Legality in MD of using a suppressor for SD in the home

[Sticky]

Heard from a friend of a recent case that has aroused my curiosity. Now... bear in mind that this is probably a 4th or 5th hand story, so I may be totally off-base, but..

The story I was told was that the ATF was investigating someone who owned NFA items (including an SBR and/or suppressors) and they found a suppressed weapon in a bedroom of the residence in the state of MD. They asked what the purpose of it was and the owner replied 'for self-defense'. Apparently the owner was prosecuted for this and it cost quite a bit to have all of his legally owned weapons (excluding the one in question, it was not returned) returned after they were confiscated. I was told that the use of an NFA weapon for self-defense was not legal, but after some exhaustive searching, I can find nothing of this noted anywhere.

I have a feeling that the story I was told is not fully correct and there was some other caveat that caused this issue and the subsequent confiscation and prosecution, but... I will ask anyway, is there any legal reason (other than the fear of the jury's potential interpretation of using an NFA weapon or suppressor for self-defense) that I can't use a suppressor on a home defense pistol, for example?

 

[Rich1911]

I would start with why they were being investigated in the first place...

 

[Fox123]

Nothing to stop any DA and law enforcement from trying to charge you. not to say it's not legal to use, just saying they can and do make it expensive for you afterwards. Remember that MD hates you and hates that you have them.

 

[Inigoes]

Sounds like the owner of the NFA items did not pay the price of admission for the Tax stamp(s).

If you are a lawful owner of an NFA item, you can use it for all lawful purposes, which includes self-defense.

If you are not the lawful owner, then you will be held liable for even possessing the NFA item.

 

[Sticky]

I would start with why they were being investigated in the first place...

Again, this is at least a 3rd hand story that I was told, but apparently it was somehow related to a charging levied against one of the owner's children. I have no idea how the ATF got involved, but apparently they had a warrant to search the premises. The owner had many other firearms, all of which were confisated along with the NFA weapon in question (I believe it was an SBR or SBS).

It really makes no sense to me and I would guess (pure conjecture on my part) that it was somehow related to the charge against the child and perhaps some violation of law as a result of that.

 

[Sticky]

Nothing to stop any DA and law enforcement from trying to charge you. not to say it's not legal to use, just saying they can and do make it expensive for you afterwards. Remember that MD hates you and hates that you have them.

Agreed and acknowledged, but.... I am looking for any evidence that me, as a legal gun owner, should I choose to apply for, receive my tax stamp and manufacture a suppressor for a home-defense pistol and keep it near by bed, would not legally be able to use that to defend myself in the event that my life was threatened inside my home.

I understand all of the various legalities and inferences of using a firearm to defend one's self in the home, but.... is there anything anywhere that says it can't be suppressed by law, either in MD or here in the USofA?

 

[teratos]

BS. There is nothing in Maryland statute which would forbid the use of NFA items for HD. There must be more to the story.

 

[Sticky]

Sounds like the owner of the NFA items did not pay the price of admission for the Tax stamp(s).

If you are a lawful owner of an NFA item, you can use it for all lawful purposes, which includes self-defense.

If you are not the lawful owner, then you will be held liable for even possessing the NFA item.

Understood and this is why I am pretty sure I was told incorrectly, what the person was being charged with.

I have two stamps now for suppressors for rimfires for hunting use, using 'all lawful purposes' as my justification and that should include self-defense in my home as well. I would like to apply for two more form 1's, one for a large caliber rifle suppressor and one for a pistol suppressor to protect my poor ol ears in the event that I may someday have to discharge that sucker in my house.. LOL

 

[Sticky]

BS. There is nothing in Maryland statute which would forbid the use of NFA items for HD. There must be more to the story.

Pretty sure there is and that what I was told was not fully correct... just wanting to be sure before I send more $$$ to the ATF... LMAO

 

[Inigoes]

Understood and this is why I am pretty sure I was told incorrectly, what the person was being charged with.

I have two stamps now for suppressors for rimfires for hunting use, using 'all lawful purposes' as my justification and that should include self-defense in my home as well. I would like to apply for two more form 1's, one for a large caliber rifle suppressor and one for a pistol suppressor to protect my poor ol ears in the event that I may someday have to discharge that sucker in my house.. LOL

Following up on that logic.

If you use a silencer is a SD shooting, it is going to be seized along with the gun. Every time there is a shooting, an investigation is going to be conducted.

 

[teratos]

Pretty sure there is and that what I was told was not fully correct... just wanting to be sure before I send more $$$ to the ATF... LMAO

My current HD set up is an AR with a 10.5" barrel with a 762-SDN-6 on the end.

 

[AssMan]

Was the guy married? Maybe it's an access issue? Suppressor is registered to him but family has access to it? I dunno...

 

[Sticky]

Following up on that logic.

If you use a silencer is a SD shooting, it is going to be seized along with the gun. Every time there is a shooting, an investigation is going to be conducted.

I realize that, but in this case there was not a shooting involved, but perhaps some other related legal issue that the owner was in violation of, that's the only thing that really makes any sense here.

I know how the system works, I did have a run-in in my youth and did have to go to court to get my legally owned firearms back. It took over a year to get a trial date and I can tell you first-hand, that you don't want MSP holding your weapons for an extended period, they were ugly when I finally got them back... LOL

 

[Inigoes]

Look in the ATF press releases

https://www.atf.gov/news/press-releases?division=All&show_national=All&year[value][year]=&=Submit

most are about prohibited persons. and the Hyattsville firebombing.

 

[Sticky]

Was the guy married? Maybe it's an access issue? Suppressor is registered to him but family has access to it? I dunno...

I suspect it may be something along this line.. apparently (or so I was told) this was somehow related to a child (that was probably living in the house at the time) and some infraction of the law that the child had been prosecuted for. I know that one must ensure that only legal/authorized users of an NFA weapon are allowed to have access to them, perhaps it was something as simple as that...or perhaps the child was now a prohibited person and the owner did not 'prevent' him from having access (the weapon in question was apparently not secured).

 

[Rack&Roll]

Sounds like he's got bigger problems than his firearm collection.

 

[Biggfoot44]

But in Md's Machine Gun statute firing anywhere except shoot range is "being kept for Offensive Purpose" . Don't start about the meaning of offensive vs defemsive. Offensive Purpose is assumed for possesing loaded machine gun' except for specific exemption of shooting range.

 

[Sticky]

But in Md's Machine Gun statute firing anywhere except shoot range is "being kept for Offensive Purpose" . Don't start about the meaning of offensive vs defemsive. Offensive Purpose is assumed for possesing loaded machine gun' except for specific exemption of shooting range.

Safe there... a full auto weapon is a little out of my price league... LOL

 

[Rack&Roll]

But in Md's Machine Gun statute firing anywhere except shoot range is "being kept for Offensive Purpose" . Don't start about the meaning of offensive vs defemsive. Offensive Purpose is assumed for possesing loaded machine gun' except for specific exemption of shooting range.

Oh.....bitchez

 

[CharlieFoxtrot]

As others have said there must be more to the story. There is nothing in MD or Fed law that prohibits you from using a lawfully possessed suppressor in self defense. Have one on my home gun.