quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
We're talking about Federal law, yes? There must be uniformity, but we're talking about this state and that state, and who was or was not part of the lawsuit, and who is or is not a member of this organization or that. This is not going to work as it now stands. There's no way.

This is the clusteryest of fucks that ever clustered fuckingly.

bolded is very true, and I am stealing that line

The more we learn, the less we know.

quote:

This is happening nation wide today in “free” states.

Not all FFL's are willing to risk their businesses, my Range is an FFL just sent out an email that we need a Form 4 to transfer one through them.

So be sure the FFL in your state you select at Silencer Shop or anywhere, even a free state, is going to participate this early in the process.

Nobody wants to receive one, do a 4473 then end up in front of a federal prosecutor or ATF agent at the door....

From their email to all Range Members:

We wanted to provide everyone with an update regarding the recent federal court ruling out of the Northern District of Texas concerning portions of the National Firearms Act (NFA), along with an important reminder about scheduled maintenance at the range.

So call your FFL to see if they are willing to sell it via a 4473. Glad I didn't hit the buy button yet... Have one in the cart, I'll go by a different FFL tomorrow.

NFA Ruling Update

On August 5, 2026, a federal judge in the Northern District of Texas ruled that certain NFA registration and approval requirements for suppressors, short-barreled rifles (SBRs), and short-barreled shotguns (SBSs) exceed Congress’s constitutional authority following the elimination of the applicable NFA taxes. The injunction took effect after the Department of Justice declined to seek an emergency stay.

There is an important distinction, however: this ruling should not be interpreted as a nationwide repeal of the NFA. The injunction provides relief to specific parties and qualifying individuals or entities identified in the litigation. Simply being a gun owner, living in Florida, or being a member of a local sportsmen’s club does not by itself establish that you are covered by the injunction.

ATF guidance concerning how FFLs and other regulated parties should implement the ruling is still developing. As of today, there remain significant questions regarding transfers, manufacturing, registration, state-law requirements, and the procedures dealers should follow.

For that reason, Chuluota Sportsmen’s Club is not providing legal advice or interpreting the injunction for individual members. Members should continue to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws unless they have independently confirmed through qualified legal counsel that a particular transaction or activity is lawful and that they are covered by the court’s injunction.

For context, violations of the NFA can carry serious federal consequences. Depending on the offense, federal law provides for up to 10 years of imprisonment, fines that can reach $250,000 for an individual, and forfeiture of firearms involved in an NFA violation.

Please do not rely on social-media posts, internet discussions, or informal interpretations of the ruling when making decisions concerning NFA-regulated firearms. The legal landscape is changing quickly, and additional guidance or litigation could change how the ruling is implemented.

As a FFL/SOT, we will continue to operate business as usual (BAU) unless and until we receive clear guidance from the ATF or further direction from the courts.

At this time:

The ATF continues to process pending Form 4 applications.

We will continue to transfer NFA items upon receipt of an approved Form 4, consistent with our existing procedures and applicable state law.

In the absence of additional guidance from the ATF or the courts regarding how the recent ruling affects the processing and transfer of NFA items, we will continue operating under our current procedures and conducting business as usual.

We will continue to submit and process NFA transactions through the existing ATF systems and procedures.

We will continue to monitor developments and will share additional information with our membership as reliable guidance becomes available.

quote:

Originally posted by sourdough44:
I find it interesting how some European countries have much less of an issue with suppressors. Norway is one of the most open, over the counter, no paperwork or registration.

Again this is mostly for hunting & target shooting with a rifle. I think too many learned what they think about ‘silencers’ by watching the Bond movies.

Thats nice and all for them, thing is, gun ownership itself is over-regulated and just plain "fucked" in those cuntries.

Sure you can buy a can without a problem there. Is it going on anything I wanna shoot or own??

Im betting no.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:

NFA Ruling Update
...this ruling should not be interpreted as a nationwide repeal of the NFA.

Aye, there's the rub.

I have a feeling this will end up in the courts, and it will be quite some time before there is a clear definition of what has occurred.

quote:

Originally posted by DoctorSolo:
Thats nice and all for them, thing is, gun ownership itself is over-regulated and just plain "fucked" in those cuntries.

Sure you can buy a can without a problem there. Is it going on anything I wanna shoot or own??

Im betting no.

That's the irony that he's pointing out. We have the best gun culture in the world and yet, we've been arguably the most backwards on this suppressor and barrel length stuff, and somehow let it go largely unchallenged for nearly a century. The Euros have us beat on this one in some places and that's one of the world's most oppressive regions in terms of firearms ownership. It's embarassing, really.

quote:

somehow let it go largely unchallenged for nearly a century.

Actually, it has been challenged more than once, unsuccessfully. Until now. Thanks to the “no tax on NFA” from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, judge Hendrix ruled the registration requirement on untaxed firearms unconstitutional. So, who do we thank for this outcome? Not the Kackle, for sure.

quote:

Originally posted by DoctorSolo:
gun ownership itself is over-regulated and just plain "fucked" in those cuntries.

No one is claiming that anywhere else is a better place to own guns in general, it was to point out the irony of what this particular thread is about.

As an FFL I will not change anything until directed by the ATF. I do not need them up in my business any more than possible. I think they have 60 days to appeal although they claim they will not. This will be months before anything solid is in place. Right now there is a lot of confusion and somebody will do something stupid then post videos of it all over the net. This admin may not try to take anyone down but I do not trust those in the future and people are dumb enough to leave eternal proof.

Trump does something. The commies sued and got some federal judge to rule his action unconstitutional. He then either appealed or accepted the ruling.

The government stuffed the NFA down our throat for nearly a century. We sued and finally got a federal judge to rule it unconstitutional. He gave the government time to respond, but they decided to let it expire. But here we are, many of us still worry about what the ATF has to say about something a federal judge has ruled unconstitutional. I for one applaud those FFLs who have taken the bold new step and treat the NFA exactly as the judge has ruled.

I can't fault any man or any business for proceeding cautiously. Who wants to be a test case and have their life intertwined with the federal government for an extended period, and risk the possibility of hefty fines, criminal record, and possibly jail time? Over a silencer?

What business owner wants to jeopardize their livelihood and what they've labored to build, and what they fret about on a daily basis under the best of circumstances?

Caution is unquestionably called for right now.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
The government stuffed the NFA down our throat for nearly a century. We sued and finally got a federal judge to rule it unconstitutional. He gave the government time to respond, but they decided to let it expire. But here we are, many of us still worry about what the ATF has to say about something a federal judge has ruled unconstitutional. I for one applaud those FFLs who have taken the bold new step and treat the NFA exactly as the judge has ruled.

The time to appeal has not expired, I think they have 60 days. Why would anyone not directly involved change what they are doing knowing it can be appealed and turned around? Even those involved know the risk of doing anything right now.
The people that took this to court were willing to spend the money to let this run its course. The ruling doesn’t yet apply to every FFL and those who were not involved would be fools to change how they conduct business on the judges ruling. Brandon Herrera knew that doing that transfer could cost him and he was willing to pay for it. Yes, I am thankful for those that were willing to take this to court but it is a long way from being changed.
Here is an FFL consultant giving better info than most of the garbage on the innerwebs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvvbMcvZFBs

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
Trump does something. The commies sued and got some federal judge to rule his action unconstitutional. He then either appealed or accepted the ruling.

The government stuffed the NFA down our throat for nearly a century. We sued and finally got a federal judge to rule it unconstitutional. He gave the government time to respond, but they decided to let it expire. But here we are, many of us still worry about what the ATF has to say about something a federal judge has ruled unconstitutional. I for one applaud those FFLs who have taken the bold new step and treat the NFA exactly as the judge has ruled.

The trouble is, a lot of those lefty commie types are cool with a record, it gives them more credibility. Meanwhile, someone like a gunshop, I can understand why they'd be a bit more cautious about keeping their behymen intact and avoid completely destroying their livelihood. It shouldn't be so, and yet it is.

I'm just happy Janet Reno's corpse is probably up to about 9,000RPM right now.

Something is lawful today because of the court's ruling. If a future court overturns this court, can the government prosecute for what happens today?

I appreciate that there are complexities especially when adding in state laws. But if the court ruling means that today one may purchase without the Form 4, how can they retroactively prosecute in the future?

Spoke to another FLL, 3 locations, Silencer Shop location, they won't sell them yet until their legal team has clarification and was told the ATF is going to issue a statement this next Monday. That is the "skuttlebutt" from an fairly larger FFL.

Now I didn't sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night, however, I would imagine that anyone participating during the period when the order became effective wouldn't subject the buyer/seller to any legal ramifications.

To do so would be like the State changing the speed limit on a road from 45 to 60, then a month later back from 60 to 45 then use FLOCK to find all the cars on the road during that period and issue speeding tickets because they drove the new speed limit during that period.

Then again this is Federal Government so...


The Tax is gone per the Big Beautiful Bills, passing and it is now LAW.

Don't think there is a real chance that the BBB or any part of it will be rescinded in the next 2.5 years while Trump remains POTUS. Since the elimination of the NFA tax isn't an EO it can't be simply reversed by the election of a D POTUS in 28.

They would have to repeal the law completely, which means the House and Senate would have to have a full on D super majority, meaning the Senate would need 60+ D seats. Not sure if they take the house and senate and could pass a new tax on them basically reinstating, but again that would need 60+ votes in the senate for the Left...

That part (the no Tax) may be safe, barring the law being challenged and taken to SCOTUS, and even then the courts would have to issue a rule that Congress doesn't have the power to tax and un tax, and that's not going to happen.

So the next potential step is that the rule is appealed in the 5th district and perhaps moved up the legal chain, and for now the DOJ/ATF is declining to do so, we do as gun owners, FFL's need hard copy validation though.

There is no legal reason for CA,IL,NY and other ban states to challenge since it doesn't change state law, and allow them to be sold there either way, until, GOA sues in one of those states, that might not happen though because you could get a court in the 9th to say that Suppressors are not firearms, and therefore, the sale of them can be legally banned as a product not legal for sale in XY State, or XX state, however your suppressor identifies...

But you can take my post for what it cost you, it's just conversation.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
The more we learn, the less we know.

I can confidently claim I now know everything about nothing.

Again, the NFA is federal law and that means it must apply equally to all states.

Article 6, Clause 2 of the Constitution:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

So, this stuff about "This ruling applies to these states, these organizations and their members, but not these states or people who are not part of these organizations."

I am not an attorney or a COMPSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR but I don't think there's any question that those conditions cannot withstand legal challenge.

^^ The brilliance of the Founders of this great Republic simply cannot be understated! To ignore the truth(s) of the unambiguous language in the U.S. Constitution (and especially the 'Bill of Rights'!), just exposes would be tyrants for who they really are!

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

somehow let it go largely unchallenged for nearly a century.

Actually, it has been challenged more than once, unsuccessfully. Until now. Thanks to the “no tax on NFA” from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, judge Hendrix ruled the registration requirement on untaxed firearms unconstitutional. So, who do we thank for this outcome? Not the Kackle, for sure.

Yes, I know. I bolded the qualifier in my statement for you. Nothing I said was taking away credit from anyone, I'm not sure what you feel like you're responding to.

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
Something is lawful today because of the court's ruling. If a future court overturns this court, can the government prosecute for what happens today?

I appreciate that there are complexities especially when adding in state laws. But if the court ruling means that today one may purchase without the Form 4, how can they retroactively prosecute in the future?

GOA's lawyers sent the DOJ and ATF a letter asking five questions and that was one of them. They requested a response by the 21st. Hopefully we get some clarification. I'm sure there is a lot of scrambling on that side to also figure out what the hell this all means.

Seen some musing that in states like Arizona that have constitutional carry but also still offer concealed carry permits that are honored in other states, that a Form 4 could be used in a similar prophylactic capacity. It's still "asking for permission," but also kind of not, since you don't have to, but it could help cover you in states that codified the NFA stuff into their laws. That's a long-term playout kind of thing, however.

All three of the NFA FFL's I've used in the past issued statements today saying they would do suppressor transfers starting today with just a 4473, provided you are a current GOA member and can prove it, and have a valid Arizona resident ID of some sort. One of the three, EVT, is the biggest NFA dealer in Arizona and claims to be the biggest in the western US and I believe it. If they had a look at it with their lawyers and decided it was go time, I'm personally good with that.

Will it all get challenged in court? I'm sure. Do I care? At this point, the more of us who choose to step over the line, the harder it's going to be to go after everyone. Now we all get to make our decisions about what risks we're willing to take. Godspeed, gentlemen.