The Gen5 Glock included in the kit comes with a factory threaded-barrel and a couple of custom features from B&T. The first is a switch that immobilizes the slide, eliminating the sound of the semi-automatic pistol’s slide reciprocating for the quietest operation possible. The second feature is the custom milling for Aimpoint’s enclosed emitter ACRO mini red-dot optic. The beauty of B&T’s work is how deeply the ACRO is embedded into the slide. The bottom of the optic’s window is just about level with the top of the slide, offering co-witnessing with standard-height irons.

The B&T Hush Puppy silencer uses polymer wipes instead of conical metal baffles for the ultimate performance in noise reduction. The wipes will last a dozen rounds, or so, before they’re no longer able to trap gasses and suppress the noise of the host pistol. Replacing the wipes with a new set takes a minute and restores the can’s performance. B&T says the Hush Puppy is as quiet as it’s VP9 silenced, bolt-action pistol, which is pretty damned quiet.

The Hush Puppy includes a custom laser cut case, two boxes of 158-grain subsonic ammo, and tools to work on the pistol and suppressor.

B&T hasn’t released an official price, but a representative expects the kit to retail for between $2200 and $2500.

In late 2006, we ran an article on the then recent investigation that the Office of the Inspector General performed on the NFRTR. In that article we asked everyone to pay close attention to the forms and the information that is contained on those forms that anyone submits to the ATF. That one article didn’t seem to hit home with a lot of people, so we are going to hit some key points on the forms and make some suggestions that will make a lot of sense to most of you.

One of the age-old issues that we all have faced is to make certain that all of the information that you complete on a new form is identical to the information on the old. While sounding like a good idea, the real problem with this strategy is not only do we pass up an opportunity to correct old problems but we increase the odds of adding new problems. Just because a form has inaccurate information doesn’t give anyone an excuse to exacerbate the problem. If something is wrong, and you know it’s wrong, then correct it. Continuing to pass along mistakes only insures that someone else will come along in a year or two and inadvertently make another mistake making a bad situation even worse. What we want to do is correct anything and everything we possibly can at every opportunity that we have. In section 4, “Description of the Firearm,” all of the information that can make a major difference in helping to correct errors in the NFRTR is contained in sections “4.a” though “4.g.” In this section we want to take every opportunity to review and correct if necessary, any and all issues pertinent to the firearm.

Section 4.a: Name and Address of Manufacturer and/ or Importer of Firearm:

In this section the requirement is relatively simple. Make certain that you review the information on the old form, or the new form, and insure that all of the information is accurate and as detailed as possible. At this stage, please make certain that you correct any errors or omissions as possible.

Section 4.b: Type of Firearm

In many of the commercial off the shelf programs, users will generally find pull down menus allowing you to select whether this firearm is one of the following categories:

• Any other Weapon (AOW)
• Destructive Device (DD)
• Machine Gun
• Short Barreled Rifle (SBR)
• Short Barreled Shotgun (SBS)
• Silencer

Section 4.c: Caliber, Gauge, or Size

Check to make certain that all of the information required for this section is complete.

Section 4.d: Model

Make certain that all alpha and numeric characters that represent the model are accurately recorded in this section. Insure that as much information as possible from the receiver of the NFA weapon is accurately depicted in this section.

Section 4.e: Length of Barrel

In this section, please insure that the barrel length on your Form 4 matches the exact barrel length on the firearm you are either shipping or receiving. We will address the ton of questions that you have concerning this issue in another article.

Section 4.f: Length Overall

In this section you want to make certain that you take exacting measurements on the total length on the firearm you are either shipping or receiving.

Section 4.g: Serial Number

Obviously this section is absolutely critical. Please make certain that you examine the NFA item in question and validate each alpha or numeric character and validate that the serial number matches exactly.

The most important issue here is to make certain that we pay attention to the details on any of the forms that we provide the NFA Branch. Today, nearly 40% of the forms that are being handled by the Branch still contain some sort of error or omission that requires the form to be returned for correction. We can all spend a little more time and attention to the detail and get it right the first time.

In addition to the time and attention issue, every dealer and collector in our community should pay attention to the details of the weapon itself. In this process we recommend that you look closely at exactly what is happening with this transfer. Use a little common sense and ask for help when you need it when something is in question. If it doesn’t seem to be right you are probably correct. Check it out with another dealer or consult with the NFA Branch for help.

In summary, we all want to work together to help clean up the NFRTR. The NFRTR follows the old technology adage of “garbage in, garbage out.” Fortunately, the problems with the NFRTR can be straightened out, but only with the help of the industry and ATF. Let’s all work together to make that happen.

Help us make a better community for the entire industry today and join successes that we are creating together. Log on today at www.nfatca.org and join the only organization that has and continues to protect your NFA rights.

• The introductory chapter also mentions that the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act of 1986 amended the NFA definition of “silencer” by adding combinations of parts for silencers and any part intended for use in the assembly or fabrication of a silencer. As most SAR readers know, the 1986 Act also amended the 1968 Gun Control Act to prohibit the transfer or possession of machine guns (18 U.S.C. Section 922(o)). Exceptions were made for transfers of machine guns to, or possession of machine guns by, government agencies, and those lawfully possessed before the effective date of the prohibition, May 19, 1986.
• An explanation of What Constitutes “Firearms” under the NFA are detailed in Chapter 2, the types of shotguns, rifles, weapons made from a rifle or shotgun, Any Other Weapon, machine gun, silencer, destructive device, explosive device, large caliber weapon, and Curios and Relics. Also covered are applications to remove firearms from the scope of the NFA as collector’s items or by modification/elimination of components.
• Chapter 3 delves into the Registration of NFA Firearms and explains the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record, including registration by state and local agencies, registration by makers, importers, and manufacturers as well as registration to transferees. Also covered is how to determine the registration status of an NFA firearm, lost or stolen registration documents, and correcting incorrect registration documents.
  
• The Taxes Imposed by the NFA are the subject of Chapter 4 to include making, transfer and special (occupational) taxes, exemption from tax, and the exportation of firearms.
• Chapter 5 details Qualifying to do Business in NFA Firearms including license fees, standards, registration by firearms manufacturers and exporters with the U.S. Dept. of State, etc.
• Chapter 6 covers the Making of NFA firearms by Non-Licensees and explains the preparation of ATF Form 1 and other subjects, including the reactivation of a registered unserviceable NFA firearm.
• The Manufacturing of NFA Firearms is the subject of Chapter 7 to include qualifying for a license, engaging in business in multiple locations, makers of destructive devices, registration exemption for fabricating articles for research and development, and the ATF firearm classification process.
• Chapter 8 goes into Importing NFA Firearms and explains the necessary licensing, payment of special (occupational) taxes, importation for use as a model by a registered manufacturer, importation as a sales sample, and marking requirements.
• The Transfer of NFA Firearms is explained in Chapter 9 to include the forms used for transfers, as well as transfer of silencers for repair, distribution of estate firearms, manufacturers’ use of contractors to perform work on firearms, etc.
• Chapter 10 covers Collectors of NFA Firearms Curios & Relics, transfers, acquisition and dispositions, etc.
• The Exportation of NFA Firearms is the subject of Chapter 11 to include the Arms Export Control Act, firearms and firearm component parts subject to the AECA, license requirements for permanent and temporary exports of defense articles, etc.
• Chapter 12 covers Recordkeeping including the manner in which registration documents must be kept, custody of NFA firearms by employees of FFLs/SOTs, etc.
• The Required Reports and Notifications to ATF for NFA businesses are covered in Chapter 13.
• Chapter 14 details the procedures that must be followed when Going-Out-of-Business.
• Chapter 15 warns of the Penalties and Sanctions for non-compliance with regulations.

Spanning nearly 200-pages, the NFA Handbook is available from the ATF website (www.atf.gov) or a reprint may be ordered from the industry trade journal, The International Firearms Trade by e-mailing: INTLFT@aol.com. The cost from IFT is $55. postpaid. Customers outside the U.S. must add $10 shipping.

AG Gonzales Proposes ATF Reforms

U.S. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales has announced the Violent Crime and Anti-Terrorism Act of 2007, a Dept. of Justice proposal. The bill provides greater flexibility in the penalties that could be imposed on federal firearms licensees who violate the Gun Control Act.

Specifically, the bill would establish additional, graduated sanctions for certain violations of the federal firearms laws, including suspension of federal firearms licenses and imposing civil monetary penalties. Such lesser sanctions will enable ATF to more effectively address violations of the Gun Control Act, the Justice Dept. has said.

Guidance on Post Office Box Addresses of Gun Buyers

ATF has issued an Open Letter to federal firearms licensees (dated June 7, 2007) advising on procedures to follow when a firearms purchaser presents an identification document showing only a post office box or rural route number as their legal address. Though the Form 4473 (Firearms Transaction Record) includes language stating that a post office box is not an acceptable residence address, it is possible to get a variance.

While the Form 4473 requires that the buyer’s residence address be provided, the term “residence address” is not defined in the law or regulations. Since non-licensed purchasers are generally restricted to their state of residence in acquiring firearms, ATF requires that the residence address provided on the Form 4473 be sufficient to identify the physical location of the purchaser’s residence in the event the firearm is the subject of a trace request. Persons in rural areas may have only a post office box or rural route number as their only legal address, but this does not necessarily mean that such persons are prohibited from buying firearms.

ATF says it wants to assist dealers in verifying the addresses of purchasers and will issue a variance to dealers (who request it) who may then transfer firearms to customers who can only provide a post office box or rural route number as their address. However, the following conditions must be met:

1. The FFL has information indicating the purchaser resides in a state where a post office box or rural route number is considered by the jurisdiction to be a legal residence address.
2. . The dealer has no reason to believe the purchaser is not telling the truth about his address.
3. The government-issued identification document of the prospective buyer must include a photo, date of birth and residence address.
4. After the variance is approved, the dealer must require the purchaser to indicate the actual physical location of his residence on the Form 4473.

FFLs may request authority to use this alternate method by sending a request in writing to: ATF, Firearms Programs Division, Room 7400, 650 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20226.

ATF Seizes Inventory of New Orleans Retailer

The owner and two employees of Elliot’s Gun Shop in the New Orleans area were arrested in mid-May by ATF and Secret Service special agents on charges of falsifying firearms records and aggravated identity theft. The store’s inventory and business records were seized.

Herman Eicke, 65, of Kenner, LA, the store’s owner, and employees Timothy Harris, 54, and Rebecca Zitzmann, 42, both of Jefferson, LA, were arrested without incident. Zitzmann was charged with falsifying federal firearms records and Eicke and Harris with aggravated identity theft.

The ATF investigation found that firearms purchased at Elliot’s had an extremely short “time to crime” – the time from the sale of the firearm to its recovery after use in a crime.

During the period March 1, 2002, to March 1, 2007, more than 2,300 firearms purchased at Elliot’s Gun Shop and its predecessor, Elliot’s Small Arms, were recovered by various law enforcement agencies in relation to crimes. Over 125 of these were related to murder investigations and more than 500 were related to crimes involving illegal drugs.

According to the criminal complaint, an informant and an undercover ATF agent posing as a ‘straw buyer’ were able to purchase a firearm from Elliot’s with Zitzmann’s assistance. Zitzmann illegally sold a handgun to the informant (according to the complaint), but allowed the undercover ATF agent to complete the ATF paperwork to make it appear that the agent purchased the gun.

In February 2005, ATF revoked a FFL held by Harris, who was operating the store as Elliot’s Small Arms. Prior to losing his license, ATF cited Harris on numerous occasions for failing to comply with federal firearms regulations regarding the sale of guns. Immediately after having his license revoked, Eicke, who had been an employee of Harris at Elliot’s Small Arms, obtained a FFL under the trade name of Elliot’s Gun Shop. An ATF undercover investigation reportedly revealed that Harris was still running the business even though Eicke held the license.

ATF announced it also uncovered an Eicke-Harris scheme that included forging law enforcement officers’ signatures and using a photocopy of their law enforcement credentials to purchase handguns from a distributor in New York at discounted prices to increase the store’s profit margin. Upon confirming that Eicke and Harris were “stealing” the identities of law enforcement officers, ATF invited the Secret Service into the investigation due to its expertise in identity theft and financial crimes investigations. The Secret Service has jurisdiction for crimes of aggravated identity theft.

Anti-Violence Activist Arrested by ATF on Gun Charges

The founder (and an allegedly “documented” gang member) of “NOGUNS-Networks Organized for Gang Unity and Neighborhood Safety,” an alleged gang intervention program, has been arrested on California state firearms charges.

During the investigation, an undercover agent was able to facilitate the purchase of a machine gun, three assault rifles, one handgun and two silencers from the founder of the group.

Hector Marroquin Sr., 51, of Downey, CA was held on charges for the illegal transfer/possession of the arms and conspiracy. Two others were also arrested.

CA Assembly Approves Micro-Stamping Bill

California Democrats are refueling a firearm micro-stamping proposal that has already passed the state Assembly. The measure, AB1471, would require starting in 2010 that all semiautomatic pistols sold in California contain a mechanism to stamp the gun’s make, model and serial number on the shell casing of the bullet every time the pistol is fired.

California state Department of Justice records reportedly show that about 2,400 homicides are committed each year and about 60% involve the use of a handgun. Moreover, about 70% of new handguns sold in California are semiautomatic pistols.

Last year, then-Assemblyman Paul Koretz, D-West Hollywood, introduced a similar bill that passed several hurdles but came up two votes shy in the Assembly on the last day of the legislative session. The latest bill was approved by the Assembly in a 44-29 vote, largely along party lines. The bill now heads to the state Senate.

The primary difference in this year’s bill is that the measure requires the micro-stamping mechanism to etch the information from at least two different places in the pistol. Last year’s bill only required one and the firing pin was widely considered as the most logical piece of the firearm to stamp the information.

Opponents argued then, and now, that the firing pin can be removed and defaced, or simply replaced. That’s why this latest bill requires the etching to occur in more than one place inside the gun.

To negate the arguments of opponents that the proposal will greatly add to the manufacturing costs of handguns equipped with the technology, proponents of the measure have gotten the patent owner, NanoMark Technologies of Londonderry, N.H., to agree to give away the patents to gun manufacturers if the bill is enacted.

The proposal has also gotten the attention of the U.S. Congress. One of the leading proponents of gun control of all sorts, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D- Massachusetts, has said that he will craft a micro-stamping bill to be introduced in the U.S. Congress in the near future.

Denel Eyes New Ventures

South African arms manufacturer Denel has been holding talks with various overseas and local companies, as part of its strategy to unbundle the organization and make it more open to mergers and acquisitions, according to trade sources.

Bushmaster in Joint Venture

Bushmaster Firearms International, LLC (Bushmaster) and Iron Brigade Armory, Ltd. (IBA) have formed Bushmaster Custom Shop by Iron Brigade (BMCS) – a new joint venture to focus on premium AR rifle systems, and customized tactical precision bolt action rifle platforms, initially for law enforcement and military applications.

The new firm will be based in Jacksonville, North Carolina with Norm Chandler, Jr. as its CEO. Bushmaster will be the majority owner and will provide the initial funding for facilities and personnel. “The opportunity to work with IBA allows Bushmaster to extend our brand to the premium end of the AR-15 market place with customized solutions at lower volumes than our Windham facilities can handle economically, and is something that our customer base is telling us is important in addressing their needs,” stated E. Scott Blackwell, Bushmaster President and Chief Sales and Marketing officer.

Initially, BMCS will focus on custom AR-15 platforms based on the .223 and 5.56 caliber ammunition, with first products being available for sale in mid summer 2007. BMCS will also leverage the work done by Iron Brigade Armory and its founder – weapons designer and sniper author LTC. (ret) Norm Chandler, Sr. – to offer tactical precision rifles later this year.

Formed in 1994, IBA specializes in designing, producing and selling customized Sniper Weapon Systems (SWS). IBA’s focus is to provide field/combat reliable SWS that are capable of urban as well as long range operations.

Beretta has New Director of Sales

Beretta USA Corp. has promoted Rob Viner to Director of Sales/Dealers. Viner joined the company in 1997 as a Commercial Field Sales Representative. Most recently he held the position of South East Commercial Regional Business Development Manager. At the Beretta National Sales Meeting Awards Banquet he was recognized with the coveted Beretta Trident Ring for being named the 2006 Regional Business Development Manager of the Year.

Sabre Defence Has New Director of Commercial Operations

Sabre Defence Industries of Nashville, Tennessee has hired Michael Curlett as Director of Commercial Operations. Curlett will oversee all of the production, sales and marketing activities for Sabre’s Commercial Products in the U.S. He will assist with commercial, police and military sales in the international market.

Curlett comes to Sabre Defence from EOTech, a subsidiary of L3 Communications, one of the largest defense contractors in the U.S. As Director of European Sales for L3-EOTech, he worked to expand their sales and distribution channels throughout Europe and the Middle East

The author publishes two of the small arms industry’s most widely read trade newsletters. The International Firearms Trade covers the world firearms scene, and The New Firearms Business covers the domestic market. He also offers FFL-mailing lists to firms interested in direct marketing efforts to the industry. He may be reached at: FirearmsB@aol.com.

On Tuesday, December 27, 2005, Michigan’s Attorney General Mike Cox issued an opinion that reversed a 29 year old opinion and changed Michigan from a Curio and Relic (C&R) only state to one in which the citizens could now purchase and possess any transferable machine gun or suppressor. The entire opinion is centered on Michigan Law MCL (Michigan Combined Laws) 750.224 which reads in part: 750.224 Weapons; manufacture, sale, or possession as felony; exceptions; “muffler” or “silencer” defined. Sec. 224. (1) A person shall not manufacture, sell, offer for sale, or possess any of the following:

1. A machine gun or firearm that shoots or is designed to shoot automatically more than 1 shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.
2. A muffler or silencer.
3. A bomb or bombshell.
4. A blackjack, slingshot, billy, metallic knuckles, sand club, sand bag, or bludgeon.
5. A device, weapon, cartridge, container, or contrivance designed to render a person temporarily or permanently disabled by the ejection, release, or emission of a gas or other substance.

(2) A person who violates subsection (1) is guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or a fine of not more than $2,500, or both. (3) Subsection (1) does not apply to any of the following:

1. A self-defense spray device as defined in section 224d.
2. A person manufacturing firearms, explosives, or munitions of war by virtue of a contract with a department of the government of the United States.
3. A person licensed by the secretary of the treasury of the United States or the secretary’s delegate to manufacture, sell, or possess a machine gun, or a device, weapon, cartridge, container, or contrivance described in subsection (1).

(4) As used in this chapter, “muffler” or “silencer” means 1 or more of the following:

1. A device for muffling, silencing, or deadening the report of a firearm.
2. A combination of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling or fabricating a muffler or silencer.
3. A part, designed or redesigned, and intended only for use in assembling or fabricating a muffler or silencer.

History: 1931, Act 328, Eff. Sept. 18, 1931; – CL 1948, 750.224; – Am. 1959, Act 175, Eff. Mar. 19, 1960; – Am. 1978, Act 564, Imd. Eff. Dec. 29, 1978; – Am. 1980, Act 346, Eff. Mar. 31, 1981; – Am. 1990, Act 321, Eff. Mar. 28, 1991; – Am. 1991, Act 33, Imd. Eff. June 10, 1991. Subsection (3)(c) above regarding individuals, deals with the exceptions to the basic law. Prior to the new opinion, former Attorney General Frank Kelly had ruled that only individuals who were literally licensed by the Secretary of Treasury could possess (or sell, etc.) the prohibited items. This was typically understood to be some kind of FFL. For the non-dealer, this meant a Federal Curio & Relic collector’s license. An AG opinion in Michigan works much like a US Supreme Court ruling in that the “official” interpretation of the law is set down. In order to request an official opinion in Michigan, the request must be submitted by an elected representative or state Senator. Mike Sessa, a C&R machine gun owner and founder of Gun Owners of Macomb County, was the main driving force for this change. Working with state Rep. Leon Drolet, a Republican and a friend of his, the two worked long and hard to get the language right for the requested ruling. Some patience was needed too in waiting for the political climate to be favorable in the state for the request to be submitted. The new opinion concentrates on the requirement for a license and whether the process followed for an approved ATF Form 4 is an acceptable, and legal, substitute. Page 4 of the opinion says in part: “In light of this federal regulatory background, it must next be determined whether this federal approval process culminates in the issuance of a “license” for purposes of the exception to the prohibition on the possession of a machine gun found in MCL 750.224.” Indeed, in the AG’s opinion, it does, for on page 5 the AG says: “Although the application and registration scheme provided for under the federal laws and regulations discussed above do not result in the issuance of a document labeled “license,” the Form 4 application and resulting approval process bears all the hallmarks of licensure. The permission granted by the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to transfer and possess a machine gun is the official authority required in order to avoid the federal proscription. Absent such approval, a person possessing a machine gun would be subject to serious sanctions, including prosecution and incarceration under both federal and state law. See 18 USC 924 and MCL 750.224(2).” Translation for non-lawyers might say, “if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and swims like a duck, it’s a duck!” Interestingly, to leave no doubt regarding his intent, AG Cox even included a copy of the ATF Form 4 in the attachments to the opinion. Further, since Sec. 224 subsection (1)(b) of the listed prohibited items defines suppressors, and the exceptions subsection (3)(c) includes any “contrivance described in subsection (1), then it is logical to believe that suppressors will be legal to purchase and possess too. Unfortunately, short barreled rifles (SBR) and short barreled shotguns (SBS) are covered in Michigan Law under a different section (750.224b) and are not part of this new deal. Though, C&R SBR and SBS weapons were, and are, allowed prior to this new opinion. As of January 4, 2006, AG Cox has forwarded all pertinent information to ATF for their attorneys to review and evaluate. Already several Form 4s have been submitted and checks have been cashed by ATF. Sessa contacted Ken Houchens at ATF regarding the status of his Form 4 and the situation in Michigan and was told that ATF would likely hold these forms awaiting final approval rather than kicking them back while the ATF and Michigan State AG’s Office resolve any questions. This is a good example of how one determined individual, with lots of help from friends, can make a considerable difference regarding gun laws and their application. Sessa is humble about his part and is quick to spread the accolades around preferring to refer to himself as more of a facilitator. Ideas were exchanged over the course of about a year and a half on this project with many interested parties believing this would never work out. However, refusing to take “No” for an answer, and refusing to listen to the nay-sayers warning not to rock the boat too much, Sessa boldly called Rep. Drolet and set things in motion with the resulting positive outcome. The Attorney General’s opinion is number 7183 and is available at the Michigan AG’s website at the following URL: http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/2000s/op10259.htm.

Organized and sponsored by The Small Arms Review, the 1999 Silencer Trials drew manufacturers, government personnel, scientists, and journalists from around the country to Knob Creek, Kentucky, on October 5 and 6. Even Jane’s Infantry Weapons sent their small arms editor. For only the second time in history, industry leaders came together for a rigorous testing and evaluation of both new and established products. Some folks even brought World War II and Vietnam era silencers for testing. This event was not intended to be a contest with winners and losers, but rather an opportunity for learning. Such a gathering is unprecedented in the small-arms industry, with competitors coming together in a spirit of cooperation to improve everyone’s understanding of the art. In fact, I can’t think of another industry in the United States where competitors come together in a similar show of scholarship and fraternity. I am not only impressed by the caliber of minds in the silencer industry, I am impressed by the spirit of the people within this industry.

Doug Melton of D.H. Melton Enterprises, for example, really entered into the spirit of the Trials by bringing four new untried prototype designs for his Sound Master suppressed Ruger Mark II pistol, with the intent of selecting the best for subsequent production. He didn’t try to posture before his peers by bringing a really souped-up system that was too complex or expensive for production (unlike some computer manufacturers when submitting systems to computer magazines for comparison with other brands). Melton simply brought four new ideas to see how they measured up to his currently produced design. Melton also brought a newly designed suppressed Ruger 10/22 rifle to see how it compared to his older but outstanding suppressed rifle. He exemplified the spirit shown by the other participants.

Several manufacturers took this sense of fraternal cooperation about as far as it will go, taking apart their silencers for folks to examine. Tim LaFrance of LaFrance Specialties, for example, disassembled his awesome sound suppressor for the .50 caliber Browning M2 heavy machine gun, describing at length the principals of its operation, the R&D that went into its development, and the manufacturing techniques used to carve the complex guts of the device from a solid block of titanium. Can you imagine the major players of any other industry sharing so much information with their peers? I must confess that I really admire these guys as people as well as suppressor designers.

In fact, a lot of exceptional folks made the very ambitious SAR’s 1999 Silencer Trials possible. Everyone pitched in where needed, making this very much a grass-roots effort with a proverbial “cast of thousands.” Dan Shea, the general manager of The Small Arms Review undertook the considerable task of overseeing the event, with Joanne French from SAR organizing all aspects of the event . Dr. Philip Dater, Dan Shea and myself worked out the sound testing regimen. Stan Andrewski worked out the testing regimen for accuracy, with LMO supplying the Ransom Rest. Jeff Hoffman of Black Hills Ammunition donated all of the centerfire ammo used for testing. Two physicists, Drs. Chris Luchini and Reagan Cole, brought the necessary equipment to record pressure versus time data as well as frequency data, providing a whole new level of performance analysis.

So much was going on at once that it took a lot of folks working together like symphony musicians to orchestrate the complex flow of the event. Dan Shea was the conductor, making sure that every player knew what to do when. I was the producer, making sure everyone followed the script and making sure we maintained quality control throughout the data-gathering process. We had five people involved with gathering and recording sound data, two people at any given time handling the shooting and proper alignment of the suppressed firearms (under the leadership of Matt Smith), one person handling the chronograph (three different people shared this assignment), one person moving the firearms from a supervised storage area in the shade to the sound-testing station and thence to the accuracy-testing station, another person handling the movement of data sheets with the weapon and the filling out of duplex targets (one registered behind the other, so both SAR and the manufacturer each got identical witnessed targets for their records), and one person taking the appropriate ammunition from shaded storage to the shooting position.

Another cast of characters took over during the accuracy phase of the testing. The entire process seemed rather like a running of the gauntlet—a trial by ordeal—to those of us immersed in the frenetic nuts and bolts of the event. Occasional hiccups in the process did occur, but the impressive esprit de corps among the participants made working through the occasional problem as graceful as possible. I was quite impressed by the enthusiasm, flexibility and grace of the participants working under difficult technical, logistic and time constraints.

Why go to so much trouble and expense and heartburn? It is true that impartial observers can provide a reasonably satisfactory subjective comparison of suppressor performance when several silencers are compared side by side on the same day. This is how the British National Physical Laboratory compared silencer performance during World War II. Even rigorously conducted subjective comparisons have their limitations, however.

Subjective comparisons can differ substantially depending on an individual’s ability to perceive different frequencies. People who have lost their ability to hear high-frequency sounds, such as an old gunnery sergeant exposed to years of intense impulse noise, might evaluate suppressors quite differently than someone with a normal frequency response. Consider, for example, two suppressors that eliminate different frequencies and yet produce the same peak sound pressure level (abbreviated SPL). For people with normal hearing, the suppressor that is especially good at eliminating the higher frequencies of a suppressed gunshot will seem quieter than the suppressor that eliminates predominantly lower frequencies. The gunny would prefer the suppressor that was better at eliminating low-frequency sound (since he can’t hear the higher frequencies anyway).

There are other limitations to subjective testing. The system breaks down if many suppressors must be compared; it’s just too hard for any person to keep track of too much sensory input. (Ask, for example, any modern fighter pilot about sensory overload in the cockpit during combat.) Then there is the problem of how to describe one’s subjective impression of sound signatures. Descriptions such as “pop” and “whoosh” don’t really convey any useful information, nor do descriptive words conjure up the same mental image to everyone.

Measuring the actual amount of sound pressure produced by a suppressed gunshot and converting the data to a simple scale that mimics the subjective impression of the human ear (the decibel scale) provides a rigorous and objective benchmark that can be compared to benchmarks such as the threshold of human hearing and other sounds of known intensity. Any number of samples can be compared. The decibel reading of the sound pressure level isn’t the whole story, but the SPL represents the most objective single data point suitable for measuring how quiet a suppressed gunshot is. The SPL in decibels also provides the means for comparing that suppressed gunshot to any number of other suppressed gunshots and as well as to the same firearm without a sound suppressor.

Gathering the data for such evaluations is time-consuming. I normally evaluate just two or three suppressors during a typical day at the range, when I’m working by myself. Testing scores of suppressors on the same day required a lot of organization, specialized equipment, and—most of all—help from a lot of enthusiastic people.

In terms of the aforementioned equipment, we used two precision impulse meters: a Brüel and Kjaer Model 2209 Impulse Precision Sound meter with a B&K Type 4136 1/4 inch pressure type microphone; and a Larson Davis Model 800-B meter with Model 2530-1133 random incidence microphone. The meters were set to Peak Hold and “A” weighting, with the microphones placed 1.00 meter to the left of the muzzle or front of the sound suppressor. Time domain and frequency domain data were collected using a computerized digital recording oscilloscope built by Dr. Reagan Cole; this system also used a B&K Type 4136 1/4 inch pressure type microphone. Projectile velocities were measured using a P.A.C.T. MKIII timer/chronograph with MKV skyscreens set 24.0 inches apart and the start screen 8.0 feet from the muzzle, and hard copies of the data were printed after each string using a Hewlett-Packard Model 82240B battery-powered printer via infrared data link.

Accuracy testing was conducted to look for design flaws. One of my own suppressed Ruger Mark II pistols, for example, only delivers 4+ inch groups at 25 yards and the projectiles leave oval holes in a target (suggesting extreme bullet yaw), while another suppressed Mark II that I own delivers 1/4 inch groups and perfectly round holes at the same distance. Since these pistols exhibit a ten-fold difference in accuracy, clearly one manufacturer is doing something right, while the other is doing something very wrong. The accuracy testing phase of the 1999 Silencer Trials was intended to reveal such disparities.

Ransom Rests were used for the accuracy phase of the testing, and here the manufacturers or owners of the suppressed firearm were allowed to do the shooting so that they could be confident that the results were as good as possible. Sandbags were used if Ransom did not offer a pistol adaptor for a given handgun.

Stan Andrewski handled the accuracy testing at the trials. The manufacturer removed the pistol grips, and Andrewski mounted the pistol in the machine rest. When the manufacturer was happy with the adjustments, the manufacturer himself would then do the shooting. While the Ransom Pistol Rest is a true machine rest, the rifle rest still depends upon shooter skill. Therefore, manufacturers were allowed to nominate a designated shooter, and a number of them opted for this approach. Mark White of Sound Technology frequently served as the designated shooter, which was a tribute both to his shooting ability and the to respect of his peers. No one seemed to worry that he might do less than his best when shooting a competitor’s system. In fact, White shot a one-hole group using Black Hills .44 Specials with the suppressed Ruger 77/44 rifle made by John’s Guns. Folks were so impressed by the sound reduction and accuracy of this system that three people ordered a rifle from John Tibbetts on the spot.

What about the specific results of the testing? We’re still working on data analysis, which will be published in book form by Moose Lake Publishing LLC, the parent company of The Small Arms Review. We’ll include a brief history of each company, sound and velocity data, detailed descriptions of silencers and integrally silenced guns (including length, diameter, weight, and construction details), plus a photo of each item being tested, as well as the test target used to determine system accuracy. Drs. Chris Luchini and Reagan Cole will contribute a chapter on their frequency and time-domain analyses, Dr. Philip Dater will contribute a chapter on testing methodology and using sound suppressors as hearing protection devices, and Mark White will contribute a chapter on the latest developments in subsonic ammunition for centerfire rifles, including an evaluation of the subsonic 7.62x51mm ammunition from Black Hills Ammunition and Engel Ballistics Research. We’ll also provide a discussion that will try to synthesize all of the data into simple-to-digest conclusions.

We’re also trying to work out some new quantitative ways to compare systems, such as using a plot to compare sound reductions versus velocities generated by integrally suppressed guns, and we may be able to incorporate price versus performance analyses as well. I’m working with several established scientists and engineers to develop meaningful new ways for comparing system performance in easily digested ways. This will take several more months of work. Publication of the book will be reported in a future issue of The Small Arms Review.

For the moment, the bottom line for me is that I was impressed by the state of the art exhibited by all of the participants. Performance that was unthinkable just a few years ago is now commonplace. It was a real privilege to study so many outstanding products, and that study has just begun. My heartfelt thanks go out to the many folks from throughout the industry who made this stimulating and historic event possible. We will all learn a great deal from this considerable effort.
Participating Manufacturers

Black Hills Ammunition, Inc., P.O. Box 3090, Rapid City, SD 57709-3090; phone 605-348-5150; fax 605-348-9827

CCF/Swiss, Inc., P.O. Box 29009, Richmond, VA 29009; phone 804-740-4926; fax 804-740-9599; URL http://www.ccfa.com

D.H. Melton Company, Inc., 1739 E. Broadway Road, Suite 1-161, Tempe, AZ 85282; phone 480-967-6218; fax 480-902-0783

Don Austin Wagenknecht, 12400 Blue Ridge Blvd., Grandview, MO 64030; phone 816-765-2539; fax 913-829-6999; e-mail daw@sprintmail.com

Engel Ballistic Research, 544A Alum Creek Road, Smithville, TX 78957; 512-360-5327; fax 512-360-2652

Gemtech, P.O. Box 3538, Boise, ID 83703; phone 208-939-7222; fax 208-939-7804; URL http://www.gem-tech.com

J.M.B. Distribution, 4291 Valley Quail Street, Westerville, OH 43081; phone 614-891-5784; e-mail JBurg@mailbox.iwaynet.net

John’s Guns, 3010A Hwy. 155 N., Palestine, TX 75801; phone 903-729-8251; fax 903-723-4653

LaFrance Specialties, P.O. Box 178211, San Diego, CA 92177; phone 619-293-3373; URL http://www.NAIT.com/LaFrance

S&H Arms of Oklahoma, P.O. Box 121, Owasso, OK 74055; phone 918-272-9894; fax 918-272-9898

Serbu Firearms, 6001 Johns Road, Suite 511, Tampa, FL 33634; phone 813-854-1532

Sound Technology, P.O. Box 391, Pelham, AL 35124; phone 205-664-5860; e-mail rem700p@sprintmail.com; URL http://www.hypercon/soundtech

Special Op’s Shop, P.O. Box 978, Madisonville, TN 37354; phone 423-442-7180; URL www.compfxnet.com/opshop

Summers Machine Enterprises, 1303 Pauls Airport Road, Thomasville, NC 27360; phone and fax 336-472-6394; e-mail badgerf4@aol.com

TBA Suppressors, 10998 Leadbetter Road, Ashland, VA 23005; phone and fax 804-550-3159; e-mail TBASuppressors@erols.com

Urbach Precision Mfg., 1529 Axe Drive, Garland, TX 75041; phone 972-864-0848; fax 972-864-0571

Young Manufacturing, Inc., 5621 N. 53rd Avenue, Glendale AZ 85301-6011; phone 623-915-3889; fax 623-915-3746; e-mail sales@newriverarms.com, URL http://www.newriverarms.com

SAR’s Suppressor Technology Editor Al Paulson was recently asked what he thought were good choices for someone’s “Kit” in the event of needing suppression on a firearm. The ensuing article provides some interesting perspectives and choices, and we hope this helps answer some questions for the readers- Dan

Who knows if this Y2K business is media hype or not? Friends who are computer programmers disagree. One suggests fixing code is simplistic stuff. Another points out that even the first release of Windows 98 was not Y2K compliant. He suggests that the Y2K problem is much more subtle and pervasive than a lot of people believe, and not all the Y2K problems will appear on the first day of the Year 2000. There are several minefields that will appear on subsequent critical dates as well. He also points out that a lot of public utilities use an archaic programing language that has not been taught at the college level in decades, so there are a limited number of qualified programmers to resolve Y2K issues for the many mainframes still using this old language. His personal solution to the Y2K issue was to buy a generator, bury a fuel tank, put in a well with hand pump, stockpile gallon cans of freeze-dried food and crates of ammo, and add some sound suppressors to his kit. That got me to thinking. What sound suppressors would I want in my Y2K kit? They would fall into several mission categories: small game hunting, big game hunting, general tactical, and long-range tactical.

Selecting silencers for a Y2K kit is somewhat daunting, since this is the golden age of silencer design. The state of the art has grown considerably in the last decade, and the industry is rich with talented companies making diverse and outstanding products. Some of these manufacturers are relatively large and well known, while others are small shops catering to small but fiercely loyal clienteles. Both big and small companies produce some really excellent products. The net result is that the consumer has a plethora of outstanding sound suppressors to choose from. The following are some of my personal favorites, which I hope will stimulate your thought processes concerning what your own needs may be. You may wish to add a few suppressors or integrally suppressed arms that will serve similar needs, be they from these or other manufacturers.

If food availability becomes a problem, the easiest way to supplement your existing stores is the hunting of small game. If local laws permit the use of suppressed firearms for hunting, you will be at a social and strategic advantage by using such tools.

Small Game Hunting

The criteria for selecting the best silenced arm for hunting small game will depend upon several factors. Can you hunt openly (i.e., with a rifle) or must you hunt surreptitiously (i.e., with a concealed handgun) to avoid alarming nearby farmers or residents, or to avoid giving away the location of your favorite hunting ground? Is visual stealth important? This would favor an integrally silenced arm, which the uninitiated will view as a target-barreled gun. Or is maximum service life more important? This would favor the use of a visually conspicuous muzzle can. Finally, does your skill level permit the use of a handgun to feed the family?
I now live in a semi-rural area that features individual homes and small subdivisions interspersed with small farms and woodlots. Hunting is frowned upon but small game abounds. Since hikers are welcome, I could go for a walk at dawn or dusk (when most game is especially active) with a day pack and an integrally silenced pistol hidden under a long shirt. It would be a simple matter to use a single well-placed shot to collect a rabbit, squirrel or game bird for the pot within the 50 yard effective range of a good silenced pistol.

In fact, I regularly did this when I was a graduate student at the University of Alaska—Fairbanks. With the blessing of campus security, I’d hike or ski the two miles to campus with a Ruger Mark I (not silenced to conform to local game laws). Since most of the two miles were woods, and since homes and cabins were rare, I frequently collected several snowshoe hares or grouse for the evening meal on the way home. All UAF security asked of me was that I keep the gun unloaded while on campus. While one saw people with long arms on campus routinely in those gentler days (often grad students who needed protection while conducting field research in bear country), it still would have been tacky to walk from class to class with a rifle on my shoulder. The pistol resided in my day pack, which was a ubiquitous and therefore invisible accouterment of campus life. The pistol was a graceful and discreet solution for adding meat to the table of a starving grad student.

If both game and neighbors are plentiful, my own bias would be to use an integrally silenced pistol that features a tensioned barrel to minimize barrel harmonics. Such pistols by manufactures like Gemtech, Sound Technology, and the D.H. Melton Company (to name a few) can be easily holstered and carried unobtrusively. This assumes the operator limits his or her shots to a range where first-round kills are assured and great care is taken to ensure that no livestock, hikers, or buildings lie behind the target.

If you can hunt openly in a rural setting, then I like a good silenced .22 rifle, which will greatly extend a hunter’s effective range. If visual stealth or maximum suppression are required, then I’m particularly fond of D.H. Melton’s Sound-Master integrally silenced Ruger 10/22, which can deliver a sound signature that is within 2 decibels of action noise when using subsonic ammunition, or it can deliver maximum practical subsonic projectile velocity by using high velocity ammunition, when maximizing penetration is important.

If I were cynical about the duration of problems following Y2K, then I’d opt for a muzzle can rather than an integrally suppressed .22 rimfire. Any integrally suppressed arm will have a finite lifespan, limited by the infinitesimally slow accumulation of lead and hard carbon residue inside the suppressor wherever there is porting. I have x-rays documenting this process, but I can’t publish them without giving up the design secrets of the manufacturer. For most end-users, this process is so slow as to be irrelevant; you’ll be able to leave these guns to your grandkids. But if you expect to hunt game for food on a frequent and long-term basis, then using a well-designed muzzle can might increase the number of rounds you could put through the system tenfold.

Perhaps the most thought-provoking muzzle can design in the marketplace is the Millennium .22 suppressor from Sound Technology. It’s very quiet. It’s as tough as a Russian T34 tank. Lead and carbon accumulation is minimal. Furthermore, the design will probably tolerate more lead and carbon build-up than any design I’ve seen, which means it could well deliver the longest service life. Finally, the Millennium’s mounting system is practical in the extreme.

For mounting to a rifle or pistol, it features a 5/8 inch, hardened steel stud with NF, left-hand threads. The muzzle of a heavy (target-weight) rifle or pistol barrel is counterbored, crowned and threaded to accept this stud. This arrangement has a number of practical advantages. (1) The new barrel crown is protected by the deep, threaded socket. (2) The use of internal threading in front of the new crown eliminates any expansion of the bore that might be caused by the use of conventional outside threading. Such expansion adversely affects accuracy. (3) The use of left-hand threading ensures that the muzzle can tightens to the weapon with each shot, since the barrels use RH rifling so the resulting torque from each shot is applied in a right-handed vector. (4) No external thread protector is required. (5) This design assures proper axial alignment and it compensates for face wear over the long haul. (6) The same suppressor can be swapped between rifles and pistols. Sound Technology’s Millennium suppressor would be part of a very practical and durable system for hunting small game after the dawn of Y2K and well into the new millennium.

Big Game Hunting

For most residents of the United States, deer are the most readily accessible large game. Decades of experience hunting big game in Alaska has given me some definite biases. One of these biases is my confidence in the efficacy of heavy bullets of large diameter. My standard gun for bear protection was a Winchester Model 95 in .405 caliber. It stopped three bears at very close range with a single shot each time. Another of my favorites was the .44 Special round, which proved to be very accurate and effective on the black-tailed deer of Kodiak and Afognak, consistently providing one-shot kills. Coincidentally, this is a subsonic round and well suited to employment with a silencer. An integrally suppressed Ruger 77/44 rifle would be my first choice for discreetly taking deer-sized game.

The suppressed Ruger 77/44 from John’s Guns is an especially attractive system. Featuring a 16.25 inch barrel, and a 1.25×20 inch suppressor tube of 4140 steel finished in a handsome but discreet matt blue, this suppressed Ruger 77/44 has an overall length of just 39 inches. More importantly, it has a superbly quiet sound signature, and it’s as accurate as the unsuppressed rifle. This system from John’s Guns is my suppressed rifle of choice for the taking of deer-sized animals.

General Tactical

Any tactical requirements related to Y2K would probably relate to a possible breakdown of the social order, which could manifest itself as looting, or as an increased incidence of robbery, burglary, and carjackings. For protection from robbery and carjackings, it’s hard to beat a concealed and unsuppressed handgun of major caliber, preferably in .45 ACP according to my biases. For home defense, however, it’s hard to beat a 5.56x45mm carbine fitted with a sound suppressor to preserve the family’s short-term and long-term hearing if the weapon must be fired. One of my favorite systems is a select-fire M16 with 11.5 inch barrel and a quick-mount suppressor. A quick-mount suppressor is handy because some tactical situations call for making as much noise as possible, such as the need to gain temporary fire superiority to disengage from a superior force or to flank the enemy using fire-and-movement tactics.

One of my favorite quick-mount cans for the M16 family of weapons is the Model M4 3L sound suppressor from Suppressed Tactical Weapons. STW’s Model M4 3L features a patented three-lug quick-mounting system which is the most robust and trouble-free quick mount in the business. Designed by Carl O’Quinn and Andy Andrews, STW’s M4 3L suppressor has just four parts. The rear end cap and suppressor guts are machined from a single block of solid titanium. This ingenious monobloc design does not use baffles and spacers in any conventional sense. In my opinion, STW’s very efficient, one-piece suppression module represents one of the most important technological advances in the history of suppressor design.

Crafted entirely out of G2 titanium, the M4 3L suppressor has an overall length of 8.5 inches. Since the quick mount slips over the weapon’s barrel for 1.6 inches, the suppressor only adds 6.9 inches to the overall length of the weapon. The diameter of the silencer is 1.3 inches and the weight is an astonishingly light 14.0 ounces. The M4 3L runs 6-11 ounces lighter than the other quick-mount systems in the marketplace. Only the superbly crafted, screw-mount titanium Viper Model 3016 from the Special Op’s Shop is comparably light, but this smallest Viper variant produces a much louder sound signature. An M16 carbine with STW’s M4 3L suppressor provides an outstanding system for the up-close and personal requirements of family defense and the repelling of boarders.

Long-Range Tactical

Some folks live in open areas where they can see trouble coming from a considerable distance. To deal with such problems, it’s hard to beat a precision rifle chambered for 7.62x51mm ammunition. My own bias would be to use a system that featured a sound suppressor since, as the old Finnish proverb explains, “A silencer does not make a soldier silent, but it does make him invisible.” Using a suppressed rifle greatly facilities the ability to engage a superior force at a distance.

Furthermore, if the rifle features a barrel with a 1 in 10 inch twist, then the operator could also use high-performance, 200 grain 7.62x51mm Precision Bonded Subsonic (PBS) hollowpoint ammunition from Engel Ballistics Research that will give accurate shot placement, good penetration, and reliable expansion at subsonic velocities. Thus the operator could place high velocity shots reliably out to perhaps 800 yards using conventional match-grade service ammunition or 1,000 yards using VLD ammo. This same rifle could also be used to provide virtually silent hits into 1 MOA at 100 yards by using EBR’s PBS rounds. This would be a very versatile system suitable for a wide variety of hunting or tactical applications.

There are a number of outstanding .30 caliber suppressors in the marketplace. One of my favorites is the TPR-S suppressor from Gemtech. The TPR-S is very quiet with supersonic ammo, and it has a large enough bullet passage to use with subsonic ammo when the rifle barrel has a 1 in 10 twist rate. (Some other .30 caliber cans have tight bores that require a 1 in 8 rate of twist with subsonic ammo.) One of the best features of the Gemtech suppressor is that it features a spring-loaded quick mount that snaps onto two asymmetric lugs of a patented muzzle brake called the Bi-Lock. Not only does this allow the operator to mount or dismount the can in a few seconds, it also means that the rifle returns to the same zero every time the suppressor is mounted. Screw-mount suppressors will frequently require re-zeroing every time they are mounted, unless a torque wrench is used to mount them with the same number of inch-pounds every time the can is installed.

Final Thoughts

Is all this concern about Y2K insightful or just so much hokum? Only time will tell. While you might never use that new-in-the-box generator or a basement full of freeze-dried food, a careful collection of suppressed firearms would serve you well for years to come, whether or not you and your loved ones are bitten by the Millennium Bug. A good suppressed .22 rimfire rifle or pistol, a silenced .44 Special rifle, a 5.56mm carbine with quick mount suppressor, and a silenced rifle of .30 caliber should prove to be practical tools that will cover a wide spectrum of requirements in the new millennium. But this selection is a very personal one, based upon my own experiences and biases. What suppressed weapons would best fill your own needs as the new millennium approaches? I hope the preceding discussion has stimulated your own decision-making process.

D.H. Melton Company
Dept. SAR
1739 E. Broadway Road, Suite 1-161
Tempe, AZ 85282
phone 602-967-6218, fax 602-902-0783

Gemtech
Dept. SAR
P.O. Box 3538
Boise, ID 83701
phone 208-939-7222, fax 208-939-7804
URL http://www.gem-tech.com

Engel Ballistic Research, Inc.
Dept. SAR
544A Alum Creek Road
Smithville, Texas 78957
phone 512-360-5327, fax 512-360-2652
e-mail engelbr@swbell.net

John’s Guns
Dept. SAR
3010A Hwy. 155 North
Palestine, TX 75801
phone 903-729-8251, fax 903-723-4653

Sound Technology
Dept. SAR
P.O. Box 391
Pelham, AL 35124
phone and fax 205-664-5860
e-mail rem700p@sprintmail.com
URL http://www.hypercon.com/soundtech

Suppressed Tactical Weapons, Inc.
Dept. SAR
6911 Bill Poole Road
Rougemont, NC 27572
phone 919-471-6778, fax 919-471-3314
e-mail raymonda@earthlink.net

Special Op’s Shop
Dept. SAR
P.O. Box 978
Madisonville, TN 37354
phone 423-442-7180
URL http://www.compfxnet.com/opshop