• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

WA suppressor law + integrated suppressor?

antispam540

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
546
Location
Poulsbo, Washington, USA
RCW 9.41.250 prohibits the "Uses [of] any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any firearm"

At what point does a suppressor cease to be a "contrivance or device" and become an integral part of the firearm itself? Are integrated suppressors an exception to this law? If they served another purpose (such as recoil reduction) and just *happened* to reduce noise output, would they still be illegal to use?
 

antispam540

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
546
Location
Poulsbo, Washington, USA
OK, bear with me here - imagine a new rifle design.
With a new rifle design, there's no "baseline" noise level until it's built.
If the design is made with an integrated baffle as part of the mechanism (recoil reduction, gas action, whatever) that also makes the rifle quiet by default, does this integrated baffle count as a silencer, or is the rifle just quiet by design?

I guess what I'm asking is, are rifles required to be designed as noisily as possible? If not, where's the line between "this rifle is quiet" and "this rifle is suppressed"?
 
Last edited:

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
OK, bear with me here - imagine a new rifle design.
With a new rifle design, there's no "baseline" noise level until it's built.
If the design is made with an integrated baffle as part of the mechanism (recoil reduction, gas action, whatever) that also makes the rifle quiet by default, does this integrated baffle count as a silencer, or is the rifle just quiet by design?

I guess what I'm asking is, are rifles required to be designed as noisily as possible? If not, where's the line between "this rifle is quiet" and "this rifle is suppressed"?

It will really end up a matter of design. If it's designed in such manner that it reduces noise/sound/muzzle report, etc. the powers that be will consider it a suppressor regardless of what your intent was.

Pretty much anything other than a straight barrel, or a barrel with un-baffled ports like in flash suppressors or recoil compensators will be viewed as a "sound" suppressor.

Read again the WA law that restricts "any device or contrivance" designed to reduce or mask the sound of a weapon.

Good luck on your design but it will probably end up an NFA device.
 

antispam540

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
546
Location
Poulsbo, Washington, USA
That's disappointing. I had an idea for using a sliding baffle as a blowback *eliminator* for a non-blowback-operated design :(

I've been trying to figure out a way to reduce or eliminate springs in the slide and firing mechanism, so I can actuate it all electrically without wasting a lot of power and carrying around huge solenoids.

The design's based on a PS-90 barrel, with the action built in front of the breech face (along both sides of the barrel). With electrical actuation, the trigger doesn't have to be mechanically connected to the action - it'll mean the butt of the rifle won't have to be any further back than the magazine's edge. With a folding stock, you could get a rifle with the same length as the minimum barrel length in WA (plus 30mm or so). If you went to a state that allowed SBR, you could have one heck of a compact 5.7x28 rifle.

Plus, it'd mean you could leave the chamber open and unloaded until the trigger's pulled, *seriously* improving barrel cooling. It'd pull the chamber closed, scooping a round out of the magazine. As it finished closing, it'd lock into grooves which would simultaneously rotate the firing pin into alignment and release it.

I think it wouldn't be too difficult to have a laser diode mounted in such a way that, when the firing pin's rotated out of the way, the laser diode shines straight through the barrel, giving you all the benefits of a bore sight (and eliminating the huge parallax problems that a normal PS-90 sight has)

Also, the firing cycle'd be controlled in software - meaning the only difference between semi-auto and full-auto is a couple lines of code. Adding a round counter would also be just a couple more lines of code and an LED display.
 
Last edited:

MSG Laigaie

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
3,239
Location
Philipsburg, Montana
"any device or contrivance" designed to reduce or mask the sound of a weapon."

I carried an XM177 in SE Asia and it had a 5.5" "flash hider" on the end of an 11.5 inch barrel. It had a real SBR flash problem, but the F hider helped. The BATF determined that it would reduce sound and deemed them "Suppressors for a while. Balderdash!!

Suppressors are being issued in Afghanistan now, it will not be long before they start to filter home.
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
I carried an XM177 in SE Asia and it had a 5.5" "flash hider" on the end of an 11.5 inch barrel. It had a real SBR flash problem, but the F hider helped. The BATF determined that it would reduce sound and deemed them "Suppressors for a while. Balderdash!!

I have a "civilian" version of that rifle, a CAR-15 built by SGW. The changed the Flash suppressor to comply. The original Flash Suppressor is still NG for civie use. The replacement flash suppressor sure looks like it has the same O. D. as the I. D. of a 2-liter pop bottle neck. Don't know as I haven't tried it yet. May get around to it someday though. Won't be anyone around though when or if I do.
 

Lammo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2009
Messages
580
Location
Spokane, Washington, USA
I have a "civilian" version of that rifle, a CAR-15 built by SGW. The changed the Flash suppressor to comply. The original Flash Suppressor is still NG for civie use. The replacement flash suppressor sure looks like it has the same O. D. as the I. D. of a 2-liter pop bottle neck. Don't know as I haven't tried it yet. May get around to it someday though. Won't be anyone around though when or if I do.

I see a boating accident in your future. :)
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
I have a "civilian" version of that rifle, a CAR-15 built by SGW. The changed the Flash suppressor to comply. The original Flash Suppressor is still NG for civie use. The replacement flash suppressor sure looks like it has the same O. D. as the I. D. of a 2-liter pop bottle neck. Don't know as I haven't tried it yet. May get around to it someday though. Won't be anyone around though when or if I do.

I see a boating accident in your future. :)

Why, when I can just sell it anonymously at a Gun Show. At least for now.
 
Top