Silenced weapon and CCW. is it legal?

1TallTXn · Post by **1TallTXn** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:48 pm

On another forum I'm on somebody asked if a silenced weapon could be legally concealed (assuming a CHL)

I don't recall there being any restriction on what kind of firearm you could carry under a CHL. Does anybody know if thats true or did I miss something?

jbirds1210 · Post by **jbirds1210** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:54 pm

I have absolutely no basis for my comment, BUT legal or not, I bet that would be the dream scenario for a liberal judge or prosecutor.

1TallTXn · Post by **1TallTXn** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:57 pm

jbirds1210 wrote:I have absolutely no basis for my comment, BUT legal or not, I bet that would be the dream scenario for a liberal judge or prosecutor.

That was pretty much my thought. any Anti lawyer would have a hay day painting the carrier as some kind of James Bond wanna-be

cyphur · Post by **cyphur** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:58 pm

silencers are restricted by the BATF - IIRC. Not sure if they are legal to carry or not, but I know you generally need a permit to own one. I've known people who own them, who don't have a permit, but I wouldn't play chicken with the BATF.

Nor would I carry a silenced handgun, as thats just asking for trouble IMHO.

1TallTXn · Post by **1TallTXn** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:02 pm

cyphur wrote:silencers are restricted by the BATF - IIRC. Not sure if they are legal to carry or not, but I know you generally need a permit to own one.

I forgot to make the mention of assumption that the silencer and the CHL are both purchased through all the proper legal loop holes

kw5kw · Post by **kw5kw** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:30 pm

PC Â§46.05.
PROHIBITED WEAPONS.

(a) A person commits an offense if he intention-ally or knowingly possesses, manufactures, transports, repairs, or sells:

(4) a firearm silencer;

(b) It is a defense to prosecution under this sec-tion that the actor's conduct was incidental to the performance of official duty by the armed forces or national guard, a governmental law enforce-ment agency, or a correctional facility.

(c) It is a defense to prosecution under this sec-tion that the actor's possession was pursuant to registration pursuant to the National Firearms Act, as amended.

(e) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree unless it is committed under Subsec-tion (a)(5) or (a)(6), in which event, it is a Class A misdemeanor.

nitrogen · Post by **nitrogen** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 7:54 pm

Wow, so it's only a defense to prosecution, and not technically "legal"?

Does that mean what I think it does: You can have a silencer, legally via FEDERAL law, and still get arrested, and have to wait for a judge/jury to acquit you?

Hopefully I have my understanding of "defense to prosecution" wrong...

Scott Murray · Post by **Scott Murray** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:21 pm

Whether or not it can be done legally, this would seem like an exceedingly bad idea. A silencer would make the weapon more awkward to carry and deploy. And if you should ever actually need to fire it, why in the world would you want to keep it quiet? I'd want to draw all the attention that I possibly could.

And then as has been mentioned, it's going to make you look suspicious, and not just to liberal judges and prosecutors. If there is any way the situation could be construed to be intentional or malicious on your part, the silencer would support that theory.

Scott

kauboy · Post by **kauboy** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:56 pm

nitrogen wrote:Wow, so it's only a defense to prosecution, and not technically "legal"?

Does that mean what I think it does: You can have a silencer, legally via FEDERAL law, and still get arrested, and have to wait for a judge/jury to acquit you?

Hopefully I have my understanding of "defense to prosecution" wrong...

You are technically correct sir. It is an arrestable offense, but you have a defense in court against prosecution.

The only reason I could see for a civilian owning a silencer(and I do want one some day, legally of course) would be to practice with it. But once you leave the house(not for the range), leave it there too.

Syntax360 · Post by **Syntax360** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:51 pm

I have heard of a lot of people keeping their HD weapons equipped with suppressors so that in the event of an emergency, they (and perhaps their family) don't have to pay for defending their lives with significant hearing loss down the line.

Sounds like a good idea to me, but I'd be awfully tempted to detach the thing after the fact, which I'm quite sure would be a bad idea legally.

Also, haven't there been ridiculous civil cases against people involved in legal SD shootings because of possible hearing loss? Perhaps not, but I seem to recall our CHL instructor discussing something insane like that during class.

A suppressor would really help you out with that second shot, as you would probably flinch pretty hard after hearing that first ear-shattering blast. Suppressors also help out in the accuracy department.

I've asked this very same question on other boards and it is pretty much universally regarded as a bad idea. If you were going to carry a suppressed weapon, I think it would be advisable to leave the suppressor attached all the time, or perhaps opt for an integrally suppressed pistol. Others have mentioned the legal implications of having time to attach the suppressor to the weapon and how the action might show some type of malicious intent.

G.C.Montgomery · Post by **G.C.Montgomery** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:52 pm

Assuming the suppressor is registered, meaning you've paid your $200 tax and filed the appropriate paper work with the BATFE, there is nothing illegal about carrying a suppressed pistol under the CHL law.

Having made the above statement, there are some practical issues with carrying a suppressed pistol. The bulk of the can and gun is a pretty serious issue for most of us. Not many pistols were designed with suppressors in mind and the few that were are not particularly well suited to concealed carry even without a suppressor attached.

But there are some known benefits to suppressors. Generally speaking, velocities and accuracy have been known to show improvements if all other variables were equal. Muzzle flash is pretty much non-existent and your hearing won't suffer as badly, meaning you can maintain greater situational awareness.

Now, for those who say a suppressor means you'll go to jail, PLEASE cite the cases in which the use of the suppressor was a material fact in the conviction. I double dog dare you. Logically, I can see where a suppressor might complicate forensics in that powder dispersion and GSR won't be the same as it would be from an unsuppressed weapon firing the same cartridge at any given distance. But again, it seems that pointing this out is just as likely to support your case if explained properly. I can even see it being a problem if you are witnessed attaching the suppressor just prior to the shooting, but I've still never actually seen documented cases, just rumors on the Erronet.

kauboy · Post by **kauboy** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 3:20 pm

I can completely understand the point about using a suppressor on your home defense weapon for the exact reason stated. I know that the first time I heard my PX4 without hearing protection I nearly pooed myself

. That thing was LOUD. And I was outside and it still rung me pretty well. I can't imagine the noise within the confines of my home. I don't however recommend that you take it off before the police arrive. They will undoubtedly ask your neighbors "Around what time did you hear the gunshot?" To which they will all reply, "Huh? Gunshot? I didn't hear no gunshot. Honey, did you hear anything?" That certainly won't look good for you if the sound of even a .32 can be heard through quite a few brick walls. At least by leaving it on, you can explain such answers.

But back to the CC debate, It IS legal in our great state, but I don't think any member here or anywhere else would recommend it... unless maybe Charles is your lawyer.

seamusTX · Post by **seamusTX** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 3:35 pm

kauboy wrote:They will undoubtedly ask your neighbors "Around what time did you hear the gunshot?" To which they will all reply, "Huh? Gunshot? I didn't hear no gunshot.

In some neighborhoods, the neighbors would always say that. Ditto screaming.

- Jim

stevie_d_64 · Post by **stevie_d_64** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:13 pm

I can't see that a suppressed weapon would be any advantage, but more of a hindrince if you carried in that manner, without bogging down in the legality of it...

I choose not to go down that road...To many legal twists can be wrought from this...

KBCraig · Post by **KBCraig** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:21 pm

Don't y'all remember this guy? The story was less than a month ago.

Carrying a suppressed AR carbine while making his ATM rounds. Not only wasn't he in trouble when it was stolen, he was a hero for helping recover it (and put a bunch of thugs in jail).

Kevin