Gun reviewers using suppressors?

[IdiotFool]

Greetings, all.

I have never really wanted a suppressor. I only shoot paper targets at public ranges and don’t see a need for reduced sound when I’m surrounded by excessively loud percussions from my fellow shooters. I do know that there is an application to get these suppressors and my understanding is that you’re getting approval to suppress a specific firearm with any suppressor. This approval can’t really be transferred, as far as I know, and all new owners must go through the actual process again, for the same firearm.

If all the above is correct, how are firearms reviewers suppressing during their reviews? Is what they’re doing legal and, if so, how?

Thanks!

 

[easy]

It depends on where you live for starters. In CA it's a no-go no matter what. It's the suppressor that's registered, not the firearm(non NFA). The suppressor can be moved from firearm to firearm. They come in various sizes and are caliber specific, such as .22lr, .223/5.56, .30 etc. Some firearms are NFA registered such as full auto, short barreled rifles(less than 16"), short barreled shotguns (less that 18"). There is a NFA section here on THR where you should be able to find most any info on such things.

The 'registration' approval process takes months per item, special forms and has a tax per item.

Clear as mud?

 

[<*(((><]

Suppressors are not tied to any ONE firearm. They are by definition of the National Firearms Act (NFA) a firearm in themselves. There is no concern with the reviewers using a suppressor in a review, providing they own or are permitted through a trust to be using said suppressor and are in a state/region that allows the use of suppressors.

 

[shoobe01]

Yes, this. The suppressor is (legally) a "firearm" as well, regulated under the National Firearms Act, like an SBR or MG. Except for the few integrally-suppressed uppers or guns (which are, you know: integral), unscrew it or use the QD mount and put on a different gun. Many are even expressly multi-caliber, so you can own one and put it on several different guns.

I am not sure what suppressor tests from reviewers are causing you to question this, but all I see are explicitly discussed. Just like the guns, they say whether they bought it, borrowed it, or were demoing from the manufacturer in the interests of full disclosure generally.

Same for suppressors. You can totally pull the trigger on an NFA item you don't own as long as not a prohibited person (a felon etc) and they are there with you. Seen a few big suppressor tests where mfgs or others loaned out the suppressors, by showing up and sitting there nearby during the test to fulfill the requirements for keeping the regulated items under their control.

 

[MachIVshooter]

If all the above is correct, how are firearms reviewers suppressing during their reviews? Is what they’re doing legal and, if so, how?

The reviewers you're most likely thinking of go about it one of 2 ways; either they're demoing with the owner of the suppressor (to include SOT manufacturers or dealers) present, or they are SOTs themselves, and the demo models are sent to them on a form 3 (tax free transfer between SOTs).

SOT means Special Occupational Tax, a tax we manufacturers or dealers must pay annually to make and/or deal in NFA weapons.

As an 07/02, I can receive any NFA item either on a form 3, or temporarily for gunsmithing services (repairing or rebuilding). For the latter, there is no ATF involvement in the temporary transfer, just goes into my books when I get it and out when I send it back to the owner.

That said, for a non-licensee private citizen, there is no legal way to possess a suppressor or other NFA weapon in the absence of a person who is authorized to possess it, be that a private owner or a responsible party on an FFL/SOT. LEOs and government agents have exceptions, but that's another matter.