STeps to take to get a silencer/supressor?

[Romeosierra616]

The title pretty much says it all, I want to buy a silencer/suppressor for either my 1911A1 or my Glock 19, what are the steps I have to take to get one?(aside from buying it lol)

I was gonna put this into the equipment forum, but I think it fits better under laws.

any help/advice is greatly appreciated!

 

[drgrant]

In MA you have to be a federally licensed manufacturer (Full blown FFL/SOT) to even possess one. Have fun with that.

Barring that, you'll need to move out of MA or somehow (via a legal entity like a trust or corporation) own one outside of MA and keep it out of the state.

-Mike

 

[Boghog1]

step one move out of MA

 

[tictac]

If you live in MA, as your location indicates, then:

step one: move out of the state.

 

[Maclen]

It has been my understanding that Mass. is not a suppressor state.

 

[Romeosierra616]

Civilian ownership is not allowed in MA I understand, does Civilian count for anybody BUT FFL's?

 

[bill o]

Civilian ownership is not allowed in MA I understand, does Civilian count for anybody BUT FFL's?

Not sure what you're asking...?

 

[Romeosierra616]

If I'm a LEO does that mean anything to the state, or am I still not qualified? I'm gonna guess the answers no lol, but I'm still curious

 

[Boghog1]

last I knew police were civilians too

 

[PaulD]

If I'm a LEO............am I still not qualified?

Nothing personal, but I sure hope so.

 

[drgrant]

If I'm a LEO that doesn't mean anything to the state, I'm still not qualified? I'm gonna guess the answers no lol, but I'm still curious

Not as an individual officer purchase (non departmental, non duty use) hell no. If your PD buys it and issues it to you, then there is likely some exemption that provides for that, but there is no way you are flipping a badge and using that as a bypass.

In MA it's the following - Official LE, Official Military, and Federally licensed manufacturers. That's it.

-Mike

 

[bill o]

If I'm a LEO does that mean anything to the state, or am I still not qualified? I'm gonna guess the answers no lol, but I'm still curious

You're still not professional enough to privately own a suppressor.

 

[Romeosierra616]

Nothing personal, but I sure hope so.

You cut down my question to work better for you, interesting.

 

[bill o]

You cut down my question to work better for you, interesting.

I think he's just saying that the gun privileges of police shouldn't be better than us common folk.

 

[jasons]

Dude, those things shoot through schools.

 

[Romeosierra616]

Not as an individual officer purchase (non departmental, non duty use) hell no. If your PD buys it and issues it to you, then there is likely some exemption that provides for that, but there is no way you are flipping a badge and using that as a bypass.

In MA it's the following - Official LE, Official Military, and Federally licensed manufacturers. That's it.

-Mike

Seeing as how the odds of getting issued a suppressors non-existent I'll take that as a no haha,

 

[drgrant]

Actual law text:

C269 10A

Section 10A. Any person, other than a federally licensed firearms manufacturer, an authorized agent of the municipal police training committee, or a duly authorized sworn law enforcement officer while acting within the scope of official duties and under the direct authorization of the police chief or his designee, or the colonel of the state police, who sells or keeps for sale, or offers, or gives or disposes of by any means other than submitting to an authorized law enforcement agency, or uses or possesses any instrument, attachment, weapon or appliance for causing the firing of any gun, revolver, pistol or other firearm to be silent or intended to lessen or muffle the noise of the firing of any gun, revolver, pistol or other firearm shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years in state prison or for not more than two and one-half years in a jail or house of correction. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to prohibit a federally licensed firearms manufacturer from selling such instrument, attachment, weapon or appliance to authorized law enforcement agencies for law enforcement purposes or to the municipal police training committee for law enforcement training. Upon conviction of a violation of this section, the instrument, attachment or other article shall be confiscated by the commonwealth and forwarded, by the authority of the written order of the court, to the colonel of the state police, who shall destroy said article.

They don't mention the military, but it is pretty much implied that if it came down to it the Feds would tell the state to **** off and die if they ever whined about official use of suppressors in MA, as there is probably some federal preemption clause in federal law that makes MA's BS moot with regards to the armed forces.

-Mike

 

[Kevlar]

Mike's got it right. Here's the statute...

Any person, other than a federally licensed firearms manufacturer, an authorized agent of the municipal police training committee, or a duly authorized sworn law enforcement officer while acting within the scope of official duties and under the direct authorization of the police chief or his designee, or the colonel of the state police, who sells or keeps for sale, or offers, or gives or disposes of by any means other than submitting to an authorized law enforcement agency, or uses or possesses any instrument, attachment, weapon or appliance for causing the firing of any gun, revolver, pistol or other firearm to be silent or intended to lessen or muffle the noise of the firing of any gun, revolver, pistol or other firearm shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years in state prison or for not more than two and one-half years in a jail or house of correction. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to prohibit a federally licensed firearms manufacturer from selling such instrument, attachment, weapon or appliance to authorized law enforcement agencies for law enforcement purposes or to the municipal police training committee for law enforcement training. Upon conviction of a violation of this section, the instrument, attachment or other article shall be confiscated by the commonwealth and forwarded, by the authority of the written order of the court, to the colonel of the state police, who shall destroy said article.

http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter269/Section10A

ETA: dammit Mike, seconds, mere seconds.

 

[Romeosierra616]

I think he's just saying that the gun privileges of police shouldn't be better than us common folk.

I didn't mean to come off as being better than anybody, sorry if thats how it sounded

 

[Romeosierra616]

Dude, those things shoot through schools.

don't forget they're evil just like AR-15's and AK-47's, both of which have special devices to target elderly and children.

 

[PaulD]

You cut down my question to work better for you, interesting.

You had an 'or' and then a negation in your original statement. I did cut it down but I think it still had the same meaning. Restructuring your statement helped clarify my response. If I somehow lost some of the original meaning, I apologize.

Like Bill O said, I don't believe an individual who happens to be a police officer should be allowed to own something that a person with a different career can't.

 

[Romeosierra616]

We'll I mean, no offense, but there is a bit more Responsibility and Trust put on the shoulders of a LEO, compared to somebody who works in an office or at a Register or a Desk. You don't just "Happen" to be a Police Officer, it's not something you just wake up one day and become cause you feel like it. you have to achieve it, and you gotta bust your ass to actually become one. You ever had to handcuff somebody with pepper-spray in your eyes? it really, really sucks. and thats only training.

But I don't think that entitles me to a suppressor, I understand that if it's illegal for private ownership in the state, it's illegal for private ownership in the state.

but what I was trying to say was, a quote isn't really a quote when you edit it to fit your purpose more easily lol.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Like Bill O said, I don't believe an individual who happens to be a police officer should be allowed to own something that a person with a different career can't.

And EOPS agrees with you. Remember that unsigned/undated letter which basically says that officers MUST leave their issue mags (if hi-cap) at the PD at the end of each shift!!

Ludicrous, but that is what MA is all about these days.

So giving special privs to LEOs to buy/possess suppressors/silencers is just never going to happen in MA. Given a few more years of the lunatics running the asylum and LEOs will be lucky if they are still able to carry their badge/ID when off-duty!

 

[Romeosierra616]

Don't get me wrong, It may not be seem fair in some instances to trust a LEO over a Civilian, I agree, but personal opinions aside, The fact is, that in most instances, a LEO's word is taken over a civilians word. That's how our society is.

 

[Romeosierra616]

Given a few more years of the lunatics running the asylum and LEOs will be lucky if they are still able to carry their badge/ID when off-duty!

It's funny, cuz thers a joke somebody I know made that in a few years the force will be carry the same gear as Mall cops, flashlight and radios lol

 

[jasons]

Don't get me wrong, It may not be seem fair in some instances to trust a LEO over a Civilian, I agree, but personal opinions aside, The fact is, that in most instances, a LEO's word is taken over a civilians word. That's how our society is.

First rule of holes: When you're in one stop digging. Seriously.

 

[PixelPusher]

We'll I mean, no offense, but there is a bit more Responsibility and Trust put on the shoulders of a LEO

[SNIP]

Oh, really?

IBTL

 

[bill o]

Don't get me wrong, It may not be seem fair in some instances to trust a LEO over a Civilian, I agree, but personal opinions aside, The fact is, that in most instances, a LEO's word is taken over a civilians word. That's how our society is.

Are you being serious?

 

[Romeosierra616]

First rule of holes: When you're in one stop digging. Seriously.

Excuse me? I'm not in a hole.

I'm not saying I agree with it or like it, but who do courts tend to agree with in most situations?

A guy is accused of shooting somebody, a Officer says he saw the accused commit the crime, regardless of if he really did it, the general public and courts tend to favor and take the Officers word over the "Criminals".

Whatever your personal views are, thats how it tends to go down. thats what our society has come to see as acceptable and proper.

Again I'll say I don't agree, but thats what people have allowed to be come the norm.

 

[jasons]

Excuse me? I'm not in a hole.

I'm not saying I agree with it or like it, but who do courts tend to agree with in most situations?

A guy is accused of shooting somebody, a Officer says he saw the accused, regardless of if he really did it, the general public and courts tend to favor the Officers word.

Whatever your personal views are, thats how it tends to go down. thats what our society has come to see as acceptable and proper.

Again I'll say I don't agree, but thats what people have allowed to be come the norm.

Let me revise:

First rule of holes: Know when you're in a hole.
Second rule of holes: When you're in one, stop digging.