Tennessee "decriminalizes" firearm silencers

[boxer90]

So are manufacturers of suppressors and distributors of suppressors going to sell them in Tennessee to in state residents without a tax stamp?








Yeah........No.

In theory, sure. But I doubt you'd get anyone with an FFL of any type to partake in it. Similar to the marijuana industry. Early on (and still to some extent) those willing to start businesses were subject to raids, inability to find a bank that would maintain accounts for them, etc. Would also depend on the Administration's position. Obama took a more lenient position on pot as his Presidency went on, so in theory DJT and Sessions could direct the ATF to not interfere with suppressor businesses in Tennessee/other decriminalized states and in theory the ATF would not interfere, and the locals would not interfere to comply with State law, and in theory Tennesseans could have their shushers. But unlike the pot industry, there isn't as much money in the suppressor industry, so I don't see anyone taking that giant leap forward.

 

[jcountry]

I don't think that law will do anything.

The federal law still exists, and that's what people would have been prosecuted under anyhow.

I wouldn't go anywhere near an unregistered suppressor.

 

[Piglatinhater]

I love this video. I watch it whenever I need a good laugh.

He really had to focus on riding that bike.

 

[Rolling_trip]

 

[spencer60]

I'm not sure why people are thinking that this does anything but put TN on the same footing as GA.

They both basically point at the federal law and say 'this is what you need to do'...

It's funny how all these 'gun states' have such jacked up laws. The other thread about the crazy laws in SC really pointed that out to me, and Texas (which always gets raves) still has some truly repressive laws on the books..

In fact short of Arizona I think GA probably has some of the best state gun laws on the books.

 

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

Spencer 60, according to Georgia law, it's perfectly legal to build a gun that has a 3-round burst trigger system. Or even 5 or 6 rounds per burst. See O.C.G.A. section 16-11-121 and the Georgia definition of "machine gun."

QUOTE: "Machine gun" means any weapon which shoots or is designed to shoot, automatically, more than six shots, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger."

Yet we have NEVER seen any Class III manufacturers make such weapons and sell them intrastate (in Georgia only).
Cobray/ MAC/ SWD never tried that, even though the Daniels (owners of SWD) were known to push the envelope on gun laws to see just what ATF would let them get away with.

Advanced Armament Co. is based in Lilburn. They manufacture machine guns and silencers. Don't you think they'd love to sell some "burst fire" AR's to Georgia's millions of gun owners? Why haven't they done so?

Because no matter what Georgia law says is OK about machine guns, when the federal law is stricter, it must be obeyed. And the feds say a MG is a gun that fires even two shots for one "function" of the trigger.

 

[Kman]

It's a little step, but as others have said, The federal penalties are very stiff and not worth the risk.

 

[TheGman]

Spencer 60, according to Georgia law, it's perfectly legal to build a gun that has a 3-round burst trigger system. Or even 5 or 6 rounds per burst. See O.C.G.A. section 16-11-121 and the Georgia definition of "machine gun."

QUOTE: "Machine gun" means any weapon which shoots or is designed to shoot, automatically, more than six shots, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger."

Yet we have NEVER seen any Class III manufacturers make such weapons and sell them intrastate (in Georgia only).
Cobray/ MAC/ SWD never tried that, even though the Daniels (owners of SWD) were known to push the envelope on gun laws to see just what ATF would let them get away with.

Advanced Armament Co. is based in Lilburn. They manufacture machine guns and silencers. Don't you think they'd love to sell some "burst fire" AR's to Georgia's millions of gun owners? Why haven't they done so?

Because no matter what Georgia law says is OK about machine guns, when the federal law is stricter, it must be obeyed. And the feds say a MG is a gun that fires even two shots for one "function" of the trigger.

While I agree in principle that Federal law "trumps" state law. The whole marijuana issue is removing the foundation of Federal supremacy (IMHO) perhaps not legally but how can any Federal law be enforced if all are not enforced???

 

[spencer60]

Spencer 60, according to Georgia law, it's perfectly legal to build a gun that has a 3-round burst trigger system. Or even 5 or 6 rounds per burst. See O.C.G.A. section 16-11-121 and the Georgia definition of "machine gun."

QUOTE: "Machine gun" means any weapon which shoots or is designed to shoot, automatically, more than six shots, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger."

Yet we have NEVER seen any Class III manufacturers make such weapons and sell them intrastate (in Georgia only).
Cobray/ MAC/ SWD never tried that, even though the Daniels (owners of SWD) were known to push the envelope on gun laws to see just what ATF would let them get away with.

Advanced Armament Co. is based in Lilburn. They manufacture machine guns and silencers. Don't you think they'd love to sell some "burst fire" AR's to Georgia's millions of gun owners? Why haven't they done so?

Because no matter what Georgia law says is OK about machine guns, when the federal law is stricter, it must be obeyed. And the feds say a MG is a gun that fires even two shots for one "function" of the trigger.

That was exactly the point I was trying to get across... not very well though it seems.

Federal law is the 'baseline', all states have to adhere to that no matter what. If a state wants to make a more restrictive version of a federal law, that's not usually a problem.

Where we run into issues is with a less restrictive state law trying to supercede a federal law. This is where the 'legal pot' movement has trouble and where anyone making the 'GA only' 3-round-burst machine gun you mention would get themselves in hot water.

I'm glad TN got rid of their restrictive laws, but that doesn't mean that they are somehow exempt from the federal rules... which is what I think some folks were implying.

Could be wrong there and thanks for the tidbit on how GA defines machine guns... that's kind of cool.

 

[Ben Worthy]

Montana did this a while back, saying anything manufactured and kept in state was exempt of federal gun laws.
I'm not sure what ever happened with that.

The Feds won't challenge the legal marijuana states because it's clear who would win that one so maybe there's a chance for guns too.