TN Firearms Freedom Act

[wrenchhead97]

I've been doing some reading on the TN FFA. If I'm reading it correctly, I can manufacture a silencer or SBR without an NFA stamp so long as it is never sold, is produced and kept at all times in TN, is engraved "Made in Tennessee", and all major parts are made in TN. Am I reading that correctly?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kenstaroni]

You cannot manufacture a silencer or SBR without a tax stamp in any state in the U.S.  Firearms yes, NFA item no.  I haven't read the whole FFA but I'm not aware of any changes regarding NFA items.

 

Edited July 13, 2016 by Kenstaroni

[Oh Shoot]

14 minutes ago, wrenchhead97 said:

 

I've been doing some reading on the TN FFA. If I'm reading it correctly, I can manufacture a silencer or SBR without an NFA stamp so long as it is never sold, is produced and kept at all times in TN, is engraved "Made in Tennessee", and all major parts are made in TN. Am I reading that correctly?

 

That is correct, except that there is also no prohibition about selling them, dunno where you got that.

However, the ATF disagrees. No test case yet.

- OS

[dallasb]

I've been doing some reading on the TN FFA. If I'm reading it correctly, I can manufacture a silencer or SBR without an NFA stamp so long as it is never sold, is produced and kept at all times in TN, is engraved "Made in Tennessee", and all major parts are made in TN. Am I reading that correctly?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The version that I read did not include short barrel rifles only silencers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Oh Shoot]

40 minutes ago, dallasb said:

 

The version that I read did not include short barrel rifles only silencers
 

The only "version" that counts is the actual statute: 4-54-101 - 4-54-106.

Only exclusions are:

   "(1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one (1) person;

   (2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than one and one half inches (1 1/2'') and that uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;

   (3) Ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or

   (4) A firearm that discharges two (2) or more projectiles with one (1) activation of the trigger or other firing device."

The last one is rather odd, since it conflicts with existing definition of machine gun in TCA, which is "... any firearm that is capable of shooting more than two (2) shots automatically, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger."

- OS

 

Edited July 13, 2016 by Oh Shoot

[wrenchhead97]

Nobody has tried this yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Oh Shoot]

9 minutes ago, wrenchhead97 said:

Nobody has tried this yet?

Not much to risk really, 'cept 10 years in federal prison and $100K in fines.

No to mention legal fees.

- OS

Edited July 13, 2016 by Oh Shoot

[wrenchhead97]

I'm surprised the TFA or NRA hasn't done anything on this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wrenchhead97]

Or is it along the same lines as them busting pot dispensaries in states that have legalized it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nightrunner]

2 minutes ago, Oh Shoot said:

Not much to risk really, 'cept 10 years in federal prison and $100K.

- OS

And I know this is assumed, but also a felony charge that sticks with you when you do get out and effectively ruins the rest of your life. 

 

If someone doesn't really value their freedom all that much and has a few hundred thousand dollars to throw at court costs/legal fees to set a precedent, that'd be great.

[Oh Shoot]

2 minutes ago, nightrunner said:

And I know this is assumed, but also a felony charge that sticks with you when you do get out and effectively ruins the rest of your life. 

 

If someone doesn't really value their freedom all that much and has a few hundred thousand dollars to throw at court costs/legal fees to set a precedent, that'd be great.

Yep, note the Act did not include TN state funds and lawyers to mount your defense, either. And I don't think any of the legislature will be willing to stand in front of the ATF vehicles that take you away.

- OS

Edited July 13, 2016 by Oh Shoot

[nightrunner]

2 minutes ago, Oh Shoot said:

Yep, note the Act did not include TN state funds and lawyers to mount your defense, either. And I don't think any of the legislature will be willing to stand in front of the ATF vehicles that take you away.

- OS

My opinion, when this was passed, it was nothing more than a feel good gesture, knowing it had no legs to stand on and no one would test it. TN isn't the only state that has this, I believe Montana? maybe Wisconsin? has it also. Still no test case in any state.

[Oh Shoot]

Just now, nightrunner said:

My opinion, when this was passed, it was nothing more than a feel good gesture, knowing it had no legs to stand on and no one would test it. TN isn't the only state that has this, I believe Montana? maybe Wisconsin? has it also. Still no test case in any state.

Even if you wanted to, there is the practical matter of making all the parts to be in compliance with the TN law. It's one thing to make maybe a receiver and barrel, but think of all the many small parts that make up a firearm you'd have to fabricate somehow.

- OS

[wrenchhead97]

I'm not thinking about a gun... I'm thinking cans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nightrunner]

2 minutes ago, wrenchhead97 said:

I'm not thinking about a gun... I'm thinking cans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Same thing for the legal issues.

[wrenchhead97]

Same thing for the legal issues.

Yes, but not the same technical nightmare as producing a complete working firearm. It looks like the Montana Shooting Sports Foundation's lawsuit was shot down in '14 by the SCOTUS...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DaveTN]

3 hours ago, wrenchhead97 said:

Am I reading that correctly?

Yes, but because I had a C&R I got a letter from the BATF stating the TFFA violates Federal law. We haven’t found anyone yet that wants to be a test case.

[Garufa]

1 hour ago, DaveTN said:

Yes, but because I had a C&R I got a letter from the BATF stating the TFFA violates Federal law. We haven’t found anyone yet that wants to be a test case.

Why would you get such a letter as a C&R holder?

[nightrunner]

14 minutes ago, Garufa said:

Why would you get such a letter as a C&R holder?

If I'm not mistaken, all TN FFLs received the same letter.

[Mindless-Focus]

4 hours ago, Oh Shoot said:

The only "version" that counts is the actual statute: 4-54-101 - 4-54-106.

Only exclusions are:

   "(1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one (1) person;

   (2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than one and one half inches (1 1/2'') and that uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;

   (3) Ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or

   (4) A firearm that discharges two (2) or more projectiles with one (1) activation of the trigger or other firing device."

The last one is rather odd, since it conflicts with existing definition of machine gun in TCA, which is "... any firearm that is capable of shooting more than two (2) shots automatically, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger."

- OS

 

So basically, you can't make a punt gun or blunderbus.

[DaveTN]

2 hours ago, Garufa said:

Why would you get such a letter as a C&R holder?

I give up... why?

[dallasb]

So what is the consensus? I've read articles saying that it is legal and others that say it is illegal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wrenchhead97]

According to state law it's legal. According to the feebs it's illegal. If you do it, the BATFE WILL prosecute, the state WON'T protect you, and you will lose 10 years of your life and become a felon in the process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DaveTN]

5 hours ago, wrenchhead97 said:

According to state law it's legal. According to the feebs it's illegal. If you do it, the BATFE WILL prosecute, the state WON'T protect you, and you will lose 10 years of your life and become a felon in the process.

That’s about how I see it, although I would say it’s not that the state won’t protect you; it’s that they can’t protect you.

I have never understood why we need a test dummy. No laws were violated in Heller and no arrests made. It might have something to do with the rulings on the Montana case; I don’t know?