Air Gun Home :: View topic

yourdaddyjoe · Supporting Member

YES WE CAN HAVE SILENCERS!
Signed into Law Oct. 2010!

http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2010/H0589.pdf

WhitleyStu · Veteran Member

Several states have similar laws for automatic knives (switch blades) stating that if the knife is made in that state it is legal there. +1 for Idaho and noise supressors!!!

broommaster2000 · Moderator

Very nice! Wink

Congrats.

yourdaddyjoe · Supporting Member

I like the part that I can build pretty much a canon up to 1.5" Cal. as long as it can be carried by one person...

broommaster2000 · Moderator

That means that you ARE gonna build a 1.5 " cannon that can be caried by one person?

bones · Member

sweet deal. i might have to move there now... Smile

AirGunEric · Site Admin

I think these "state laws" are dubious at best and are only "legal" because the federal government hasn't challenged them in court (let's assume they have better things to do).

It's hardly the job of Idaho, or South Carolina, or Texas or New York or wherever to re-write and re-interpret federal law. No offense to people, but this idea of "states rights" stuff has gotten out of hand- very few individual states would be able to "make it" on their own and trying to pull away from any sort of federal government authority would be a recipe for disaster in the long term for most states in the continental US. It might also be worth noting that if the US were to become a series of 48 little republics- virtually none of them would have any negotiation power on their own with other parts of the world and almost nobody outside the current US borderline would take them seriously- it would be a very swift ride to the bottom of the bowl if these ideas of "secession" are taken anywhere. The world doesn't like teeny little republics- especially not land-locked ones to try and do any sort of trade. If every state were to become a little republic, each one would tax the crap out of the next for moving vehicles across their land, using their roads, using their airspace and so on- the cost of doing the simplest of "business" would skyrocket.

yourdaddyjoe · Supporting Member

Audio of the House debates are posted here.
http://www.viddler.com/explore/IdahoTom/videos/31/

IMO... the more states that in act similar laws forces the Feds to listen to the people.

Some laws are best left to the individual states due to demographics of that state.

One thing's for sure. Idaho allows more freedom than my former state. The People Republic of Kalifornia.

Slavia · Moderator

yourdaddyjoe · Supporting Member

California all ready banned 100w incandescent bulbs and the wiring that would allow for them...

yourdaddyjoe · Supporting Member

Alstone · Moderator & Site Supporter

The Suppressor laws in the US always seem to amaze me, here is a country that you can buy just about any gun you like, have regular massacres in your universities and drive by shootings, yet you can’t do it quietly! Or so it seems.

From what I understand provided you pay for a licence about $200.00 you can have a suppressor fitted to your gun, there is even a US website dedicated to silencer building and use.

So does the Idaho law mean that things stay the same apart from paying the $200.00, or have I got it wrong and Idaho is not part of the “United States” and can therefore go it’s own way? Mr. Green

PS: You don't go to jail for 15 years just for reading this post, it's a myth. Laughing

Al

yourdaddyjoe · Supporting Member

Alstone · Moderator & Site Supporter

jlwilliams · Veteran Member

This isn't as revolutionary as it seems. This was the law until 1968. Before that (and after 1933 National Firarms Act) the only regulation on machine guns, silencers and short barreled rifles was a requirement to register them and pay a $200 tax IF it was introduced into interstate commerse. All the Tommy guns that were in private handsafter the 1933 NFA only needed to be registered if they were ever intended to be sold. The 1968 Amnesty registration perion was meant to allow those unregistered guns legally owned to be registered to keep in compliance with the (at that time new) law that all NFA weapons needed to be registered.

The 1933 NFA was clearly an overstep of Constitutional authority, but in the Miller vs US case the Supreme Court ruled it was OK, so it's carved in stone. The new state laws only address the overstep of the 'commerse clause' that came about in the 1968 Omnibus Crime Controll Act.

This interstate commerse issue is still the case with switchblades. The 1958 Switchblade act bans them from interstate commerse with limited exceptions. The states that chose to ban ownership did so, but there is no federal ban on ownership of automatic knives.

This new rash of laws in Idaho, Montana and a number of other states is more for a grand standing camera oportunity than it is a move to protect citizens' rights. The legislatures are largely unaware of the positive impact on airgunning and largely not as pro gun as they are posing to be. This is about flexing 10th Ammendment muscle. Problem is, most Americans are so poorly educated by our public schools that they don't know what the 10th Ammendment is and won't get excited over it; so the politicians grab onto our 2nd Ammendment band wagon because that's one of the two or three that everybody knows.

Rest assured, they don't want to re assert the 10th to give power to the masses, they want to take some of what the Feds have usurped back to the State level so that the state level politicos have some personal power again.

Still, it's a victory. Particularly to the air shooting sports.