Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

This is the forum for topics directly related to desired changes in the upcoming legislative session.

Moderator: carlson1


Topic author
dhoobler
Senior Member
Posts: 413
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 2:58 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX

Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby dhoobler » Sat Nov 19, 2016 3:07 pm

With the election of Trump, there is a real possibility suppressors will be removed from the list of class three devices and would be treated by federal law as an ordinary firearm.

Lest we forget, Texas law prohibits silencers unless they have an NFA stamp:

Sec. 46.05. PROHIBITED WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally or knowingly possesses, manufactures, transports, repairs, or sells:
(1) any of the following items, unless the item is registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record maintained by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives or classified as a curio or relic by the United States Department of Justice:
(A) an explosive weapon;
(B) a machine gun;
(C) a short-barrel firearm; or
(D) a firearm silencer;


It would be a tragedy if federal was reformed, but state law was not. We could find ourselves in a catch 22 situation where Texans can only own NFA silencers which are no longer available. We could be locked out of the silencer market until the state legislature acts.

I think that repeal of 46.05(a)(1)(D) should be a high priority for the 2017 session.
Revolver - An elegant weapon... for a more civilized age.
NRA Endowment Life Member
TSRA Life Member

User avatar

Charles L. Cotton
Site Admin
Posts: 16589
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX
Contact:

Re: Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby Charles L. Cotton » Sat Nov 19, 2016 3:14 pm

This is a good point.

Chas.
Image

User avatar

AJSully421
Senior Member
Posts: 1304
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Benbrook / SW Fort Worth

Re: Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby AJSully421 » Sat Nov 19, 2016 3:19 pm

46.05 (A)(1) shall be repealed if any federal law, regulation, rule, order, or other directive which removes the requirement of registration with the NFA to possess an item in this section.
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan, 1964

30.06 signs only make criminals and terrorists safer.


Ruark
Senior Member
Posts: 982
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby Ruark » Sat Nov 19, 2016 5:03 pm

AJSully421 wrote:46.05 (A)(1) shall be repealed if any federal law, regulation, rule, order, or other directive which removes the requirement of registration with the NFA to possess an item in this section.


1. You don't need the "which" in there.

2. It's a no-go, anyway. As it reads (assuming you mean (a)(1), not (A)(1), which doesn't exist), the entire section is repealed if any one item is removed. In regard to silencers (46.05 (a)(1)(D)), it should read:

46.05 (a)(1)(D) shall be repealed if any federal law, regulation, rule, order, or other directive removes the requirement of registration with the NFA for possession of a firearm silencer.

Personally, I'm also discomforted by the use of the word "silencer" here, although I'm probably grasping at straws. These devices aren't "silencers," not even close.
-Ruark

User avatar

ELB
Senior Member
Posts: 5771
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 9:34 pm
Location: Seguin

Re: Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby ELB » Sat Nov 19, 2016 5:11 pm

I always wondered why there was a Texas statute dealing with NFA items in the first place. Trump or not, that's a good place to start removing unnecessary gun laws from Texas books.
USAF 1982-2005
____________
The Most Interesting Texan in the World. :txflag:

User avatar

TexasJohnBoy
Senior Member
Posts: 1759
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 4:21 pm
Location: North Texas

Re: Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby TexasJohnBoy » Sat Nov 19, 2016 5:12 pm

Call me super hopeful, but strike all of 46.05(a)(1).
TSRA Member since 5/30/15; NRA Member since 10/31/14

User avatar

Pawpaw
Senior Member
Posts: 5492
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 11:16 am
Location: Hunt County

Re: Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby Pawpaw » Sat Nov 19, 2016 5:32 pm

Ruark wrote:Personally, I'm also discomforted by the use of the word "silencer" here, although I'm probably grasping at straws. These devices aren't "silencers," not even close.

The original inventor, Hiram Percy Maxim, would disagree with you. :biggrinjester:

Image

Image
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. - John Adams

NRA Benefactor Life Member


The Wall
Senior Member
Posts: 819
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:59 am

Re: Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby The Wall » Sat Nov 19, 2016 5:44 pm

It doesn't say anything about suppressors! :lol:


Dave2
Senior Member
Posts: 3138
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 1:39 am
Location: Bay Area, CA

Re: Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby Dave2 » Sat Nov 19, 2016 5:46 pm

Pawpaw wrote:
Ruark wrote:Personally, I'm also discomforted by the use of the word "silencer" here, although I'm probably grasping at straws. These devices aren't "silencers," not even close.

The original inventor, Hiram Percy Maxim, would disagree with you. :biggrinjester:

Typical marketing exaggeration... They don't make anything silent, especially if you aren't shooting subsonic ammo.
I am not a lawyer, nor have I played one on TV, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, nor should anything I say be taken as legal advice. If it is important that any information be accurate, do not use me as the only source.


Ruark
Senior Member
Posts: 982
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby Ruark » Sat Nov 19, 2016 10:01 pm

I think it goes without saying that the primary obstacle to getting this one passed will be the widespread, almost universal belief that guns with silencers just go "pfft, pfft, pfft." Because of that, I strongly suspect this bill will be DOA.
-Ruark

User avatar

ScottDLS
Senior Member
Posts: 3954
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
Location: DFW Area, TX

Re: Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby ScottDLS » Sun Nov 20, 2016 10:39 am

ELB wrote:I always wondered why there was a Texas statute dealing with NFA items in the first place. Trump or not, that's a good place to start removing unnecessary gun laws from Texas books.


It may date back to the Uniform Machine Gun Act which was a suggested law for states by the Feds around the time of the 1934 National Firearms Act.
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"


juno106
Member
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2015 10:59 pm

Re: Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby juno106 » Sun Nov 20, 2016 10:17 pm

My understanding is that at present, there are multiple versions of a potential Hearing Protection Act, each slightly different, which potentially could be passed and sent to the new President for his signature.

That being said, there is apparently at least one version floating around, which will effectively preempt (Texas) state law on this matter.

If this version is enacted, your worries are likely for naught.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/3799/text

SEC. 4. Preemption of certain State laws in relation to firearm silencers.

Section 927 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: “Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, a law of a State or a political subdivision of a State that, as a condition of lawfully making, transferring, using, possessing, or transporting a firearm silencer in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, imposes a tax on any such conduct, or a marking, recordkeeping or registration requirement with respect to the firearm silencer, shall have no force or effect.”.



Not saying repeal of 46.05(a)(1)(D) is a bad thing, but perhaps not a necessary thing.




dhoobler wrote:With the election of Trump, there is a real possibility suppressors will be removed from the list of class three devices and would be treated by federal law as an ordinary firearm.

Lest we forget, Texas law prohibits silencers unless they have an NFA stamp:

Sec. 46.05. PROHIBITED WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally or knowingly possesses, manufactures, transports, repairs, or sells:
(1) any of the following items, unless the item is registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record maintained by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives or classified as a curio or relic by the United States Department of Justice:
(A) an explosive weapon;
(B) a machine gun;
(C) a short-barrel firearm; or
(D) a firearm silencer;


It would be a tragedy if federal was reformed, but state law was not. We could find ourselves in a catch 22 situation where Texans can only own NFA silencers which are no longer available. We could be locked out of the silencer market until the state legislature acts.

I think that repeal of 46.05(a)(1)(D) should be a high priority for the 2017 session.

User avatar

RogueUSMC
Senior Member
Posts: 1398
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 12:55 pm
Location: Smith County
Contact:

Re: Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby RogueUSMC » Mon Nov 21, 2016 10:15 am

juno106 wrote:My understanding is that at present, there are multiple versions of a potential Hearing Protection Act, each slightly different, which potentially could be passed and sent to the new President for his signature.

That being said, there is apparently at least one version floating around, which will effectively preempt (Texas) state law on this matter.

If this version is enacted, your worries are likely for naught.



I wouldn't want to see federal preemption in this...leaves the door open for 'preemption' of other forms...
A man will fight harder for his interests than for his rights.
- Napoleon Bonaparte
PFC Paul E. Ison USMC 1916-2001

User avatar

nightmare69
Senior Member
Posts: 2013
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:03 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Hearing Protection Act - effect of state law

Postby nightmare69 » Mon Nov 21, 2016 10:49 am

I never understood why suppressors were so regulated in the first place.
2/26-Mailed paper app and packet.
5/20-Plastic in hand.
83 days mailbox to mailbox.


Return to “2017 Legislative Wish List”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests