 years ago when the ATF arbitrarily decreed that the swappable end caps on a YHM Cobra II were silencers in their own right if YHM sold you more than one when you purchased the can. But here we see lately that convertible silencers are all the rage these days.

Liberty has the mystic.

Silencerco has launched several cans in the last year that allow you to replace the end caps. (Omega, Harvester, and OmegaK. Especially the Hybrid)

How does the ATF justify this discrepancy?
Click to expand...

I did not say that to call you out as a dummy or anything like that. Just wanted to put it out there so you or nobody else had the wrong idea. Lots of convoluted ins and out with the ATF and their rulings. It's my understanding the manufacturers submit their plans and get an approval on a design with the atf. I am also surprised they can provide end caps of different sizes for different calipers and different mounts for cans like the Gemtech multimount.
 
Len-2A Training said:
From discussions with my state rep over prior bills, all bills have to go thru the Ways & Means Committee after release from their original committee. It's to evaluate the $$ impact to the state, required before a floor vote. So that is likely where this bill is now headed (along with the NR LTC bill).
Click to expand...

That's supported by what I see here:
https://trackbill.com/bill/ma-s1271...rv6AMQ.2&utm_referrer=https://www.google.com/

"On March 14, 2016 in the Senate:
  • Bill reported favorably by committee and referred to the committee on Senate Ways and Means
"

Also, can see it here on the Bills in Committee tab for the Ways and Means committee:
https://malegislature.gov/Committees/Senate/S30?generalCourtNumber=189
"S.1271An Act Relative to Suppressors "


Is it time to start contacting these fine folks?

Karen E. Spilka - Chair
Sal N. DiDomenico - Vice Chair
Patricia D. Jehlen - Assistant Vice Chair

William N. Brownsberger
Sonia Chang-Diaz
Kenneth J. Donnelly
Eileen M. Donoghue
Benjamin B. Downing
John F. Keenan
Thomas M. McGee
Michael O. Moore
Michael F. Rush
James E. Timilty
Kathleen O'Connor Ives
Joan B. Lovely
Viriato M. deMacedo
Richard J. Ross
Donald F. Humason, Jr.
 
Last edited:
bigblue said:
" NR LTC bill" ?
Click to expand...

knfmn said:
I don't remember the bills number off the top of my head, but the NR LTC bill would increase the length of time that NR LTC's are valid from one year to six, like resident LTC's.
Click to expand...

DarthRevan said:
One can dream.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Non-sequitur.

Take it to its own thread.[offtopic]

Is this one dead? I thought I read on here there was a date a few weeks ago that this stuff was all ending, even though it usually does not end until July or August time frame.
 
Coyote33 said:
Non-sequitur.

Take it to its own thread.[offtopic]

Is this one dead? I thought I read on here there was a date a few weeks ago that this stuff was all ending, even though it usually does not end until July or August time frame.
Click to expand...
It is far from dead, it is currently at senate ways and means. stay tuned
 
Rekonn said:
About a month has gone by, any updates? Anything we can do to help things along?
Click to expand...


According to https://malegislature.gov/Bills/189/House/H1305:

On May 2, the Bill (H. 1305) had its reporting date extended to Wednesday June 1, 2016, pending concurrence. The Senate concurred that same day.

Unsure on how follks can help move this along, but it seems a call / email to the Judiciary Committee wouldn't hurt.
 
VTHunter said:
According to https://malegislature.gov/Bills/189/House/H1305:

On May 2, the Bill (H. 1305) had its reporting date extended to Wednesday June 1, 2016, pending concurrence. The Senate concurred that same day.

Unsure on how follks can help move this along, but it seems a call / email to the Judiciary Committee wouldn't hurt.
Click to expand...


Does this mean it is dying in committee or is moving along through the mechanations of the MA legislature?
 
DarthRevan said:
I've been hearing that there have been some laws regarding use of suppressors being passed, I don't have the citation on it but it sounds very promising.
Click to expand...

There are 2 bills here in MA but I haven't heard anything about any of them passing here. Other states yes but not here.
 

Similar threads

MagLite suppressor
Replies
5
Views
202
pcgod
P
Libs sound reasonable about guns.
Replies
13
Views
622
Dench
Dench
GOAL ALERT – Legislative Hearing
Replies
9
Views
930
MainelyFree
MainelyFree
Amber Alert Chicopee
2
Replies
42
Views
853
Garys
Garys
3 House Democrats file bill to ban 50 caliber rifles
2
Replies
33
Views
737
40 Creedmoor fan
4
Back
Top Bottom