Posted: 8/13/2026 12:03:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Wombat][Edited]
Who is making things? Or at 10 when the times is up in Texas. 
|
 DOJ Officially Backs Down on Defending the NFA For most blue states and some reds, according to Bill at Wa gun law; those states allow suppressors and SBS SBRs only if complied with federal law and federal registration. As he said in the video, there are a lot of unanswered questions still. Such as will the ATF maintain their system for those states? If they dont, I forsee a cease of new sales unless those states create their own system.... which I doubt they will. |
|
Buying a suppressor or SBR still requires a 4473 and the NICS background check. The state of Washington does not define a suppressor as a firearm so there’s no option in the WSP system to submit a background check for it. State definition of pistol actually covers an SBR so a dealer could submit your SBR background check as a pistol. Could you make your own suppressor or SBR? Seems like that should be an option. It’s a fucking mess and I for one am not touching it as a dealer or as a buyer… |
|
Orchid Advisors has a pretty good take on it. https://orchidadvisors.com/silencer-shop-atf-ruling/ |
 Originally Posted By foggy: ATF should shut down processing of form 4s and clarify that sales of suppressors are recorded to their satisfaction on the 4473. Nothing from Washington requires federal records to be held indefinitely. You can thank SD prick John Thune for allowing the senate parliamentarian  to scrub that very stipulation from the BBB when he could've ensured its reinstatement & passage. As for the silencers, the RCW stipulates that legal "use" is predicated on "...registration & possession in accordance with federal law." To my mind, ownership & use are distinct, so it could mean that we get time-warped right back to when silencer ownership was legal, but not use. Retarded WA legislative crafting strikes again. |
|
Originally Posted By Master_Blaster: You can thank SD prick John Thune for allowing the senate parliamentarian to scrub that very stipulation from the BBB when he could've ensured its reinstatement & passage.As for the silencers, the RCW stipulates that legal "use" is predicated on "...registration & possession in accordance with federal law." To my mind, ownership & use are distinct, so it could mean that we get time-warped right back to when silencer ownership was legal, but not use. Retarded WA legislative crafting strikes again. Really could not care less. Not directed at you - just in general, I'm done giving a shit about the super special WA takes on what constitutes "registered" or "federal law" If everyone else is doing them without NFA, I will do the same. Anyone who tries to stop me or question me can suck my farts if it's legal in the rest of the country. |
|
Originally Posted By mancat: Really could not care less. Not directed at you - just in general, I'm done giving a shit about the super special WA takes on what constitutes "registered" or "federal law" If everyone else is doing them without NFA, I will do the same. Anyone who tries to stop me or question me can suck my farts if it's legal in the rest of the country. How are you going to accomplish that? What dealer is going to risk their business and livelihood for you? WA Dealers have been instructed by the State to continue business as usual at the moment. Hopefully, this ruling will spur changes/ legal challenges so that it eventually applies to all 50 states. WA wasn't included in the lawsuit, so we don't get to benefit from the ruling. |
|
Originally Posted By 2T2_Crash: I'm betting the WA DNC bans suppressors this coming session. If you're talking about them banning possession (prohibition), Im on the fence about that. They've had plenty of time and opportunity to ban them. In 2011 there was a grassroots bipartisan effort to change RCW 9.41.250 to allow use of suppressors. Both sides cooperated to do that. I know theres dims who want to ban them, but I think overall dims like gun owners having to go through the strict process of the NFA. Hell its what they want for all gun purchases. |
|
Washington State gun owners have been handed 2 wins from the state of Washington. Yet we keep grasping defeat from the jaws of victory!!! State Supreme Court rules magazines are NOT FIREARMS ... everyone runs around moaning we lost we lost we lost. State Patrol issues a letter saying business as usual, and that suppressors and silencers are NOT FIREARMS ... thank you Kevin for the confirmation and the win. RCW 9.41 title is Firearms and Dangerous Weapons Magazines and Suppressors are regulated here. This violates (yeah. like anyone follows the constitution, state or federal) Wa State Constitution Article II section 19. BILL TO CONTAIN ONE SUBJECT No bill shall embrace more than one subject, and that shall be expressed in the title Magazines are not FIREARMS so that is a different issue than RCW 9.41 covers Suppressors are not FIREARMS so there is another issued that RCE 9.41 covers We lost $30 license tabs over Taxes and Fees being different issues in the same law (yeah, it started as an Initiative but it was law until the courts). I know, I am expecting the same treatment from the courts ... why yes, yes I am. |
|
Originally Posted By MountedMedic: How are you going to accomplish that? What dealer is going to risk their business and livelihood for you? WA Dealers have been instructed by the State to continue business as usual at the moment. Hopefully, this ruling will spur changes/ legal challenges so that it eventually applies to all 50 states. WA wasn't included in the lawsuit, so we don't get to benefit from the ruling. Originally Posted By MountedMedic: Originally Posted By mancat: Really could not care less. Not directed at you - just in general, I'm done giving a shit about the super special WA takes on what constitutes "registered" or "federal law" If everyone else is doing them without NFA, I will do the same. Anyone who tries to stop me or question me can suck my farts if it's legal in the rest of the country. How are you going to accomplish that? What dealer is going to risk their business and livelihood for you? WA Dealers have been instructed by the State to continue business as usual at the moment. Hopefully, this ruling will spur changes/ legal challenges so that it eventually applies to all 50 states. WA wasn't included in the lawsuit, so we don't get to benefit from the ruling. lol |
|
Originally Posted By WorkDroid: They dont have to. If the ability to do a form 1 or form 4 is gone, state law takes over and makes new purchases impossible. If you're talking about them banning possession (prohibition), Im on the fence about that. They've had plenty of time and opportunity to ban them. In 2011 there was a grassroots bipartisan effort to change RCW 9.41.250 to allow use of suppressors. Both sides cooperated to do that. I know theres dims who want to ban them, but I think overall dims like gun owners having to go through the strict process of the NFA. Hell its what they want for all gun purchases. State law has nothing to do with the ability to do form 1 or 4 or not do them. From 94 to 2011 you could still buy or make a suppressor. The only grey area goes back to use and what is registration. State law has never done anything about acquisition of suppressors only use. |
|
What law would you need to comply with. Suppressors are not firearms as far as the state goes, only the feds have called them that. Use is they only grey area as there is no clarification on what registered means but it is only a gross misdemeanor not a felony. |
|
Originally Posted By mancat: Really could not care less. Not directed at you - just in general, I'm done giving a shit about the super special WA takes on what constitutes "registered" or "federal law" If everyone else is doing them without NFA, I will do the same. Anyone who tries to stop me or question me can suck my farts if it's legal in the rest of the country. “I” truly wish you the best of luck AND “I” hope that you live on the Dry Side of the state since your chances of getting away with this is much better over their than on the Wet Side of this state. Call me a coward or a sheep, I’m cool with that since I’m not in a hurry to go bankrupt in court to defend myself, to only end up broke as phuck and still doing time in Walla Walla as a convicted felon with the other Homies and booty bandits. Hopefully, DOJ/ATF will come down with some beyond clear guidelines to the issue with silencers and SBRs in the very near future. |
|
Originally Posted By Wombat: What law would you need to comply with. Suppressors are not firearms as far as the state goes, only the feds have called them that. Use is they only grey area as there is no clarification on what registered means but it is only a gross misdemeanor not a felony. Federally a firearm, and has to be bought in state of residence. With WSP SAFE, all FFL’s lost access to NICS directly, so there is no way to submit a 4473 background check, which is still a federal requirement. As you said Washington state doesn’t consider it a firearm so there’s no option in WSP SAFE for it. So right now there is no avenue available to a dealer to transfer the suppressor to a customer except via Form 4 |
|
Originally Posted By Master_Blaster: You can thank SD prick John Thune for allowing the senate parliamentarian to scrub that very stipulation from the BBB when he could've ensured its reinstatement & passage.As for the silencers, the RCW stipulates that legal "use" is predicated on "...registration & possession in accordance with federal law." To my mind, ownership & use are distinct, so it could mean that we get time-warped right back to when silencer ownership was legal, but not use. Retarded WA legislative crafting strikes again. https://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=2853946&tl=Federal-Court-Strikes-Down-NFA-Registration-on-untaxed-firearms&page=186#i117601220 "Sporting Systems in Vancouver, 4473 via the WSP background system is what I heard…" |
|
Originally Posted By SamuelAdams1776: https://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=2853946&tl=Federal-Court-Strikes-Down-NFA-Registration-on-untaxed-firearms&page=186#i117601220 "Sporting Systems in Vancouver, 4473 via the WSP background system is what I heard…" Originally Posted By SamuelAdams1776: https://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=2853946&tl=Federal-Court-Strikes-Down-NFA-Registration-on-untaxed-firearms&page=186#i117601220 "Sporting Systems in Vancouver, 4473 via the WSP background system is what I heard…" That is interesting because WSP sent an email in April 2025 saying: Good morning, FFLs - We’ve have become aware that there are FFLs submitting background checks on silencers and suppressors through SAFE. SAFE is not to be used for any NFA items. Silencers/Suppressors are NOT firearms under Washington State law RCW 9.41.010 (20): "Firearm" means a weapon or device from which a projectile or projectiles may be fired by an explosive such as gunpowder. For the purposes of RCW 9.41.040, "firearm" also includes frames and receivers. This is one of those times when federal law and state law do not totally align with each other. Because we are a state agency, conducting a state background check, for compliance with state laws (in addition to federal laws), we go by the state definition of “firearm”. RCW 9.41.090 requires dealers to obtain a background check from WSP for firearms (as defined by state law). The SAFE firearm TYPE “Other Firearm” is only meant to be used for firearms (as defined by state law) that do not meet any other definition in state law, such as a ‘Shotgun with a rifled barrel”, a “Smooth bore .22LR”, or a ‘Gatling Gun’, to name a few. The background check, including the required NICS check, for silencers/suppressors is handled by the ATF using the fingerprints submitted during the NFA application process. Thank you, Kevin Kevin L. Baird Assistant Commander Firearms Background Division Phone: (360) 704-7842 | VoIP: 11842 Email: Kevin.Baird@wsp.wa.gov Washington State Patrol – “Service with Humility” |
Pain or damage don't end the world.Or despair, or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man and give some back.-Al Swearengen
|
Originally Posted By Brian_h: The background check, including the required NICS check, for silencers/suppressors is handled by the ATF using the fingerprints submitted during the NFA application process. Washington State Patrol – “Service with Humility” WSP is still trying to write new laws. WA law does not require fingerprints. Fuck WSP. |