Somebody on Gunbroker is asking for trouble, ATF style!

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

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!
  • combat45acp

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    22   0   0
    Oct 27, 2010
    1,541
    38
    DeMotte
    there are provisions in place for using the device on an air rifle or 1/2 the people on air rifle forums would be in jail.
    Hmm, I'm not an expert on the provisions of airguns, but I do know that those baffles WILL reduce a db or more when and if the BATF would test that "muzzle break".

    So without it registered and $200 tax stamp you would be in some hot water.
    Like this guy.
     

    combat45acp

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    22   0   0
    Oct 27, 2010
    1,541
    38
    DeMotte
    Why use that as an example? His case was thrown out, and his conviction overturned.
    ...and it cost him nothing? No hot water? My point is if someone were to purchase that "muzzle break" on ebay, that the BATF would no doubt consider it a "silencer" and unregistered. With it's unattached state, threaded in 1/2" and the sellers video stating that it CAN be used on a .22 would probably be a good case for the feds.

    So,was dudes case thrown out? I didn't know it was thrown out, didn't bother following the whole story, because the simple fact there was a case is enough for me to steer clear. So what did it cost him? More time than the form 4 wait I'm sure, and more money than $200.
     

    RobbLG

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 6, 2010
    276
    16
    ...and it cost him nothing? No hot water? My point is if someone were to purchase that "muzzle break" on ebay, that the BATF would no doubt consider it a "silencer" and unregistered. With it's unattached state, threaded in 1/2" and the sellers video stating that it CAN be used on a .22 would probably be a good case for the feds.

    So,was dudes case thrown out? I didn't know it was thrown out, didn't bother following the whole story, because the simple fact there was a case is enough for me to steer clear. So what did it cost him? More time than the form 4 wait I'm sure, and more money than $200.

    Yeah... I got the idea... But... It was a bad example... He had alot more legal issues than having an airgun silencer...

    "In April 2004, Crooker-who had previously been convicted of a felony-was engaged in offering chemicals for sale"

    "The conviction is reversed and the case remanded for the entry of a judgment of acquittal."

    "The device was apparently home-made at Crooker's request and made to fit to an airgun that Crooker also possessed.   The evidence is very thin-and anyway the government did not try to prove-that Crooker expected this device to be fitted with an adapter or used in any way except as a muffler for the airgun with which it was shipped."
     
    Top Bottom