UZI Talk Forums
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Well this is curious...silencer parts now require a form 4?

  1. #1
    Mr. Miata
    UZI Talk Life Member
    Jmacken37's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    SE MI
    Posts
    4,764

    Well this is curious...silencer parts now require a form 4?

    I hope I'm reading this incorrectly...

    I've bolded the important parts.

    Manufacturers are going to have to start selling their cans with all conceivable attachments or customers will have to send their cans back to get a piston swapped?


    Silencer Markings and Registration Requirements


    Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(24), 27 § CFR
    478.11, and 27 § CFR 479.11, the terms “firearms
    silencer” or “firearms muffler” mean “any device
    for silencing, muffling, or diminishing the report of
    a portable firearm, including any combination of
    parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use
    in assembling or fabricating a firearm silencer or
    firearm muffler, and any part intended only for use
    in such assembly or fabrication.” Such parts
    include, but are not limited to, these terms: outer
    tube, baffles, front end cap, and rear end cap.
    Therefore, a device, a combination of parts, and any
    part intended only for use in assembling a silencer
    are “firearm silencers” and each a “firearm” under
    both the Gun Control Act (GCA) and the National
    Firearms Act (NFA).

    Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 923(i), 26 U.S.C. §5842(a),
    27 CFR § 478.92, and 27 CFR § 479.102, each
    licensed manufacturer is required to mark each
    firearm manufactured with a serial number, the
    name of the manufacturer, the city and State of
    manufacture, the model (if such designation has
    been made), and the caliber or gauge. Because each
    “part” is a “firearm,” these statutes require that each
    part or component of a silencer be marked with the
    required information. However, because of the
    difficulty, expense and limited public safety value
    associated with this, ATF has never required that
    each component of a silencer be marked when
    possessed during the production process by Federal
    firearms licensees paying special occupational tax
    (FFL/SOT). This enforcement policy extends to
    parts made by FFLs/SOTs for the sole purposes of
    repairing a registered silencer.
    Accordingly, an FFL/SOT (Class 2 manufacturer of
    firearms) who manufactures a silencer part for the
    sole purpose of repairing a registered silencer 1)
    is not required to mark the part; 2) is not required to
    register the part on ATF Form 2; 3) is not required
    to submit and receive an approved ATF Form 3 to
    transfer the part to FFL/SOT; and 4) is not required
    to maintain records of manufacture or other
    acquisition and records of disposition (A&D)
    pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 923(g), 26 U.S.C. § 5843,
    27 CFR § 478.123, and 27 CFR § 479.131,
    provided the part is transferred to an FFL/SOT for
    the purpose of repairing a registered silencer.
    If someone other than an FFL/SOT wants to acquire
    a silencer part, that part must be marked in
    accordance with regulations and registered by filing
    a Form 2. A Form 5 must be filed if the part is being
    acquired by a government entity. A Form 4 must be
    filed if the part is being acquired by an unlicensed
    person or FFL who is not qualified under the NFA.



    https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/ne...-2021/download
    AWWWW NUTS!

    REAL MEN DRIVE MIATAS

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    41
    I dont think that is anything new, they are just quoting the existing law there. They've generally not applied that to mean pistons, mounts etc. Consistency is hardly applicable to the ATF, though, so who knows what the future holds.

    'Silencer parts are silencers' is the current state of ATF interpretation, but boosters & mounts aren't silencer parts, and so aren't silencers. Makes sense if you don't think about it, right?

  3. #3
    Mr. Miata
    UZI Talk Life Member
    Jmacken37's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    SE MI
    Posts
    4,764
    I don't like them mentioning "front end cap."
    AWWWW NUTS!

    REAL MEN DRIVE MIATAS

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,469
    Quote Originally Posted by Jmacken37 View Post
    I don't like them mentioning "front end cap."
    Lines of text that would comprise many barrels of ink if printed have been written on firearms blogs with respect to the 'front end cap'.

    MHO, YMMV, etc. Be well.

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    721
    This is likely just part of their cracking down on "solvent trap" and "fuel filter" sellers who make things that can be converted into silencer parts.

  6. #6
    UZI Talk Supporter
    JohnFreeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    SE USA
    Posts
    737
    Quote Originally Posted by slimshady View Post
    This is likely just part of their cracking down on "solvent trap" and "fuel filter" sellers who make things that can be converted into silencer parts.

    That has been so fruitful for them in the past!

  7. #7
    Registered User DINK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    480
    That provision was added to the law back in the early 80s, after some enterprising individuals started selling Sionics-type silencer kits with all the parts needed except the outer tubes. By odd coincidence there was another company located right next to them that was selling tube sets. You could leaf through the old Shotgun News and find the two ads a few pages apart. The feds raided the company or companies and grabbed their shipping records, then spent the next few months confiscating the kits all over the country. They asked congress to add the wording to the existing law to prevent similar shenanigans.

    More recently, the legitimate silencer manufacturers have worked out a legal way to sell different attachment "modules" and I don't know the exact legal mechanism they used, but it's a good thing they have worked it out with BATF. I have no idea what the status of end caps is.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Please consider becoming an UZI Talk Supporter.