Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Suppressor "Possession" Question

Lots of info out there about what states allow suppressor ownership, legality for hunting, how trusts work, etc. but what constitutes "possession" out in the field? I see videos where individuals are handed suppressed weapons to shoot at the range, to shoot an animal, and so on, even when the actual owner is not necessarily standing right there. I'd imagine private property usage only. Can an individual hand his or her registered suppressor to another person on a private tract, allow them to shoot it or hunt with it unsupervised, and then get it back from said person, so long as they don't leave the private property? I don't see how else some of these gunshops/ranges I see on Youtube would let folks shoot and test the suppressors they've already paid for while they wait for the stamp to arrive. Plenty of articles out there where gun writers are handed suppressed rifles to test and hunt with on private tracts. Just curious how all that works and stays legal.

Great inquiry - I'm interested to learn on this as well.

I believe if the person you are borrowing it to is listed on your trust, they can handle and use that silencer just like it’s their own, they have to have a notorzied copy of the trust with their name and a copy of the tax stamp. Far as I’ve Been told

I believe that is correct, but I'm referring to a shooter not on your trust. You can obviously let your buddy shoot your suppressor in your backyard when you are having a range session, but what if you left for a few minutes and he was still there shooting with the suppressor in your yard? Are you now doing something that's a problem? What if after your range session you were to drop him off at a treestand on your property with said suppressor and then came back to pick him up after his hunt? Where is the line drawn regarding possession? I don't really hear much on this matter, but it seems like it could use some clarification. It's kind of like our Youth Season Deer Hunts here in Louisiana. The youth has to be accompanied by a supervising adult and supervising is defined as "maintaining visual and voice contact at all times". So it might be in the same box blind, or it might actually be in two separate bow stands, maybe even a hundred yards apart. The defined parameters can help.

The fact that we have to jump through these hoops at all is bullshit.

You are not wrong.....

Reckon this is the first thing ever uttered on the fire that'd have unanimous agreement.

I think you'd be in trouble on this one.

pos·ses·sion
/pəˈzeSH(ə)n/
noun: possession; plural noun: possessions
1.
the state of having, owning, or controlling something.

LAW
visible power or control over something, as distinct from lawful ownership; holding or occupancy.

If he's in the tree stand - you as the owner have no "control" over it. If he's standing next to you - you likely do. (range session)

I think that's why they use the term "transfer" when you pick up the suppressor. They're transferring control of it over to you. Prior to that, they have control as the appropriate FFL (why you can use it on the range but not take it home till cleared). They (the FFL) still "control" and thus "possess" the suppressor while you're in their place and their RO is running the range. Same as you might on the back 40 letting cousin Sal squirt some 300 Blackout.

I was also told that if you were to get in “trouble” with what you are talking about that it would have to be from a federal warden, not state.. but not 100 percent sure . I can tell you I’ve been with buddies who had their suppressors on their rifles when getting checked by a state warden and they never asked a word about it as far as ownership

Makes pretty good sense with the RO example. You are likely right in that some sort of visible proximity and inferred control is needed to claim possession. I'd not push the limits myself, but have been curious from time to time regarding videos and articles where it appears that someone is using a can they don't actually own.

That's for sure!

If you're using one of my cans you are RIGHT THERE with me. As in, I can touch it. So, basically just my son, and he's getting them per the trust, so no issues with him not being by me in the future.

If you're a grown man and want a can, buy one. I'll wet your appetite at the range, but am not taking on the liability of you using it without me there.

Yeah, I've hunted in the same box blind with folks while we were using my cans, and of course others have shot them at the range, which generally results in them wanting to start paperwork on one of their own.

Like everything else ATF there’s a grey area. Common theme from my research is close enough to talk to.

My biggest concern is kids can’t “possess” them until 18. So there is some risk if you’re not hunting together.

Many state game wardens are also federal deputy federal Fish and Wildlife agents agents

The age for anyone to legally posses one is 21 as per my trust attorney.

Not according to this: https://americansuppressorassociation.com/education/

ETA: the law firm that did my trust told me 18 to possess as co-trustee.

Some states may have more restrictions in the state statute. Like how machine guns are legal in MN, but only if they are C&R.

True, but crittr used the term anyone and that's not the case for everyone. And I'd be surprised if it's the case in his state.

My bad, my son had to be 21 before I could add him on to my trust.

Thanks, crittr. Is that something in Utah trust law, not necessarily specific to the suppressor?

Per my NFA dealer kids can be added as a beneficiary at any age but can’t be added as a trustee until 18 (or hell, maybe it was 21?). If your beneficiary is a minor, a trustee would keep possession until they were old enough.

That's how mine was done. Beneficiary as a minor and now a co-trustee.

If you want to see the future, look north to Canada. Unless you are the legally registered owner of a firearm, you CANNOT shoot it. I can take my shotguns to Canada for tournaments, but it's illegal for somebody to "try it out" even with me standing adjacent to them.

Ditto for purchasing ammo - you cannot buy a caliber/gauge unless your card indicates same ownership. Must be registered to buy ammo? Yes in Kanada. Yes in Kommifornia (and other places).

Kanada law coming to Amerika soon.

It was a suppressor specific trust that was done. Not sure if it is Utah specific or not, might have to give my attorney a call to find out.

Just a couple of thoughts after reading some of this...

1. "grey area" is just a place you don't want to be these days if you are wise.

2. follow the "money"

3. phone cameras and recorders have turned most "social" situations risky legal "minefields"

4. [bleep] always runs downhill to the name on the "dotted line"/deepest pockets (see #1!)

5. consider the "[bleep] show" we live in as we speak... certain things, at least, are definitely unraveling

Suppressors certainly look interesting for certain applications but not worth the risk, cost, and "dance" with the legal system for me. Ear plugs and muffs have worked just fine when utilized.

This is still America I think, so for now anyway, to each his own.

Fixed it

I agree. It is total bull schidt. One of my buddies is a SWAT member. He lets me shoot his suppressed rifles all the time. He actually requests that I do testing with them, to prove their accuracy. However, he is there with me. Is that legal, or not? I do agree, we live in America where we used to have freedoms. It's just stupid where it's going, especially with this current administration.

Fu ck that!!! FJB. I'm assuming you are not voting trump?

BSA, was only reporting observations. This thread about suppressor laws demonstrates how eerily close we are to Kanadian dictats. Nowhere did I indicate those were my preferences.

FJB indeed! Only a fool would vote for Brandon.

Mr. Passive Aggressive - how in the gawd's creation did you interpret this gentleman to be a lefty?

I'm already on "the list" (so are you) --- may as well have the toys to go with.

^^^^He is not blowing smoke on that. All I’ll say.

I brought this up to FWP ranger /CO in Montana and he said if Let anyone use my can that can better be within arms reach of me the entire time it’s NOT actually in my hands and being used by others.

Informal discussion in the sage that day, for what it’s worth.

Osky

No suppressors "aloud" (allowed), for sure & Yes, Kanada law is [bleep], but .......................

As long as I have a Possession & acquisition license, I can buy any commercially available ammunition or components, commercially available.

It's not limited to any firearms I own.

Without our defunct long gun registry, they have no idea (supposedly), of what we own / possess.

Only 5 of our firearms, were purchased, prior to the scrapping of the long gun registry.

We do not own, any restricted or prohibited firearms, which are still recorded, via your special access license.

When they decide to do confiscation or line up the box cars - they will not discriminate based on "type" of firearm they believe you own. All they'll know is you own A firearm and are a threat to them.

Thanks for clarifying 99s. Back in the day (2010-13) I called ahead to my buddy and asked him to buy some .22 ammo, and was told he can't because he only has shotguns registered. When I drove to border & submitted my form 5589 for shotguns (which Constable said would function as my ammo purchase authority), Canadian Tire worker wouldn't let me buy .22 or 7RM ammo, only shotshells. Perhaps things have changed since 2013. Or maybe it's just a visitor thing.

No need to own firearms. Taking a stroll thru the Capitol is enough to scare them