Armory Sponsor
Posted: 8/13/2026 5:03:25 PM EDT
| With the recent court ruling and Justice Dept not filing an appeal in the 7 day window, what happens next?? All the talk right now is about suppressors. Which in some cases and some states, you can now literally walk in, fill out a Form 4473 or have one transferred to a FFL, at least what I understand from SilencerCo website. Anyone with better understanding? |
Member
Joined:
Aug 2025
Posts:
225
EE: 0% (0)
TX, USA
|
So ... the US President has now proclaimed that his DOJ will not appeal. So, his spank'n new AG has some cleaning up to do. Many states will follow and legislate accordingly. Right now, if you have the right friends (TSRA and GOA for me) and live in a free state ... barrel length can be your personal domain. |
|
Originally Posted By BeardownAZ: With the recent court ruling and Justice Dept not filing an appeal in the 7 day window, what happens next?? All the talk right now is about suppressors. Which in some cases and some states, you can now literally walk in, fill out a Form 4473 or have one transferred to a FFL, at least what I understand from SilencerCo website. Anyone with better understanding? Can you? Has it happened? Im watching but have not seen any instances. I want to believe. |
"Once Open AI is good enough we will ask it to find a way to become profitable."
- Sam Altman
- Sam Altman
|
Walked into PSA today & an hour later walked out with my can on a 4473. If your state participated and you buy from one of the plaintiff companies SBR/SBS/suppressors are the same paperwork as any other gun purchase. Doesn’t mitigate the need to maintain control/restrict access to others /etc. |
|
Originally Posted By BeardownAZ: So to add to this- What does or does not need to happen in order for suppressors, SBRs, and SBS's to become a normal purchase item? Normal in the sense of buying like a standard(4473) firearm now? Originally Posted By BeardownAZ: So to add to this- What does or does not need to happen in order for suppressors, SBRs, and SBS's to become a normal purchase item? Normal in the sense of buying like a standard(4473) firearm now? 18 U.S. Code 922 - Unlawful acts (a) It shall be unlawful ... (4) for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector, to transport in interstate or foreign commerce any destructive device, machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986), short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, except as specifically authorized by the Attorney General consistent with public safety and necessity; -AND- (b) It shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to sell or deliver ... (4) to any person any destructive device, machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986), short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, except as specifically authorized by the Attorney General consistent with public safety and necessity; and... As for suppressors, those are mainly restricted by the NFA law that was blocked by the injunction, so in their case they can be transferred on just a 4473 (they're still "firearms" under 18 USC 921), or made by non-licensees with the same rules as any other personally made firearm. But again, only to those that are a plaintiff in the injunction and who's state laws don't otherwise prohibit it. That said, many FFLs are going to play it safe and wait for guidance on how to do all this. The issue is this is an injunction, not an overturning of the NFA, so it could be rescinded or stayed at a later date and jeopardize the legality of transfers done in the meantime. Also, the injunction only applies to certain people and groups, so unless you're a direct part to the lawsuit like Silencer Shop is, Joe-Blow FFL would have to be diligent in checking if the person they transfer to without doing the NFA stuff qualifies, which is a sketchy proposition. If you want to make an NFA item yourself and feel you can skip the NFA process because you're a qualified plaintiff to the lawsuit, then that's on you to figure out and verify. |
Joined:
Sep 2024
Posts:
375
EE: 0% (0)
MI, USA
|
As I am stupid Boomer, I am barely understanding this. Someone please explain all this to me like I am 5. I wish to build an SBR off an 80%. I know cash is no longer needed, but do I still engraving my info on the lower, or is building an SBR now not taxed or no longer needs a Form 1? |
|
Originally Posted By Retroguy2: As I am stupid Boomer, I am barely understanding this. Someone please explain all this to me like I am 5. I wish to build an SBR off an 80%. I know cash is no longer needed, but do I still engraving my info on the lower, or is building an SBR now not taxed or no longer needs a Form 1? I see you are in Michigan, which has a law requiring federal registration of SBRs. The penalty is a civil infraction, but to be legal you would still need a Form 1. Luckily the tax has been $0 since Jan 1, but you still need to do the eForm 1. You still need to engrave it too, but this may change soon. |
|
Just did two SBRs here in FL. Second degree felony under FL law if not registered under the NFA. Don't see that changing anytime soon with our "Pro-2A" RINOS in our legislature. 790.221 Possession of short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or machine gun; penalty.— (1) It is unlawful for any person to own or to have in his or her care, custody, possession, or control any short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or machine gun which is, or may readily be made, operable; but this section shall not apply to antique firearms. (2) A person who violates this section commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. (3) Firearms in violation hereof which are lawfully owned and possessed under provisions of federal law are excepted. |
|
Originally Posted By SteveG75: Just did two SBRs here in FL. Second degree felony under FL law if not registered under the NFA. Don't see that changing anytime soon with our "Pro-2A" RINOS in our legislature. 790.221 Possession of short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or machine gun; penalty. (1) It is unlawful for any person to own or to have in his or her care, custody, possession, or control any short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or machine gun which is, or may readily be made, operable; but this section shall not apply to antique firearms. (2) A person who violates this section commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. (3) Firearms in violation hereof which are lawfully owned and possessed under provisions of federal law are excepted. |
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer
|
Originally Posted By RolandofGilead: And what of federal law says they don't need to be registered under the NFA? Seems like you'd be in compliance then. ^^^^ This. Some state law specifically reference the NFA, so that’s a problem for them. Florida doesn’t, it just says federal law, and if you’re in one of the plaintiff groups, the NFA provisions requiring a Form 1 and Form 4 don’t apply to you, so “making” without a Form 1 appears to be in compliance with federal law. YMMV. |
|
Originally Posted By willi3d: ^^^^ This. Some state law specifically reference the NFA, so that’s a problem for them. Florida doesn’t, it just says federal law, and if you’re in one of the plaintiff groups, the NFA provisions requiring a Form 1 and Form 4 don’t apply to you, so “making” without a Form 1 appears to be in compliance with federal law. YMMV. I'm using this reasoning, and, I joined the GOA a few days ago. Attached File |
|
Originally Posted By RolandofGilead: And what of federal law says they don't need to be registered under the NFA? Seems like you'd be in compliance then. Yeah, that whole "provisions of Federal law" language is so vague. It is frustrating. I would like to see 790.221 (and .222 (bump stocks)) go away but our "Republicans" in FL are too weak willed. I had my local state senator about 4 years ago tell me that he wouldn't support open carry because of tourism and people would be scared to come to Disney. Weak. |
|
Originally Posted By Retroguy2: As I am stupid Boomer, I am barely understanding this. Someone please explain all this to me like I am 5. I wish to build an SBR off an 80%. I know cash is no longer needed, but do I still engraving my info on the lower, or is building an SBR now not taxed or no longer needs a Form 1? What he said....... Using logic...(ATF and courts seldom do dealing with 2A )... If you already have a legal PMF 80% lower Rifle and or Pistol that you have made for "your self use" and do not intend to permanently transfer /sell ( Possession is tricky; imagine at SHOT how many people could be charged shooting at RANG DAY for possessing a class II or III without a tax stamp in the shooters name while they are shooting it. ) Since an 80% rifle /pistol without markings for personal ownership/use is permissible , I ( not a lawyer) would think there might be enough to keep one covered under the injunction to make a SBR out it. There is no statute that addresses this scenario, The GCA only addresses licensed manufacturers, in the sense that they are for transfer needing markings. Your 80% _____________ is not for transfer, it's for you and you only per se'. In a sense you are a "private/personal" manufacturer not a licensed manufacturer in business. A Licensed manufacture vs. Private/Personal manufacture. Having a License places you under the laws of the license without exception. HOWEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The NFA after 1934 kept you from hack sawing your non- marked shotgun or rifle down. If you did it would exist as per 18 U.S. Code § 921 - Definitions as an SBR or SBS but still not requiring markings if done before 1968. Move forward to GCA 1968 ,now everything made must have markings moving forward except a PMF. A PMF is a PMF and since the NFA is unconstitutional there is no more SBR regs under NFA (Poof gone ) but the GCA is the catcher. it references 18 U.S. Code § 921, definitions i.e Short Barrel Rifle the same as did the NFA. GCA PUBLIC LAW 90-618-OCT. 22, 1968 Chapter 44.—FIREARMS "Sec. "921. Definitions. "922. Unlawful acts. "923. Licensing. "924. Penalties. "925. Exceptions: Relief from disabilities. "926. Rules and regulations. "927. Effect on State law. "928. Separability clause (3) The term 'firearm' means (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel H projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon; (C) any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or (D) any destructive device. Such term does not include an antique firearm (8) The term 'short-barreled rifle' means a rifle having one or more barrels less than sixteen inches in l e n ^ h and any weapon made from a rifle (whether by alteration, modification, or otherwise) if such weapon, as modified, has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches (10) The term 'manufacturer' means any person engaged in the manufacture of firearms or ammunition for purposes of sale or dis- 1216 PUBLIC LAW 90-618-OCT. 22, 1968 [82 STAT. tribution; and the term 'licensed manufacturer' means any such, per- son licensed under the provisions of this chapter. 82 STAT. ] PUBLIC LAW 90-618-OCT. 22, 1968 1227 T I T L E I I M A C H I N E GUNS, D E S T R U C T I V E D E V I C E S , A N D C E R T A I N O T H E R F I R E A R M S SEC. 201. Chapter 53 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 is amended to read as follows "CHAPTER 53—MACHINE GUNS, DESTRUCTIVE DEVICES, AND CERTAIN OTHER FIREARMS Subchapter B—General Provisions and Exemptions "Part I. General provisions. "Part II. Exemptions. "PART I—GENERAL PROVISIONS "Sec. 5841. Registration of firearms. "Sec. 5842. Identification of firearms. "Sec. 5843. Records and returns. "Sec. 5844. Importation. "Sec. 5845. Definitions. "Sec. 5846. Other laws applicable. "Sec. 5847. Effect on other law. "Sec. 5848. Restrictive use of information. "Sec. 5849. Citation of chapter 1230 public law [82 STAT. "SEC. 5842. IDENTIFICATION OF FIREARMS. " ( a ) IDENTIFICATION OF FIREARMS OTHER T H A N DESTRUCTIVE DEVICES.—Each manufacturer and importer and anyone making a fire- arm shall identify each firearm, other than a destructive device, manu- factured, imported, or made by a serial number which may not be readily removed, obliterated, or altered, the name of the manufacturer, importer, or maker, and such other identification as the Secretary or his delegate may by regulations prescribe. "(b) FIREARMS WITHOUT SERIAL NUMBER.—Any person who pos- sesses a fii'earm, other than a destructive device, which does not bear the serial number and other information required by subsection (a) of this section shall identify the firearm with a serial number assigned by the Secretary or his delegate and any other information the Secretary or his delegate may by regulations prescribe. [color=#de3535]Sec 5845 " ( m ) MANUFACTURER.—The term 'manufacturer' means any person who is engaged in the business of manufacturing firearms. [/color] "Business" is key As per DOJ: privately made firearms are not illegal. The rule does not restrict an individual’s ability to make their own firearms from parts for self-defense or other lawful purposes provided the individual is not prohibited from possessing or receiving firearms, engaged in the business of dealing or manufacturing firearms without a license, or other unlawful activity. Of course, private makers must abide by the Undetectable Firearms Act, National Firearms Act, and Gun Control Act requirements, and any applicable state and local laws that govern privately made firearms. NOTE : this is my understanding based on the presumption 80% receivers are part of a kit and not just an aluminum chunk that looks like a receiver bought by itself alone. ATF definition PMF: 2023:A PMF is defined as “[a] firearm, including a frame or receiver, completed, assembled, or otherwise produced by a person other than a licensed manufacturer, and without a serial number placed by a licensed manufacturer at the time the firearm was produced. The term shall not include a firearm identified and registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record pursuant to chapter 53, title 26, United States Code, or any firearm manufactured or made before October 22, 1968 (unless remanufactured after that date ) Does not prohibit an individual from making their own PMF. Does not mandate unlicensed persons mark their own PMF. Does not require an FFL to accept unmarked PMFs into their inventory. Does not apply to firearms marked and registered pursuant to the NFA, 26 U.S.C. 5842 and 27 CFR 479.102, upon approval of an ATF Form Does not apply to firearms manufactured or made before the effective date of the Gun Control Act of 1968, October 22, 1968, unless remanufactured after that date. Does it mean only a Licensed Manufacturer as per Ch44 (10) or ANY manufacturer as per Title II ch53 (m) Business ? To me "business" means revenue generating i.e. to sell / transfer . A PMA isn't for generating revenue or transfer. So Title II Ch53 (m) may not apply . CONFUSED YET!?............ Thought experiment; If 18 U.S. Code § 921, definition (SBR) is deemed unnecessary since SBRs are no longer contraband why have a legal definition that is no longer applied to regulating anything? i.e. No revenue collected = no paperwork/no paper trail/no registry needed or warranted. This would take another challenge in court or an amendment from congress. Seeing the ATF and DOJ both reference the GCA and or "manufactured / remanufactured" clause indirectly on this, I think it would be a safe bet to mark your "new SBR" according to the regs. So until then........keep it a braced pistol.....and use it accordingly unless its marked. ? Chime in here legal people |
|
Originally Posted By SteveG75: Yeah, that whole "provisions of Federal law" language is so vague. It is frustrating. I would like to see 790.221 (and .222 (bump stocks)) go away but our "Republicans" in FL are too weak willed. I had my local state senator about 4 years ago tell me that he wouldn't support open carry because of tourism and people would be scared to come to Disney. Weak. Hopefully some clarification comes out soon. I'm in GA so in a similar boat. |
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer
|
Buy GOA membership, buy gun from PSA. 1. The firearm itself must be a qualifying firearm from Palmetto State Armory. 2. You must be a current Gun Owners of America member. 3. State and local law must allow the configuration.  NFA Update - SBRs & SBSs | Palmetto State Armory |
|
Originally Posted By waywaup: Buy GOA membership, buy gun from PSA. 1. The firearm itself must be a qualifying firearm from Palmetto State Armory. 2. You must be a current Gun Owners of America member. 3. State and local law must allow the configuration.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfSzfoo4hg0If you’re a member of GOA, you’re already a covered plaintiff. You don’t need to buy from PSA or anyone specific for the injunction to apply. Point #1 is a bit self-serving for PSA to claim. |
|
Originally Posted By willi3d: If you’re a member of GOA, you’re already a covered plaintiff. You don’t need to buy from PSA or anyone specific for the injunction to apply. Point #1 is a bit self-serving for PSA to claim. Correct, GOA members have protection from various aspects of the NFA being enforced against them, it has nothing to do with who they bought a firearm from. This "gotta be from PSA" rubbish apparently came from them, is in the Wikipedia article about the NFA ruling, and since AI (correct term - search engine that uses primarly Wikipedia and Reddit (that cesspool) for its source) uses that as a prime source, it's widely belived. |
Joined:
Sep 2026
Posts:
16
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By FRT: I live in SC and have an AR pistol purchased directly from PSA. Do I need to be a GOA member to throw a stock on it? Or is purchasing from PSA enough, like suppressors? I believe you’ll still have to engrave unless you’re also one of the Jensen Plaintiffs. |
Armory Sponsor