Previous Post
Next Post

Silencers have become a significant segment of the firearms business and it’s growing every day. With the Hearing Protection Act on the horizon it seems everyone and their brother is making a suppressor and getting ready for the (hoped for) flood of new can owners.

For those who don’t want to pay through the nose for a gun muffler (or really just want to do it themselves) there are kits available with all the parts you need to cobble together your own. You just need to file the requisite paperwork and drill some holes. But it appears that the ATF has just shut down one of the providers of such kits.

SD Tactical Arms in Prescott, Arizona had been selling “solvent trap” kits. These are ostensibly designed to be fitted on the muzzle of a firearm to catch any solvent leaking out during cleaning. The kits are completely enclosed, with no central passage through which a projectile might pass.

But according to a letter from the ATF posted on SD Tactical’s Facebook page the ATF believes that these items are 100% legal to own.

The stated intent of a solvent trap is to catch and trap gun cleaning solvent during bore cleaning operations commonly performed on firearms. Solvent traps do attach to the muzzle of a firearm but do not have any design features intended to allow a bullet to pass through them. Since as originally manufactured they are not intended to silence, muffle or diminish the report of a portable firearm they are not silencers as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(24) and thus also are not firearms as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3) or 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(7).

However, if the solvent trapped was redesigned or utilized to assemble a device for silencing, muffling or diminishing the report of a portable firearm or if intent was demonstrated to use the device for silencing, muffling or diminishing the report of a portable firearm, the solvent trap would be classified as a “firearm silencer” as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(24) and as a “firearm” as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3)(C) and 26 U.S.C. § 5845(a)(7).

Despite that apparent approval, the ATF has shut down SD Tactical’s solvent trap business as of January 25th citing “constructive intent,” a regulatory concept used by the ATF which says possession of the materials to produce a regulated item is the same as possession of the actual item. Here’s SD Tactical’s statement:

As of today the ATF shut down our business of selling solvent traps. This is 99% of our income. They have put 3 Veterans, my wife and son out of work. They said I can’t sell freeze plugs. NAPA can’t even sell them to us because they are a suppressor part. They said all I can sell is complete suppressor’s. That is what we do for now until I get some legal help to fight these vauge laws or opinions. The issue is NFA items. He said tubes and freeze plugs were suppressor parts. Would that mean if you have a shotgun and a hacksaw you have a sawed off shotgun? If you own a AR isn’t that a potential SBR?

My plea for help is to make this Viral to the Trump admin, the Trump family and such. I have been put in the street over mindless opinions. I had talked to the ATF in the past and they had no issues. Today they shut us down.

Despite what you may think, the ATF has historically been a relatively reasonable entity to work with. If you ask them a question, they issue an opinion letter and that remains the official opinion until there’s a change in the underlying law.

Recently, however, the ATF has been completely unreliable in adhering to their own opinion letters. Despite numerous letters stating that the ATF believes a “pistol arm brace” does not make an AR pistol an SBR no matter how it is used, the ATF reversed its own decision two years ago and confusion has reigned ever since. The SD Tactical situation looks like another such reversal.

While the closure of a “solvent trap” business is troubling, the larger issue is the unreliability of issued ATF opinions. If the firearms business and the public can’t rely on the agency’s opinion letters to clarify the often complicated web of gun control laws, we might see a real world Henry Bowman in the near future.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Total BS! I’ve used two of their kits in the past for my form-1 cans and they are one of the most affordable options for someone looking to play the quiet game. Just like anything else NFA related this is nothing but class discrimination. If you can’t afford a high dollar can and don’t know how to run a lathe, these kits are an awesome way for the average Joe to enjoy a little liberty. Land of the free? Home of the brave… Nation of the BATF nazis!

    • ” Land of the free? Home of the brave… Nation of the BATF nazis!”

      Dude. It’s the law.

      If you want to talk about class discrimination: it’s low class to blame the law enforcers. You should be blaming the law itself. Blame the people who passed it. Blame the people who (now) refuse to try to repeal it. The GOP is in power–CONTACT YOUR CONGRESSMAN!!!

      • Solvent traps are silencers now? Hmmm, okay! I’ll blame the ATF for interpreting the law any way that suits them.

        • ^lol this. Your post is exactly why they are now regulated.

          That and the fact that it is apparently a company selling these with a wink and a nod. If they called their company “Solvent Solutions” and just sold this and gun cleaning kits I bet they would have been fine.

        • Law states “including any combination of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling or fabricating a firearm silencer” So if parts are sold for the purpose of constructing a silencer, you are in violation. The moment they told you NOT to drill the holes until you get your form 1, they were selling parts.

      • A clearly stated law that doesn’t change with the opinion of the enforcing agency would be palatable. This flip flop bs needs to stop. Constructive intent is bs as well. It either is or isn’t. Until it’s assembled, it’s not a suppressor/SBR/SBS.

        • Go sell a AR lower some time. It’s not a “assembled” firearm. If everything you need to build the suppressor is in the “Kit”, then one of the parts has to be the suppressor.

          • Has anyone seen baffles included with the kit? Do you have a silencer without having baffles? If you drill-out the freeze plugs, does the shroud actually dampen any sound?

            Seems the ATF is, indeed, making flashlight barrels potential silencer parts.

        • Sam I Am; they no longer have their “kit” listed with the parts, but judging by what people who have claimed to use the kits and the kits listed on other sites I would have to say yes. Would be nice to see if someone actually worked with the ATF on what parts could be sold for someone who wants to manufacture their own suppressor. It’s more akin to the whole “brace” crap, but worse. There is no way you can argue that a “solvent” trap needs to have multiple baffles in it (even if they are not drilled out).

          • Does that mean that my 2inch aluminum tube, and 8 .224 inch IAD washers, loose in a single drawer, would be a suppressor? Or at least constructive manufacture? What if the items were in separate drawers in the same cabinet? Or separate cabinets? Or….

        • Binder,

          I sell several lowers per week. I’m familiar with the ins and outs of selling them as well as the opinions of my local ATF reps about those sales.

          What about an 80% lower ( stupid term)? Is that a “firearm”? If not, why not? How is this “kit” any different? If you assembled the”kit” without drilling holes in the plugs, is that a suppressor?

        • Jack; that 80% lower you are selling has been manufactured by someone who worked with the ATF to determined exactly how far they can go before be becomes a “firearm”. These guys are not doing that, they are trying to be cute and calling the suppressor kit something else. Also, try and sell that 80% lower with lower parts kit with a regular stock and 14 inch upper in the same box. I would NOT recommend doing that.

        • Binder,

          We’re not going to agree on this. I see no problem with your scenario because none of those parts are regulated. Would you be OK with someone purchasing that same kit if they bought a “brace” along with it?(Assuming they weren’t going to shoulder it of course). What if you sold them a muzzle device they could look and weld? Again, you either break the law or you don’t. This kit, if assembled as is, would not be a suppressor.

        • How about we all read the statue:

          “18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(24)
          The terms “firearm silencer” and “firearm 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.”

          Are you going to say that these were not intended to be coveted into silencers?

          • I cannot imagine intent on the part of someone else. Talk about capricious and arbitrary. There are plans and instructions on the internet for building a machine gun from common items around the house. If I download those instructions, can you safely infer that I have the intent to build a machine gun? If I happen to have all the requisite items, and download the plans, can you seriously conclude my intent is to build a machine gun? As noted by others, if I have an AR-15, ammunition and a duffel bag in the trunk of my car, and park the car in front of a bank, is that constructive intent to rob the bank? If I have empty 2 liter coke bottles, duct tape and a pistol in a salesman’s sample bag, is that also constructive intent to make a silencer? “Constructive intent” has no boundary; that is the crime.

        • Law states “including any combination of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling or fabricating a firearm silencer” So if parts are sold for the purpose of constructing a silencer, you are in violation. The moment they told you NOT to drill the holes until you get your form 1, they were selling parts.

          • Under that reasoning, if I buy liter sized bottles of cola and duct tape at the same time, and the clerk hands me a flyer stating that I must take care to not allow those items to be used to make a firearm suppressor (because all the gangers do it), then the 7-11 is suddenly selling silencer parts? Or if the flyer simply states “Do not use any purchased item for illegal purposes”, that constitutes knowledge by the store operator that the items can be used for illegal purposes, and is selling “parts” that will be used in a crime?

        • So, Sam I Am, you really think theses are not intended to be combined to build a suppressor. Really. And here is the crux of this, no matter what the AFT puts in a letter, good luck convincing a jury of that augment. Do you at least agree that you can not sell suppressor parts without a form one. If not, try and ask SilencerCo sometime for replacement parts. (and not the end caps)

          • I do, indeed, understand suppressor parts. My statements are to highlight how impossible it is to control “constructive manufacture” based on an undefined “intent”. There is no stopping the re-defining (on-the-fly) of “intent”. We have “hate speech” because of a warping of “intent”. You want more of that? What I am saying is a government agency that is a real and established “though police” is dangerous to humans and other living things. If you are a hardened murderer, with a long history of imprisonment, I do not care what you intend to do with whichever hardware and supplies you obtain, I care only about you actually do with the items. That means I would have to wait until you commit a crime before you are arrested (“conspiracy law” that preempts is more “thought police”). Not only do we have hate crimes based on elastic concepts of “intent”, we also have pre-crime temporary restraining orders that are based on no rationality regarding “intent”. TROs themselves are pre-crime accusations. I can’t imagine a more slippery slope to subjugation than “thought” crimes.

      • “Law enforcers” are human, as such they have free will. If they choose to enforce the law, then they are just as responsible for the law as the moral degenerates who passed it.

      • “Dude. Its the law.”

        That means literally nothing. Slavery was the law, execution of Jews was the law. Burning witches at the stake was the law. CLEARLY the law can be, and often is, wrong.

        But we’re not talking about the law – we’re talking about an OPINION, because the ATF does not have the power to make laws.

      • In this case it is NOT the law, it is the law enforcers who are in a position to interpret the law as to what is or is not illegal under the law, then change their mind(s) capriciously at some later date and turn you into a felon.

        • Those who make one rule and then reverse it, leaving citizens in the lurch, should be given the weapon of their choice plus basic gear and dropped into the desert to fight ISIS. If nothing else, their rotting bodies would improve the environment by supplying nutrients.

        • SD Tactical was obeying the law. They had written documentation from the pertinent LEA that they were obeying the law.
          Then, suddenly, the LEA said they weren’t obeying the law.
          Nobody changed the law.
          SO, how does “Instead of saying fuck the SS why don’t you obey the law?” fit here?

      • Actually the law says shall not be infringed. Heller affirmed that portable arms were sn individual right. Just because government writes a law that says this class of portable arms is legal but that class isn’t doesn’t mean the law is constitutional. Its far past time the unconstitutional NFA was abolished.

      • your right it’s the law makers/writers that are responsible but the atf is going to translate it in thier own interest anyway…just like that video on you tube where this guy builds an ak47 out of a shovel!!!…”INTENT” Is bullshit!!!…what happened to INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY!!!…the atf will have you believing that shovels are assault rifles!!!

      • Ebby 123. The law also said slavery was legal at one time. The law is written by men, who often push for restrictions on rights under the guise of safety. There has been no evidence that a mass surge of people are going around converting solvent traps and killing people. This is an unelected agency making new law in violation of the constitution. The classification of a silencer as a firearm is just as ignorant, given it has zero characteristics of a firearm. Just as a solvent trap has NO characteristics the define a silencer or supressor. It’s like the government telling you a potato is an apple, just because they say so. If you follow along blindly, you are part of the problem.

      • The law is repugnant to the US Constitution, therefore anyone enforcing laws against their oath should be charged with a crime. Unjust laws should be repealed, so I agree with you in regards to Congress being ultimately to blame, but the law and it’s enforcing agency shouldn’t be valid in the first place.

    • I cannot agree more with all the comments. It is absolutly unconstatutional for the court to make laws by decree , so should it be by any entity . if there are no actual laws. then opinions are worthless. You just cant trust any entity that has the power to just make up what ever rules they want. then change thiers mids after you have already paid fof items. the brace is a good example. they were ok, now they decide well you cant shoulder it u can put it on your cheek. wtf is wrong with thesr people, the neighbors of our gun clubs would like nothing better than to make cans manditory so they dont have to listen to the noise. for gods sakes! NFa rules should not apply to silly thongs like sound safety ear protection. its stupid that ig evfn exists. Funny they gave an 18 yr old kid a full aupr M-16 and m-60 , 47 yrs ago and said go kill a shitload of people, thats ok, cone home you need a permit to do everything. Patriots should not need permission from anyone fir anything as long as they are not felins. and really? 11 months for a 200.00 tax stamp? that should be a 10.00 fee.? and oncd you are on record and have prints and picture, why not a short form for any other cans? BFSII TRIGGERS ARE GREAT! now what,? do we have to worry about some bureucrat deciding well maybe we change our minds? F them!! the entire nfa should be done over! period, skels will still do bad things, no matter what rules are made up. ever wonder maybe the big businesses are behind it? charging 1000.00 for a 200.00 item? everytime someone has an idea, big money shits themselves, and gets rules changed. if you are stupid enough to pay 600-1200 for a can and 200.00 for everyone you buy, you deserve to get the screwing big business gives you. stop buying thier products… Surefire should just make over priced flashlights ill still buy my 20.00 china made 1200 lumen lights!! 200.00 for a flashlight, see what i mean? big business tells them what to do. i think ill order another solvent trap so i dont get the solvent on my garage floor. nuff said

  2. Congress could cut off their funding, but that would leave the agency in existence Just shut the thing down and throw the savings at the deficit.

    • Yeah, just defunding them won’t stop them. They’d just get on the UnConstitutional bandwagon with other Police State rights violators and start ‘integrating’ their raids with drug raids so they could share in the attendant asset forfeiture for profit scam. You know, instead of raiding law-abiding businesses or setting up gun stings they’d follow someone smoking a joint, arrest them, get their address of their ‘National I.D. card’ (courtesy of the ‘2005 Real I.D. Act) which turns out to be the parents house where he’s living in the basement but nevertheless, the police determine that the parent’s property is ‘somehow’ connected as an accessory to drug dealing jeven though the parents were in no way involved and not arrested, the house is seized and winds up on police auction to fund the agency.

      Better to just shut down the ATF and most other corrupt anti-Constitutional agencies.

      • Asset forfeiture is a while other brand of tyranny.

        But I have an idea to cut it back drastically: all proceeds from asset forfeitures should go to fund a public defender’s office on par with the prosecutor’s office, with the added authority of being able to prosecute cops found crooked in any case. Not wanting to fund that, police chiefs would suddenly find they don’t want to seize much at all.

        • Asset forfeiture was originally a great tool for law enforcement. It stripped the bad guy of his wealth and provided money for investigation and prosecution of serious crimes. The Feds ruined that as they have with many good ideas. I worked for DEA for a few years before going back to my state agency. We called DEA “Don’t Expect Anything” “Don’t Even Ask”. Nothing but a bunch of punks working on their career and most would walk right past a good case if it involved any actual effort… Don’t get me started on the FBI.
          And your obvious bias against police officers is of no consequence to me. I don’t listen to that sort of garbage.

      • the whole problem with this is simple if you buy the parts for the solvent trap and then you get a form 1 you have broke no law period it is bull crap along with all the bull crap NFA laws they all keep the people from utilizing the 2nd amendment in the manner our fore fathers had intended which is we the people are to be allowed to have the same weaponry as the US military PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • You wouldn’t believe the armaments you can make there! BOMBS! GUNS! MACHINE GUNS! SHORT-BARRELED EVERYTHINGS!!!

      We are building a case against Lowes now, and unfortunately Ace hardware still isn’t giving us any evidence to prosecute.

  3. “Despite what you may think, the ATF has historically been a relatively reasonable entity to work with”

    The roasted children at Waco disagree.

    • As I recall, it was the FBI that roasted the children. The ATF was the ones who mucked up a simple arrest so badly the FBI had to finish.

      • You are correct. Remember….it all started with the ATF deciding that their charter stretched to cover situations where guns and children were co-located. That determination has never been declared inaccurate, erroneous, illegal or any other status of blatant and obvious overreach.

      • Let’s be honest, the ATF did not attempt a simple arrest, they wanted to stage a grand spectacle to demonstrate their power. They even notified local press ahead of time.

        • The ATF acquitted itself poorly at Waco and got what it deserved. However, the Branch Davidians could have resolved the situation at any time by simply walking out with their hands up. You are presumed innocent in a court of law, but you are presumed guilty when you get arrested.

          However, the FBI started the fire that burned the compound and then opened fire on the only exit so nobody could escape. And bulldozed the crime scene.

          Janet Reno and Bill Clinton can’t die soon enough.

        • “However, the Branch Davidians could have resolved the situation at any time by simply walking out with their hands up.”

          The ATF could have simply arrested David Koresh on his daily jog. Instead they announced their intention to make a show.

          Also by your argument, 2A is utterly useless, since everyone should surrender themselves to mercy of the legal process.

          • The feds could have avoided the entire episode !

            The justification for the raid was that there were children in the compound, and there were guns in the compound. ATF and FBI concluded that they were now in the social services business, and their responsibilities included armed raids into a home where guns were located because…guns. No violations of any law had occurred. Local police did not have warrants for Davidians, because there were no crimes requiring search or arrest. The episode was entirely legal murder under cover of some people having official badges, and complete disregard for law, procedure, human rights.

            Don’t blame the Davidians for rogue law enforcement action that should have sparked an armed response against the feds, from the entire town and county.

        • No, David Koresh and the families (several families were British citizens, by the way) were assaulted, shot and burned alive.

          Most of the injuries by the attacking ATF/FBI forces were caused by ‘friendly fire.’

          The government (and us through our inability to control our government) murdered those people. And they got away with it.

          The whole reign of terror that was Bill Clinton’s presidency was full of these illegal acts that were just ignored by so many of us citizens. It was a disgusting example of how a society can so easily slip into allowing wholesale evil to exist.

        • you are right David and his followers should have opened fire on the hostile take over of their rights i do not recall it being illegal to have firearms in the same home as a child i was taught about gun safety at 3 and hunting and shooting regularly at 4 they the feds had no business there but they were but we have muslims in york sc and michigan training muslims in gorilla war fare and our gov does nothing to stop them give me a break and trump fix the problems sir thats why we elected you

  4. The real problem is that the industry has completely outpaced the NFA side of ATF to the point of near irrelevance, and they know it: pistol braces, binary triggers, and more.

  5. FFS, I have freeze plugs and some leftover exhaust pipe in my garage. Constructive intent my ass.

  6. Well if nothing else… this is what you need to build a surpressor. :p

    That being said I really hope that we can get some positive reform of 80% lower laws to include kits like this. Personally I think there’s a ton of room for expansion of the 80% market to include more less common designs could be a great way to expand the market. We have AKs, ARs, and Glocks. Why not more designs? How about an aluminum 80% CZ-82 or something? Less common parts, but hardly bank breaking either.

    • It is legal to build you won firearm as long as it is not intended for resale. It is a crime to build a silencer, machine gun, short barrelled shotgun or short barrelled rifle without the right license. So there is a difference.

      • Yes, at this moment it is. But then again I don’t know how’s that’s going to work out if the HPA is signed. Most versions of it I’ve seen didn’t really mentioned home made cans.

      • Pretty sure you can build suppressors and and sbr’s (I know you can for sbr’s because I have) …just make sure you get your stamp back BEFORE you build/assemble.

        • Except according to this, you’d better not even have anything in your house or shop that could be used to make a suppressor until you have that stamp.

          I’d better get rid of my PVC parts and cotton balls, apparently.

      • You can make your own gun (and I have, just to say I have), but you can’t make your own suppressor, for reasons that make no sense.
        One is a deadly weapon, the other isn’t. So why is the first OK, but the second not?
        Why ask for common sense from people who are responsible to no one?

        • You most certainly CAN make your own suppressor. It’s done all the time.

          Fill out an ATF Form 1, send a copy to your local police, send a copy to the ATF with a $200 check, 2 passport photos and 2 completed fingerprint cards, and wait 9 or 10 months.

          When the approved Form 1 comes back with the NFA tax stamp affixed, make your home-built suppressor.

          • Tired: “You most certainly CAN make your own suppressor. It’s done all the time.”

            You got me.
            What I meant was the difference between making a gun, and making a suppressor, legally.
            I can make a gun without involving any government agency at all, and, even if it’s found in my possession by a LEO, it’s legal.
            But I can’t do the same with a suppressor.
            The gun is a deadly weapon, but I can make one with no legal repercussions (barring local laws). The suppressor, OTOH, is not dangerous, but is regulated as if it were a machine gun.
            It’s the hypocrisy of it all I was trying to point out.

            • Okay, I should have mentioned this earlier to minimalize unnecessary speculation about the ATF’s illogical, nonsensical, UN-Reasonable Subjectiveness concerning their apparent whimsical and capricious Anti-Constitutional, unauthorized by We, the People administrative Fiat Decrees.

              . All this speculative debate here is wasting valuable time better used for getting our selective Reps to support that Congressman’s recently proposed ‘hearing Protection Act’ Bill and making sure it gets passed with absolutely NO Compromise or background checks, or anything more than would a standard flash hider or muzzle comp or lawnmower muffler would require. Which is No purchase regulations at all.

              Here’s why there is an obsessive compulsive suppressor disorder byanyTotalitarian Statist regime with this simple piece of metal. On a good ‘Watter’s World’ public interview question day, most if not all people would not know about an esoteric unpublicized Police State tool now in regular federally subsidized by grant funding for
              Totalitarian agenda based program known as Metropolitan SST proliferation. Almost none of us have a clue, even
              if they were standing right beneath the technology. The police don’t talk about it and much like the illegal ‘license plate reading’ devices that public vehicles use constantly and the ubiquitious integrated face recognition cameras in public (now able to ‘read’ a facial identity scan at distances of 50 feet or more) and you must request a FOIA to get details of deployment and use.

              But SST (ShotSpotter Technology) has been evolving below radar for several years now very rapidly under the previous Obama regime right ‘up there’ with the aforementioned private identity invading and location tracking cameras,hundred of small private aircraft (Cessnas,pipers, etc.),with high res, high altitude FLIR tracking ‘off the record FBI shell company’ nationwide surveillance operation designed to violate 4th/A due process requirements by warrantless spying on American Citizens from high above a supposedly Constitutionally guaranteed Free and privacy protected country.

              But Shotspotter tech is the REAL set of brass knuckles in a Tyranny Brawl. To appreciate the almost can’t
              defeat level of tactical advantage of something like this integrated with other advanced surveillance technology, like ‘backscatter’ and wall penetrating radar, you would have to understand basic urban guerilla warfare. So here’s a fundamental scenario. Small Cell Patriot Tyranny Resistance groups ambushing Totalitarian Occupation forces and resources, ESPECIALLY with indirect sniping attacks would immediately send a gunshot signature to the nearest SST device which would GPS a location detection within a few feet of the shot simultaneously alerting rapid response government units or Armed Drones (North Dakota Sheriff’s Departments are already deploying these armed drones by permission of their State legislatures) to trap and take out the sniper/ambush Resistance teams before they get away or do much damage. and thereby effectively neutralizing guerilla fighters before they get started.

              Bottom bullet in the magazine is that Suppressors/Silencers DEFEAT SST devices. And would give Jeffersonian anti-Totalitarian resisting forces a tremendous NON-Detection advantage in hit and run engagements with Anti-Constitution Totalitarian regime forces. These devises are well tested and proven at this point in time (Tens of Thousands of gunshot detections where they are deployed nation wide in places like Washington and California and New York. All paid for, by the insulting way, with your tax dollars. With advancements currently being refined like actual shot direction and type of shot, ie., pistol, rifle, shotgun. Interfacing with publicly AND Privatey located cameras they would also have almost an instant identification of the shooter’s location and appearance in integrated real time remote observation, until the small armed drones-soon to be a common sight in major metropolises- can quickly get there and neutralize the shooter.

              Technology is a hell of a wonderful thing…until it is used to surveil, track, and oppress the people of a Free Nation.

              Now you know the rest of the story. And the REAL reason they don’t want the rapid proliferation of ‘waiting to be made in to silencer’ solvent traps as these companies are doing without the tracking ability of a Class 3 stamp and I.D. data base. (Because obviously that’s so if a civil war or revo=type martial law breaks out, ‘They’ want to quickly round up registered suppressors from their owners, For…Public Safety, of course.

              One more ingredient in this poisonous stew is that you’re not hearing much support for
              Solvent Trap companies by commercial Suppressor manufacturers. In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me if they are actually FOR the ban. You know, because of cut throat competition, greed, profit, and all???

      • no sir you are wrong there is absolutely no difference as long as said individual acquires the correct license before building what ever he wants the only difference is the 80% doesn’t require a license it is a given as long as paper work is in order no law has been broken PERIOD!!!!!!!!

  7. Breaking – ATF shust down all grocery and convenience stores and vending machines due to the availability of 20 oz and 2 liter bottled soft drinks.

  8. The ATF should be sued for failure to perform their duties. Aluminum sheet is the source of freeze plugs, the source of elements of the “suppressor” outlawed by the ATF. If manufacturers of any part of a “suppressor” (aluminum or other material) refuse to comply, then arrests are required. There is already prima facie evidence of a crime being committed, warrants should be easily obtained to seize and arrest.

    Trump should have the DOJ drop a Writ of Mandamus on ATF, and arrest ATF officials who refuse to do their jobs.

    • exactly, if the ATF wants to play this stupid game, kick them in the rule book till their nuts fall off.

      Anyone found in possession of steel or aluminum sheet/tube stock should be arrested for constructive intent ASAP!

  9. as the story said “SD Tactical Arms in Prescott, Arizona had been selling “solvent trap” kits. These are ostensibly designed to be fitted on the muzzle of a firearm to catch any solvent leaking out during cleaning. The kits are completely enclosed, with no central passage through which a projectile might pass.” that just so happen to be designed to withstand muzzle pressure if used as a suppressor.

    I’m betting if the “solvent traps” were made out of plastic this would not have been an issue, The company made a point of selling a product that could easily be converted to a suppressor and was built to withstand use as one.

    Sure it’s a grey area of the law as they sold a legal product but I’m betting if this went to court then intent could be proven that these devices were designed to be used as suppressors.

    If I wanted to start making desk ornaments that coincidentally could be drilled a few places and dropped into a rifle to make if full auto should I cry foul if the ATF comes knocking on my door?

    • The point overlooked is the concept that a government can dictate that anything or any material that can be used to make a controlled firearm is by definition a controlled firearm. Actually, this ruling can be taken all the way back to the dirt from which the materials are derived. It is a favorite toy of the bureaucracy to be able to take something to illogical extreme so that any un-favored activity can be made illegal, subject to criminal law.

      • Sam I Am; you are wrong in this case. There is a point where all the wink wink nod nod goes out the window. These were sold for the sole purpose of making a suppressor. Even Nick has a hard time calling them a “solvent trap”. But he was quick to call them a silencer kit.

        • ” These were sold for the sole purpose of making a suppressor.”

          So what? Does that scare you? Too bad. The important point is they are NOT suppressors and were (and are) perfectly legal to sell. Winking and nodding is immaterial.

        • The point, is that solvent traps are not suppressors until certain machining is accomplished, just like “80%” receivers are not guns until certain machining is accomplished.
          The problem here is that the threshold between a random parts and a complete suppressor is not stable one, it varies on who is reading it at any given time, and such ambiguity has no place in law.

        • The ruling is quite clear….the ATF can declare that any material, within whatever proximity, that can be mad into a controlled firearm is a controlled firearm. The fact that the ATF, for no apparent reason, unilaterally re-defined “silencer” (after once declaring the kits were NOT controlled firearms) is the give-away clue. It is not prudent to ever believe the government is doing anything to your benefit. Game-playing is the common pastime among the species known as “government employee”. And to answer someone else’s question, the ATF can declare that having a shotgun in your garage while simultaneously storing a hacksaw in the same garage are materials co-located such as to amount to possession of an SBR. All it takes is some combination of events that catches the eye of bureaucrats.

          Sanity and reason are not required.

        • OK, so Big E agrees that they are suppressors, and the 80% argument goes out the windows as they were trying to be cute and call them solvent traps. Now if someone would work with the ATF to figure out want a 80% suppressor is, that would be nice. And, sam I am, try to sell a shotgun with a miter box, can of cold blue and a hacksaw and see where you get with a judge. “Sanity and reason are not required”, OK on which side.

        • If Binder’s stupid theory about shotguns, miter boxes and hacksaws were true, the ATF would have raided every Walmart, Meijer’s and Thiessens in the US long since.

          • Yes. You restated the issue. Question, why the selective enforcement about “constructive intent”?

            And no, government agencies rarely pursue charges against people who just might be able to bite back.

            • I guess to make it simple and explain it the best I can the only thing I can say about “constructive intent” allegations or charges is “Because They Can” ?

              • “Because They Can”


                Although it has been posted, elsewhere, that maybe, just maybe, suppressors (of any kind) create difficulty (if not neutralization) for shot spotter technology. Reasoning given is that shot spotters, along with all sorts of other existing technology, provide a significant and serious deterrent to insurgent snipers and combat teams (just in case it becomes necessary to spark a civil war). Wide-spread acquisition of suppressors by the public just might represent a leveling of the field.

      • as per the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act of 1986
        The terms ‘firearm silencer’ and ‘firearm 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.”

        It’s all about proving what was intended, basically the ATF called SD Tactical’s bluff and they folded. I don’t like the law and hope the the HPA gets passed soon, but I know if I start playing in grey areas I’d better be ready to get called on it and defend my position.

        The fact that the ATF said it was their legal opinion then changed their mind is troubling but that is nothing more than what happens all the time with any agency that has regulatory authority when a re-evaluation is called for.

        • A good prosecutor can sell “intent” quite easily. Essentially, a person knowing that certain conditions could result in a determination of NFA violation has requisite intent if that person was aware that certain items are related to other items already defined as NFA-controlled. Simple knowledge is easy enough to prove, such as a formal reminder to purchasers that improper use of whichever materials could be illegal.

        • Soooooo when budwiser puts out a psa durring the super bowl reminding people not to drink and drive its tacit acknowledgment that the product they sell will be used to brake the law and budwiser,… ney, ALL alcohol companies need to be shut down?….. i think their lawyers are better than SD tactical and the ATF went after the low hanging fruit.

      • I have, and still can, legally make a firearm for my own use. Not from an 80% lower, but from stuff lying around my shop.
        If I can do that (make a deadly weapon) from pieces I have, or can legally buy, what is the problem with making, from stuff I have just lying around, or can buy legally, something that isn’t a weapon at all, but is arbitrarily deemed to need to be registered?
        But then, I expect reason and sense from government drones.

        • According to the ATF attempt to bolster the ITAR, the implication was that sheet metal qualified as a firearm, immediately after manufacture, and required a serial number that would be retained throughout the manufacturing process, because the sheet was a component part of a firearm by its mere existence. The ATF and DOS were crushed in that attempt. The progeny lives on.

          On a related note, the purpose for controlling silencers also lives on….regular people would not hear a gunshot, and fail to call the police or stop the shooter from running away, thus the crime would go unreported and the “trail” turn cold. This frustrated law enforcement, so the item that made crime invisible had to be regulated. We say that same reasoning on this blog only a few days ago.

          • Ah, Sam, interesting rationale you bring up.
            usually I categorize all Alphabet 2nd and 4th/A violations as fundamental universal disarmament agenda tactics. But as a former military specialist trained in counter insurgency tactics, it just occurred to me because of your comment, that lack of shot signature would greatly reduce the tracking and interdiction ability of government forces over dissident armed opposition forces among a 2nd/A anti-tyrannical government armed resistance to tyranny movement???

            Which would be why you now see certain little black ‘boxes’ under the ubiquitous proliferation of facial recognition cameras endlessly popping up not yet but almost everywhere which are ‘sound recognition and location origination detectors’ that can pinpoint and gps the location of a gunshot!

            Very interesting, this latest OCD the ATF has with sound suppressors. Especially since there are other companies selling these Solvent kits. Very interesting, indeed.

          • Sam, I understand the words you’re using.
            My point is this: If I can make a deadly weapon from scrap pieces of stuff I have lying around, and the government says they don’t care, then why is using similar stuff lying around to make a suppressor somehow more dangerous?
            The rhetoric that it makes the report from the gun so much less that other people won’t notice it is, other than in either fantasyland or in stratospheric price land, is just wrong. Wrong, as in untrue.
            So, why the difference?
            But, my point continues, why do we expect sense from bureaucratic drones? It’s that way because they can do it that way, pure and simple.

            • Historically, reaching clear back to the Babylonian empire, the evidence is that two things can be expected of “tenured” bureaucrats: expanding the size and reach of their authority, and lining their own pockets.

              • Having been there, one always wonders how many would remain government employees if they couldn’t play games with the populace?

              • I’d use the rule of fifths and say two-fifths are actually dedicated to doing their job of serving the public. One-fifth are as I described, and the other two-fifths don’t really care, they just want to get their paycheck.

      • Exactly, Sam.
        But that the way it was ‘intended’ to expand after the initial launch of one of the greatest 2nd/A destroying frauds ever perpetrated on the American Free citizen. The illegal LBJ Fascist motivated disarmament law known as the 1968 Gun Control Act.

        Which made any convicted person, even once, even Not for violence WITH a firearm, subject to permanent disarmament for life. And of course with the predictable inevitable slippery slope of Totalitarian tyranny. Now if you admonish your neighbor for letting her shit ass dog leave his droppings all over your front steps a bit too sternly.
        She calls the police saying she is seriously afraid because she saw you putting cased rifles in your car for a hunting trip and ‘liberty and privacty be DAMNED as the police rush in without a warrant and search and seizes your guns for ‘public safety’ while you incur the expense of fighting to prove you are not a public danger? (Recent California law with dedicated officers assigned just for this)

        Permanent disarmament after you have paid your dues for a crimeand are reintegrated back into society once again as a law abiding citizen is an insidious sanction that defies and defiles all sane reference to crime and punishment in an Egalitarian Libertarian society. A punishment that completely dismisses any higher concept of reform and rehabilitation and creates a subculture of permanent criminals with no hope to remedy past mistakes. This goes against all reasonable expectations of conscionable morality if you want an advanced culture of equitable humanitarianism. And they were aware of this when they created the law. That’s why they had to also ban ex criminals from Voting also!

        So the 68 GCA Totalitarian disarmament legacy works like this. All they have to do now is make new laws, or specifically oriented Administrative Fiat decrees like this Solvent Trap silencer mandate and they’ll eventually achieve their total population disarmament goal.

        Because eventually they’ll make most able bodies 2nd/A Free Americans criminals (read George Will’s article on the criminalization of America) and most ex convicts are automatically then disarmed for life! And while getting away with this violation of natural human rights, they can’t help themselves from going further!

        Next it will be what we do for pleasure, not crime! Or maybe you won’t have to be shooting anyone, you’ll just be too bad at doing your own financial business, or may be you are regularly on prescribed meds, and ‘shouldn’t’ be allowed guns if you can’t handle that? Hah! Don’t believe it? Too far a stretch? If you think that, your head must be so far up your ass you don’t even know if the sun came up yet?

        We can’t snooze just because Trumps in. More money will be spent by the ‘enemy’ this year alone on impeaching or disrupting his Office than was spent during the entire election process by the Totalitarian left to accomplish that.

        Lets take advantage of this fortunate last chance opportunity to reverse the tyranny while we still can.

        • Egalitarian libertarian society? What country are you living in? In the aftermath of Zerobama, but also after years of “establishment” federal encroachment on the Bill of Rights, we are on the verge of being converted irrevocably to subjects – when the Constitution clearly designates us as citizens. That is, free people, who organize the government for their benefit. I have never heard a politician be as adamant about the essence of our founding principle “that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed” as I have since Trump took office. I pray to God that this imagery and philosophy is, and remains, his guiding light as he exercises his appointed executive powers as President.

          • People here way often refer to the Constitution as if invoking a talisman or deity that has cosmic power to right wrongs with some hammer of vengeance. As if the Constitution were a listing and enforcement of immutable natural, civil and human rights. It is time to put away the toys, and come to grips with reality.

            The one and only immutable, inalienable, absolute, un-modifiable constitutional right…the right to Abortion. No challenge, no resistance, no tampering will be permitted. Every political body is a guardian of that singular absolute right. The rest of the Constitution is merely an interesting relic of days before life began, a time when there was only black and white television, rotary dial wired telephones, before free sex. This is now, for however long a moment in “now” lasts.

            • I have a rather nuanced position on abortion as a right, but I do advocate the right to correct the situation when people reach government office who plainly should have been aborted.

              In short, dueling should be made legal again — but only for constituents challenging elected officials.

          • You’re correct, gsteele531, I was digressing into wishful delusion. It is no longer an Egalitarian paradigm framed in liberty and justice as the Founders attempted to design and establish. It is a creeping Totalitarian Corporatism hell bent on total authority and control over all its peonic subjects.

            • Interesting take. While undeniably, the influence of powerful corporations and campaign donors has deformed the original mold, the elevation of visibility of that influence in this election seems to have roused the citizenry to a voter’s revolt. Time will tell, but with every day, the motion back to strict construction and decentralization seems to be picking up steam. We are in interesting times, worth watching and remembering.

        • Well Sam I Am, that’s pretty incoherent. But I do suggest one thing: that those who insist on the right to abortion not just get their way, but that the rules on abortion for them change from freely available to mandatory . . .

          And, you may note, that the founding principle that I cited is from the Declaration – not the Constitution. So it still applies . . .

          • What is incoherent? You raised the Constitution as some sort of shield designed to protect “citizens” from government. My response was that the Constitution has not been what is was designed since about the time of the ratification. My illustration was to point out that government decide what you may have, your standing before law. I also pointed out that the romance of “absolute” (inalienable?) rights is understandable, but the only remaining absolute right is abortion on demand. Such a situation underscores the futility of attempting to politically pursue the notion of rights not violable by government. All “rights” under the Constitution are alienable, except one. It is where we have come, it is where we are. How much more corruption do you need before you understand how the game is rigged? Trump and a Republican (not conservative, libertarian or moral) Party have exactly 11 months to completely reverse the trend toward a completely coercive government. After that come the elections, and the aftermath. Look at history. How many times, and for how long, has the slide to serfdom been permanently arrested?

            • That is true, and I agree. It’s just that your first post was not scrutable. With constitutionality, and SCOTUS strict constructionists (we’ll find out next week), the reversal is positively possible. But the reversal is already under way – having dodged the bullet of Clinton – or at least, on hold. The Constitution is nonetheless required, because irrespective of the establishment reality, there is also a populace to contend with. And this election proved incontrovertibly that the populace is not yet subdued. And that population has beliefs founded in that Constitution.

              • I would not be depending on the “populace” as an indicator. Even if there were 3.5million fraudulent voters for Clinton, the popular vote would have been a near tie. Not an encouraging majority. If we accept the reported results, the majority of the populace does not support Trump or his (our?) agenda. A constant stalemate is not a victory. “The populace” can be a fair meter, but one must know the difference between democracy and the electoral system. Gun owners could completely capture the non-costal states popular vote, and lose to the festering cities. More people are moving to big cities, than to rural states.

                Beware of “conservatives” appointed to the SC. Over history, most have moved left in an effort to look pious, reasonable and scholarly. Of the current so-called “conservative” justices, only Thomas is reliable. Even another Thomas would only create a minority of two. The real key is hard-right justices in the lower courts. The SC is conveniently ignored (without consequence) by lower courts today. Do not expect that to change much.

                When the balance between good and evil is just about at stasis, good will depend upon the self-evident as a barrier to debasement. Evil never rests, and relies on the selfish natural condition of humans.

            • Your point is well taken. In fact, the number of vacancies in the lesser courts must become a priority of the Trump administration to fill. Obviously, the primary job is to appoint SCOTUS originalists, because lower court rulings on matters of import inevitably will be presented, and may receive consideration. If, however, the preponderance of lower court decisions sway towards liberty, the cost to the dogmatic progressive totalitarians of appeal at some point will reach high enough that they will have to pick and choose, which defaults to greater freedom as a result of economic expediency. Even a stalemate is a victory when your previous state is minority underdog. Eternal vigilance; there’s no such thing as unconditional ideological surrender.

              • Saying “originalists” is too vague. What we need are good solid Jeffersonians who construe every part of the Constitution in favor of individual rights — not corporate rights not church rights, not party rights not union rights, but individual rights. People here complain about the ruling on marriage equality, but it is a matter of historical fact that it is far, far better to err on the side of enhancing individual rights, however much that may offend some, than on the side of allowing government to define anything having to do with free associations between citizens.

                Indeed, should Trump appoint rabid individualist interpreters of the Constitution, the odds of his re-election would skyrocket, as he would pick up a fair portion of former Bernie supporters who just want individual freedom maximized.

    • Sorry, but not even close. SD Tactical states explicitly on the site that you must follow all laws regarding silencers and baffles cannot be drilled unless you have a tax stamp. They hold no liablilty in misuse of their products, which the ATF previously stated were perfectly legal.

      • Why would they put anything about “you must follow all laws regarding silencers and baffles” on their website if they were not selling silencers and baffles. Maybe that is what brought down the ATF?

        • The same reason McDonalds coffee cups have “CAUTION: HOT” on the outside. Being stupid, careless and / or thoughtless doesn’t preclude you from suing the snowflakes out of a company.

          It reminds me of a 10″ AR upper I saw at a gun show had a note that said something like “Warning: for installation on an AR pistol only!”

        • Or it could have been the centering jigs they sold. maybe the links to YouTube videos on how to actually assemble a suppressor from the parts they sell, maybe because they were a one stop shop to get all the supplies for a suppressor. We just don’t know, right now all we have is a vendor who was working in a grey area who was basically told to knock it off by the Government, I’m guessing it wasn’t that bad otherwise it would have been a lot more then just a knock it off notice.

        • Law states “including any combination of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling or fabricating a firearm silencer” So if parts are sold for the purpose of constructing a silencer, you are in violation. The moment they told you NOT to dill the holes until you get your form 1, they were selling parts

  10. How does this ruling affect Solvent Trap – type connectors (to attach oil filter type traps)?

    If you have a threaded barrel, and anything that you can cross-thread onto it, it’s constructive manufacture of a suppressor?

    F dat.

  11. I really hope that at some point silencers are taken off of the NFA. They should just be another accessory, like a stock or a flash hider. Just buy it over the counter, no background checks or extra consideration required.

    • I doubt we’ll get that much, but I’d be fine with them treating them the same as firearms themselves.

      In addition, I hope they can write that law to expressly make them legal where they currently aren’t, like Cali…

      • BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! 34% of californians want to secede from the USA (news flash, the DNC will never let it happen)….. good luck getting us some freedom any time soon! I say we secede, fight a guerilla war for six months, get forced back in to the union, hang all the traitors, impose federal law on the state, get some supressors and AOW’s, and live happily ever after.

    • Why not save all the bullshit attempts to get around tyrannical disarmament and just REPEAL the whole Fucking NFA ACT??? It was created after the prohibition of Alcohol was finally correctly repealed just to help disarm future opposition to the nascent totalitarian political power elite gaining momentum. It was not by coincidence that J. Edgar Hoover, the most corrupt and dangerous rights violating crimininal Police State NAZI felon to ever carry a badge and wear women’s underwear was also setting up a ‘surveillance’ state for that purpose.

  12. Well, I suppose they should get their last bit of licks in before they get told to STFU and do their actual jobs properly.

    If anyone important at ATF ever reads this, what is your problem with people having stupid things like silencers and SBR/S’s? I know, you might have a bunch of people buying cool things and having fun in their backyards or at ranges. God forbid we actually enjoy ourselves.

    • We here at the ATF strive to conform to the letter of the law, unless we see people getting uppity with the privileges we have bestowed up them, then see, we drop the ban hammer! We don’t want you to have fun things, useful things, and if we could get away with it we would ban everything related to arms & ammunition, because we’re the government, and we know what’s best for you.

  13. This is dumb. Go to Amazon look up freeze plugs and look at the recommendations to buy with them. Seriously.

  14. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. It’s pretty obvious they were trying to “get cute” with this solvent trap and, as someone else stated, why not just make them out of plastic if you’re just looking to keep your work bench clean?

    And, give me a f’ing break about veterans being put out of work. These solvent traps are not that and everyone knows that. Frankly, I’m surprised they’ve lasted this long. Follow the laws as written and if you don’t like them, get them changed.

    • They did follow the law as written, then some IOI twerp got uppity and “reinterpreted” an old letter stating these exact products were legal and above board. The point, is that solvent traps are not suppressors until certain machining is accomplished, just like “80%” receivers are not guns until certain machining is accomplished.
      The problem here is that the threshold between a random parts and a complete suppressor is not stable one, it varies on who is reading it at any given time, and such ambiguity has no place in law.

    • A law that is predicated in “intent”, with no action required is simply witchcraft. Pre-crime policing. There is absolutely no discernible difference between these items in a shipping box, and the same materials scattered about a garage.

      Unfortunately, there is precedence in government contract law. About 2007, the SC ruled that a contractor who knowingly presented the government with a false invoice did not commit fraud, because the government had to prove that the contractor intended to commit fraud. This is Alice In Wonderland stuff. Fraud means an intentional act that seeks to extract consideration from another, while knowing that information or product presented is not valid. Intent is the basis of fraud, separating it from mere misunderstanding. Fraud not requires the intent to have the intent. For government, “the words mean what we say they mean…whenever we say the words”.

    • lionsfan54 no laws are broken with this unless someone buys from them and makes a suppressor without the proper paperwork its simple but the ATF has absolutely no common sense what so ever

  15. This means that all metal stock, drills, taps, millers, lathes, and all hand tools that can be used to fabricate a silencer are now illegal, including duct tape and pillows. If you dispute this, define for me exactly the point at which ATF’s “intent” begins and ends. I can own a solvent trap kit with no intent to create a silencer; I can own bar stock, flat stock, and machine tools with every intent to create a silencer. A point of law is that there is no prior restraint because you can’t prove, absent testimony thereto, intent – and thus you cannot stop a man on his way to a street corner with a soapbox intending to preach sedition. This is clearly unconstitutional on its face, unless the purveyor of the parts also provides directions on how to convert their product into a silencer. Or a pipe bomb. Or a rocket-propelled grenade. But even at that, you have to have someone buy the materials and fabricate an illegal-under-NFA device without having done a form 1 and payment for there to have been any violation of law involved. This is abuse of power by the ATF and should be reversible by statute or executive order if enough people write to their elected representatives.

    • I wonder what the face of the ATF agent would look like if I submitted a Form 1 on a pillow and a roll of duct tape.

    • I know a few guys who own CNC machines who got a visit from ATF and are under the microscope, albeit well within the law…. ATF is salivating at the opportunity to seize their CNC machines on the slightest pretext….. so you are not far off.

    • Exactly, just like an avid ‘4th of July celebrator’ will have a big box full of legally purchased bfireworks but since he’s a building contractor he also has pieces of steel pipe in his garage can that be ‘stretched’ to sustain a ‘construct intent’ arrest for conspiracy to manufacture pipe bombs, even if no pipe ‘bomb’ itself was ever found? Sure it can if you want to be Nazi cop? The person who had this happen to him, had no criminal or drug history and was ‘raided’ by mistake by drug Nazis and when there was no drugs found they had to cover their feckless fart asses and brainfarted that frame up. Months later, tens of k in legal fees, the push for a high profile media pumped jury trial in the mostly conservative venue ‘persuaded’ the prosecutors to see ‘the light’ and drop the charges in exchange for not filing a lawsuit against the police.

      This is just Obama’s last jab using his favorite junkyard dog Gestapo agency to bitch slap Free American Patriots.

      But this bullshit highly corruptible ‘construct’ issue is like the out of control due process violating search and asset forfeiture seizure injustice going down like hotcakes at a free food service for the homeless with these drug raids.

      They are morphing socially engineering the concept of criminality to a level of delusional interpretation of inanimate objects suddenly being ann accomplice to human behavior just because they exist in some minimally ‘connectible’ relationship with a person who has not done, or intended to do, or acted in furtherance of any potential plan to do, ANY CRIME whatsoever?

      Essentially they are making up their own abusive totalitarian laws as the feel inclined for their profit and disarmament agenda!

      This has got to stop and we now have a good chance to push through a remedy for this outrageous abuse of authority and police powers with the new Trump administration. We have to reign in these agenda based agencies, or disband them completely. While we work to REPEAL ALL current gun legislation, especially the NFA and LBJ’s tyrannical 68GCA from which the ATF gets it’s Nazi Gestapo authority, and replace it with new legislation prohibiting ANY future gun laws without the complet process of a Constitutional Amendment.

      SD tactical should immediately retain the same law firm that handled that ’80 percent’ receiver company’s (name escapes me at the moment but they’re still in business, and their story is all over the internet) illegal raid and shut down in California for making receivers supposedly too easy to finish.

      This SD tactical injustice is so egregious it can’t stand under the jury or reasonable justice system not blatantly corrupted by a disarmament agenda based out of control administrative fiat rampaging rogue agency.

  16. I want to see this headline:
    “ATF Ruled Most Useless Gathering of Humans Since Dawn of Time, Disbanded”

  17. I’m of two minds on this.

    On the one hand “constructive intent” is complete bullshit but so is a lot of what has happened after 9/11.

    On the other hand these guys decided to play in a legal grey area and they knew, or should have known, that “the law” might not cover them. ATF opinion letters carry the weight of law and there is nothing that says the ATF cannot change it’s opinion and write a new letter whenever it wishes so long as that opinion doesn’t conflict with “the law” as Congress has written it. That’s what makes this a grey area, it’s subject to ATF interpretation and therefore ATF reinterpretation at any time in the future.

    That’s the way it works. It sucks, but that’s how it works and these guys knew it so this is on them. If they didn’t know, well that’s still on them because ignorance of the law isn’t a license to break it.

    I’ll give you guys an example: A friend of mine and I, about a year ago, were thinking about how to make a Belton Flintlock. So I wondered: is a Belton Flintlock, which is based on the idea of superposed loads, a single barreled volley gun or a machine gun under the law? We argued it back and forth from various points of view to no avail. So we started doing some research.

    Now the ATF says that a machine gun is “Any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger”.

    Well now, what the actual fuck does that mean in regards to a Belton Flintlock? The gun isn’t an MG by modern standards but it certainly discharges more than one round per pull, or “function” of the trigger. Does it do so “automatically”? Well, since “automatically” is defined as “by itself with little or no direct human control” one could well argue that it does indeed fire automatically multiple times after the trigger is depressed.

    On the other hand, it doesn’t load itself automatically so it might rationally be argued to be a volley gun with a single barrel. The whole thing would seem to hinge on how the ATF interprets the sentence fragment “…automatically more than one shot without manual reloading…”.

    So what’s the answer? Is a Belton Flintlock an MG or a volley gun? I have no idea. I wrote to the ATF on 6/22/16. I explained the situation and asked about where the agency feels such a device falls under the law. To date I haven’t heard back from them other than a form letter stating they got my email and would get back to me.

    So here’s the point: I wouldn’t even consider starting to build such a device until I had a letter from the ATF in my hand that said it was legal to build one. Even with that letter in hand I would keep multiple copies of that letter on hand in paper form and I would always be prepared for the idea that the ATF could show up at my door with another letter stating that this thing is now illegal and I have to turn it over to them or face prosecution. The letter(s) in my possession are nothing but a CYA in case this happens. It was legal right up until they informed me it was no longer legal and here’s the proof that I was operating, in good faith, under rules officially passed to me by the ATF. Those rules changed and I immediately moved to comply with the new rules by surrendering the object in question as soon as I knew it was no longer legal.

    • Do not be duped. The prohibition of ex post facto law in the constitution is void. There is no effective difference between declaring you have committed a crime in the past based on a new law today, and enacting a law that says you are committing a crime in the now, based on making once legal activity illegal by virtue of the new law. The alleged legality of such laws is based on the law providing some amount (no universal standard) of time for you to surrender your illegal activity. Indeed, it is the same thing as jailing a person who surrenders contraband that was found by that innocent person.

      Had a family member in another jurisdiction, who turned over an old .32 revolver found in one of grannie’s shoe boxes, after she died. the person delivering the firearm to the police did not have any permit to possess a firearm in a jurisdiction requiring same. Only because another family member was a serving cop in another state, who knew the patrol captain, was the finder eventually released. Getting the arrest removed from the record took three years, and attorney fees. Yes, the family could have called the police to collect the gun, but having a patrol car sit out front in that neighborhood would be a character flaw for everyone in the house, so they didn’t even consider making the call. They were trying to do the right thing, but the police were just so happy to arrest another criminal.

      • It’s so much easier arresting good people trying to do the right thing, than going after bad people trying to do bad things!

      • That sucks for your family member and I have to admit that it is possible it could happen with the ATF.

        However, the ATF generally doesn’t act that way if you’ve been in contact with them and acted in good faith. Instead they demand you surrender the item to avoid prosecution. Look at the guy who had his Form 1 approved and then had that approval revoked. They didn’t just swoop in and arrest him. They informed him of the fact his approval was rescinded and gave him a certain period of time to turn in the firearm. Rescinding his approval after it was granted is a dick move but they didn’t add insult to injury by simply sending agents to arrest him for a now unlicensed MG.

        While it is technically true that you are in violation from the moment their new letter is drafted I doubt the ATF wants to argue before a federal judge that they can arbitrarily change the law and then make arrests without even attempting to inform people that their opinion, and therefore “the law” has changed. Especially when said person can prove they’ve gone out of their way to jump through every hoop the ATF has created and even gone further by corresponding with the ATF to ensure compliance which the ATF has previously assured the person in question of.

        At that point the agency would be begging to have a judge rule that a lot of their “rule making authority” is arbitrary, capricious, unconstitutional and therefore void. The agency’s ability to write legally binding “opinions” would already be suspect to a lot of federal judges that’s not a game I think the ATF wants to play. Playing hardball with threats keeps them getting what they want and generally avoids, or at least seriously reduces, the risk of having a judge give them a spanking over this. They’re betting you don’t have the time, money and will to challenge their “authority” and 99.9999% of the time they’re right about that. The same is true of certain state laws. DUI’s in Colorado come to mind.

        Even the DEA doesn’t try to play the “we wrote a letter and you were in violation as soon as it came off the printer so you’re under arrest” game.

        • Which brings up another twisted complication. So what happens now to the people who bought the solvent trap kits with the approval letter from the ATF that SD Tactical got from the ATF before they started selling them, and before the ATF shut down their business. Which by the way there are at least two more companies selling similar kits and parts??? Are they now criminals subject to seizure raids? Did the ATF confiscate the customer list from SD tactical, like they did from Polymer 80% receivers when they raided them?

          Are the customers grandfathered ‘in’, as long as they don’t convert it to a functioning suppressor? Or must they endure jumping through stressful life disrupting hassles to prevent themselves from tyrannical abuse causing serious personal damages of untold monetary loss do to the debilitating fear of jackbooted WACO style Police State Gestapo flash banging them out of bed at 4am and causing families to be terrified and traumatized for the rest of their Fucking LIVES! Again these Solvent traps have been out there for a while and there’s gotta be thousands of purchasers?
          You can’t arbitrarily and capriciously mentally torture or illegally turn innocent persons into criminals just because of your own malicious agenda?

          I devoutly propose that an immediate Class Action be formally filed. If anyone knows any lawyers that would handle this lets post back with their names on this site. I know one very famous Constitutional lawyer and will try to contact him this week.

          Meanwhile we gotta get a media Blitz going. Pass the Word, Let’s rock! We did it before not too long ago when they tried to ban more than 5 round shotgun tube magazines, remember? Lets crack down harder this time.

          And for the lawyer who takes the civil action. I beg of you to put me on that jury. I’ll teach the court something about Jury Nullification powers and the anti-oppressive liberty value they produce that they never imagined would be possible.

        • the atf is a fucking joke that the american people do not need any more just mine and several million more peoples opinion

      • When you get paid by number of squares of roofing you nail down, you try to nail as many as you can. Low pitch roofs where you can walk allow you to cover more in same amount of time and are much safer. Why would cops think differently? As long as their performance is measured by number of arrests they will go after low hanging fruits first and avoid dangerous real criminals if they can get away with it.

  18. Solvent traps my ass, they are suppressors. Arm braces, gat cranks and “gun toys” fall into the same category. Instead of trying to get around the law change it.

  19. Solvent traps my ass, they are suppressors. Arm braces, gat cranks and “gun toys” fall into the same category. Instead of trying to get around the law change it. We only seem stupid when we pretend these things don’t subvert the law.

  20. “The ATF has been a historically reasonable organization to deal with”. I had to check to see if this article was written by Sara Tipton after reading that!

  21. In related news, the AFT has banned all production and sales of automotive oil filters, claiming they are “too readily turned into silencers, which make guns 50X more lethal since the bullets cannot be heard and fly twice as fast.”

    AFT Special Agent Dick Haid declared “people will just have to trade their cars for new ones before the oil change is due. Public safety is more important than convenience.”

  22. “Constructive intent” – more precrime bullshit and abused by the ATF in this case.

    If I have a giant chuck of steel and a machine shop – does that mean I have constructive intent to make a machine gun? It’s all arbitrary capricious nonsense. People should do away with “constructive intent” altogether. Either you broke the law or you didn’t. Not this fuzzy bullshit, used and abused to capture people and their possessions.

    They crack down on “Solvent Traps!???” But fake silencers are ok – even though those could be modified to make a real silencer. Arbitrary nonsense, and as a result the agency (ATF) can pick and choose whoever they want to shutdown regardless of the law. They just need to make some shit up.

  23. If an 80% lower is not a firearm until certain machining is performed, thus making it a functioning weapon … the solvent trap parts are not a suppressor until they are machined and assembled in such a way as to allow a bullet to pass through it. Pretty darned simple to me. If SD TACTICAL wants to warn you not to break the law, so be it … they don’t tell you to do it, they tell you not to do it unless/until you have the nod from ATF to do it properly.

  24. If anyone doesnt know who Henry Bowman is, you owe it to yourself to find out. If memory serves, there is a great book about him….

  25. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be a convenience store name, not a government bureau . . .

  26. Constructive intent is bull, and I wish some Gun group would sue to remove this bull from the ATF’s arsenal of threats.

  27. Lets be somewhat real here folks. Very few people are buying these kits to do a Form 1 with. When you consider that you have to pay $200, do fingerprints. photographs and get an ATF/FBI background check anyway most people would just spring for the $300 or so that can get you a nice tidy, Cerakoted can all ready to go and with better alignment and sound suppression anyway. No, most of these “kits” are being used for just what you think… Remember the Golden 80’s when there were advertisements to buy a threaded tube from Catawaba tubing in the Shotgun News and a few pages later you could buy “for replacement purposes only” full internal suppressor parts kits for very little money? ATF shut that down too. Not to mention the Su-Press-On guy that sold “pre 81” drop in auto sears which were legal to buy but you could not put it legally into or even possess an AR-15 in the same house as the DIAS…. I look forward to the day the Hearing Protection Act passes and then the rollback of the 86 “No new full auto transfers” illegal law…. But let’s not lower ourselves by believing that anyone actually uses this stuff to clean guns with… If you have to be a felon go on eBay and buy yourself a threaded adapter to use oil filters on your gun… Those adapters have not been ruled against yet but the moment you screw an oil filter on and there is a LE nearby… big trouble…. Just do it the right way, you will all pay more but sleep better at night.