carguychris
New member
I believe you are correct; as I read it, the bill does not preempt a state from enacting an outright ban.vicGT said:I see where it would preempt registrations and taxes ("a tax on any such conduct, or a marking, recordkeeping or registration requirement") at the state level, but nothing else. If a state has a law which is a general ban on the ownership / possession of silencers, this bill doesn't appear to preempt such a law, does it?
FWIW it also doesn't explicitly preempt a state from requiring a license to carry a silencer, depending on how one interprets the words "possessing" and "transporting," and/or whether the license fee could be considered to be a tax.
If the law passes, restrictive states are likely to pass both bans and licensing requirements, and there will likely be legal challenges which may not be worked out for some time.
The main thing is that this clause (a) appears to exempt suppressors from state-imposed UBCs, which would impose a record-keeping requirement above and beyond the minimum requirement in federal law; and (b) forestalls conflicts with state laws that make silencer possession legally conditional upon NFA registration which has ceased (as I discussed earlier).
Last edited: