Sig Sauer and ATF Set to Face Off in Court

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Erick

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
2,014
Reaction score
47
Location
Yukon
This is interesting. It sounds like the ATF is assuming law abiding citizens would thread on an outer tube and convert the brake into a suppressor.

Gunnews.com
Posted by Tom Hudson on Wednesday, April 16, 2014


www.gunnews.com_wp_content_uploads_2014_04_sigsauermuzzlebreak.jpg


At the 2013 Shot Show, Sig Sauer introduced the MPX with the optional 9” muzzle brake, bringing the overall length of the gun to 16”, making it a legal rifle under National Firearms Act (NFA) rules.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) has designated this unique muzzle brake as a silencer. Their ruling is because of the design of the brake. According to the ATF, “The submitted item is designed and constructed as a silencer component commonly referred to as a ‘monolithic baffle stack’”
Earl Griffin, chief of Firearms Technology Branch of the ATF, continued, “A monolithic baffle stack is a silencer core that replaces traditional individual baffle and spacer parts with a solid unit that may contain a series of baffles, spacers, ports, or expansion chambers. Welding it to a barrel does not change its design characteristics or function. Based on the findings reviewed above, the FTB examination has determined that the submitted sample is a part intended only for use in the assembly or fabrication of a silencer and, therefore, is a silencer … Hence, it is subject to regulation under both GCA and (National Firearms Act) provisions.”
Sig Sauer, in response, set about doing tests to determine if the muzzle brake had any silencing properties, or if it just helped reduce the felt recoil of the rifle.
The first test was to measure the decibel level of their rifle with the muzzle brake attached. As to be expected by anyone with even a cursory knowledge of firearms and muzzle brakes, the rifle with the brake was actually louder than one without the brake.
The second test was to determine if the brake did as Sig Sauer originally advertised, which it did. The muzzle brake reduced the felt recoil, which is what is to be expected.
The third test investigated other rifles with similar concepts to its muzzle brake that already had ATF approval.
The ATF’s response was to be expected. Griffin wrote, “We appreciate your further inquiry, but find no reason to amend our earlier findings.”
In other words, facts are meaningless and we do not care what you think. The ATF is flexing their governmental muscle in this ridiculous ruling.
Sig Sauer is doing the only thing that they can: They are suing the ATF. According to Sig Sauer’s attorneys, this classification is causing “economic injury” because it cannot be marketed as a silencer, since it has no silencing properties.
The other issue is that many potential customers will simply not buy the rifle because of the added red tape and fees associated with purchasing a silencer.
This is classic government overreach on the part of the ATF. I am also a little confused as to why silencers are on the NFA list. Obama and crew are very concerned with the environment, and noise pollution is a huge deal. Silencers are a great way to combat noise pollution, so I would think that the government would want all shooters to use a silencer.

http://www.gunnews.com/sig-sauer-atf-set-face-court/
 

austin.brown

Sharpshooter
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
501
Reaction score
2
Location
stillwater
I have seen this so many places I cannot remember if it has been discussed here.

It gonna be an up hill battle for Sig because the BATFEces is allowed to make their own stupid laws, and it is going to be hard to argue that that is not a part of a suppressor. If the ATF has previousley ruled that those muzzle breaks that go inside the suppressor and act as a blast chamber are muzzle breaks then Sig can use their own ruling against them.

Here is an example of what I mean.

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/87...-762mm-ar-10-lr-308-5-8-24-thread-steel-matte

All this to say I hope Sig wins big time, and yes I need to purchase one of their products.
 

mr ed

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
6,999
Reaction score
4,834
Location
Tulsa
it would have probably gotten approval if it didn't have the threads on the end for screwing on the outer tube.
I've seen other supposedly approved ones that were similar with no threads.
 

Maverick1911

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
593
Reaction score
4
Location
Edmond
I wonder if the ATF does their own "unbiased" testing to determine the validity of the suppressor claim? Seems like a few hours on the range with a government approved decibel reader might save the tax payers and sig millions of dollars. What a waste of resources and time.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom