PDA

View Full Version : Suppressors legal in CA?


flatovercrest
12-23-2008, 12:59 PM
Hi,
If legal, I'd like to install a sound suppressor on my 9mm for home defense use. There is a vendor online that sells threaded barrells for my Beretta.
Are sound suppressors legal in CA and are they easy to find/purchase?
Thanks.

uzigalil
12-23-2008, 1:03 PM
Have you called the DOJ ? im sure they'll educate you on threaded handgun barrels and suppressors.

nrakid88
12-23-2008, 1:03 PM
They are not legal, just having that threaded barrel on your berretta makes it, by california law, an "Assault Weapon".
Sorry

flatovercrest
12-23-2008, 1:04 PM
ok, thanks guys.

flatovercrest
12-23-2008, 1:10 PM
Have you called the DOJ ?

no, I ask on Calguns when I have a question... :D

jmc45
12-23-2008, 2:00 PM
follow up questions:
I've read you can own a threaded barrel that is NOT installed on a pistol (for use when out of state). Is that true? Can you also own a suppressor that is NOT installed on a pistol?

bwiese
12-23-2008, 2:11 PM
follow up questions:
I've read you can own a threaded barrel that is NOT installed on a pistol (for use when out of state). Is that true? Can you also own a suppressor that is NOT installed on a pistol?

1.) You may own a separated non-attached threaded bbl. Despite lack of constructive possession, I'd advise keeping them a bit separated and perhaps locking them separately when you travel out of state.

2.) A suppressor is that device whether or not it's attached to a gun. Normal souls can't legally get one in CA, and can't get a tax stamp from to even start the process. I'd advise not even having a few parts to build one (i.e, wipes, etc.)

I've heard rumors that some 'fake suppressors' may not be too fake, so I'd not own one unless it were a solid chunk of metal just bored out for bullet passage. And I take a dim view of fake 'cans' anyway: all they do is add weight to end of bbl that could be better spent by using a longer bbl w/rifling to get velocity - and it adds one more layer of complexity/ explanation on an OLL if in a traffic stop situation.

ke6guj
12-23-2008, 2:12 PM
follow up questions:
I've read you can own a threaded barrel that is NOT installed on a pistol (for use when out of state). Is that true?
yes, there is no constructive possession laws for AWs.

Can you also own a suppressor that is NOT installed on a pistol?No.

Jonathan Doe
12-23-2008, 2:19 PM
Check section 12500 of Cal. Penal code for the definition and 12520 for the penalty. 12520 PC says it is a felony to possess the silencer. I wouldn't do it.

howiesatwork
12-23-2008, 6:13 PM
On guns, no silencers.
On cars, motorcycles, lawnmowers, and sometimes people - yes.

Spyder
12-23-2008, 7:30 PM
Should be more often on some people...

eccvets
12-23-2008, 8:36 PM
dont buy any unless you like getting reamed in the butt cuz your going to jail if you do!

stormy_clothing
12-23-2008, 8:56 PM
dont buy any unless you like getting reamed in the butt cuz your going to jail if you do!

lets not insinuate that it's even possible to illegally purchase one anyway. too many fake facts for obamathon to attach on to as it is.

dodgerfan175
12-24-2008, 2:38 PM
I believe that only Type 01 FFLs can own suppressors in CA. Last time I checked.

csmintel
12-24-2008, 2:46 PM
On guns, no silencers.
On cars, motorcycles, lawnmowers, and sometimes people - yes.

there is no such thing as silencers. you can't effectively silence the weapon. you can effectively suppress it. therefore there are suppressors however.

Shane916
12-24-2008, 3:30 PM
Personally I see the suppressor as a poor choice for home defense use.

It would add a significant amount of length and muzzle weight to the handgun.

dodgerfan175
12-24-2008, 3:34 PM
Personally I see the suppressor as a poor choice for home defense use.

It would add a significant amount of length and muzzle weight to the handgun.

I agree, however I do see how it could be of benefit to precision rifle shooters.

Shane916
12-24-2008, 3:35 PM
I agree, however I do see how it could be of benefit to precision rifle shooters.

I fully agree with you on that. :)

dfxjedi
12-24-2008, 11:13 PM
On guns, no silencers.
On cars, motorcycles, lawnmowers, and sometimes people - yes.

Most of the time just for people.I've never heard a car exhast that was too loud(with the exception of race cars),I agree with you about the motorcycles though,around here they're always louder than cars.

You gotta be kidding about lawn mowers though,they're never too loud unless your right next to one.

freakshow10mm
12-24-2008, 11:26 PM
Take the muffler off of your lawnmower once. It's very loud. Even with a muffler you should still wear hearing protection with a lawnmower as over time you will develop hearing damage.

gunrun45
12-25-2008, 12:00 AM
Take the muffler off of your lawnmower once. It's very loud. Even with a muffler you should still wear hearing protection with a lawnmower as over time you will develop hearing damage.

+10000.

Max-the-Silent
12-25-2008, 8:19 AM
Hi,
If legal, I'd like to install a sound suppressor on my 9mm for home defense use. There is a vendor online that sells threaded barrells for my Beretta.
Are sound suppressors legal in CA and are they easy to find/purchase?
Thanks.

NFA weapons and devices used for defense, home or otherwise, is a legal mess best avoided.

For all intents and purposes, you'll never get the state permit, which means you won't get the tax stamp, so spend your money on Thunder Ranch and practice ammo instead.

Miltiades
12-25-2008, 11:15 AM
I find it ironic that in California you cannot legally operate an automobile without a functional muffler, but cannot legally operate a firearm with a functional sound suppressor.

gunrun45
12-25-2008, 6:16 PM
I find it ironic that in California you cannot legally operate an automobile without a functional muffler, but cannot legally operate a firearm with a functional sound suppressor.

That't liberal politics for you at its best :rolleyes:

freakshow10mm
12-25-2008, 9:47 PM
31 out of 50 states allow suppressors to be owned and used by individuals. There are 3-4 states that only allow SOTs to possess them (MI is one of them). It isn't just California; them and 18 more.

gunrun45
12-25-2008, 11:21 PM
I think its funny that if you go to some european countires they think it rude to fire your gun WITHOUT a sound supressor but in the US its considered outside the norm to even want an supressor...

freakshow10mm
12-26-2008, 7:29 AM
Like Finland. Their government encourages you to use suppressors.

goathead
12-26-2008, 8:54 PM
me i would want the noise so everyone can hear me shooting, they can call for help if i can make it to the phone someone will hear the shots and call for the backup

mattmcg
08-08-2009, 10:53 PM
Rifle suppressors should be legal in CA and it is only through ignorance in our capital that we are where we are currently. Rifle suppressors are a very useful addition to any long gun, especially bolt actions and it offers no additional risk to the public to allow common citizens to own these devices.......

When I've been out of state, I shoot a buddy's bolt action rifle with suppressor and it is a pleasure to shoot. After returning to a range here, it is even more painful to shoot next to someone with a muzzle brake knowing how it is in the majority of other states.....

Bigballaizm
08-09-2009, 9:04 AM
Rifle suppressors should be legal in CA and it is only through ignorance in our capital that we are where we are currently. Rifle suppressors are a very useful addition to any long gun, especially bolt actions and it offers no additional risk to the public to allow common citizens to own these devices.......

When I've been out of state, I shoot a buddy's bolt action rifle with suppressor and it is a pleasure to shoot. After returning to a range here, it is even more painful to shoot next to someone with a muzzle brake knowing how it is in the majority of other states.....

:thumbsup:

erik18
08-09-2009, 9:12 AM
From what I have heard, suppressors are illegal because they change the markings on the bullet that the barrel makes, thus making it harder for LE to ID what firearm fired a round if used in a crime.

trapshot68
08-09-2009, 9:16 AM
^^^^^^^^say what?????????????????? FUD

J-cat
08-09-2009, 10:10 AM
Not FUD at all. If there is even the slightest hint of misalignment between the bore and the supressor, the bullet will assume machine marks from whatever it rubs-up against.

Linburger
08-09-2009, 10:14 AM
I always thought suppressors were illegal because you could potentially shoot people without being noticed. i.e. I just watched a movie where the bad guys covertly took out the guards point blank without drawing any attention by using suppressed pistols.

B Strong
08-09-2009, 10:19 AM
1.) You may own a separated non-attached threaded bbl. Despite lack of constructive possession, I'd advise keeping them a bit separated and perhaps locking them separately when you travel out of state.

2.) A suppressor is that device whether or not it's attached to a gun. Normal souls can't legally get one in CA, and can't get a tax stamp from to even start the process. I'd advise not even having a few parts to build one (i.e, wipes, etc.)
I've heard rumors that some 'fake suppressors' may not be too fake, so I'd not own one unless it were a solid chunk of metal just bored out for bullet passage. And I take a dim view of fake 'cans' anyway: all they do is add weight to end of bbl that could be better spent by using a longer bbl w/rifling to get velocity - and it adds one more layer of complexity/ explanation on an OLL if in a traffic stop situation.

Bill, since FOPA '86 a single suppressor part is considered an NFA weapon or device into and of itself -one wipe w/o a tax stamp would be the same as an unregistered can.

B Strong
08-09-2009, 10:21 AM
I always thought suppressors were illegal because you could potentially shoot people without being noticed. i.e. I just watched a movie where the bad guys covertly took out the guards point blank without drawing any attention by using suppressed pistols.

Hollywood nonsense.

Even the best cans make noise, like The door of a Mercedes being shut.

Suppressors are scary to the people in charge, that is the sole reason that they are controlled items.

J-cat
08-09-2009, 10:28 AM
If you sew two pillows together...

dchang0
08-09-2009, 12:36 PM
Personally I see the suppressor as a poor choice for home defense use.

It would add a significant amount of length and muzzle weight to the handgun.

Yeah, but saving your hearing is a big plus. Not that a suppressor reduces the indoor blast enough to not cause hearing loss, but it's a lot better than no suppression.

J-cat
08-09-2009, 12:38 PM
Plus you could just throw the burglar into the dumpster and go back to sleep.

dchang0
08-09-2009, 12:44 PM
I always thought suppressors were illegal because you could potentially shoot people without being noticed. i.e. I just watched a movie where the bad guys covertly took out the guards point blank without drawing any attention by using suppressed pistols.

Hollywood is the single biggest threat to gun freedoms in the USA, and not because most of them are liberal gun control freaks.

It's because they spread extreme misinformation about guns to billions of viewers worldwide, most of whom are so gun-ignorant that they believe whatever they see.

At the very least, even if the movie directors portray guns accurately, they are causing serious problems by romanticizing the use of guns, such as making full-auto fire look super-scary and ridiculously common (ask real military and LEOs how often full-auto is actually used or useful, and they'll tell you "very rarely") or showing characters with inhuman accuracy.

Lifeofahero
08-09-2009, 7:40 PM
It's because they spread extreme misinformation about guns to billions of viewers worldwide, most of whom are so gun-ignorant that they believe whatever they see.

OR HEAR!!! "CHANGE!"

sigfan91
08-10-2009, 12:54 AM
Is there anything against putting a "loudener" on a pistol? Or any gun? :p

bondmid003
08-10-2009, 8:33 AM
Hollywood is the single biggest threat to gun freedoms in the USA, and not because most of them are liberal gun control freaks.

It's because they spread extreme misinformation about guns to billions of viewers worldwide, most of whom are so gun-ignorant that they believe whatever they see.

At the very least, even if the movie directors portray guns accurately, they are causing serious problems by romanticizing the use of guns, such as making full-auto fire look super-scary and ridiculously common (ask real military and LEOs how often full-auto is actually used or useful, and they'll tell you "very rarely") or showing characters with inhuman accuracy.

The only guns that the Marines generally allow to be operated at full auto are the M249 and the M240G. Its not tactically sound nor ammo efficient to run an M4 on auto or M16A4 on three round burst.

Edited because I can't speak for the Army

M47_Dragon
08-10-2009, 8:48 AM
The only guns that the military generally allows to be operated at full auto are the M249 and the M240G.

Um, I think there are a few more.

paratroop
08-10-2009, 9:12 AM
The only guns that the military generally allows to be operated at full auto are the M249 and the M240G. Its not tactically sound nor ammo efficient to run an M4 on auto or M16A4 on three round burst.

too many video games bud. anyway, suppressors would be cool, but i think i would probably just get into trouble with one. sometimes there are just some darn noisy crows on the telephone wires outside my room on a saturday morning after a long night of binge drinking.

B Strong
08-10-2009, 11:38 AM
too many video games bud. anyway, suppressors would be cool, but i think i would probably just get into trouble with one. sometimes there are just some darn noisy crows on the telephone wires outside my room on a saturday morning after a long night of binge drinking.

Binge drinking and any type of firearms don't mix.

B Strong
08-10-2009, 11:41 AM
The only guns that the military generally allows to be operated at full auto are the M249 and the M240G. Its not tactically sound nor ammo efficient to run an M4 on auto or M16A4 on three round burst.

Since both the SAW and the 240 are full-auto only...

Turbinator
08-12-2009, 5:53 PM
I always thought suppressors were illegal because you could potentially shoot people without being noticed. i.e. I just watched a movie where the bad guys covertly took out the guards point blank without drawing any attention by using suppressed pistols.

I actually believe the original regulation for suppressors came about to stop poaching.

Anyone alive and buying guns during the original NFA 1934 to verify this? :)

Turby

andrewj
08-12-2009, 6:06 PM
Plus you could just throw the burglar into the dumpster and go back to sleep.

:rofl2:

Is there anything against putting a "loudener" on a pistol? Or any gun? :p

xIpLd0WQKCY

bondmid003
08-13-2009, 1:46 PM
too many video games bud. anyway, suppressors would be cool, but i think i would probably just get into trouble with one. sometimes there are just some darn noisy crows on the telephone wires outside my room on a saturday morning after a long night of binge drinking.

Ok I'm not speaking for the Army so I edited my post, but as a Marine officer this is coming from my experience, not video games. Nice try though pal

B Strong, that was my point....

paco ramirez
08-13-2009, 11:36 PM
I actually believe the original regulation for suppressors came about to stop poaching.

Anyone alive and buying guns during the original NFA 1934 to verify this? :)

Turby

True, silencers were regulated because of poaching.

there is no such thing as silencers. you can't effectively silence the weapon. you can effectively suppress it. therefore there are suppressors however.

Yes, there are such things as silencers. All suppressors are silencers.

bondmid003
08-13-2009, 11:49 PM
paco, I think he was referring to the fact that even 'silenced' pistols still make a noise. A pretty distinct one in fact

paco ramirez
08-13-2009, 11:57 PM
I know, but saying that there's no such thing as a silencer is kind of an ignorant comment to make. Maxim named his invention "silencer". You can't argue that they aren't properly called silencers. Between the two words, there's no difference between the level of sound loss they mean.

cmaynes
11-30-2009, 1:16 AM
Not FUD at all. If there is even the slightest hint of misalignment between the bore and the supressor, the bullet will assume machine marks from whatever it rubs-up against.

if the projectile is touching the suppressor it will ultimately damage it. That is not a typical design feature in most current products.

lunde
11-30-2009, 3:57 PM
Sort of getting back on topic, I would like to take this opportunity to point out that California residents can legally own a suppressor, but it must be kept out-of-state. I legally own two suppressors, for .223 and .22LR, and keep them out-of-state in accordance with ATF regulations. I became the legal owner of the .223 one before I moved to California, and became the legal owner of the .22LR one after I moved to California. Both are on Form 4s, and have CLEO signatures on the second page of the form. In other words, I didn't go the "trust" route.

paco ramirez
11-30-2009, 4:01 PM
Sort of getting back on topic, I would like to take this opportunity to point out that California residents can legally own a suppressor, but it must be kept out-of-state. I legally own two suppressors, for .223 and .22LR, and keep them out-of-state in accordance with ATF regulations. I became the legal owner of the .223 one before I moved to California, and became the legal owner of the .22LR one after I moved to California. Both are on Form 4s, and have CLEO signatures on the second page of the form. In other words, I didn't go the "trust" route.

How did you manage that and what CLEO signed off on it?

stix213
11-30-2009, 4:05 PM
there is no such thing as silencers. you can't effectively silence the weapon. you can effectively suppress it. therefore there are suppressors however.

The legal term used in California law when referring to suppressors is "Silencer." You aren't helping when someone asks a legal question to claim that the legal term used isn't what they are called.

http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/12500.php

Edit: ehh I just noticed I was replying to a several month old post... I'm assuming he isn't going to read my response

lunde
11-30-2009, 4:14 PM
paco ramirez, you wrote:How did you manage that and what CLEO signed off on it?The front of my Form 4 has my California address. The CLEO of the area where the suppressor is kept (out-of-state) signed it. Of course, I consulted with the NFA branch of the ATF when I did all of this. My Form 4 includes an attachment that states the physical address where the suppressor is kept. It is an attachment, because the Form 4 does not have a way to specify both addresses (the physical address of the owner, and the physical address of the NFA weapon).

Turbinator
11-30-2009, 5:24 PM
Ken, for your 2nd purchase, I presume the lesson here is that as a CA resident you were still able to purchase a suppressor - so you don't necessarily have to be a resident in another friendly state to be eligible to purchase, eh?

Turby

lunde
11-30-2009, 5:29 PM
Turbinator, you wrote:Ken, for your 2nd purchase, I presume the lesson here is that as a CA resident you were still able to purchase a suppressor - so you don't necessarily have to be a resident in another friendly state to be eligible to purchase, eh?Correct.

justin_5585
11-30-2009, 6:14 PM
Turbinator, you wrote:Correct.

So did you have to have a residence in said state to purchase it, or could you just leave it there with friends / family? Also, does anyone know how a legally owned / federally authorized silencer works should you move to California from a free state? Is there no way to bring it with you, it has to stay in the other state or be sold?

lunde
11-30-2009, 6:58 PM
justin_5585, you wrote:So did you have to have a residence in said state to purchase it, or could you just leave it there with friends / family? Also, does anyone know how a legally owned / federally authorized silencer works should you move to California from a free state? Is there no way to bring it with you, it has to stay in the other state or be sold?Put simply, the residency requirement that we know and love when it comes to handguns does not apply to NFA weapons.

The ATF allows NFA weapon owners to keep their weapons out-of-state (meaning in a state other than their state of residence) if their state of residence does not permit NFA ownership. If this is done, they must be secured, and only the legal owner can have access to the NFA weapons. This means that the combination or key to the lock cannot be provided to others.

The only NFA weapon that can be possessed in California without any sort of California DOJ permit is AOW (Any Other Weapon), except for pen guns. See California Penal Code 12020(b)(8) for details. Machine guns and short-barreled rifles/shotguns require a California DOJ permit, and your chance of getting said permit is somewhere between zero and none. Suppressor ownership is even more strict, because there is not even a permit for that, ignoring the fact that your chance of getting a permit would be zero.

paco ramirez
12-01-2009, 4:30 AM
The front of my Form 4 has my California address. The CLEO of the area where the suppressor is kept (out-of-state) signed it. Of course, I consulted with the NFA branch of the ATF when I did all of this. My Form 4 includes an attachment that states the physical address where the suppressor is kept. It is an attachment, because the Form 4 does not have a way to specify both addresses (the physical address of the owner, and the physical address of the NFA weapon).

Thanks for the info. Is this attachment available from the ATF or is it something you formatted up yourself? Is it possible to see a copy of the Form 4 and attachment?

lunde
12-01-2009, 5:53 AM
paco ramirez, you wrote:Thanks for the info.My pleasure. I am just doing my part to make the world a safer place, one weapon at a time. ;)
Is this attachment available from the ATF or is it something you formatted up yourself? Is it possible to see a copy of the Form 4 and attachment?The Form 4 is available on the ATF website, and its full designation is ATF Form 5320.4. See: http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-5320-4.pdf

There is nothing special about the two sides of my Form 4. Section 2a has my residence address in California, and Section 2b has the county that corresponds to the address in Section 2a. Section 17 was filled out and signed by the CLEO of the area where the NFA weapon is being kept. In the case of my .22LR suppressor, it was filled out and signed by the Sheriff of county of the state where it is being kept. Of course, CLEOs do not automatically sign Section 17 of Form 4s, so you need to make contact, and then present yourself well.

There is no prescribed format for the attachment if the address for where the NFA weapon is being stored is different (as in a different state), but the following is what I used:
Attachment to ATF Form 4 (5320.4) for <full name here>
Weapon Serial Number: <NFA serial number here>

The firearm being transferred by this Form 4 shall be stored at the physical address below, in accordance with ATF regulations:

<physical address here>
<city, county, state, and zip code here>
<and for good measure, a phone number>That's it. Each page of the Form 4, including any attachments and their reverse sides if they have printing, is stamped by the ATF with a unique number (mine is two letters followed by five digits), so my attachment is considered a permanent part of this Form 4.

Also, whenever you move an NFA weapon across state lines, whether temporary or permanently, you need to file ATF Form 5320.20. This is required for machine guns, but optional for AOWs, short-barreled rifles/shotguns, and suppressors. If the move is permanent, it is strongly advised that you file this form for any NFA weapon. See: http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-5320-20.pdf

I filed an ATF Form 5320.20 twice. The first time was about five years ago when I had to move my NFA weapons from Wisconsin (where I first acquired them) to another state. I filed one for the second time earlier this year, before I brought my (non-pen gun) AOW to California.

Lastly, I keep all of the original Form 4s here in California. What I keep with the out-of-state NFA weapons are copies of the Form 4s.

paco ramirez
12-01-2009, 6:22 AM
My pleasure. I am just doing my part to make the world a safer place, one weapon at a time. ;)
The Form 4 is available on the ATF website, and its full designation is ATF Form 5320.4. See: http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-5320-4.pdf

There is nothing special about the two sides of my Form 4. Section 2a has my residence address in California, and Section 2b has the county that corresponds to the address in Section 2a. Section 17 was filled out and signed by the CLEO of the area where the NFA weapon is being kept. In the case of my .22LR suppressor, it was filled out and signed by the Sheriff of county of the state where it is being kept. Of course, CLEOs do not automatically sign Section 17 of Form 4s, so you need to make contact, and then present yourself well.

There is no prescribed format for the attachment if the address for where the NFA weapon is being stored is different (as in a different state), but the following is what I used:
That's it. Each page of the Form 4, including any attachments and their reverse sides if they have printing, is stamped by the ATF with a unique number (mine is two letters followed by five digits), so my attachment is considered a permanent part of this Form 4.

Also, whenever you move an NFA weapon across state lines, whether temporary or permanently, you need to file ATF Form 5320.20. This is required for machine guns, but optional for AOWs, short-barreled rifles/shotguns, and suppressors. If the move is permanent, it is strongly advised that you file this form for any NFA weapon. See: http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-5320-20.pdf

I filed an ATF Form 5320.20 twice. The first time was about five years ago when I had to move my NFA weapons from Wisconsin (where I first acquired them) to another state. I filed one for the second time earlier this year, before I brought my (non-pen gun) AOW to California.

Lastly, I keep all of the original Form 4s here in California. What I keep with the out-of-state NFA weapons are copies of the Form 4s.

Thanks again, this is perfect for my circumstances :)

TangoCharlie
12-01-2009, 1:21 PM
Sort of getting back on topic, I would like to take this opportunity to point out that California residents can legally own a suppressor, but it must be kept out-of-state. I legally own two suppressors, for .223 and .22LR, and keep them out-of-state in accordance with ATF regulations. I became the legal owner of the .223 one before I moved to California, and became the legal owner of the .22LR one after I moved to California. Both are on Form 4s, and have CLEO signatures on the second page of the form. In other words, I didn't go the "trust" route.

I cannot help but think a mistake or misunderstanding allowed you to travel way down the NFA road by acquiring a suppressor without being a resident of the state you bought it in.

Federal residency requirements are pretty clear for firearm acquisition. A CLEO in another state has no authority to sign the Form 4 for you, even if he actually did so. An FFL/SOT in that state broke the law in transferring you a suppressor when you were not a resident of his state.

Im well aware that NFA Branch is okay with storage of an already acquired NFA firearm in another state, but I find it dubious that they allowed you to acquire it under those circumstances.

I'm certainly not calling you a liar by any means, I just think there must have been a huge mistake made somewhere along the road that has snowballed.

Who was advising you through this process at NFA Branch? An examiner?

Was is very clear on the Form 4 that you were NOT a resident of that state? An out-of-state mailing address is fine, but you must be a resident of the state in which you are planning to acquire the NFA firearm. A storage address is not good enough, but could be misinterpreted as a residency on the Form 4. I'm quite sure the examiner who approved your Form 4 misinterpreted your storage address as a residency address. Maybe the C3 did as well.

Anyway, unless new laws were passed recently that I missed, you should really have your Form 4 and situation reviewed by a lawyer knowledgable in NFA. None of this sounds like something to hang your hat on.

lunde
12-01-2009, 1:29 PM
TangoCharlie, you wrote:I cannot help but think a mistake or misunderstanding allowed you to travel way down the NFA road by acquiring a suppressor without being a resident of the state you bought it in.

Federal residency requirements are pretty clear for firearm acquisition. A CLEO in another state has no authority to sign the Form 4 for you, even if he actually did so. An FFL/SOT in that state broke the law in transferring you a suppressor when you were not a resident of his state.

Im well aware that NFA Branch is okay with storage of an already acquired NFA firearm in another state, but I find it dubious that they allowed you to acquire it under those circumstances.

I'm certainly not calling you a liar by any means, I just think there must have been a huge mistake made somewhere along the road that has snowballed.

Who was advising you through this process at NFA Branch? An examiner?

Was is very clear on the Form 4 that you were NOT a resident of that state? An out-of-state mailing address is fine, but you must be a resident of the state in which you are planning to acquire the NFA firearm. A storage address is not good enough, but could be misinterpreted as a residency on the Form 4. I'm quite sure the examiner who approved your Form 4 misinterpreted your storage address as a residency address. Maybe the C3 did as well.

Anyway, unless new laws were passed recently that I missed, you should really have your Form 4 and situation reviewed by a lawyer knowledgable in NFA. None of this sounds like something to hang your hat on.I originally had the same (mis)understanding as you, but after speaking with several people at the NFA Branch of the ATF, I found out that the residency requirements to which we are accustomed when it comes to handguns simply do not apply to NFA weapons.

In fact, my Form 4, with its permanent attachment, makes it quite clear that my residence address and the storage address are in two completely different states. In fact, when it came to the CLEO signoff, the ATF made it clear that it should be the CLEO where it is being stored, and presumably where it would be used when out of storage.

Super Spy
12-01-2009, 1:51 PM
Move to Montana...GTG There

virulosity
12-01-2009, 4:38 PM
Does constructive possession apply to suppressor parts? Could I pay the stamp, fill out the federal form, make parts, and then only assemble out of state? I want to make my own instead of buying one.

TangoCharlie
12-01-2009, 6:50 PM
Does constructive possession apply to suppressor parts? Could I pay the stamp, fill out the federal form, make parts, and then only assemble out of state? I want to make my own instead of buying one.

No, there is no constructive possession for a "suppressor", but not in a good way. Federal law precludes "constructive possession" when it comes to "suppressors" since it defines a suppressor as a single, individual part or as the whole assembly. A single baffle is a "suppressor", a suppressor tube by itself is a "suppressor", etc.

If you have a single unregistered suppressor baffle, you are in actual possession of an unregistered suppressor, so Constructive Possession does not exist and is irrelevant.

virulosity
12-01-2009, 8:11 PM
I guess what i was getting at, is that I can do the federal paperwork and register federally. Then all I have to worry about is the state legislation.

justin_5585
12-01-2009, 9:55 PM
[QUOTE=TangoCharlie;3436225]A single baffle is a "suppressor", a suppressor tube by itself is a "suppressor", etc.QUOTE]

So by this logic, then how is a "fake can" not under NFA law? It's a suppressor tube that could be modified to accept baffles, no?

ke6guj
12-01-2009, 10:21 PM
So by this logic, then how is a "fake can" not under NFA law? It's a suppressor tube that could be modified to accept baffles, no?

Because most fake cans properly made are solid in construction, with just a hole in the middle for the bullet to pass. Or if in a double-tube configuration, are welded together so that baffles can't be installed without cutting apart the fake can.

paco ramirez
12-02-2009, 10:15 PM
I just remembered another question I had: How did you manage to convince the dealer that this was legal?

DaveFJ80
12-03-2009, 10:55 AM
If you sew two pillows together...

or grab a 2-liter coke bottle.....


:p

SystemError
09-29-2010, 8:01 PM
Suppressors are scary to the people in charge, that is the sole reason that they are controlled items.

Everything firearms related is scary to those in charge.

Moto4Fun
10-06-2010, 7:45 AM
Since building silencers out of everday housewhold items is fairly simple, I imagine all of the parts would have to be assembled or in the same place for someone to be committing a crime. Additionally I would think that the part that interfaces with the gun barrel would be the primary identifying component of a home mede silencer.

evidens83
10-06-2010, 8:02 AM
OP keep dreaming or move to another state..

map
10-06-2010, 7:32 PM
good info guys thanks.

Heiko
10-06-2010, 8:15 PM
Because most fake cans properly made are solid in construction, with just a hole in the middle for the bullet to pass. Or if in a double-tube configuration, are welded together so that baffles can't be installed without cutting apart the fake can.

Does this describe the fake can on the GSG-5? There are some GSGs that have fake cans with an end that screws off. It's just an aluminum tube that slips over the barrel. Some (newer?) GSG-5s have a sealed fake can, I presume.

ke6guj
10-06-2010, 8:20 PM
Does this describe the fake can on the GSG-5? There are some GSGs that have fake cans with an end that screws off. It's just an aluminum tube that slips over the barrel. Some (newer?) GSG-5s have a sealed fake can, I presume.

I don't know the exact construction of the fake can on the GSG-5, but IIRC there was a recall on the GSG-5SD because of the design of the fake can.

Moto4Fun
10-08-2010, 7:12 AM
So is it also illegal for a manufacturer to produce a gun that has features buit in to it that lessen the sound produced when it is fired?

JTROKS
10-08-2010, 7:29 AM
Just get yourself a Peltor or Proears electronic hearing protection and you'll have an advantage. Get night vision goggles and you definitely own the night. Sorry but night vision scopes mounted on your firearm is also illegal in California.

Tommy-gun-justin
10-08-2010, 7:34 AM
Just get yourself a Peltor or Proears electronic hearing protection and you'll have an advantage. Get night vision goggles and you definitely own the night. Sorry but night vision scopes mounted on your firearm is also illegal in California.

Everything on the topic of tactical would all be ilegal :(.i want to live in nevada.

Stubbie
10-17-2010, 6:48 PM
Wait a minute. Let me get this straight...if I have a relative that's living in Nervada, I can use his or her address as the storage address? If I can convince the CLEO there to sign the paper, I can actually legally own a suppressor? Other than the poster "Lunde" has this ever been done before?

rero360
10-17-2010, 7:52 PM
Wait a minute. Let me get this straight...if I have a relative that's living in Nervada, I can use his or her address as the storage address? If I can convince the CLEO there to sign the paper, I can actually legally own a suppressor? Other than the poster "Lunde" has this ever been done before?

Actually, if you establish a trust or LLC I believe then you don't even need to get CLEO signature. I've actually been thinking about going this route myself, only using a bank's security deposit box or something like that as a storage facility for the can(s).

BrocLuno
02-10-2011, 4:40 PM
What good do they do a (or many) State away? Are threaded barrels on rifles restricted in Calif? I asked, because I'm pursuing a Kel-Tec SU-16CA that has a threaded muzzle and all info I have so far says it is legal to ship to Calif? I'd like to add a screw-on compensator or muzzle brake. Please advise?

KCDS
02-10-2011, 4:52 PM
I thought night vision is ok to mount on firearms as long as there's no IR illumination device on the same firearm??

sigfan91
02-10-2011, 5:17 PM
If by "suppressor" you mean those who want to strip our right to own guns, yes "suppressors" are legal.

Or are they known as "oppressors?"

Cyc Wid It
02-10-2011, 5:18 PM
What good do they do a (or many) State away? Are threaded barrels on rifles restricted in Calif? I asked, because I'm pursuing a Kel-Tec SU-16CA that has a threaded muzzle and all info I have so far says it is legal to ship to Calif? I'd like to add a screw-on compensator or muzzle brake. Please advise?

It's fine.

i<3HK
02-10-2011, 5:58 PM
I have a suppressor :cool2: (Check the website)

m98
02-10-2011, 7:43 PM
Not FUD at all. If there is even the slightest hint of misalignment between the bore and the supressor, the bullet will assume machine marks from whatever it rubs-up against.

From what i've learned there has never been a case that was solved by bullet forensics because there are so many uncontrollable varibles that effects it. Its never been used as scientific evidence for any trial.
Like the bs micro stamp crap.

slick_711
02-11-2011, 12:44 AM
From what I have heard, suppressors are illegal because they change the markings on the bullet that the barrel makes, thus making it harder for LE to ID what firearm fired a round if used in a crime.

That is 100% complete and total FUD. Forensic identification/match of a bullet to a specific gun happens much less often than bull**** shows like CSI would have you believe. Suppressors are illegal in CA because people unfamiliar with firearms are scared of them, and politicians play on fear to sway votes.

glock7
02-11-2011, 6:04 AM
I find it ironic that in California you cannot legally operate an automobile without a functional muffler, but cannot legally operate a firearm with a functional sound suppressor.

i think hybrid cars such as the prius have suppressors, my bil picked me up one time in his. I was standing on the curb waiting for him, he drove right up and i didn't even know he was there.;) that being said, when i move out of this state...my first purchase is a suppressor.:D

ke6guj
02-11-2011, 9:58 AM
i think hybrid cars such as the prius have suppressors, my bil picked me up one time in his. I was standing on the curb waiting for him, he drove right up and i didn't even know he was there.;) that being said, when i move out of this state...my first purchase is a suppressor.:D

And I've heard about Blind people complaining that they are too quiet and that blind people are being hit by an inordinate number of hybrids and that there should be legislation to require automakers to make hybrids louder.

duc748bip
02-11-2011, 11:33 AM
That is why law maker want to put "loundener" on hybrid cars. So pedestrian with their eyes gluded to blackberry or iphone can hear them coming...

Toast
02-11-2011, 11:58 AM
I always thought suppressors were illegal because you could potentially shoot people without being noticed. i.e. I just watched a movie where the bad guys covertly took out the guards point blank without drawing any attention by using suppressed pistols.

:ack2: I hope this is a joke post.

I hate it when you see on TV or a movie and someone's shooting a rifle (like a M14) with a suppressor inside a room and it's the hollywood pew pew pew silencer sound. A suppressor (on a rifle especially) just brings the level of sound down to where it won't give you hearing damage, it'll still be as loud as a jackhammer. Even if you're shooting subsonic ammo out of a pistol it won't be silent, just more like dropping a heavy phonebook from head height onto carpet.

GoingQuiet
02-11-2011, 12:05 PM
Personally I see the suppressor as a poor choice for home defense use.

It would add a significant amount of length and muzzle weight to the handgun.

Length, yes. Weight, no.

The new Silencerco Osprey is remarkably lightweight.

bentnbroken
02-11-2011, 12:07 PM
I noticed this thread has been active one way or the other now for over two years!
How can this subject be discussed for two years? Suppresor/silencer possesion in Ca. Felony. end of thread. lol........... I wonder what the longest active thread is in this forum? anyone know.

LongRangeShootin
05-06-2011, 6:05 AM
whatdifference does it make if the supressor changes the bullets footprint. there are tons of ways to do what. 1) if the guns used in a crime, drop a rat tailed file down the barrel. changes the "scratch pattern" inside the barrel so ballistics dont match up. in that case, all they can do is to identify the amount of lands and grooves (I.E. likely id the model of the gun) 2) if its a semi-auto (such as a 1911) change the barrel and throw the old barrel into the river or torch it. stock plain jane 1911 barrels can be had for a song. extractor markings are the same. just hit the extractor with a file and it changes the extractor marks on your brass.

camron882
05-06-2011, 7:18 AM
i thought level III FFLs can legally possess suppressors?