The AirGun Guild

A friendly place to share one's interest in all things airguns.

It would be bad idea to petition the government. The current state of the law is that silencers for airguns are LEGAL without registration even if they can be removed. ATF says otherwise but they have been OVERRULED. See the Crooker case from the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Crooker had a removeble airgun suppressor that with some work could be fitted to a firearm. But there was no evidence that he intended such. He was convicted and sent to Federal prison. In 2010 his conviction was overturned and ATF's position was rejected. Doesnt matter if the suppressor is removable. What matters is whether its intended for a firearm. There was no evidence in Crooker's case he intended such. Therefore he was released and was awarded $170k in damages for unjust conviction. The court opined that Congress might consider changing the federal statutes to include airgun suppressors in ATF's authority, but as written the law does not currently give them power over airgun only suppressors. No other federal appellate court case has tackled the issue so this one case is the law of the land.

So there's no need to lobby congress. The law already says what it needs to. We don't want to tempt them to add airgun suppressor's to ATF's jurisdiction.

As a few asides, yes most airgun websites have it wrong. They parrot what ATF says without consideration that ATF may be willfully and stubbornly lying about what the law is because they don't like what the courts have told them. And yes, I am an attorney. But most importantly, yes I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

It would be bad idea to petition the government. The current state of the law is that silencers for airguns are LEGAL without registration even if they can be removed. ATF says otherwise but they have been OVERRULED. See the Crooker case from the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Crooker had a removeble airgun suppressor that with some work could be fitted to a firearm. But there was no evidence that he intended such. He was convicted and sent to Federal prison. In 2010 his conviction was overturned and ATF's position was rejected. Doesnt matter if the suppressor is removable. What matters is whether its intended for a firearm. There was no evidence in Crooker's case he intended such. Therefore he was released and was awarded $170k in damages for unjust conviction. The court opined that Congress might consider changing the federal statutes to include airgun suppressors in ATF's authority, but as written the law does not currently give them power over airgun only suppressors. No other federal appellate court case has tackled the issue so this one case is the law of the land.

So there's no need to lobby congress. The law already says what it needs to. We don't want to tempt them to add airgun suppressor's to ATF's jurisdiction.

As a few asides, yes most airgun websites have it wrong. They parrot what ATF says without consideration that ATF may be willfully and stubbornly lying about what the law is because they don't like what the courts have told them. And yes, I am an attorney. But most importantly, yes I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Agreed! The less mentioned to the Federal government the better. If anyone hasn't already noticed, they have a tendency to muck things up when they get involved.   

Quote from: Bullfrog on February 11, 2016, 03:42:31 PM

It would be bad idea to petition the government. The current state of the law is that silencers for airguns are LEGAL without registration even if they can be removed. ATF says otherwise but they have been OVERRULED. See the Crooker case from the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Crooker had a removeble airgun suppressor that with some work could be fitted to a firearm. But there was no evidence that he intended such. He was convicted and sent to Federal prison. In 2010 his conviction was overturned and ATF's position was rejected. Doesnt matter if the suppressor is removable. What matters is whether its intended for a firearm. There was no evidence in Crooker's case he intended such. Therefore he was released and was awarded $170k in damages for unjust conviction. The court opined that Congress might consider changing the federal statutes to include airgun suppressors in ATF's authority, but as written the law does not currently give them power over airgun only suppressors. No other federal appellate court case has tackled the issue so this one case is the law of the land.

So there's no need to lobby congress. The law already says what it needs to. We don't want to tempt them to add airgun suppressor's to ATF's jurisdiction.

As a few asides, yes most airgun websites have it wrong. They parrot what ATF says without consideration that ATF may be willfully and stubbornly lying about what the law is because they don't like what the courts have told them. And yes, I am an attorney. But most importantly, yes I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Agreed! The less mentioned to the Federal government the better. If anyone hasn't already noticed, they have a tendency to muck things up when they get involved.   

Thank you Bullfrog.  That was something that I wasn't aware of and I for one appreciate your knowledge.

Joe

It would be bad idea to petition the government. The current state of the law is that silencers for airguns are LEGAL without registration even if they can be removed. ATF says otherwise but they have been OVERRULED. See the Crooker case from the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Crooker had a removeble airgun suppressor that with some work could be fitted to a firearm. But there was no evidence that he intended such. He was convicted and sent to Federal prison. In 2010 his conviction was overturned and ATF's position was rejected. Doesnt matter if the suppressor is removable. What matters is whether its intended for a firearm. There was no evidence in Crooker's case he intended such. Therefore he was released and was awarded $170k in damages for unjust conviction. The court opined that Congress might consider changing the federal statutes to include airgun suppressors in ATF's authority, but as written the law does not currently give them power over airgun only suppressors. No other federal appellate court case has tackled the issue so this one case is the law of the land.

So there's no need to lobby congress. The law already says what it needs to. We don't want to tempt them to add airgun suppressor's to ATF's jurisdiction.

As a few asides, yes most airgun websites have it wrong. They parrot what ATF says without consideration that ATF may be willfully and stubbornly lying about what the law is because they don't like what the courts have told them. And yes, I am an attorney. But most importantly, yes I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Well written.  Thank you. 

I'm not an attorney but having been business all my life, and accidentally stumbling into a law class or two in college I might have picked up a thing or two besides what I learned watching crime dramas on TV. 

Seriously.  I don't know why any airgun forum or airgun expert would suppress (pun intended) knowledge of legal use of a legal part for airguns.  I ran across the Crooker case on Find Law some time ago.  I even asked a local ATF investigator if there is any other case law on the subject.  He said that there was none he was aware of.  Under federal law airgun SILENCERS, moderators, or lead dust collector are not restricted as long as their is no proof of intent for use on a firearm.  Nothing about removability, capability, service life, or ability to survive more than one shot is involved. 

However, that does not mean your silenced airgun is completely legal.  I've been told that some states have made airgun silencers illegal to own.  Technically this even applies to guns that are manufactured with them.  NJ comes to mind.  Maybe they have changed, but we had some conversation on that subject over at AirGunOne back before Splash stepped down. 

Rather than suppressing knowledge on the subject I think we should promote accurate knowledge on the subject like many sites do regarding firearms laws from state to state.  Its not about trying to sneak anything by the law, but about being informed, staying within the law, and not restricting our own right to do something because somebody not involved with the law or its enforcement suppresses it.  By censoring discussion on the topic or using aggressive and threatening language on the subject it takes away your right to own a perfectly legal object and perform a perfectly legal activity through fear and intimidation.  Knowledge negates that. 

Quote from: Bullfrog on February 11, 2016, 03:42:31 PM

It would be bad idea to petition the government. The current state of the law is that silencers for airguns are LEGAL without registration even if they can be removed. ATF says otherwise but they have been OVERRULED. See the Crooker case from the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Crooker had a removeble airgun suppressor that with some work could be fitted to a firearm. But there was no evidence that he intended such. He was convicted and sent to Federal prison. In 2010 his conviction was overturned and ATF's position was rejected. Doesnt matter if the suppressor is removable. What matters is whether its intended for a firearm. There was no evidence in Crooker's case he intended such. Therefore he was released and was awarded $170k in damages for unjust conviction. The court opined that Congress might consider changing the federal statutes to include airgun suppressors in ATF's authority, but as written the law does not currently give them power over airgun only suppressors. No other federal appellate court case has tackled the issue so this one case is the law of the land.

So there's no need to lobby congress. The law already says what it needs to. We don't want to tempt them to add airgun suppressor's to ATF's jurisdiction.

As a few asides, yes most airgun websites have it wrong. They parrot what ATF says without consideration that ATF may be willfully and stubbornly lying about what the law is because they don't like what the courts have told them. And yes, I am an attorney. But most importantly, yes I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Well written.  Thank you. 

I'm not an attorney but having been business all my life, and accidentally stumbling into a law class or two in college I might have picked up a thing or two besides what I learned watching crime dramas on TV. 

Seriously.  I don't know why any airgun forum or airgun expert would suppress (pun intended) knowledge of legal use of a legal part for airguns.  I ran across the Crooker case on Find Law some time ago.  I even asked a local ATF investigator if there is any other case law on the subject.  He said that there was none he was aware of.  Under federal law airgun SILENCERS, moderators, or lead dust collector are not restricted as long as their is no proof of intent for use on a firearm.  Nothing about removability, capability, service life, or ability to survive more than one shot is involved. 

However, that does not mean your silenced airgun is completely legal.  I've been told that some states have made airgun silencers illegal to own.  Technically this even applies to guns that are manufactured with them.  NJ comes to mind.  Maybe they have changed, but we had some conversation on that subject over at AirGunOne back before Splash stepped down. 

Rather than suppressing knowledge on the subject I think we should promote accurate knowledge on the subject like many sites do regarding firearms laws from state to state.  Its not about trying to sneak anything by the law, but about being informed, staying within the law, and not restricting our own right to do something because somebody not involved with the law or its enforcement suppresses it.  By censoring discussion on the topic or using aggressive and threatening language on the subject it takes away your right to own a perfectly legal object and perform a perfectly legal activity through fear and intimidation.  Knowledge negates that.

I don't blame airgun sources being cautious prior to the Crooker case, as you had ATF strongly asserting control over airgun suppressors with no authority to the contrary. But after Crooker I do not believe there is any reason to not acknowedge the fact that airgun only suppressors are not regulated by ATF. I think pride is probably a primary reason why Crooker isn't openly acknowledged in some circles. Some people doubled down on what turned out to be the wrong interpretation of the law and human nature being what it is, people just don't like to admit when they are wrong.

Suppression of knowledge isn't being cautious.  Its suppression of knowledge. 

Yeah, it's very easy for some to ridicule for limiting certain discussions that help preserve a forum. After all, they can just move on to the next one when a forum gets the attention of the gub-mint and start getting harassed or shut down.

Ridicule?  I didn't ridicule anything.  I spoke the truth.  Don't start saying things that are false.  Don't bring your problem with me here.