|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 14, 2012, 08:16 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2011
Location: New York
Posts: 393
|
Legalities of a "built in" suppressor? (New York)
I was looking around the internet and came across the GSG 5, a clone of the H&K MP5, but in .22lr. There is an SD variant, which has some other variances to the rifle, but has a "fake" suppressor. I checked this out on Wikipedia.
It says that the BATFE ruled that the "previously approves barrel shroud included with the GSG 5 SD to give the cosmetic appearance of a real supressor, was in fact a suppressor, despite being physically incapable of functioning as a suppressor, and therefore is regulated under the National Firearms Act. Ati, inc. instituted a recall of the item. Now the definition of a suppressor is a device that is attached to a firearm (etc.), which is used to reduce the amound of noise generated by firing a weapon. This can also apply to parts, etc which will be used for a "muffle" effect or "silencing" effect, according to the BATFE. This is the part I dont understand. As many know, silencers are completely banned in the state of New York. Many also know that there is a device known a a "Baffle". These are essentially what make suppressors "suppress". Here is the problem I have. There are many air rifle on the market with built-in baffleing. Such a rifle would include the Gamo Silent Cat. There are many others, but this is a prime example of a built in noise dampener. How can a built in silencer be legal on an air rifle and not a normal firearm? They are both technically used for the same purpose, yet it is some sort of double standard. A device which cannot silence a rifle was recalled, yet a rifle with a built in "silencer" is perfectly legal, no matter where you live... No doubt the conventional firearm is far more deadly, however logic-wise, this makes no sense. Does anyone think they can explain this oddity to me? It's things like this that I just have trouble understanding... Quick Edit: Wouldnt a loophole be the fact that the silencer is built in? You arent reducing the report of the firearm if the firearm was designed to be quiet. It's like false logic... :'( Damn lawmakers... Last edited by GunXpatriot; February 14, 2012 at 11:11 PM. |
February 14, 2012, 08:27 PM | #2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 8, 2000
Location: SLC,Utah
Posts: 2,704
|
Quote:
|
|
February 14, 2012, 08:39 PM | #3 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: August 5, 2010
Location: West Coast...of WI
Posts: 1,663
|
Quote:
At least that is how it has been explained to me. Quote:
__________________
NRA Life Member, SAF contributor. |
||
February 15, 2012, 12:26 AM | #4 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: In the valley above the plain
Posts: 13,392
|
Quote:
Quote:
It must be built in to the rifle. Any attempts to remove the device must render it inoperable, and/or destroy it. It must be constructed in such a way, that rigging the suppressor up to a proper firearm will destroy the suppressor on the first shot (and should not suppress the report). If it does not meet those requirements, then it must be registered, like any other suppressor.
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe. |
||
Tags |
built , gsg5 , silencer , suppressor |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|