Gun Zone Deals

Texas Suppressor Law

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!
  • innominate

    Asian Cajun
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jan 3, 2010
    2,045
    96
    Austin
    So Law Shield’s position is that may is not legally binding like shall or will is. You and I disagree with that for similar reasons of written communication is required.
    ac9cb2f35a6c748fa6582cbdc0bd4263.jpg




    And we’ll have to see what the courts determine “substantially similar to” means in practicality.
    Where's the Spanish version?
    Lynx Defense
     

    Renegade

    SuperOwner
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 5, 2008
    11,749
    96
    Texas
    So Law Shield’s position is that may is not legally binding like shall or will is.

    "may" is permission. Well they do not need permission to put up a sign, it is their property. The problem is it does not say this is the only binding sign like 06/07 are worded. So they "may" put up a sign like that says, or not. And if they put up a ghostbusters, where in 05 does it say that is not valid? I think that is the problem LS sees.
     

    Axxe55

    Retiretgtshit stirrer
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 15, 2019
    47,022
    96
    Lost in East Texas Elhart Texas
    If we could make them biodegradable and nature safe and super cheap you could buy one before a hunt and bury it with the guts of the kill. Could use some kind of wipe system even.

    Disposable suppressors 3d printed out of compostable plastic good for 1-3 shots for 20 bucks right before you get to the hunting ground.

    ----
    Edit- not sure where I was planning on posting this, but I don't think it was here...

    Some people call them a two-liter soda bottle with TP stuffed inside!
     

    innominate

    Asian Cajun
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jan 3, 2010
    2,045
    96
    Austin
    "may" is permission. Well they do not need permission to put up a sign, it is their property. The problem is it does not say this is the only binding sign like 06/07 are worded. So they "may" put up a sign like that says, or not. And if they put up a ghostbusters, where in 05 does it say that is not valid? I think that is the problem LS sees.
    Doesn't it say that in must include language, English and Spanish, and 1"height. So doesn't that rule out the pistol with line across it sign?

    I could interpret that sign to mean Berettas are not allowed
     

    toddnjoyce

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Sep 27, 2017
    19,285
    96
    Boerne
    "may" is permission. Well they do not need permission to put up a sign, it is their property. The problem is it does not say this is the only binding sign like 06/07 are worded. So they "may" put up a sign like that says, or not. And if they put up a ghostbusters, where in 05 does it say that is not valid? I think that is the problem LS sees.

    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.
     

    Renegade

    SuperOwner
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 5, 2008
    11,749
    96
    Texas
    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.

    Do you have an integrated version of 30.05? I am too lazy to try to roll HB1927 into it, never mind there might be other laws that changed it too.
     

    newbirdhunter

    New Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 15, 2015
    34
    11
    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?
     

    jcriswell

    Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    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

    Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 23, 2011
    106
    26
    Seguin
    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.
     

    EZ-E

    King Turd of Shit Mountain
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    May 4, 2017
    7,628
    96
    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.


     

    TexasBB

    Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 21, 2014
    105
    26
    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