The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > NFA Guns and Gear

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 20, 2014, 12:35 PM   #126
Wyosmith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2010
Location: Shoshoni Wyoming
Posts: 1,161
Your quote.---
"But I disagree with your assertion that the prices are too high simply because the manufacturers have joined together to keep them artificially high."

You are arguing out of nothing but emotion now.
It’s not "my assertion"
I never said that
I never even thought that.
I never wrote anything like that.

You wrote that.

I do understand economics pretty well. Greed is inherent to the quest of money.
No conspiracy is needed. If you can sell what you make for 1000 and it's truly only worth 100 that just means there are foolish people out there. What the market will bear is what levels the price on any given class of product.

When the price gets too high the majority of buyers do not buy, leaving only the small percentage to support the whole of the industry. That's exactly where the suppressor industry is today.

YOU ASKED THE FIRST QUESTION Theo!
You seem to keep missing that point.


It takes a person of unusually high integrity to step out and make a product for an honest price when it's easy to charge more. Such people do exist, but they are rare.

Apparently there are NONE of them in the US suppressor industry, who are in a position to make the decision to make cans at an affordable price and thereby own the market.

Read that last line again Theo.

It is the answer to your question---- “I'll ask you again: As popular as silencers have become recently, why hasn't any company come forward yet and capitalized on your proposed business model of offering super-cheap silencers to all those people who are put off by the current high prices? The answer is simple: They just can't get them low enough to appeal to those people and still survive as a company.”

It’s actually quite simple
Again go back and re-read all my answers in this thread. All of your points have been answered quite well already.

You say “you seem awfully convinced that you know those reasons better than I do.”
Yes Theo, I do believe I know those reasons. I may be wrong, but you have not successfully answered even one of my counterpoints so far.

I do see that you failed to list the exact taxes and burdened that cause the hassle to be worth so much extra money to EACH customer and the exact laws (copy and paste them pleas) that MAKES the manufacturer charge so much. I have worked with high order explosives in the past and those laws exist for them. As I said, it took us about 3 hours a week (60 hour week I might add) to jump through those hoops, but I can tell you we didn’t have to charge each and every drill hold an extra chunk of money to do out job. It was just part of the job.

Theo, you seem to be making this a personal debate between you and I, and frankly, I don’t think it’s something I need to do or want to do. I don’t have a dog in the fight. I don’t own a can. I don’t think I ever will. I know I never will at the prioces that are currently being charged and I don’t care if anyone else spends their money on cans, beer, football, golf and anything else.

It was YOUR QUESTION.
These are MY answers.

I seem to read a LOT of others that have posted here that agree with me too. Are you mad at them for having an opinion?

Your quote again;
“you seem awfully convinced that you know those reasons better than I do.”
I leave this to you and the other that read here with this last statement.
If you know all about the suppressors and ALL about the marketing of them, why did you ask the question in the first place?
I am going to leave now. I wish you a good business and a good life, but this is not going anywhere that is going to help anyone so I’ll leave you and the other gentlemen to beat this horse as and when you will.
Wyosmith is offline  
Old January 20, 2014, 03:04 PM   #127
Theohazard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western WA
Posts: 2,105
Relax, my friend. I'm not emotional at all, I'm simply engaging in a discussion with you.

I asked the question. I got a lot of good answers.

I agree with almost all of them; I agree prices are high for what you're getting. I agree that all the costs involved are often prohibitive. I simply disagree with your assertion that a company could come in and corner the market by offering super-cheap suppressors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyosmith
When the price gets too high the majority of buyers do not buy, leaving only the small percentage to support the whole of the industry. That's exactly where the suppressor industry is today.

YOU ASKED THE FIRST QUESTION Theo!
You seem to keep missing that point.
I understand your point. And my point is this: Due to the fees and effort involved in buying a silencer ($200 transfer tax; hundreds of dollars for a trust or the pain of getting fingerprinted, photographed, and signed off by local law enforcement; the very long wait; the fact that the silencer is only registered to them and selling it is very difficult), the cost of the core product itself is much less important than in other other industries.

A lot of people here are mentioning the cost. Well, even if a company managed to cut prices drastically, there would still be those extra costs and hassles to deal with, costs and hassles that the company has absolutely no control over; it's much harder for a manufacturer to pass on savings to the consumer when a large percentage of the total cost is completely out of their control due to regulation.

Your business model would make PERFECT sense if silencers were regulated like any other firearm, or at least they were a little easier to get. But they're not.

If nothing changes involving the BATFE, eventually prices will still come down. Inflation will cause the $200 tax to be worth less, and manufacturing costs will go down. We're in the middle of a silencer arms race, with companies constantly making their silencers quieter, more versatile, stronger, lighter, and (for rimfire and pistol silencers) easier to disassemble. Once this arms race settles down, smaller companies with much smaller R&D budgets will be able to compete more with the bigger guys. And prices will go down as a result.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyosmith
It takes a person of unusually high integrity to step out and make a product for an honest price when it's easy to charge more. Such people do exist, but they are rare.

Apparently there are NONE of them in the US suppressor industry, who are in a position to make the decision to make cans at an affordable price and thereby own the market.
This is where you lose me. If this were possible given the state of the industry today, it would have happened already.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume."
Theohazard is offline  
Old January 20, 2014, 06:35 PM   #128
robmints
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 16, 2014
Posts: 11
You have 6 pages of people responding with the cost being too high.

If you have such a high regulatory cost at each step, One thing the industry can't have and expect to expand their market is the distributor level.

Personally, I disagree with you about the admin costs. And many that have responded do also. This is not mystery paperwork that requires a lawyer to do. There is a time delay that affects stocking. But around here when you buy a suppressor you pay for it at the time of purchase, not time of delivery.

I think I read where in this thread you charge $150-$200 for a sparrow? They are $500 here, I can't find a discount. The market here must support $500 cans being sold at sufficient volume to support them being worthwhile for dealers to carry.

If suppressors were $350 all in I would have a trust and several already. And i am nowhere near alone. But here, one, with just fingerprints and sign-off is going to push $850-$900 and take a just about a year between CLEO and atf. That requires dedication. Selling something most consider over-priced for what it is does not instill dedication. And I'm not talking about the atf fee, most of us feel like the fee is nothing anyone has any chance to change at this time. It's fixed and a bitter pill. It's the cost of the product it's self that is not instilling the desire to make the commitment to the process.

You have 6 pages of people telling you why, and you trying to convince. Maybe consider a little believing us mixed in with the convincing. They are over-priced, and we aren't buying.
robmints is offline  
Old January 20, 2014, 06:59 PM   #129
Theohazard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western WA
Posts: 2,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by robmints
Personally, I disagree with you about the admin costs. And many that have responded do also. This is not mystery paperwork that requires a lawyer to do.
No, but it helps add to the overall costs. More work goes in to selling a suppressor on every level when compared to selling a normal firearm.

Quote:
Originally Posted by robmints
I think I read where in this thread you charge $150-$200 for a sparrow? They are $500 here, I can't find a discount. The market here must support $500 cans being sold at sufficient volume to support them being worthwhile for dealers to carry.
No, we charge $450 for a Sparrow. $150-$200 was our below-cost price on our old overstocked .22 cans.

Quote:
Originally Posted by robmints
You have 6 pages of people telling you why, and you trying to convince. Maybe consider a little believing us mixed in with the convincing. They are over-priced, and we aren't buying.
I think you're misunderstanding me, also. Of course they're overpriced for many people. I understand that. I'm not disputing that. I'm simply saying that they're overpriced due to the way the BATFE regulations affect the market overall, not because the companies are all working together to screw us.

And that's basically what Wyosmith was saying. He claimed he never said that, but if he's right how else would the prices stay so high? If it would be so easy for a company to swoop in and make cheap cans that everyone wanted to buy and therefore corner the market, why hasn't someone already done it? There are only two possible answers I can think of: Either there's an industry-wide conspiracy keeping any company from doing that, or it's just not possible in today's silencer market.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume."
Theohazard is offline  
Old January 20, 2014, 07:24 PM   #130
robmints
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 16, 2014
Posts: 11
I don't even know how I got involved in this. I just signed up to research a shotgun for my son. Well, at least I feel like I made a couple of new friends. Theo, I think we agree more than disagree. We are just looking at it from different sides. I will add that while being sort of suppressor negative on this thread, every gun I have bought over the last several years has been the threaded version given a choice. And I know who I am seeking out for advise when the time comes to purchase.
robmints is offline  
Old January 20, 2014, 08:12 PM   #131
Willie Lowman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 5, 2009
Location: Uh-Hi-O
Posts: 2,410
There is a general consensus in the silencer market that only the latest and greatest are worth looking at/talking about/buying.

The fact is, there are cans designed and built a few years back that are still good cans. I paid $150 for my TAC-9. Sure it has the old fashioned threaded locking collar instead of the spring loaded kind that is seen on all the new 3-lug cans. Sure it weighs a lot, it's made of stainless not titanium. The other thing about it, it's quieter than a new Raptor II.

Theo talks about marking old cans down to get rid of them. I feel like I missed out on a deal. There are plenty of old suppressors I would be happy to own. (The SPR/M4 especially)
Willie Lowman is offline  
Old January 20, 2014, 11:29 PM   #132
mrvco
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 1, 2011
Posts: 214
For me it is the paperwork. If I could walk in and buy a silencer out right, even with the $200 tax stamp, I would have done it already. For now I simply have better uses for my time.

And if I do get around to going through the process, my priorities are going to be performance, durability and price, in that order.
mrvco is offline  
Old January 21, 2014, 03:32 AM   #133
Theohazard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western WA
Posts: 2,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by robmints
I don't even know how I got involved in this. I just signed up to research a shotgun for my son. Well, at least I feel like I made a couple of new friends. Theo, I think we agree more than disagree. We are just looking at it from different sides. I will add that while being sort of suppressor negative on this thread, every gun I have bought over the last several years has been the threaded version given a choice. And I know who I am seeking out for advise when the time comes to purchase.
Welcome to TFL, my friend; I just realized you're a new member here. Yeah, I agree with almost everyone in this thread except on one matter of opinion; I think the high price of silencers is worth it and many others don't. But that's just personal preference; I can try to persuade them, but in the end there's no right or wrong on that subject. All I can say is be careful, once you start shooting with good silencers you're going to want to buy as many as you can afford!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willie Lowman
Theo talks about marking old cans down to get rid of them. I feel like I missed out on a deal. There are plenty of old suppressors I would be happy to own. (The SPR/M4 especially)
Don't worry, Willie, that can wasn't one of them! And if it had been it wouldn't have lasted long at all. I wish AAC had never discontinued it, it's even quieter than an M4-2000; and the M4-2000 is one of the quietest cans on the market.

I guess there's just not as much demand for reflex cans anymore. Slip-over mounts don't fit on some barrels and the cans themselves are heavier. But I have a buddy who has one and another buddy who has two, and man are they quiet!
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume."
Theohazard is offline  
Old January 21, 2014, 02:26 PM   #134
DannyB1954
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2013
Location: Pahrump Nv USA
Posts: 382
Not saying it is so, but just asking. If someone near you was shot, and nobody heard it, wouldn't you become a person of interest?


Where were you 27 days ago, is not a question I would enjoy. I couldn't tell where I went the Tuesday before last.
DannyB1954 is offline  
Old January 21, 2014, 07:25 PM   #135
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,399
I consider that question to be more than a stretch but just for sake of entertaining it, what difference would it make if you did? First, I doubt "Nobody heard the shot." rises to probable cause for a search warrant. If it did, they'd check your gun and absolute worst case scenario if the calibers match they'd have to run ballistics tests. If they're shot with a 45 and your silencer is 9mm, there's not much of a case, eh? There's so many reasons that such a thing is unimaginable that I'd be more concerned about alien abductions.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 21, 2014, 10:06 PM   #136
TennJed
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2010
Posts: 1,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theohazard View Post
I can try to persuade them, but in the end there's no right or wrong on that subject. All I can say is be careful, once you start shooting with good silencers you're going to want to buy as many as you can afford!


!




I respect your passion but I an curious as to why you feel the need to persuade? A silencer would never be nothing more than a "fun" thing for me. And it is impossible for them to be more fun than a Single Action revolver in 45 colt. Give me smoke and thump any day.

I have no doubt that a SAA revolver is the best thing you can spend your money on, but I doubt you will agree or care, so I just accept that. Like you said there is no right or wrong. Keep enjoying them, and like the poster above, if I do decide to get into them I know who to come to with my questions

Last edited by TennJed; January 21, 2014 at 10:22 PM.
TennJed is offline  
Old January 21, 2014, 11:33 PM   #137
Justice06RR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2010
Location: Central FL
Posts: 1,244
Quote:
You have 6 pages of people responding with the cost being too high.

If you have such a high regulatory cost at each step, One thing the industry can't have and expect to expand their market is the distributor level.

Personally, I disagree with you about the admin costs. And many that have responded do also. This is not mystery paperwork that requires a lawyer to do. There is a time delay that affects stocking. But around here when you buy a suppressor you pay for it at the time of purchase, not time of delivery.

I think I read where in this thread you charge $150-$200 for a sparrow? They are $500 here, I can't find a discount. The market here must support $500 cans being sold at sufficient volume to support them being worthwhile for dealers to carry.

If suppressors were $350 all in I would have a trust and several already. And i am nowhere near alone. But here, one, with just fingerprints and sign-off is going to push $850-$900 and take a just about a year between CLEO and atf. That requires dedication. Selling something most consider over-priced for what it is does not instill dedication. And I'm not talking about the atf fee, most of us feel like the fee is nothing anyone has any chance to change at this time. It's fixed and a bitter pill. It's the cost of the product it's self that is not instilling the desire to make the commitment to the process.

You have 6 pages of people telling you why, and you trying to convince. Maybe consider a little believing us mixed in with the convincing. They are over-priced, and we aren't buying.
Great point.

Wyosmith also had excellent explanations of the McDonald's principle, which I can also relate it to the current Walmart Principle.

Cost is one of the biggest factors in buying anything. Quality is usually second. Why? because most people don't have the budget to afford expensive items. Most people being like 99% (that's a rough estimate).

out of all the shooters I know, I think only 1 person out of 100 has a suppresor. Even a 'wealthy' friend of mine who owns 3 BMW's and a Noveske AR15 (look it up if you don't know about Noveske) does not have a suppresor.

The hassle and cost of it just does not justify buying one. If it did, I'd be the first in line to buy one and won't mind a 6month wait. But paying $600 for just the suppresor does not make sense for an average individual.

If they applied the McDonald's approach and sold them for say $200, there would be more interest in suppresors and more shooters will buy them.

For specificity sake, I'm talking about an AR15 suppressor: 300AAC BLK which costs $600. It's a very versatile suppressor which can be used for 7.62 and 5.56/223 caliber rifles.
Justice06RR is offline  
Old January 22, 2014, 02:57 AM   #138
Theohazard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western WA
Posts: 2,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justice06RR
Wyosmith also had excellent explanations of the McDonald's principle, which I can also relate it to the current Walmart Principle.
Yes he did. But unfortunately the Walmart and McDonald's business plan just won't work in an industry so heavily regulated like NFA items are. If we all want prices to go down, the best thing we can do is to petition our congresspeople to loosen the laws and allow the free market to have more influence like it does in the fast food business or the big box store business.

Unfortunately, Obama recently penned an Executive Action that asked the BATFE to make silencers even harder to get. The specific policies have been delayed for a while, but it's still driving prices even higher than they are now.

I agree that prices are too high. But Wyosmith just doesn't seem to understand that the McDonald's business plan doesn't work in an industry like this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justice06RR
If they applied the McDonald's approach and sold them for say $200, there would be more interest in suppresors and more shooters will buy them.
There are already many companies selling silencers at very low price points; some as low as $200. But those companies are not doing very well at all. And that's because there's a very low to demand for cheap, inferior silencers when there's already a $200 tax and all the regulation involved with getting one.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume."

Last edited by Theohazard; January 22, 2014 at 03:21 AM.
Theohazard is offline  
Old January 22, 2014, 10:41 AM   #139
alex0535
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 2012
Location: Georgia
Posts: 781
It's legal to have them in my state. Hunting with them is prohibited. Seems like a lot of trouble to go and get the local law enforcement to sign off on it. $200 and the price of a silencer makes it sort of expensive.

I have neighbors that don't like the noise of me shooting outside my house. One of them once threatened to "call the law". I yelled back not to bother, I would call them myself. So I did, and they sent an officer out and the officer informed me that I was doing nothing wrong or illegal and I could shoot anything I want to shoot outside as long as it was in a safe direction and that city folk move out to the country expecting it to be quiet but people shoot guns out here and it's their problem if they don't like to hear it.

I shoot rimfire and the occasional handgun in the front yard, louder guns I take out to the 60 acres of woods in the back of the property being semi-considerate of the neighbors. Noise is about a non-issue here. If it didn't cost me $200 to be able to own one, and getting the local police to sign off on it I would probably get one. Also none of my guns are threaded so I would have to get some gunsmith work done to be able to use it.
alex0535 is offline  
Old February 11, 2014, 08:43 PM   #140
NCummins
Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2014
Posts: 92
I would love to own one to run on a .22lr pistol. Costs too much though. The $200 tax does exactly what it was designed to do, scare people away from them. That is the last thing I need is my name to be on any kind of list.
NCummins is offline  
Old February 11, 2014, 08:56 PM   #141
KeeperOath
Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 2013
Posts: 46
I'm Not buying a Silencer? Here's why....

....because I can't afford even the $300.00 Federal Tax Stamp. That has to be added to each and every Silencer you buy. Good Silencers here in Indianapolis run anywhere from 500 to over a 1000 US Dollars.

If I need to shoot, I'll shoot. I'll worry about my hearing afterwards. I'm sure as heck not going to be concerned about the Thug/Punk's hearing that caused me to shoot.
KeeperOath is offline  
Old February 14, 2014, 12:35 AM   #142
Justice06RR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2010
Location: Central FL
Posts: 1,244
Quote:
Yes he did. But unfortunately the Walmart and McDonald's business plan just won't work in an industry so heavily regulated like NFA items are. If we all want prices to go down, the best thing we can do is to petition our congresspeople to loosen the laws and allow the free market to have more influence like it does in the fast food business or the big box store business.

Unfortunately, Obama recently penned an Executive Action that asked the BATFE to make silencers even harder to get. The specific policies have been delayed for a while, but it's still driving prices even higher than they are now.

I agree that prices are too high. But Wyosmith just doesn't seem to understand that the McDonald's business plan doesn't work in an industry like this.
Agreed.

All the red tape makes it more expensive and thus not a priority for most of the shooters out there.

Unfortunately in our current state of politics and society's mentality, it will be very hard to have these regulations loosened up.

I'm curious to hear which company makes the $200 suppressors you were talking about.
Justice06RR is offline  
Old February 14, 2014, 12:58 AM   #143
Deja vu
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 14, 2010
Location: Border of Idaho & Montana
Posts: 2,097
Running a gun with out a can is like running a car with oiut a muffler. I dont sell suppressors but i own 3 and I can not believe how much more I enjoy shooting now that I own a few.

My 45-70 was a rifle I only shot sighting in and hunting. Now I shoot it several times a month (yes I reload)

For some people it may not make as much of a difference but for me it made my hobby much more fun.

All of my suppressors are higher end suppressors (cost wise) but to me the ability to shoot with out hearing protection (at least subsonics) is worth a lot. Having a conversation while shooting with out the headache afterwords is worth every penny to me.
__________________
Shot placement is everything! I would rather take a round of 50BMG to the foot than a 22short to the base of the skull.

all 25 of my guns are 45/70 govt, 357 mag, 22 or 12 ga... I believe in keeping it simple
Deja vu is offline  
Old February 14, 2014, 01:49 AM   #144
shooterbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2013
Posts: 109
Gemtech is one of the companies that make the 200$ supressor. I talked to my lgs and she said she ordered one for a customer and he was disappointed in the quality and amount of suppression. Said she wouldn't order another.
shooterbob is offline  
Old April 4, 2014, 05:53 PM   #145
kilotanker22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 14, 2012
Posts: 405
the thing stopping me is the fact that my county sherriff will not sign off on a supressor
kilotanker22 is offline  
Old April 4, 2014, 06:39 PM   #146
Theohazard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western WA
Posts: 2,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by kilotanker22
the thing stopping me is the fact that my county sherriff will not sign off on a supressor
That shouldn't be a reason to stop you. Almost all the CLEOs in my area won't sign off either. So, in my neck of the woods, almost everyone uses a trust instead.

A trust is superior in several ways: Once it's set up, it's a lot faster to buy an NFA item because there's no fingerprints, photos, or sign-offs required. And with a trust you can submit your paperwork via E-file, which cuts the current ten-month-wait in half or even more. And with a trust, more than one person can possess the NFA items. If I had gone the sign-off route, my wife and I would be breaking federal law because she has access to my gun safe. But because she's also on my trust, it's completely legal.

I know someone here who has managed to get one sign-off for a silencer. But he hasn't managed it since and all his other silencers are on a trust. His wife is on his trust, but the problem is that his wife can legally have access to all his silencers except that one that he got signed off. So he actually regrets the sign-off and wishes he had also bought that one using his trust.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume."
Theohazard is offline  
Old April 4, 2014, 06:46 PM   #147
iraiam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2012
Location: Lakewood, CO
Posts: 864
Two answer the OP's question, there are a few things that stopped me.

1) I really don't want to deal with the NFA.
2) I looked into it once several years ago, the NFA dealer asked where I lived, I told him. He said "forget it, you'll never get a CLEO sign off you'll have to do a trust", I took his word for it.
3) Cost, not that I can't afford it, I just cant justify it.
__________________
NRA Lifetime Member Since 1999

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials." George Mason

Last edited by iraiam; April 4, 2014 at 06:51 PM.
iraiam is offline  
Old April 4, 2014, 08:12 PM   #148
Theohazard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western WA
Posts: 2,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justice06RR
I'm curious to hear which company makes the $200 suppressors you were talking about.
Oops, I missed this question from almost two months ago. Some of the smaller companies like Bowers, Huntertown, YHM, and Thompson sell rimfire silencers at around $150 - $200 and pistol silencers at around $350 - $450. And you can sometimes find really small manufacturers selling low-end suppressors at prices even cheaper than that. You can also get some really good deals on older model silencers that people consider outdated.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume."

Last edited by Theohazard; April 5, 2014 at 06:17 PM.
Theohazard is offline  
Old April 6, 2014, 08:34 AM   #149
Garycw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2011
Location: Ohio-Kentucky - florida
Posts: 1,169
Mostly the money and paperwork. Now that Ohio is passing law to use for hunting hopefully the prices will come down a little. From what I've seen the benefit doesn't equal the price & hassle
Garycw is offline  
Old April 6, 2014, 09:03 AM   #150
veamon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2013
Posts: 158
As anyone used one of those oil can converters? I don't know the legality of them, and they're a little fugly, but they seem like a legal alternative that's cheap.
veamon is online now  
Reply

Tags
nfa , silencer , suppressor

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.16146 seconds with 9 queries