Posted: 8/12/2026 3:45:51 PM EDT
| Any comments about the Texas court finding on the NFA and the impact it will have on Missouri? As I read our state law, suppressors are legal in Missouri if they are purchased per federal NFA requirements. This includes ATF background check and photo and fingerprint submittal. |
|
Originally Posted By WillieTangoFox: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/123862/4236_jpg-3810674.JPG I think part 2 is the important part of 571.020 2. A person does not commit an offense pursuant to this section if his or her conduct involved any of the items in subdivisions (1) to (5) of subsection 1, the item was possessed in conformity with any applicable federal law, and the conduct: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=571.020 |
|
I'm gonna go see if I can buy a Huxwrx Flow 556k or similar on a 4473 today. https://www.silencershop.com/huxwrx-flow-556k.html Pics to follow if successful. |
|
Originally Posted By WillieTangoFox: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/123862/4236_jpg-3810746.JPG 
|
|
Really going to make me work for free early in the morning. I dont even work for money early in the morning. Attached File 1 through 5 dont have anything to do with SBR, SBS or Suppressors. Thats why they are under number 6. |
|
Originally Posted By drobs:https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/41568/571_020-3810747.jpg |
|
Originally Posted By 67Firebird: Still vague to me, because the question is whether it's in violation of federal law, for those who aren't part of the lawsuit. Also, courts do not change laws. There are many, many local, state and federal laws that courts have ruled to be unconstitutional that remain as laws. Generally speaking, it is up to law enforcement agencies, and regulatory agencies, to simply train their employees not to enforce them based upon a court's ruling. So, it will likely come down to interpretation, as to how people read Missouri's law. I am not offering an opinion. I am simply attempting to show people where the law is found and what it says. It could be that Congress never changes the federal law. It could be that Congress passes a law to bring the tax back to $200, $500, $5,000........ or whatever. $1 would nullify the recent court opinion. |
|
Originally Posted By WillieTangoFox: Also, courts do not change laws. There are many, many local, state and federal laws that courts have ruled to be unconstituional that remain as laws. Generally speaking, it is up to law enforcement agencies, and regulatory agencies, to simply train their employees not to enforce them based upon a court's ruling. So, it will likely come down to interpretation, as to how people read Missouri's law. I am not offering an opinion. I am simply attempting to show people where the law is found and what it says. It could be that Congress never changes the federal law. It could be that Congress passes a law to bring the tax back to $200, $500, $5,000........ or whatever. $1 would nullify the recent court opinion. If we are making "the sky is falling" predictions, congress could also ban all semi-auto rifles and handguns under the next president. Better buy that revolver now. |
|
Originally Posted By drobs: If we are making "the sky is falling" predictions, congress could also ban all semi-auto rifles and handguns under the next president. Better buy that revolver now. I am not attempting to "black pill" anyone, or make doomer predictions. I am simply pointing out that Missouri has clearly regulated SBR, SBS and Suppressors based upon compliance with federal law. The federal law is written by the US Congress. It remains unchanged. A change to the federal law would both change Missouri law and the court ruling. If someone wants to claim an unenforceable federal law, is no longer a federal law, they can make such a claim. I am not offering an opinion on that. I mean...... in a functioning three tiered government, if the courts tell the legislature their law is unconstitutional, the legislature would change the law to fix it. That seems simple to me. But it does not play out like that. |
|
So…are there any ffls in the house that’s gotten any guidance from the atf over this? I’ll be swinging through the local fun store and looking at suppressors over lunch, but I think im going to wait to buy or build anything until the legal stuff shakes out and we know for certain everything’s cool. |
|
Originally Posted By JAD762: So…are there any ffls in the house that’s gotten any guidance from the atf over this? I’ll be swinging through the local fun store and looking at suppressors over lunch, but I think im going to wait to buy or build anything until the legal stuff shakes out and we know for certain everything’s cool. My local shop opens at 10, I messaged the owner, telling him I'm a GOA member and asked if he will sell me a sell me a Silencer Shop suppressor on a 4473. No response yet. |
|
Originally Posted By WillieTangoFox: I am not attempting to "black pill" anyone, or make doomer predictions. I am simply pointing out that Missouri has clearly regulated SBR, SBS and Suppressors based upon compliance with federal law. The federal law is written by the US Congress. It remains unchanged. A change to the federal law would both change Missouri law and the court ruling. If someone wants to claim an unenforceable federal law, is no longer a federal law, they can make such a claim. I am not offering an opinion on that. I mean...... in a functioning three tiered government, if the courts tell the legislature their law is unconstitutional, the legislature would change the law to fix it. That seems simple to me. But it does not play out like that. Pretty sure the "any applicable federal law" is what allowed us to own NFA Stamped items in the 1st place. Just reading the other parts w/o that statement of that would make previous NFA ownership illegal in MO. |
|
Originally Posted By drobs: Join the GOA. Originally Posted By drobs: Originally Posted By 67Firebird: Still vague to me, because the question is whether it's in violation of federal law, for those who aren't part of the lawsuit. |
Joined:
Aug 2026
Posts:
4
EE: 0% (0)
USA
|
I'm waiting on word from a local FFL myself on this. Well, waiting is the wrong way to say it, I'm hoping they are willing since I placed the order with Silencer Shop and selected that FFL and it sounds like Silencer Shop may be shipping this stuff fairly ricky-tick so I hoping I didn't create a SNAFU here. Got a little excited since I have always wanted to add one, just did not want to deal with NFA at all. If they insist on form 4 then I'll have to re-evaluate and figure out the next step. Might have to send it back and make a trip to TX to get it or something. As my name might give away, I'm a little bit giddy over the win, even if its going to be a mess over the short-term. |
|
Originally Posted By drobs: Pretty sure the "any applicable federal law" is what allowed us to own NFA Stamped items in the 1st place. Just reading the other parts w/o that statement of that would make previous NFA ownership illegal in MO. I appreciate your feedback and enthusiasm on the topic, but I am done discussing the federal and missouri law. I think I have articulated myself well. |
Joined:
Aug 2026
Posts:
7
EE: 0% (0)
USA
|
SIGWO is selling and posting on Instagram Attached File ETA: That's not drobs or me. |
Know Guns, Know Peace, Know Safety...No Guns, No Peace, No Safety
|
Originally Posted By drobs: My local shop opens at 10, I messaged the owner, telling him I'm a GOA member and asked if he will sell me a sell me a Silencer Shop suppressor on a 4473. No response yet. Originally Posted By drobs: Originally Posted By JAD762: So…are there any ffls in the house that’s gotten any guidance from the atf over this? I’ll be swinging through the local fun store and looking at suppressors over lunch, but I think im going to wait to buy or build anything until the legal stuff shakes out and we know for certain everything’s cool. My local shop opens at 10, I messaged the owner, telling him I'm a GOA member and asked if he will sell me a sell me a Silencer Shop suppressor on a 4473. No response yet. Just got back from mine. They haven’t gotten any guidance from the atf so it’s business as usual for them. I don’t blame them for being cautious. But good on sigwo. I really hope the atf doesn’t try to make them a test case. |
|
Good on Sigwo, I will likely stop by on my way out of town Sunday to see what they have in stock. Just got my Tisha from Cap Armory last week and finishing up some Form 1 9mm cans I've neglected for months so no rush but like to support when and where I can. I am looking forward to more clarity as I have a few older cans in the back of the safe I'd rather pass onto someone who would use them and free up some cash for other projects. FTF sales will be nice. |
Staunch proponent of dangerous freedom.
|
I applaud groups and individuals going forward, its a bold approach. And at the the same time I completely understand the dealers and individuals who wish to wait for further DOJ/ATF guidance before proceeding. Not everyone has the same level of risk acceptance. In my opinion if we had a decent statewide Gun rights group(If someone knows of a statewide group that not run by the Dorr brothers???) they'd be pushing to amend MO law to clarify state statute on NFA items if the Federal law "goes away" in some manner. |
|
https://suppressor.org/litigation/missouri Apparently there is a copy of the lawsuit in Missouri's Eastern District, oral arguments were recently held. The judge is a Trump appointee. |
|
Originally Posted By WillieTangoFox: https://suppressor.org/litigation/missouri Apparently there is a copy of the lawsuit in Missouri's Eastern District, oral arguments were recently held. The judge is a Trump appointee. |
DAV lifetime member
NRA Patriot Life Benefactor
NRA Patriot Life Benefactor
 Is The NFA Dead Now? We Ask A 2nd Amendment Lawyer & Answer Your Questions! I believe the content put out by this gentleman to be of use. This lawyer outlines some thoughts I have, that the internet will yell at me for expressing, no matter how well I try to articulate it. |
|
Originally Posted By drobs: Join the GOA. I have been, and I don't recall an ID card to use for such things... if the .GOV asks for a list of members GOA will likely tell them to pound sand... The trouble currently is, since PSA was a co-plaintiff, currently if you go into their stores in SOUTH CAROLINA ONLY and buy one they can sell it to you.. IF you are a south carolina resident.. Similar to silencershop STORE in TEXAS... Perhaps if you use a silencershop kiosk as it applies to THEIR customers... and GOA members and etc... Clear as mud currently. I look forward to clarification and it is not necessarily OVER DOJ still has the opportunity to appeal until mid October I believe... and then what happens to people who bought in the interim and DOJ wins their appeal? Missouri needs to revise their revised statutes again to address this issue. because injunction or NO the FEDERAL law says you need a daddy may I paper... Stupid as it has always been BECAUSE the Form 4 would be complete and you can transfer then you have to do a 4473 as well... that was always stupid... similar to the old permit to purchase in Missouri and the Counties all had different requirements, Jackson County gave you a blank form... with the signatures and such to be filled out at time of purchase as it should be others wanted to know the handgun before they would grant permission to purchase it SN and MAKE MODEL CALIBER.. |
"The development of the flamethrower proves that at one time, someone, somewhere thought to themself: There are people over there that I want to set on fire, but they are too far away. George Carlin
Joined:
Aug 2026
Posts:
20
EE: 0% (0)
USA
...believe in me, I'm with the High Command.
Joined:
May 2006
Posts:
16852
EE: 100% (35)
MO, USA
|
Originally Posted By cardboardkiller: I’m looking for a spot around KCMO if anyone knows of one. If I need to go the Form 4 route, I’ll just stick to Capitol Armory. Brothers Arms, Savannah MO. Around a one hour drive north of KCMO. |
"When trading bullets it is better to give than to receive" _____________________
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - George Orwell
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - George Orwell
|
Originally Posted By M-231: So buying a SBS/SBR requires a Form 4, what about making one? I'm not really sure how the GCA can stand with the NFA being gutted. Apparently there is a provision in the GCA that the AG be notified. The Form1/Form4 essentially did that. Its been mentioned by multiple lawyers party to these court cases. |
|
Originally Posted By M-231: So buying a SBS/SBR requires a Form 4, what about making one? I'm not really sure how the GCA can stand with the NFA being gutted. The GCA and NFA are separate laws built on separate enumerated powers. The GCA specifies that dealers can only sell SBs with permission from the AG, and the F4 serves as that permission. I don't think the language, as written, would apply to private individuals. It also doesn't apply to "making" as would normally be done on a Form 1. If you really want to cross your Ts, the consensus is that only the Silencer Shop plaintiff groups have relief from the AOW laws, whereas only the Jensen plaintiffs have relief from the engraving requirements for "making." If you want coverage for both, you need to join a plaintiff organization from each case (example: GOA (SS) + CCRKBA (Jensen)). |
"Sometimes, the grass is greener because it's on a septic system."
"Sporterizing: The art of spending $700 on a $300 gun to make it worth $200." -GTwannabe
"Sporterizing: The art of spending $700 on a $300 gun to make it worth $200." -GTwannabe
|
Originally Posted By Armson-Oeg: What's this https://documents.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills261/sumpdf/HB1730P.pdf That did not go anywhere (unfortunately). |
