New Suppresser Law in Texas

[Anon]

The ATF directly warned Texas FFL Dealers that a "Texas made suppressor" is not exempt from the NFA laws. As NFA regulations associated with suppressors does not specify that it must travel in interstate commerce.

Sooo just pay a tax stamp or pay the stamp and wait?

[Clay C]

In before the ATF nags someone to commit an obscure crime then kills their entire family?

[TexaswBOWhunter]

Below is the letter from the ATF regarding HB975.


Texas Open Letter:

The passage of Texas House Bill 957 (HB957), with an effective date of September 1, 2021, has generated questions from industry members as to how this state law may affect them while engaged in a firearms business activity. HB957 claims to exempt silencers (also known as suppressors) that are manufactured in Texas, and which remain in Texas, from Federal firearms laws and regulations, including the federal registration requirements. However, because HB957 directly conflicts with federal firearms laws and regulations, federal law supersedes HB957. In summary, all provisions of the Gun Control Act (GCA) and the National Firearms Act (NFA), including their corresponding regulations, continue to apply to FFLs and other persons in Texas.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[kae006]

New Suppresser Law in Texas

Federal law still says marijuana is illegal but they don’t enforce it in states that have legalized weed. That said, dealers of NFA items are licensed through the Federal Gov’t so not sure any would be willing to test the waters?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tvc184]

Federal law still says marijuana is illegal but they don’t enforce it in states that have legalized weed. That said, dealers of NFA items are licensed through the Federal Gov’t so not sure any would be willing to test the waters?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The marijuana argument is a moot point. First and foremost is prosecutor discretion. Any government can simply choose not to prosecute. It is like making an argument that you can’t get a speeding ticket because the police in the same town do not force the seatbelt law. So you were standing in front of the judge after getting a ticket for going 50 miles an hour in a 30 mph zone. The judge asks you to make a plea if you say not guilty of speeding because the cop did not give me a seatbelt ticket. It is continually brought up again and again though, but what about marijuana…..

The federal government does not issue licenses to sell illegal drugs. And even though they simply refuse to prosecute, there is no license to give it exemption to. That is not the same with an FFL where a license does exist.

[kae006]

The marijuana argument is a moot point. First and foremost is prosecutor discretion. Any government can simply choose not to prosecute. It is like making an argument that you can’t get a speeding ticket because the police in the same town do not force the seatbelt law. So you were standing in front of the judge after getting a ticket for going 50 miles an hour in a 30 mph zone. The judge asks you to make a plea if you say not guilty of speeding because the cop did not give me a seatbelt ticket. It is continually brought up again and again though, but what about marijuana…..

The federal government does not issue licenses to sell illegal drugs. And even though they simply refuse to prosecute, there is no license to give it exemption to. That is not the same with an FFL where a license does exist.

While I completely understand what you’re saying, you misinterpreted my post. I never tried to say that the fact they don’t enforce federal marijuana laws would be a defense to prosecution for violating a firearms law. I merely mused as to whether or not the Feds would choose to actively prosecute a violation of federal law regarding suppressors or if they would allow the states to handle it themselves. In that context, it is fair to compare to marijuana laws.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Voodoo]

Any TEXAS LEO or Judge has a duty to give a suspect the heads up just like they (demoncraps) did for criminal the Illegal Aliens !

[andre3k]

While I completely understand what you’re saying, you misinterpreted my post. I never tried to say that the fact they don’t enforce federal marijuana laws would be a defense to prosecution for violating a firearms law. I merely mused as to whether or not the Feds would choose to actively prosecute a violation of federal law regarding suppressors or if they would allow the states to handle it themselves. In that context, it is fair to compare to marijuana laws.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the letter that the ATF sent to every Texas FFL pretty much sums up their stance on the issue.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[150class]

All right I’m gonna need someone to nut up and be 001.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All you.

Just don’t drop the soap afterwords

[tvc184]

While I completely understand what you’re saying, you misinterpreted my post. I never tried to say that the fact they don’t enforce federal marijuana laws would be a defense to prosecution for violating a firearms law. I merely mused as to whether or not the Feds would choose to actively prosecute a violation of federal law regarding suppressors or if they would allow the states to handle it themselves. In that context, it is fair to compare to marijuana laws.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[locolobo]

"The federal government does not issue licenses to sell illegal drugs."
But it does require a tax stamp for anyone to possess said drugs. That's what makes it illegal
Taken from an excerpt of the NORML act, passed years ago in effort to trap sellers of illegal drugs.
The DEA and BATFE are separate law enforcement departments within the US Govt. And obviously a federal law enforcement can elect to disregard enforcing their own laws at their discretion. So therefore, it will be up to your discretion which federal laws you wanna break. Pick your poison!

[M16]

It becomes a problem when law enforcement selectively enforces laws. What's to say that they won't enforce laws against democrats but will against republicans? Oh wait! never mind.

[locolobo]

It becomes a problem when law enforcement selectively enforces laws. What's to say that they won't enforce laws against democrats but will against republicans? Oh wait! never mind.

Could happen and to some extent I think it already has. Does Jan, 6 2021 ring a bell? How about G. Floyd?
Agendas?

[locolobo]

It becomes a problem when law enforcement selectively enforces laws. What's to say that they won't enforce laws against democrats but will against republicans? Oh wait! never mind.

Could happen and to some extent I think it already has. Does Jan. 6, 2021 ring a bell? How about G. Floyd?

[muzzlebrake]

It becomes a problem when law enforcement selectively enforces laws. What's to say that they won't enforce laws against democrats but will against republicans? Oh wait! never mind.

Proof! Hunter Biden is on video snorting Coke and was booted out of the military for being a drug addict yet he still bought a handgun, lied on the 4473 and was never arrested and prosecuted by the ATF or anyone else. This is selective prosecution for you. Lying on a 4473 is punishable by up to 5 years in federal prison.