quote:

Originally posted by RayGunter:
Mr. Wiebe is correct, building a suppressor is illegal, unless the proper paperwork exist. In Ranb40's first post he was never said that he had any paperwork. So Duane's message was correct, with the evidence at hand its illegal.

I think you have it backwards. Instead of saying silencers are illegal unless the right paperwork exists, you should be saying that silencers are legal, as long as the tax is paid. There is a difference. That is what it is all about. Wiebe claimed they are illegal period, and he was wrong. He did not say they are illegal if the tax stamp is not obtained first. He was also arrogant and condescending in the way his post was worded.

The evidence at hand, as you call it, was that I wanted to copy a Bramit device. There was absolutely nothing in my post that indicated that I was going to do anything illegal. You believe that I am guilty until proven innocent? That is not the American way and you know it. Anyone who is not anti-gun or disrespectful of others opinions should now this. I want you to show me some evidence that I was going to break the law.

Why did he have to be so disrespectful to me in his first post? I expect to be treated as a person, not a baby or a potential criminal when I ask a simple question. It is what everyone should expect here, unless they are the friends of Wiebe I guess.

Ranb

quote:

Originally posted by rem721:.....The fact is that without the paperwork, permits, and possibly the pope's blessing, it is illegal. You did not explicitly state that you had obtained all the necessary clearances, thus Mr Wiebe's reply. Had you been more clear you might have gotten some help. As it is, I'd say you're on your own.

Stop exaggerating. Obtaining authorization from the BATFE to make a silencer is a simple matter. If the local sheriff will not sign the ATF form 1, then anyone 18 and over can form a trust to own the silencer for them. The largest obstacle is usually living in one of the 35 states that allow an unlicensed civilian to own them. There are only 5 pieces of paper to send in not including the check, and two of those forms are duplicates. Please educate yourself before telling me how it is.

I was very clear on how I was going to obtain ATF authorization, I said I was going to use a form 1. Wiebe should have assumed I was going to obey the law. He needs to learn how about the law before he presumes to tell me that I am going to break it. Why he was so prone to believe I am so stupid as to break the law and post about it on a public forum I do not know. His post was extremely rude and have no reason to treat him better than he treated me.

Ranb

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:
His reply was polite compared the the trash you posted. I would be happy to read one of Mr Wiebe's posts anyday. As to yours I will no longer have to.

How can you say Wiebe was more polite than me? He claimed that I was intending to break the law whereas I merely cast a few personal insults at him.

Remember the trash Zumbo posted? He pissed off so many people that he lost his job for posturing like an anti-gun freak when he called AR-15's terrorist weapons.

Now we have Wiebe trying to divide the gun community here in the USA by wrongly claiming that silencers are illegal in the USA. He also did not give me the presumption of innocence. That is also far more disgusting than anything I said on this thread.

Ranb

O.K. i get it, your an expert on the form 1 and how much money it takes to do this, can you defend the other half million gun laws that are on the books? Grandview gave you what you were looking for and i havent seen a Thank You...yet!

quote:

Originally posted by ranb40:

His post was extremely rude and have no reason to treat him better than he treated me.

Ranb

I find nothing in Wiebe's post that is rude, arrogant or condescending. I really think you've got an attitude problem. But that's OK, it's your attitude, not mine.

Well, at least we got a thread going! My real concern was PR..Didn't mean to slam the toilet seat on your litle pee pee.

[quote]You are aware that you're asking for advice on how to build an illegal device????

Ranb40

Id say you were well out of line on this one,
think how much time and energy you cold have saved by just responding that you have done the homework and have your bases covered.

Cal30

quote:

Originally posted by GrandView:You might give consideration to the fact that overly aggressive, overly indignant, self righteous people like yourself are preventing a coalition from happening. You aren't garnering my support. You've likely lost some here today.

BTW.......ever get that barrel off the Mauser action? Mr. Wiebe probably does that stuff in his sleep. Pretty good resource.

Oh wait! He already got in on that thread!

If you read the thread, then you know I got the barrel off. I was not lying when I said I succeeded. I was grateful to everyone who took the time to answer my questions about the Mauser barrel.

I am in no way grateful for Wiebe telling me I was asking for advice on building an illegal device. Do you think I should be grateful for the advice he gave me in this thread?

Ranb

quote:

Originally posted by 724wd:ranb40, Mr. Wiebe is a respected gunsmith and was referring to washington state law.

If he was talking about WA state law, then he was still way off base. WA state law is silent on silencers except to say that it is a gross misdemeanor to use one on a firearm. It says nothing about buying, selling, owning, making or mounting one a firearm.

So do you really think he was right when he said that silencers are illegal in WA? If he was right, then I would have had a very hard time getting the local sheriff to sign on the ATF form 1's I presented to him. The ATF would have not approved them either.

Ranb

quote:

Originally posted by GrandView:
The following linked article seems to suggest that these are pictures of the Nagant & Bramit device in the CIA museum at Langly.

Thank you for the links. I have read the article you are referring to in your first link and it might be what I am looking for. Very small can though. Once again thanks.

Ranb

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:Crusher, I was referring to an individual rather than a business. I assume that is what you are referring to? If not, then I am at a loss.
Peter.

If a person forms a Corp or a trust then they do not need to get the sheriff's signature, supply finger print cards or personal photos. It can make it easier to give to your heirs.

I plan on going the trust route for my next silencer build instead of asking the new sheriff for a signature.

Ranb

quote:

Originally posted by adrook:You must be kidding. He makes a simple statement and you call him a shitbird and a retard and what he did was far worse? Are you for real?

I am not kidding and I am for real. Wiebe did not merely make a simple statement. He phrased his statement in a way to both state a fact (which was actually wrong) and accuse me of intending to build an illegal silencer.

He did this with even though he had no reason to believe I was going to do anything illegal. According to his, post silencers are illegal. Do you really think personal insults are worse then blatantly false accusations? It is a felony to make silencers without ATF authorization. I would never accuse someone of that unless I had a very good reason. Wiebe does not need evidence, he just makes an assumption and goes with it, no matter who he hurts.

Ranb

quote:

Originally posted by srtrax:
O.K. i get it, your an expert on the form 1 and how much money it takes to do this, can you defend the other half million gun laws that are on the books? Grandview gave you what you were looking for and i havent seen a Thank You...yet!

I am not an expert on ATF forms and I do not care to talk about other gun control laws right now.

This there some kind of time limit on thanking someone for answering a question here? I work for a living and can not post all the time. You may notice that I have answered most every question directed at me, including thanking those that helped. Too bad for you if I did not take time off from work to get on this forum fast enough to suit you.

Ranb

quote:

Originally posted by ranb40:
Do you think I should be grateful for the advice he gave me in this thread?

Don't really care if you're grateful. You overreacted in the extreme about being asked a question. Then with your hair on fire, you went on to besmirch Wiebe without justification.

Your posts for the most part are rude, crude, and boorish. Your ilk are the divisive faction of the gun owners.........not Wiebe.

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe:
Well, at least we got a thread going! My real concern was PR..Didn't mean to slam the toilet seat on your litle pee pee.

PR? Your answer to a simple innocent question on silencers is to insult and lie to the poster, and you are concerned about public relations? Pardon me if I do not believe a word of this post.

So what lead you to believe that I was going to build an illegal device? Was it because silencers are legal for unlicensed civilians to own in 35 states? Was it because I said I going to make it on a form 1? I really want to know how your thought process works.

Your behavior is very bizarre; I hope you learn to treat people better in the future.

Ranb

quote:

Originally posted by GrandView:
Don't really care if you're grateful. You overreacted in the extreme about being asked a question. Then with your hair on fire, you went on to besmirch Wiebe without justification.

Your posts for the most part are rude, crude, and boorish. Your ilk are the divisive faction of the gun owners.........not Wiebe.

Wiebe reaps what he sows. He does not even to care that he was wrong.

Ranb

quote:

Originally posted by ranb40:
Wiebe reaps what he sows. He does not even to care that he was wrong.

Look........go file a grievance with the committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Silenced Arms.

You're fast becoming the pariah around here that you richly deserve.

I would rather tell him he is wrong and give him a taste of his own medicine.

Ranb

quote:

WA state law is silent on silencers except to say that it is a gross misdemeanor to use one on a firearm. It says nothing about buying, selling, owning, making or mounting one a firearm.

You are splitting the words pretty thin. Do you have enough money to be sure you will be innocent if you follow this sort of reasoning?

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:

quote:

thats not quite true peter you can do this without local oversight with the right paperwork

Crusher, I was referring to an individual rather than a business. I assume that is what you are referring to? If not, then I am at a loss.
Peter.

Have you looked into Trusts?

quote:

Originally posted by ireload2:

quote:

WA state law is silent on silencers except to say that it is a gross misdemeanor to use one on a firearm. It says nothing about buying, selling, owning, making or mounting one a firearm.

You are splitting the words pretty thin. Do you have enough money to be sure you will be innocent if you follow this sort of reasoning?

I am on firm ground here. RCW 9.41.250 says in part;
(1) Every person who:
(c) Uses any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any firearm,
is guilty of a gross misdemeanor punishable under chapter 9A.20 RCW.

Silencers are not mentioned anywhere else by the state except in an Attorney General opinion on the matter of the word “Usesâ€. The AG said the word uses is restricted to shooting the firearm while the silencer is attached.

I do not need money for the reason you mention, I have the law on my side. I have no reason to believe that any WA state police officer would arrest me for silencer possession since it is legal. They will never see me with a silencer unless I also have a copy of my ATF form 1 with me proving legal ownership. This is standard practice for those who own silencers. When I flew to Virginia I took copies of my ATF form 1’s along with my suppressed firearms to show to those in authority (ATF only) in case they demanded I do so.

Why do you think a silencer is going to be a problem for me? Do you have any reason to believe that a WA state cop is going to risk a civil suit for false arrest?

Ranb

quote:

Originally posted by ranb40:

quote:

Originally posted by adrook:You must be kidding. He makes a simple statement and you call him a shitbird and a retard and what he did was far worse? Are you for real?

I am not kidding and I am for real. Wiebe did not merely make a simple statement. He phrased his statement in a way to both state a fact (which was actually wrong) and accuse me of intending to build an illegal silencer.

He did this with even though he had no reason to believe I was going to do anything illegal. According to his, post silencers are illegal. Do you really think personal insults are worse then blatantly false accusations? It is a felony to make silencers without ATF authorization. I would never accuse someone of that unless I had a very good reason. Wiebe does not need evidence, he just makes an assumption and goes with it, no matter who he hurts.

Ranb

Wow,

A multitude of lengthy posts in the space of a few hours in reponse to a rather innocuous one line reply by Duane Wiebe. I am the only one who thinks this a bit spooky?

Duane didn't accuse you of anything. Might someone be a little bit paranoid?

quote:

Originally posted by ranb40:

quote:

Originally posted by adrook:You must be kidding. He makes a simple statement and you call him a shitbird and a retard and what he did was far worse? Are you for real?

I am not kidding and I am for real. Wiebe did not merely make a simple statement. He phrased his statement in a way to both state a fact (which was actually wrong) and accuse me of intending to build an illegal silencer.


Ranb

Since 2003, you have 177 posings. Nothing wrong with that, but it shows that you are no heavy user, not well known to most folks. You ask questions about something that is illegal in most ways, most places.
So Wiebe jumped to the conclusion that you were one of the large ignorant crowd.
He was maybe wrong, but misunderstanding is not a crime, and I must confess that I read your post the same way Wiebe did.
Silencers are a bit touchy, and it is sound adwise to discuss them with care.

If your answer had been:

"No cofee today, Duane Wiebe? What part of (form1) do you not understand?
All paperwork is in oreder, and this is perfectly legal"

There would be no issue. None. Wiebe would probably said sorry, and we would all have helped you out.

Your respond were just stupid and childish.

Ranb40
Let me give you a little slant on how I read your first post. The way you worded (form 1) after the word make and then discussed (wipes and baffles) the same way, I jumped to the the conclusion that you intended to form the outer body in some way, maybe forming die, or ring roller. I never thought of it being a paperwork form until the thread progressed. I think you read a lot into that one question from Duane that just was not there.
James

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bent Fossdal:
You ask questions about something that is illegal in most ways, most places.
So Wiebe jumped to the conclusion that you were one of the large ignorant crowd.
He was maybe wrong, but misunderstanding is not a crime, and I must confess that I read your post the same way Wiebe did.
Silencers are a bit touchy, and it is sound adwise to discuss them with care.[QUOTE]

I have read that silencers are legal and more readily accepted in some other countries, but I read very little of gun law outside of the USA so I really do not know. So I keep my legal opinions to myself when dealing with subjects I know little about.

Wiebe lives in the same state as I do. Silencer ownership is legal in WA, always has been. Silencer ownership in the USA generally speaking has always been legal too. Since 1934 the Federal government required a tax be paid prior to transferring a silencer to an unlicensed person. An unlicensed person making a silencer also pays this tax before hand. That silencers are legal in 35 of the 50 states is information that is readily available on the internet or from the BATFE. While it requires some effort to collect this information, it is not difficult. The Treasury Department has a searchable website with all of the Federal gun regulations on it.

Wiebe seems to have remained willfully ignorant of nearly all aspects of the legality of silencer ownership in the USA. Instead of making the slightest attempt to educate himself on the legalities of silencers, he instead chose to make something up when answering my post. He was not “maybe wrong†as you suggest, he was absolutely wrong. There is no excuse for his rude behavior.

As I noted I an earlier post, since there are no Federal laws that prohibit silencer ownership by an unlicensed American, a rational person should assume that silencers are legal in the USA unless they attempt to find out otherwise. If this same rational person decides to comment on the legalities of silencer ownership and has never read any reliable source on silencers, then they owe it to themselves and the person to whom they are replying, to have accurate information. It appears that Wiebe made a deliberate decision to remain ignorant of silencers and posted based on his prejudice instead. Based on his only reply to this thread, he is still ignorant about silencers in general based on his claim that his real concern was PR (public relations?). It says much about him that he is more interested in PR than the legalities of silencer ownership when posting on this forum.

Silencers are only touchy in your opinion merely because of the ignorance and prejudice exhibited by the majority of the people who think they are not legal to own or make. Some people have even claimed (not on this thread yet) that talking about silencers, discussing design and how to make them is illegal. I guess they feel freedom of speech is way overrated. These people disgust me as it appears they want to suppress knowledge.

I frequently run into people in person and on the internet who tell me I am a criminal or a potential criminal for making silencers or even designing them. It seemed obvious to me that Wiebe was one of these. I have no reason to treat anyone like him with any respect if they choose to treat me so poorly.

quote:

Originally posted by J. Randall:
Ranb40
Let me give you a little slant on how I read your first post. The way you worded (form 1) after the word make and then discussed (wipes and baffles) the same way, I jumped to the the conclusion that you intended to form the outer body in some way, maybe forming die, or ring roller. I never thought of it being a paperwork form until the thread progressed. I think you read a lot into that one question from Duane that just was not there.
James

So I take you agree that there was nothing in my first post that would lead any rational person to believe that I was going to do anything illegal?

If you take a look here; http://test.titleii.com/form1.html you will see a fill-out form for the ATF form 1. Click on “submit†in the bottom left hand corner, then “openâ€. You will see an ATF form 1 appear. It is an application to make and register a firearm.

There is no reason Wiebe should not have known about this form if he felt qualified to give an opinion on silencers especially if he was going to say I was asking for advice on building an illegal device. It is hard to read anything else into the word "illegal".

Ranb

quote:

Originally posted by ranb40:
It seemed obvious to me that Wiebe was one of these.

What you see is what you get.

At least you do not claim he shot Kennedy.

quote:

Originally posted by Bent Fossdal:

At least you do not claim he shot Kennedy.

It is interesting that you say this. Some of the posters here are acting like the people who claim JFK was shot by someone other than Oswald. The strategy of some conspiracy nuts is to elevate Oswald to a status that would make it seem as if he was not the assassin. Then this makes it easier for them to accuse someone like JFK's limo driver of shooting the president.

Ranb

Hi,I usually post over at www.silencertalk.com under the handle of Illuminated_One.
I noticed this thread and thought I ought to try to clear up some misconceptions people seem to have over silencers/sound suppressors.

First off, anyone legally capable of owning a firearm and who is living in a state that does not ban silencers can own one.

The states that allow silencers are as follows:
AL, AR, AK, AZ, CO, CT, FL, GA, ID, IN, KY, LA, ME, MD, MS, MT, NE, NV, NH, NM, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV, WI, and WY
As per Gem-Tech's website

The first commercially successful silencer was invented and marketed my Hiram Maxim. In fact, the company sill exists producing industrial mufflers and other sound reducing equipment

Silencers and sound suppressors are one and the same. The term "Silencer" came from Maxim himself. Sound suppressor is a term that came later to give them a more accurate and politically correct name.

Silencers were REGULATED (NOT outlawed) by the NFA laws of 1934. These are the same laws the govern machine guns, short barreled rifles (SBR), short barrel shotguns (SBS), destructive devices (artillery cannons, explosive weapons, rifles with a bore diameter over 50 cal, ect) and Any Other Weapons (AOW's for short, these are best described as pistols with more than one vertical grip)

Suppressors were added to the NFA laws due to the governments concern for poaching during Great Depression.
The thought at the time was that it would be unconstitutional to outlaw these weapons, but regulating them and adding on a $200 (as much as a years pay at the time) transfer tax would keep them out of the hands of the vast majority of Americans.
The AOW is the only exception to the $200 tax, AOW's are only a $5 tax.

The NFA laws require all NFA weapons to be registered to the owner (individual or entity such as a Corporation or a Trust) with the federal government at the time they are transfered to the owner.

This is a pretty simple process usually (for a transfer to an individual) involving a signature from your chief law enforcement officer, finger prints, and a passport photo attached to the Form 4 (for purchase/ transfer) or Form 1 (for building it yourself) paperwork. The Form 4 can be seen here

If your are having the silencer transfered to a corporation or a trust, you are not required to have the finger print cars, passport photo, or chief law enforcement signature.

The government then completes a background check on the transferee, and after one to two months approves the paperwork and sends it back.
The transferee can at that point take possession of the NFA weapon.



It is important to note that anyone the NFA weapon is NOT registered to can NOT be in possession of the NFA weapon unless the individual it IS registered to is with them.
As an example, if a friend wanted to shoot my silencer I would have to be there in person while he had the weapon.
I could NOT let him borrow it and return it later.


I own a Sig 226 with an Advanced Armament Evolution 9mm silencer.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2086/2120122437_5b8668ec76.jpg?v=0
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2190/2120935090_79e5ba1014.jpg?v=0

As a final note, Ranb40 did not ask me to come here.
If you have any questions about silencers please feel free to register on www.silencertalk.com

edited to fix simple grammar and spelling

quote:

Why do you think a silencer is going to be a problem for me?

Mounting a silencer on a firearm and not using it is counter intuitive. My view is you mount a silencer on a firearm to use it. That is probable cause for arrest. Alll they have to do is test it for nitrate residue and you are busted unless you can provide evidence that what you are doing is legal. Your resources are commited against the state's. The law is complex. They might use it to obtain a search warrant for other silencers in your residence or place of business. While searching what else will they find? They will find tubing or pipe and maybe gun powder. You might have some fertilizer. This could constitute components for a destructive device.......and so it goes.
You can roll the dice if you want.

ireload2

It actually isn't too uncommon for residents of WA to own silencers, but only use them when they travel out of state.
Both Oregon and Idaho allow both the ownership and use of silencers.

You may also be surprised by the number of people who own silencers just for the sake of their collection, and never fire a single round through them regardless of weather their state allows them to or not.

>>>>Are you aware that there are no federal laws prohibiting silencer ownership by unlicensed civilians in the USA?

Are you aware that when you say that silencers are illegal in the USA you are telling a lie? I know this because normal people actually believe that anything in the USA is legal unless forbidden by law. Stupid people like you actually seem to think that the government passes laws to give rights, not restrict a person’s actions.

Are you aware that the form 1 I was talking about in the original post is an ATF form 1 used for making and registering NFA weapons (machineguns, short barreled shotguns/rifles and silencers)?

Are you aware that the ATF routinely approves the tax stamp applications sent to them by people when they want to buy or make silencers? <<<<

I will point out that your own words are contradictory in nature. Possession of a silencer is indeed illegal unless you comply with a certain set of rules and pay the tax.
Only then is it legal.

The general case is: Silencers are illegal unless you comply with the law.

Compared to: Silencers are always legal.

This is incorrect because they are not always legal.

quote:

I will point out that your own words are contradictory in nature. Possession of a silencer is indeed illegal unless you comply with a certain set of rules and pay the tax.
Only then is it legal.

The general case is: Silencers are illegal unless you comply with the law.

Compared to: Silencers are always legal.

This is incorrect because they are not always legal.

The 1934 laws are tax laws, this in essence no different than saying that it is illegal to hold a job unless you pay taxes.

You are technically correct, and yet we don't assume that anyone that makes money is doing it illegally.

quote:

Originally posted by aks74n:
It is important to note that anyone the NFA weapon is NOT registered to can NOT be in possession of the NFA weapon unless the individual it IS registered to is with them.

Not entirely true. There is an exception to this, what is it?

I apologize, I should have mentioned this before.
The exception lies in corporate and trust transfers.

I formed an LLC for my suppressor.

If the weapon is transfered to a corporation or a trust it can be in possession of anyone listed as a member of the corporation, or listed as trustees in the trust.

Another thing to note is that corporate and trust transfers are usually a little faster.

quote:

Originally posted by aks74n:
I apologize, I should have mentioned this before.
The exception lies in corporate and trust transfers.

I formed an LLC for my suppressor.

If the weapon is transfered to a corporation or a trust it can be in possession of anyone listed as a member of the corporation, or listed as trustees in the trust.

Another thing to note is that corporate and trust transfers are usually a little faster.

Nope, that's not it.

In that case I am not aware of this exception.

Edited to add unless you are referring to shipping an NFA weapon, or sending it back to a manufacturer (or class 3 dealer)
Obviously you can't accompany the NFA weapon under those circumstances.

quote:

Originally posted by aks74n:
In that case I am not aware of this exception.

Edited to add unless you are referring to shipping an NFA weapon, or sending it back to a manufacturer (or class 3 dealer)
Obviously you can't accompany the NFA weapon under those circumstances.

I install silencers and work on NFA weapons regularly, but I am not a Class III dealer. The only time I need to see the owners is when they drop them off and pick them up. It may be weeks or months. How is that possible?

As a gunsmith, I am allowed to be in possession of NFA weapons when the weapon is accompanied by it's paperwork (form 4). Years ago you would have to temporarily transfer the NFA weapon to the gunsmith in order to leave the weapon at the shop without the owners presence, but the BATF made it easier on the owners and gunsmiths by allowing gunsmiths to have possession of these weapons by merely having the paperwork with the actual weapon. That was a good thing they did.

quote:

Originally posted by ireload2:

quote:

Why do you think a silencer is going to be a problem for me?

Mounting a silencer on a firearm and not using it is counter intuitive. My view is you mount a silencer on a firearm to use it. That is probable cause for arrest. Alll they have to do is test it for nitrate residue and you are busted unless you can provide evidence that what you are doing is legal. Your resources are commited against the state's. The law is complex. They might use it to obtain a search warrant for other silencers in your residence or place of business. While searching what else will they find? They will find tubing or pipe and maybe gun powder. You might have some fertilizer. This could constitute components for a destructive device.......and so it goes.
You can roll the dice if you want.

Well me too. I mount a silencer on a weapon to use it. If you read my other posts you will see that I use my silencers when I travel to other states where it is legal to do so.

I do not know where you live, but in WA silencer use is narrowly defined as actually discharging a firearm with the silencer attached. The USA is a nation of laws. Only the letter of the law is to be enforced, not the so called spirit of the law. Is police corruption common where you live? Do the local police use the spirit of the law as they interpret it to hold you down?

I’m sure the police in WA State are not so stupid that they can not recognize that silencer use is allowed in most other states in the union. They would be very foolish indeed to arrest me just because I used them in another state.

The NFA law as it applies to silencer possession and WA’s RCW’s are only complex to those who refuse to read and understand them.

You claim that the WA police might use my lawful possession of a registered silencer to get a search warrant to search my home is a rather bold statement for someone who thinks powder residue is probable cause. I’m sure you can not show even one search warrant approved by a judge in the entire USA that used “nitrate residue on a legally owned silencer†as the reason for the search of that person’s home or business where any crime has not been known to have occurred .

You are being too alarmist. Alarmist attitudes like these are not what made America great. I do not care whether or not you are an American or not, your attitude is a real downer. I refuse to be a coward, I will roll the dice as you call it.

Ranb

quote:

Originally posted by ireload2:

The general case is: Silencers are illegal unless you comply with the law.

Compared to: Silencers are always legal.

This is incorrect because they are not always legal.

I stand corrected. I should have said there are no federal laws prohibiting silencer ownership by unlicensed civilians that can own other firearms in the USA.