Gun Zone Deals

Texas Suppressor Law

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • gll

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 22, 2016
    4,812
    96
    I thought this was all hashed out in MAY when I wrote about it in the NFA sectiuon and then it was combined into this thread.


    and now it is being /rethreaded??

    Should this be combined as a similar discussion or should I start a new, new, new discussion?
    No good argument is ever really over...
     

    crash83

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 21, 2017
    235
    26
    Spring, TX
    Can you guarantee for a fact that the bullet will not make any contact with the suppressor?

    Are you willing to gamble your freedom on your guarantee?

    I'm not in the least concerned.


    Holy cow... Lots of bad information in this thread...

    Gave me an idea though, someone should make a non baffled, rifled suppressor .
    :laughing:
     

    crash83

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 21, 2017
    235
    26
    Spring, TX
    Just curious, are you a troll or do you have some actual information to share?

    Seems you trolls are getting more and more active lately!

    Would you like me to teach you how suppressors work? The ballistics of using one? Or just spout off info i pulled out of thin air like you did?
    I would take your own advice on trolls before calling someone one.
     

    crash83

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 21, 2017
    235
    26
    Spring, TX
    Either way.
     

    Attachments

    • original_20ab4864-2241-4200-abf4-81af446d8a34_IMG_20210423_162233310 (1).jpg
      original_20ab4864-2241-4200-abf4-81af446d8a34_IMG_20210423_162233310 (1).jpg
      571.4 KB · Views: 93

    crash83

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 21, 2017
    235
    26
    Spring, TX
    Oh I see, not only like to go trolling the forum, but you must also have a side job as comedian too!

    When a some "know-it-all" comes here, making trollish remarks, I have little use for learning jack-squat from them. You might work on your online behavior and attitude a bit before posting again. Just some free advice.

    So in your mind, having the knowledge of how something works correctly ,and refusing to spout off garbage information on said topic , then refusing to take the correct info and continue to spout the incorrect info , is "trolling" ?

    Stop .
     

    crash83

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 21, 2017
    235
    26
    Spring, TX
    Your first reply on this thread quoting one of my posts, was trollish remark, which you made to instigate an argument.

    So yes, you were trolling the forum. The rest of us were having a discussion. I also asserted my thoughts and opinions might, or might not be valid. But you seem to like to cherry-pick a couple of posts I made without reading all the posts I made on this thread. So yes again, you were trolling.

    Would you like some salve for that butthurt you seem to have?
    View attachment 262643


    I'm not butt hurt...
    You make gun owners look ignorant by continuing to post false and ridiculous claims.
    I choose your post as it was the one filled with nonsense.
    Educate yourself. You literally told another poster to google your claim , which was false to begin with, when you could have simply googled your own claim to see how silly it was in the first place.
    If you want to start a discussion , which is what you claimed when making your ridiculous statement , start with something realistic.
     

    gll

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 22, 2016
    4,812
    96
    Your first reply on this thread quoting one of my posts, was trollish remark, which you made to instigate an argument.

    So yes, you were trolling the forum. The rest of us were having a discussion. I also asserted my thoughts and opinions might, or might not be valid. But you seem to like to cherry-pick a couple of posts I made without reading all the posts I made on this thread. So yes again, you were trolling.

    Would you like some salve for that butthurt you seem to have?
    View attachment 262643
    Send me a jar, please; I really need it, cause you are a royal pain in the ass...
     

    rotor

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 1, 2015
    4,239
    96
    Texas
    I read somewhere that this law might be used as a basis for testing intrastate commerce laws and possibly taking to SCOTUS as a states right issue. Just like auto knives can be shipped intrastate, long guns can be shipped intrastate. Don't ask me for my source, I believe it was one of the gun organizations.
    All the debate about bullet markings are not pertinent.
     

    Renegade

    SuperOwner
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 5, 2008
    11,749
    96
    Texas
    I read somewhere that this law might be used as a basis for testing intrastate commerce laws and possibly taking to SCOTUS as a states right issue. Just like auto knives can be shipped intrastate, long guns can be shipped intrastate. Don't ask me for my source, I believe it was one of the gun organizations.
    All the debate about bullet markings are not pertinent.

    absolutely.

    I think the big picture plan here is to get a favorable ruling on the interstate commerce clause. All the pieces are falling into place, and I while I think it is a long shot, the make-up of SCOTUS has changed significantly in the last few years, and I think there is a hope the more conservative new justices will side with the older justices to reign in some govt overreach. Obviously though that did not happen with the recent ObamaCare case
    icon_smile_big.gif


    Hopefully Paxton outsources it to Stephen Halbrook, Who uses the same tactic (Respondent paid the $200 tax levied by § 5821 upon anyone "making" a "firearm" and filed a claim for a refund. When its refund claim proved fruitless, respondent brought this suit under the Tucker Act.) he used in US vs. Thompson-Center Arms.
     

    benenglish

    Just Another Boomer
    Staff member
    Lifetime Member
    Admin
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Nov 22, 2011
    23,933
    96
    Spring
    I'd really hate to lock and clean up this thread. The job is tedious and I always screw up by deleting some content that someone finds useful.

    Try to be a little nicer, folks. If that advice doesn't sink in, I could use some help from members willing to hit the report button and point me to the most content-free and egregiously insulting posts.
     

    Coyote9

    Well-Known
    TGT Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    14   0   0
    Jan 13, 2020
    1,487
    96
    Granbury Texas
    Texas won't prosecute you for having an unregistered silencer, and won't help the feds prosecute you.
    Soo, the law that was signed, has no real legal protection on a federal level? From the little I've read from other states that have similar laws, the person selling and buying can and have been prosecuted and convicted by ATF. (Please correct me if wrong).
    I agree that Fed Law trumps, however there is a real and tangible result from every state passing these laws. Politicians are all self serving individuals, they and their staffs take notice when voters support an issue and will also support that issue IF they think it might enhance their status and/or re-election.
     
    Top Bottom