Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/21/2004 4:18:12 PM EST
If I can build an NFA semi-auti sten, can I build a suppresser for it for an additional $200.00? The ATF website is worthless!
Link Posted: 8/21/2004 5:45:00 PM EST
I would ask in the full-auto forum on the M16 board if I were you. If I'm not mistaken, present law prohibits adding a suppressor to the type of firearm you're intending to build. www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/board.html?b=3
Link Posted: 8/21/2004 5:53:34 PM EST
Anytime you create a suppressor you have to FIRST pay the $200 tax BEFORE you build it. After you pay the $200 it doesnt matter what you put it on....

Once the ATF sends your paperwork back to you with the tax stamp on it then you can build the suppressor.
Link Posted: 8/21/2004 6:00:21 PM EST

Originally Posted By Just_Some_Guy:
If I'm not mistaken, present law prohibits adding a suppressor to the type of firearm you're intending to build.



222sako mentioned in his post that he wanted to build a NFA semi-auto.

I would take it as he is building a short barreled rifle. Anything with a stock and a barrel less than 16" would have to be registered as a NFA item and a $200 tax paid before the firearm could be built.

Then he pays another $200 tax for the suppressor and once he gets the paperwork back he can build it and mount it to his NFA firearm.
Link Posted: 8/21/2004 6:07:25 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 4:51:49 AM EST by Just_Some_Guy]

Originally Posted By USMC_LB:

Originally Posted By Just_Some_Guy:
If I'm not mistaken, present law prohibits adding a suppressor to the type of firearm you're intending to build.



222sako mentioned in his post that he wanted to build a NFA semi-auto.

I would take it as he is building a short barreled rifle. Anything with a stock and a barrel less than 16" would have to be registered as a NFA item and a $200 tax paid before the firearm could be built.

Then he pays another $200 tax for the suppressor and once he gets the paperwork back he can build it and mount it to his NFA firearm.


I'd say you're missing the point by a rather large margin. Post-ban NFA SBRs are still subject to the restrictions of the current AWB and as such, CANNOT have suppressors.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 8:28:04 AM EST

Originally Posted By Just_Some_Guy:

Originally Posted By USMC_LB:

Originally Posted By Just_Some_Guy:
If I'm not mistaken, present law prohibits adding a suppressor to the type of firearm you're intending to build.



222sako mentioned in his post that he wanted to build a NFA semi-auto.

I would take it as he is building a short barreled rifle. Anything with a stock and a barrel less than 16" would have to be registered as a NFA item and a $200 tax paid before the firearm could be built.

Then he pays another $200 tax for the suppressor and once he gets the paperwork back he can build it and mount it to his NFA firearm.


I'd say you're missing the point by a rather large margin. Post-ban NFA SBRs are still subject to the restrictions of the current AWB and as such, CANNOT have suppressors.



This is correct. The ATF has determined that a suppressor is also a flash supressor. If you are SRBing a post ban receiver then a suppressor can't be installed until after the AWB sunsets. So, the short answer is "No" until Sept 13th. After the 13th its just another Tax Stamp and you're good to go.

Of course if your STEN tube is preban you can do whatever you want after the Tax Spamp is received.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 3:26:49 PM EST
I think you guys are missing something also..


A post ban Sten would only have one evil feature.. The detachable mag.. So you would legaly be allowed to install a silencer, that would give you your 2 allowable features....

Of course that will mean nothing in less than a month...
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 3:57:30 PM EST

Originally Posted By coltshorty14:
I think you guys are missing something also..


A post ban Sten would only have one evil feature.. The detachable mag.. So you would legaly be allowed to install a silencer, that would give you your 2 allowable features....


Incorrect. Direct from the AWB:

"(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm;"
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:18:54 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 4:19:57 PM EST by NAM]

Originally Posted By Just_Some_Guy:

Originally Posted By coltshorty14:
I think you guys are missing something also..


A post ban Sten would only have one evil feature.. The detachable mag.. So you would legaly be allowed to install a silencer, that would give you your 2 allowable features....


Incorrect. Direct from the AWB:

"(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm;"



No.

If you go off that idea, no AR15 can be post ban. IT is, afterall , a "semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm".

You are allowed one feature. An assault rifle had the ability accept a detachable magazine and 2 or more banned features. A flash hiding device is one banned feature. So, Yes, you can legally have the suppresor on it.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:22:21 PM EST

Originally Posted By NAM:
No.

If you go off that idea, no AR15 can be post ban. IT is, afterall , a "semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm".

You are allowed one feature. An assault rifle had the ability accept a detachable magazine and 2 or more banned features. A flash hiding device is one banned feature. So, Yes, you can legally have the suppresor on it.


Yes. That is a feature. In the future, read post. Comprehend post. Place things into proper context. Reply to post. Thanks.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:33:06 PM EST

Originally Posted By Just_Some_Guy:

Originally Posted By NAM:
No.

If you go off that idea, no AR15 can be post ban. IT is, afterall , a "semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm".

You are allowed one feature. An assault rifle had the ability accept a detachable magazine and 2 or more banned features. A flash hiding device is one banned feature. So, Yes, you can legally have the suppresor on it.


Yes. That is a feature. In the future, read post. Comprehend post. Place things into proper context. Reply to post. Thanks.



Hmm....

You better turn in all your post ban AR's. After all, they have a protruding pistol grip AND are semiautomatic version of automatic rifles. OH NO!!!

How about PM11's? a semiautomatic version of an auto AND it has a weight of over 50 oz.
OH NO!!!

Play the game liek everyone else. Instead of calling it a Sten, call it a Stenn. or a StenS. Seems to work on "A-15" and "M-15" rifles.


I'm trying to help you out. I've partaken in this discussion many times in the past. I'm not trying to start any trouble. I am stating facts. It is perfectly legal.


HOWEVER: i am no laywer, blah blah blah, take my advice with a grain of salt (insert legal jargon and disclaimer here)
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:42:46 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 4:45:56 PM EST by NAM]
From USC Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 44, Sec 921

"(B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of -

(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;

(iii) a bayonet mount;

(iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and

(v) a grenade launcher;

Note: Nowhere does it mention semi copy of a full auto.



(C) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of -

(i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;

(ii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;

(iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;

(iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and

(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and

NOTE: CLEARLY STATES SEMI AUTO VERSION OF A FULLY AUTO.


This section of the law you quote applies only to handguns. The firearm he is designing is a short barreled rifle, and is not a handgun.

Apology accepted.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:02:34 PM EST
I disagree.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:06:57 PM EST

Originally Posted By Just_Some_Guy:
I disagree.



You are more than entitled to your opinion.

However, if you follow the link I gave, that is the law. Verbatim.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:08:56 PM EST

Originally Posted By NAM:
You are more than entitled to your opinion.


As are you. And I disagree.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:11:18 PM EST

Originally Posted By Just_Some_Guy:

Originally Posted By NAM:
You are more than entitled to your opinion.


As are you. And I disagree.



Fair enough.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:25:05 PM EST
Does anyone else get a chuckle that this is coming from "just some guy"?

Oh well, maybe I have been studying too long...

Bob
Top Top