Yeah, that title may be a little on the sensational side, but this is actually a pretty good example of how ridiculous US gun laws are. We all remember the Econo-Can, the registered adapter you can buy that threads an oil filter onto your .22lr firearm and makes a rockin’-awesome silencer. As the adapter is the registered part, you can buy new oil filters as the old ones wear out. In theory, at least, since the ATF appears to have an issue with replacing parts. But if you don’t want to wait the 10 months and pay for the specialized adapter, it turns out that Amazon is helpfully selling an identical part for a mere $20. In fact, you can make a silencer from parts lying around in your garage if you put your mind to it. Probably not legal, but physically possible. Which should make you stop and realize that gun control doesn’t actually work in a world where just about every part and adapter your little heart desires can be bought on Amazon or printed on a 3D printer.
Wait, what? Is this legal for me to buy?
Buy, yes. Use with an oil filter on your gun as a suppressor? I believe that is a felony.
It is. According to ATF, using anything to reduce the sound of the firearm that has not been properly registered and paid for is a no-no
Meh, not all that interested. Seems too gimmicky for me.
Not really MB. look through vids on youtube (I would link but YT is blocked at work) and you can see that these things work great. If you’re under the radar, you could easily possess the adapter and filter and be ready to go in a SHTF situation right away (or for clandestine assasination operations, but I digress…)
It’s only a felony if you get caught.
Technically it’s a felony before you get caught and you become a felon after.
Technically the law that makes it a felony is an Unconstitutional law and is thus not really a law so it is in fact not a felony.
Technically enforcing this law is more illegal than the thing the law purports to make illegal.
I’m pretty sure the oil filter that comes with the econocan is legally part of the suppressor, and switching out is considered manufacturing a new suppressor, and uncle Sam cares.
No.
While I appreciate your incredibly eloquent and well-thought-out response, the FTB letter linked both in the post above and in the comment below this one disagree with you, and since they’re them and you’re, well… you, I’m gonna go with what they say.
Yeah, I just realized that. Too late to delete the comment now.
When word of this econo-can first came out their position was that since the oil filter is not the registered part it could be replaced by the user.
My understanding was that basically as soon as FTB heard about people actually selling these as serialized silencers they said, “Ummm… no.”
They’ve probably been around, quietly, for a long, long time, just like the linked ones on Amazon. The difference was someone trying to make it official.
Matt,
Yeah they’ve been around for awhile. There is an instruction for making an oil filter silencer in the U.S. Army improvised weapons manual fron 1963.
Oh, when I say “pretty sure” I mean to imply I looked it up on the manufacturer’s website and cross checked with the ATF. If there was a successful litigation one way or the other then I’d say I’m “sure”. If I’m just making things up… then I’d likely not comment to begin with.
Nick you might wanna check out the most recent opinion letter on the oil can suppressor.
http://i.imgur.com/Eh4Pe.jpg
Until a documented atf ruling letter for the masses is made this only applies to the original submitter, but they do indeed seem to care.
Didn’t see that one. Thanks!
I’d also like to point out that the company selling these has such a sketchy web presence that I actually think that they might be a front.
http://www.infiniteproductsolutions.com/SearchResults.asp?Cat=1827
http://www.infiniteproductsolutions.com/aboutus.asp
http://www.hoovers.com/company-information/cs/company-profile.Infinite_Product_Solutions_Inc.a5160310a52e3fa8.html
A paper company? Out of a house?
SMELLS. LIKE. BACON.
Good call.
I checked it out and came to the same conclusion. But the question is; a front for what?
The “SMELLS. LIKE. BACON.” part would mean he thinks that they are cops.
Do you think if we (TTAG) filmed a video of us doing this, we could get the David Gregory treatment? Because we would be doing it to make a point?
Somehow I think that the Feds wouldn’t feel that it was a waste of time to prosecute
Better yet, get Gregory to show how easy it is to construct one. Preferably in a studio in DC. The ATF couldn’t possibly give him another pass.
The interesting question is whether or not someone could buy the part from Amazon, then fill out Form 1 as a maker of a silencer. One way to play this would be to make a housing that encircles the oil can. This housing could then be engraved with the S/N. Silencerco does this with their sparrow. They have an outside sheath which bears the S/N. Inside is a second housing that holds the actual suppression materials. Should the baffles ever be damaged, Silencerco can affect the repair without impacting the serial numbered part.
So, assume you go through this, create a housing, file the form 1, presumably, this would let you replace the sound baffling material. Of course, the ATF could also say that since you don’t hold a SOT as a registered manufacturer, the Form 1 only allows you to create it in the first place, not to actively maintain it.
A Sparrow from Silencerco will run you less than $400 from Silencershop.com and figure paying another $25 to a local FFL to do the transfer. So, given the fact that you either have to fabricate the housing yourself or find someone to do it, you need to decide whether the money you save just buying a legal silencer is worth all of the hassle.
That’s not a suppressor. It’s a solvent trap. See, that way you can capture your gun cleaning solvents in an oil filter and then reuse them. Way to “Go Green”, Amazon!
It is not illegal to posess unless you intend to use it for purposes outlined in current law. Same applies to AR pistols and SBR rules. You can have an 8.5″ upper for your pistol, but when you attach it to a lower with a stock, it becomes a SBR, thus making it a felony.
Proving intent is difficult in a lot of cases, but when it comes to the BATFE, it is the default position, and you will likely have to prove othewise.
I think you may be incorrect. My understanding is under constructive possession you cannot own a SBR upper with out a dedicated SBR lower. If you own a SBR upper and a rifle lower or a complete rifle than you’re considered to have a SBR under constructive possession. This is why people who do 80%/paperweight parties dont allow SBR uppers on the premises.
See US v. Thompson-Center Arms Company (1992). My understanding is as long as you own all the parts to assemble in either a rifle setup as well as an SBR setup, it is not considered to be constructive possession. I am not a lawyer, don’t own a pistol upper, not legal advice, blah blah blah.
I’m also not a lawyer, but I did a bunch of reading on this a few months ago (that I can’t find citations for now, sadly), and it was also my understanding that there was a “presumption of innocence,” if you will. By that I mean that if the collection of parts you have can be or are assembled as a legal item, the presumption is that they would be. As an example: complete rifle + possession of an SBR upper would be OK; or possession of an SBR upper AND a rifle upper AND an unattached complete lower would be OK. However, an SBR upper and a complete lower WITHOUT a rifle upper would NOT be OK, because there’s no legal way to assemble the parts you have.
I know quite a few people who own multiple non-SBR ARs, and the idea that they would have to divest themselves of all of those rifles if they came into possession of a single SBR upper is simply illogical.
If there is someone who can offer an actual legal opinion or citation, I’d love to see it, since I can’t find any of my research on the subject at the moment.
Matt, that’s why I listed the case above. The long and short of it is, the ATF said that TC providing a 16 inch barrel and stock to change out with your existing TC Contender pistol was unregistered transfer of an SBR because the components could be assembled with the stock and the pistol barrel (even though it specifically was printed on the stock DO NOT DO THIS). SCOTUS disagreed, their finding in brief is essentially what you wrote about multiple assemblies, as well as lenient interpretation because of the criminal penalties and ambiguity of the statute. Except it’s way more complicated and full of legalese.
Ah, that’s right. I’ll admit I skipped over your citation because it sounded familiar. Turns out it had exactly what I couldn’t find. Thanks for the clarification.
Elliot: you and Rambeast have slight differences in the fact pattern, so you are both right.
If you have an SBR upper, no registered SBR lower, and a regular lower, you are in constructive possession: you have all the parts to make an SBR, and no legal way to configure what you have on hand. Whether you put them together or not is beyond the point.
If you have an SBR upper and a registered SBR lower, as well as regular lowers, then you are OK as long as you never actually put the SBR upper on a regular lower. In this case, you have the ability to configure the items legally or illegally, but only actual illegal configuration is punishable.
If you have an SBR upper, a “registered” pistol lower, and a regular lower, you are still ok because you can configure the parts legally (there is no maximum length for a pistol upper, but the lower does have to be manufactured as a pistol lower). It should not make a difference whether you have a regular upper.
You could also have an SBR upper and no lower whatsoever, and still be OK, since an upper is not the SBR, only the lower is, and you can’t have constructive possession unless you possess all the part needed to make the firearm (for ATF purposes, having a stripped lower would trip their wire).
By the way, this only works with ARs and other firearms where the lower receiver is the firearm. Compare with a SIG 556: why the upper is the firearm on those is beyond me. For instructional purposes only, consult an attorney, or pay me a retainer if you want Texas-specific advice
I keep wanting to buy a couple of these to put back in the safe as I suspect they will end up like the old DIAS and that little attachment to put plastic bottles on as “solvent traps.”
Same reason I got a slidefire stock. Not because I care to ever use it but because the way it flaunts danger so awesomely makes it very collectible to me.
I just dont want to end up on some list or experience a “constructive possession” raid for ordering one.
I checked out Infinite Product Solutions other items, and I had to laugh. Guys, you’re stretching the bounds of plausible deniability on some of these items. To wit:
CNC Solvent Trap 13/16-16 Oil Filter Adapter Ruger 10/22
MADE IN USA! High quality CNC machined aluminum oil filter adapter. Our machining is second to none. Just check out the pictures. Now you can cleanly and efficiently clean the barrel of your Ruger 10/22 without having thread the end. Keeps stinky solvents from getting all over. Shown fitting on the stainless barrel of a 10/22 Takedown. Outer threads are 13/16-16 for most oil filters. The common Chevy 350/5.7L filter should fit with this adapter. Not intended for bull or threaded barrels. The set screw included has BRASS tip to keep from marring the the barrel.
That’s just plain funny!
I looked at their website (which has nothing under their ‘About Us’ section), researched their company history, etc.
Only Infinite Solutions I can find is a paper company run out of a house in Hampton, VA.
I think TTAG might’ve stumbled upon an ATF sting operation.
Either that or Project Mayhem is real.
http://www.infiniteproductsolutions.com/Default.asp
Not sayin’ you’re wrong about a sting, just that here’s the site.
And look at that site. *adjusts his tinfoil*
Maybe I’m just a bit too squirrelly.
Wouldn’t that be funny. I found a website (http://www.infiniteproductsolutions.com/default.asp), but it’s pretty thin.
The paper product thing makes sense, because if you look at their Amazon offerings, other than the 4-5 “solvent traps,” they sell books. It appears they’re a small-run publishing house.
I would buy from them with great caution.
Yeah, I saw that.
*passes Matt the tinfoil roll*
To be clear, if I saw these at a gun show, I’d buy a couple-three, for cash, and throw them in the bottom of my toolbox and then forget I had them. File it under “You never know.”
But in no way am I ever buying them from Amazon with a credit card and getting involved in interstate commerce.
Or working jointly with ONI? It sure stinks of an entrap… er, sting.
Funny that that says Virginia, but if you look at their “returns” page, it lists an address in Bakersfield, CA, with an LA (possible mobile) phone number.
http://www.infiniteproductsolutions.com/returns.asp
It’s actually illegal to attach any silencing device to your gun at all, even if you never fire it. Thus installing the ‘solvent trap’ when it’s known to be identical to the ‘econo can’ cannot possibly be legal, even if you only use it for the “intended purpose” (wink wink).
Someone please explain to me the mechanics of how the device fits onto the barrel without the barrel having work done on it to join with the threads on the adapter. If the adapter is threaded how can it be joined to the barrel?
You still have to have a threaded barrel. Well, except for the 10/22 version I copied above, as it fits over the barrel and has a set screw.
Thank you.
I have one of these. And I havent spilled a drop of sovlent or any other chemical since I bought it. It works equally well on my MP22 pistol and my AR. A fantastic little device to play around with, especially those that are very concerned about our impact on the environment.
Did you buy it from this company?
I bought mine on ebay, and have been very pleased with it.
http://tinyurl.com/ccv7gfu
Thanks for the link.
That oil filter shown in the third photo, the Fram PH4967, is exactly what’s sitting on my car outside right now.
Dude, as a car guy… buy something other than Fram. We’ve seen lots of problems with Fram filters at the dealership where I work. There was even a TSB about them from Chrysler a few years ago concerning all of the issues Fram filters can cause.
I have a ’94 Celica with 234k miles that’s had Fram filters on it nearly its whole life. I’m curious about what those issues might be.
Frakkin’ Ruins All Motors is the old saw.
If you cut them open and compare them to better filter, they have a really low pleat count and the material will seem sketchy – because it is.
That said, lots of people get away with them. If you have a decent engine, and decent oil change schedule, you’ll likely be fine. A ’94 Celica with the 2.2 should easily go 300K as long a it doesn’t sludge.
If you really want to go down the rabbit hole, there are several oil enthusiast (I swear) sites out there. ‘Bobistheoilguy’ is a good one for general knowledge.
I’ll check it out, thanks.
Perhaps the filter for your car doesnt have the same style valving inside. Chrysler has a lot of problem with the Fram version of our Mopar filters not opening correctly and having noisy start up. Even caused engine failure on some Cummins engines in the 90s. Heres a couple of links to look at. Pretty interesting stuff, if youre a car guy.
http://www.corolland.com/oil-filters.html
http://www.300cforums.com/forums/general-discussion-issues-trouble-shooting/31190-oil-filters-dissected.html
Best of them all:
http://filtrationcomparisons.weebly.com/index.html
Wow, there goes my afternoon. Thanks for all the info-links.
If I ever need to draw my weapon, I am not going to be particularly concerned about the noise. There will be greater issues to deal with, during and after the shooting.
I certainly don’t want a legal silencer simply because I don’t want to “court” the Feds and I really don’t want to fire any of my weapons with an oil filter suspended oh so gracefully from the muzzle end.
It is nice to know we can create these “field expedient” devices but we have always known that.
Suppressor devices are fun to mess around with. For me, it has zero practical purpose. It does however bring a smile to my face every time I use one, so why not? It’s a novelty to me, but if I had neighbors that didnt want to hear the noise and I shot outside? It might be worth the investment. Does anyone have any statistics on how many crimes are committed with a surpressor every year? It has to be damn near zero.
I find the information interesting. However, I would not seriously consider the concept unless we entered a SHTF TEOTWAWKI situation.
I’m in the same position. If I want a silencer, I am going to get a permanent one, not one that will be rapidly degraded. But, it would be nice to have the components tucked away with a 10/22 Takedown in the SHTF cache.
Check out the “frequently bought together” on the amazon page, a Walther P22 thread adapter. Hmm. . .
Well, people need to clean their rimfire pistols, too.
As if the heavy steel golf ball launcher listed next to it wouldn’t be a superior platform. Perfect for serial number as previous poster noted. These traps have been around forever, I saw an antique brass one for a turkish 8mm mauser..
Bet you could make one with polymer putty just centering the muzzle threads between the filter’s threads (filter suspended rigidly) with petroleum jelly as release agent, and filling like a creme donut & then adding external support with more putty. Or on the 3D printer with printed threading. Or taking dies to a nylon bushing.
Do they make holsters for guns with the “filter” attached? You have to be careful, I still can’t find a holster that will fit my Ruger Charger with a bi pod and optics attached.
well, that’s like buying cannabis seeds online. It can be done, BUT………