Sig ‘muzzle device' goes to trial | Homestead Security | Forums

A A A
Avatar
Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

Lost password?
sp_Feed F-Homestead-Security
Sig ‘muzzle device' goes to trial
Avatar
K
Admin
Forum Posts: 31782
Member Since:
15 Feb ’12
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
17 May ’15 - 11:28 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Okay that's pretty cool

A trial date has been set for determining whether or not a Sig Sauer muzzle device is a silencer like federal regulators say or a muzzle brake as the company claims.

The two-week bench trial will begin Aug. 4 in a New Hampshire federal court before Judge Paul J. Barbadoro, a President George H.W. Bush appointee. Pretrial statements will be due July 1 and objections due July 15.

The case between the gun maker and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives started its journey toward conclusion in January, when the court asked for final arguments. Sig filed suit in April 2014 after the ATF rejected the company’s rebuttal to its determination.

The ATF Firearms Technology Branch ruled the muzzle device submitted for review was the internal component for a silencer and not a muzzle brake like Sig claimed.

Sig introduced the device at the beginning of 2013 at an international trade show. The device — the 9.5-inch component welded onto a 6.5-inch barrel — was featured on a pistol-caliber carbine called the Sig MPX. Alone the device does not reduce the sound of a gunshot, but when fitted with a metal sleeve it serves as a fully functional silencer — something company reps touted as a selling point during the show.

Despite the introductory marketing efforts, Sig submitted the device for review claiming it was a muzzle brake. However, some gun rights advocates view the lawsuit as a way to chip away at federal laws that prohibit owning items like silencers without following strict regulations.

http://www.guns.com/.....ainst-atf/

Avatar
easytapper
Rancher
Members
Forum Posts: 2149
Member Since:
19 Feb ’12
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
17 May ’15 - 2:54 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory

I would think the government is going to lose this case.  Bottom line, regardless of what you can do to it, at the end of the day it does not reduce the decibels of a gunshot.  It doesn't meet the legal definition of a "silencer".  That's like claiming a 10/22 is a machine gun because it can be modified to go full auto.

Now I have a technical question about silencers.  Do they have any material in them to dampen the sound, or are they hollow?  And the article says a metal sleeve.  What about a PVC sleeve?  Or is it too much pressure?

Avatar
K
Admin
Forum Posts: 31782
Member Since:
15 Feb ’12
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
18 May ’15 - 8:11 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Here is how a silencer works

I think there would be too much pressure for a complete pvc sleeve, but this guy does use some in his design

https://youtu.be/oqZMzmPBMqc

Forum Timezone: America/New_York

Most Users Ever Online: 698

Currently Online:
113 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

easytapper: 2149

DangerDuke: 2030

groinkick: 1667

PorkChopsMmm: 1515

Gravel Road: 1455

Newest Members:

Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 12

Topics: 11482

Posts: 58640

 

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 2

Members: 19842

Moderators: 0

Admins: 1

Administrators: K