Texas Suppressor Law


New Member
Jan 15, 2015
What if you use a firearm with a suppressor that is not NFA registered to defend yourself at home? I assume that the case would only be handled by Texas law enforcement so there would be no Federal involvement so no ATF to worry about right?
Suppressed shooting = Big news (due to rarity). Big news = 6pm News. News coverage = local LE didn't have to notify. ATF appears on your door. Was the $200 and a bit of a wait worth it?
I'm confused. Aren't drugs regulated on the federal level? How do states get to legalize them then?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

The state will not prosecute... doesn't mean the Feds can not stand in line right behind local cops and bring Federal Charges. The answer is in numbers... if enough cities and states "legalize" anything, the Federal legal system understands their "cooperation" with the locals is in serious doubt.

Sand Hills

Jul 23, 2011
Just noticed this tidbit in the silencer law:

Sec.A2.054. ATTORNEY GENERAL. On written notification to the attorney general by a United States citizen who resides in this state of the citizen ’s intent to manufacture a firearm suppressor to which Section 2.052 applies, the attorney general shall seek a declaratory judgment from a federal district court in this state that Section 2.052 is consistent with the United States Constitution.

Here is your chance to be that guy and send written notification.

Then you can be the one who got the law struck down.
Don't think this is a tidbit, this is the actual purpose of the law. Use the State Attorney General resources to fight the interstate commerce nonsense.

And 200K notifications would be ammo for the AG in court.

Again, I don't think the point of the law for now or the next five years is to let us build intra-state suppressors. It is to overturn Wickard v Filburn and the ridiculous overreach of the SCOTUS interpretation of the Commerce Clause, at least as it applies to firearms.


Jackenstein extraordinaire
TGT Supporter
May 4, 2017
Middle of no where
I don’t disagree with their definition of may. I find fault that they’re willing to nitpick the definition of may and completely ignore that notice, as defined in TPC 30.05 specifically requires oral or written communication, which precludes only a symbol or icon. Written word or oral language must be included to trip the notice requirement.



Nov 21, 2014
A. It’s a step in the right direction, although it is purely symbolic.
B. No Silencer manufacturer in Texas is going to sell you a Suppressor without a stamp and risk losing their license and put out of business.
C. The better law was passed last session, i believe, and makes it illegal for law enforcement in Texas to enforce or assist in enforcement of Federal gun laws.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Top Bottom