Cortland

Suppressor edit

The BATFE did at one point consider wipes to be suppressors; this is a result of individuals selling wipe kits and suppressor tubes, which could be purchased and (illegally) made into a suppressor. For the same reason, the AR-15 auto sear is considered a machine gun, even though it is not a gun at all. See http://www.sunsetguns.com/gemtech_products.htm and the notes on the Aurora model, which uses wipes. Also:

• http://www.funsupply.com/Firearms/m11.html
• http://www.firearmsid.com/Feature%20Articles/012001/Mac10History.htm

If you can provide a link to a more specific ruling by the BATFE that specifies what is and isn't considered a suppressor, I'd love to incorporate the information in the article, otherwise I think it should be changed back to note that the BATFE prohibits sale of wipes. scot 22:20, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

As you know the ATF's interpretation of the law is constantly changing -- prior to 1981 DIASs were considered non-guns, but thereafter Title II firearms and accordingly the only way to get a definitive answer to any gun related legal question (NFA question in particular) is to get it in writing from the ATF (which is of course good until the ATF arbitrarily changes its mind). Federal law defines a silencer as "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." I don't have an ATF letter on the subject (and given the vagueness of the statutes that's what you need for complete clarification) but the consensus seems to be that being in possession of a bunch of extra wipes is illegal, but it is OK to be in possession of materials used to construct wipes (neoprene sheets, for example) and to make replacement wipes yourself w/o tax as needed. The legal definition is rather badly written and as such ATF regulations don't always match up 100% with the letter of the law. As written, if a Class II SOT had a drawer full of unassembled baffles each of those baffles constitutes a "part intended only for use in [a suppressor]" and each and every baffle would have to be registered. In practice, the ATF only requires manfacturers to register cans once they're fully assembled. I think this is all way too esoteric for the article (especially since wipes are virtually unused in modern suppressor designs) but if you really want to keep it I think it's important to clarify that you don't need to file a Form 4 and pay your $200 for every wipe that wears out. --Cortland 22:49, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

The way I read it, as long as the parts are in the possession of a title II maker, they are legal, because the title II maker has a license to make the suppressor and thus must be able to possess the parts needed--conversely, if you have BATFE approval as an individual to make a suppressor, you can possess all the parts needed to make it during the construction process. Making wipes for a suppressor you already possess is a legal gray area; once you made them, they are definately "any part intended only for use in such an assembly"; the question is, since you own the suppressor, are they considered parts of that already registered suppressor, or are they considered separate parts? The issue would likely depend on how the judge was feeling that day. Selling replacement parts, however, is definately against Federal law, as you are selling dedicated suppressor parts. Maybe putting that quote in, and noting that selling wipe kits MAY qualify would be sufficient. As for why wipes are unused, I think it is as much the law as the accuracy issues that keep them from wider use; they are more efficient at reducing the sound, and wipes would, save for legal issues, be dirt cheap. scot 23:09, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Well not exactly. Remember that even a Class II SOT can be possession of an illegal MG, silencer, etc. The SOT has to register every machinegun, silencer, etc. he makes within 24 hours on a Form 2 (I think that's the number). The law would tell you that since a baffle is in and of itself a silencer, even a bunch of unassembled baffles would have to be registered. The ATF actually bends the law so that things make sense. Much of NFA regulations are a legal gray area. In general you have a confluence of written law, ATF regulations, and case law that makes definitively answering questions like "can I make my own wipes?" virtually impossible. I can assure you the law has very little to do with the move towards wipeless suppressors. Wipe and/or mesh style suppressors were once popular (i.e. the old MAC Sionics suppressor) but modern suppressor designs are really much better, both in times of longevity and effectiveness. I have "modern" baffled suppressors that would blow the pants off a Sionics or similar design. There are some suppressors still being made with wipes, but usually only very short suppressors where wipes are a "last resort." Also, the cheapness of wipe-based suppressors really isn't an advantage with the $200 stamp. The market difference between a $650 can an a $350 is much less than a $450 can and a $150 can -- nobody wants to buy a cheap can because they'll always have to put that $200 into it that they can never get back out even if they sell it.

HK P7 photograph

Would you consider uploading a version of the photograph with a neutral background? Daniel Quinlan 05:31, 22 January 2006 (UTC)