FindLaw's United States First Circuit case and opinions.
FindLaw's searchable database of United States First Circuit decisions since
caselaw.findlaw.com The Law on Moderators and Airguns
- Thread starter cavedweller
- Start date
caselaw.findlaw.com 
Upvote 0
Great information. A 20+ year sentence for a silencer attached to an airgun shows how serious the matter is and how dangerous it is to allow others to make these decisions.
The most important part of the article are the final 2 sentences.
"The conviction is reversed and the case remanded for the entry of a judgment of acquittal.
It is so ordered."
The last paragraph also speaks volumes as to setting yourself up for additional scrutiny.
"Needless to say, Crooker is in the process of doing neither himself nor society any good. His attitude toward shipping chemicals shows an indifference to law, and (quite apart from silencers) even more disturbing is his professed interest as a convicted felon in airguns that could be as powerful as firearms. He deliberately skated close to the edge of the law and took his chances with a prosecution that the government was entitled to attempt. But, given the statute's wording, the answer is not to stretch the present statute beyond its language but to amend it-if the government is so minded-to deal more effectively with home-made or adaptable devices."
I am afraid that with the look into Donny's business, we haven't yet squashed this issue. I would like to continue to use moderators on my air rifles but I have no desire to go to jail
The most important part of the article are the final 2 sentences.
"The conviction is reversed and the case remanded for the entry of a judgment of acquittal.
It is so ordered."
The last paragraph also speaks volumes as to setting yourself up for additional scrutiny.
"Needless to say, Crooker is in the process of doing neither himself nor society any good. His attitude toward shipping chemicals shows an indifference to law, and (quite apart from silencers) even more disturbing is his professed interest as a convicted felon in airguns that could be as powerful as firearms. He deliberately skated close to the edge of the law and took his chances with a prosecution that the government was entitled to attempt. But, given the statute's wording, the answer is not to stretch the present statute beyond its language but to amend it-if the government is so minded-to deal more effectively with home-made or adaptable devices."
I am afraid that with the look into Donny's business, we haven't yet squashed this issue. I would like to continue to use moderators on my air rifles but I have no desire to go to jail
Upvote 0
Idk, seems like the gov has gotten bored with lack of any real crime and is now a solution looking for a problem. Does anybody really think airgun moderators is a threat to national security or even public safety? Its absurd to think that the gov is a greater threat to non violent individuals safety than any actual criminal is. Nobody here is going to get kidnapped by a criminal (realistically), but you might get kidnapped and placed in a gov dungeon because your air powered beebee gun is too quiet. The u.s.has the highest per capita incarseration rate out of any country in the world. But beats its chest about freedom paradoxically. Whatever the founding fathers intended us to be, it probably wasnt a giant prison. And it probably wasnt to lock up people for the victimless crime of having 20 db quieter pellet rifles. Unfortunately i don't think there's anything that any of us could really do. Good hearted people never really stand a chance against villains.
If the crime is that "airgun moderators COULD be put on firearms" then prosecute people who get caught actually doing that. Instead of saying "well you could have done that" and charging them as if they did. Nobody is guilty of something they "could have done". Just a corrupt government looking for more slaves using any excuse they can find to get them
If the crime is that "airgun moderators COULD be put on firearms" then prosecute people who get caught actually doing that. Instead of saying "well you could have done that" and charging them as if they did. Nobody is guilty of something they "could have done". Just a corrupt government looking for more slaves using any excuse they can find to get them
Last edited:
Upvote 0
My kitchen knifes could be used to commit a murder. Should I be concerned ending up in jail?
Upvote 0
Its even more absurd than that. It would be like: they found a lump of iron in your basement, and you could have smelted/sharpened it and then you could have stabbed somebody with it. So theye just gonna consider the iron ore you have a katana and charge you for being a samurai.
Because it COULD be modified, and then if it was it COULD be used in a murder therefore you having it is exactly the same as having already commited a murder. Could you be using it for literally any other purpose? Of course, but then how would they justify a 20 year conviction and fear monger the populace into thinking theyre useful?
Obviously the only "rational" thing for them to do is blow your door off its hinges with det cord, dressed like taliban. shoot your dog in front of your toddler children and take you away from your wife and kids destroying their lives and yours forever, damaging the community just as badly as the event theyre trying to prevent, that wouldnt have happened anyways. But its ok cuz they will just phrase it to sound heroic when they talk to the reporters. (If theyre even at the right house). afterall you're about 7 steps away from possibly being a slightly quieter murderer, possibly, if you decided to do that. Its the equivelant of drone striking a car to teach the occupants a lesson about seatbelt safety.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
It feels a lot like the movie Minority Report, where they would arrest people before they committed a crime.
ccarson2 said it perfectly.
("airgun moderators COULD be put on firearms" then prosecute people who get caught actually doing that.)
I would bet that most homes contain a pillow and duct tape, or a soda bottle and a t-shirt. those could be made to suppress a weapon.
The notion that suppressors are treated as firearms in the first place is pretty crazy. They aren't particularly useful in the commission of a crime, and do not produce movie like silent firearms. Oddly enough their most effective use is on subsonic projectiles which makes them perfectly suited for our intended use on air rifles.
ccarson2 said it perfectly.
("airgun moderators COULD be put on firearms" then prosecute people who get caught actually doing that.)
I would bet that most homes contain a pillow and duct tape, or a soda bottle and a t-shirt. those could be made to suppress a weapon.
The notion that suppressors are treated as firearms in the first place is pretty crazy. They aren't particularly useful in the commission of a crime, and do not produce movie like silent firearms. Oddly enough their most effective use is on subsonic projectiles which makes them perfectly suited for our intended use on air rifles.
Upvote 0
One thing to consider with Donnyfl's current battle is there are new, young Agents in the Bureau looking to make a name.
Legal? They are sold in an open market, so we can consider that enough.
The Bureau guidelines handbook states there must be intent. There is No intent to break the law.
For now, enjoy your freedom with them, at least while it lasts.
Crook's case opened the market for another device which has seen considerable attack as well. Material confiscation is all that has resulted in efforts to suppress its production or ownership.
Legal? They are sold in an open market, so we can consider that enough.
The Bureau guidelines handbook states there must be intent. There is No intent to break the law.
For now, enjoy your freedom with them, at least while it lasts.
Crook's case opened the market for another device which has seen considerable attack as well. Material confiscation is all that has resulted in efforts to suppress its production or ownership.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
"Intent" is the main thing that needs to be shown for an airgun unit to be used on a fire arm. Hell I have used my registered devices on my airguns and they work fine. You can find adapters and everything needed to make them work, just have to look online. Just don't be stupid and you are fine.
This issue has been hashed out time and time again. Just don't do something stupid and you will be fine. The issue with the DonnyFl thing is that a guy did something EXTREMELY stupid and illegal. That isn't DonnyFl's fault it is the end user.
Every couple of months this gets asked and it is the same thing....gets old quick
This issue has been hashed out time and time again. Just don't do something stupid and you will be fine. The issue with the DonnyFl thing is that a guy did something EXTREMELY stupid and illegal. That isn't DonnyFl's fault it is the end user.
Every couple of months this gets asked and it is the same thing....gets old quick
Upvote 0
This question is asked due to the airgun industry's failure to be informative regarding silencers. Every airgun silencer dealer has the disclaimer, "It is your responsibility to know the laws in your country, state, county, and city and to comply with them fully." And where do they find these laws?
The end user is essentially given "Use at your own risk." So they come here to ask.
There are plenty of resources available in the powder burner world that could have and would have been extended to the airgun industry, but they have been neglected.
The end user is essentially given "Use at your own risk." So they come here to ask.
There are plenty of resources available in the powder burner world that could have and would have been extended to the airgun industry, but they have been neglected.
Upvote 0
The problem I have is with the nonsense wording “skated close to the edge of the law”.
This is absurd. Driving 54mph in a 55 mph zone is “skating close to the edge of the law.” A thing is either legal or not. There is no “edge”. We all “skate close to the edge of the law” DAILY in every aspect of life and enjoy our freedoms to the fullest extent that is not unlawful.
I hear so many people talk about this or that legal issue and say that a thing is not illegal..but it is “frowned upon”. I do not care who “frowns upon” anything if it is not illegal. We are Americans. Any rights you have that you do not exercise are likely to disappear without warning.
Upvote 0
