Guns International

ATF changing Regulations concerning Supressor mounts

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • SC-Texas

    TGT Addict
    Lifetime Member
    Emeritus - "Texas Proud"
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 7, 2009
    6,040
    96
    Houston, TX
    This has been reportedelsewhere, but the ATF has ordered YHM (Yankee Hill Machine) to stop selling Piston (Neilson device) mounts and all other quick attach flash-hider adapters because they are now considered part of the suppressor for their pistol suppressors.

    This means that each mount would be taxed and transferred on a form 4.

    From YHM and posted on [URL="http://www.silencerresearch.com"]www.silencerresearch.com[/URL]

    Sir,
    Thank you for your interest in our products. Yes, I can confirm that ATF has made us suspend sales of all individual threaded pistons, fixed barrel adapters, 3 lug mounts, and thread adapters. We are awaiting their ruling on QD mounts right now, but were ordered to halt all sales of them till they make a determination. They say that they are a component of a suppressor and therefore can only be sold with a complete suppressor as part of the suppressor. We are not happy about this to say the least and are in the process of appealing their recent decision. They are supposedly going to be looking at all sound suppressor manufacturers in the very near future. We just happened to be the first. This is all the information I have, and I have no idea how long it is going to take for the appeal process.

    Thanks,
    Tom Camilleri
    Sales-Tech
    YHM
     

    SC-Texas

    TGT Addict
    Lifetime Member
    Emeritus - "Texas Proud"
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 7, 2009
    6,040
    96
    Houston, TX
    So this is what I am hearing and taken to the extreme:

    A piston may be limited to one per can because it is a part that is only used on a silencer.

    So, this effects those that want to use a can on several pistols that have different thread pitches i.e. someon who owns a Glock 23 and a H&K USP.

    That has several bad implications for mounts outside of the multiple piston user.

    Any mount that screws into the back of a silencer is in danger of being banned by this ruling as a silencer part

    I.e.

    While the 3 lug muzzle device that screws onto the barrel would be safe, the 3 lug attachment that screws into the can would be banned

    The threads on a barrel are not regulated but the fixed mount adapter that replaces the piston by screwing into the back of the can would be regualtated.

    These devices that screw into the end of the can could be considered end caps or parts for use only on a silencer.

    This decision could be taken to the extreme and applied to flash hider mounts.

    What I do not understand is what the standard is?

    1. Do all silencer parts have to attach to the can at the same time?
    2. Does it simply mean that all silencer parts must be sold with the can and transferred at the same time?

    Another implication is the standard is #1, then taking apart a can for maintenance could be considered illegal possesion of silencer parts when the can was apart.


    Taken to an even further extreme: A baffle pusher tool, such as the SWR Spectre tool, that screws onto the silencer and is used for no other purpose than pushing baffles out of the Spectre, could be considered a silencer part along with a mount.

    While this is somewhat outlandish, even for the ATF, its possible under the Obamanation that we live in today.
     

    Texas1911

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 29, 2017
    10,596
    46
    Austin, TX
    This is ridiculous, the entire suppressor regulation is furthermore ridiculous.

    It's bad enough we have to shell out $200 and wait 6 - 9 months for a $500 - 600 suppressor to be legal... now they are going after the only saving grace for those of us that can't afford to buy 2 cans for the sake of a thread pitch.

    At least there's custom barrel manufacturers that offer various threads, but it's a hassle if you own pre-threaded guns.
     

    SIG_Fiend

    TGT Addict
    TGT Supporter
    Admin
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Feb 21, 2008
    7,218
    66
    Austin, TX
    There has to be a way to stop this. I mean this is clearly illegal. It's not a far leap from this to banning all threaded barrels and threaded attachments, even things like just flash hiders.
     

    baboon

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    May 6, 2008
    22,459
    96
    Out here by the lake!
    I figure it's part of Jugears plan at tax the rich. Just think of the amount of Escalade payments the gubmint could make for those less fortunates living in section 8 housing.
     

    cuate

    Well-Known
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 27, 2009
    1,842
    21
    Comanche Co., Texas
    All these dang Federal agencies, bureaus, and etc. likely are staffed by mostly anti-whatever they are regulating and sit and devise new prohibitions as they think of them., but instead of Big Gov. always making something illegal, why not save the taxpayers money and have some reductions of employees in those organizations?
    Like about 80%.....
     

    thorkyl

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 13, 2008
    697
    21
    Brazoria County
    I have no NFA items so bear with me on this.

    So what does that mean for those who already have one?
    Are they in violation of the NFA now because of a peons ideals?
    Do you have to return them?
    Do you have to register them?

    Who is the new NFA Czar?
     

    SC-Texas

    TGT Addict
    Lifetime Member
    Emeritus - "Texas Proud"
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 7, 2009
    6,040
    96
    Houston, TX
    I have customrs ordering cans from me and having the mounts and Neilson devices sent immediately.

    I think that anything already out htere will be grandfathered in. It will be handled on a manufacturer basis. no more seperate pieces.
     

    TSU45

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 6, 2008
    409
    1
    San Marcos, Tx
    I have customrs ordering cans from me and having the mounts and Neilson devices sent immediately.

    I think that anything already out htere will be grandfathered in. It will be handled on a manufacturer basis. no more seperate pieces.


    How would they grandfather a newly classified NFA item with no serial number though? That almost sounds too logical to be allowed by the ATF.

    That would present no way for the ATF to enforce consumer-end manufacturing of new mounts that can be claimed as grandfather parts. And we know big brother doesn't like to miss out on that $200 tax.

    But who knows really, it's the ATF and apparently the higher ups never really check in on them to see what they are up to, no matter who is in control of the White House.
     

    rodbender

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 25, 2008
    343
    1
    Elgin, Texas
    IMHO, I think the NFA 1934 and GCA 1968 are both unconstitutional. Why? Because the constitution was originally meant to apply to the Feds. Therefore, any, and I mean ANY, gun legislation restricting our RKBA of all types passed by the Federalies is unconstitutional. Yeah, I know, SCOTUS doesn't agree, but then what do they really know about what the framers thought. They obviously have not read (or just refuse to believe) the notes from the various framers or the ratification debates or anything else that would explain how the constitution is to be interpreted. My $.02. Thanks for listening.
     
    Top Bottom