- Active Posts:
- 276 (0.09 per day)
- Most Active In:
- Pump Markers (133 posts)
- 02-March 05
- Profile Views:
- Last Active:
- Dec 30 2010 07:17 AM
- Member Title:
- 40 years old
- January 26, 1973
- Not Telling
- Brigade Name:
Posts I've Made
30 December 2010 - 07:12 AMDont worry, the military isnt giving up any snipers. They dont assign snipers to every squade, when a regular unit is fortunate to have its own designated snipers they are typicaly asigned to a platoon or larger type group. What they are doing is adding designated marksmen who are better equipped and trained for more precise shooting at medium ranges. That way they can afford to place them in most of the infantry squades incresing the individual squads capabilities in the urban enviornment. The designated marksmen does not set-up a hide, or vantage point, they move with and work with the squade, just like they would as a regular soldier in that squade, what they do bring to the table is a more precise shot placement capability.
09 October 2008 - 07:15 AMIllusion, I understand that you are doing a lot of research on this, but I think you are missing some thing. I have also done allot of research into this issue, and have been led to believe that what you are proposing is in fact a violation of the law the minute you place it over the paintball barrel. Please be carefull, not just for you, but for all the kids you have now told to go forth and do this. This is a good way to ruin some ones life when the ATF or some other local LE official decides to make an example of him or her because they have been led to believe it is OK. I think you know as well as I do that if you send in a paintball barrel with the insulation on it that they will delcair it a silencer and you will have lost this argument, hense the Geni is back in the bottle. So instead you are leaving it to some poor kid who is not very well educated in the legal system to take the fall and put the Geni back in the bottle. Be responsible, prove it is a ligit solution.
08 October 2008 - 05:41 AMIllusion, would you be willing to send another sample to the ATF with an extra paintball barrel? Get a spare paintball barrel, and put the insulation on it as you intend to use it. Send that into the ATF, if they say it is legal then the debate will end.
07 October 2008 - 07:09 PMCorect. It is the use of any thing with the intent to reduce the noise level that is the issue. If it works, if the dB is reduced, then it is a sound mufler, silencer, or supresor. Keep in mind, these laws were not writen to block paint ball players, they were writen to counter the criminal elements.
07 October 2008 - 06:17 PMThat is a big part of it. The problem is that most markers are built to allow the barrels to be removed. If you had a marker that the barrel could not be removed, and the silencer material could not be removed from the barrel without completely destroying the silencer components, then in theory it could be considered legal. But most attempts at this have been shot down by the ATF showing proof that you could destroy the marker and salvage the silencer component of it, thus making it illegal to have.
Example, you glue the isulation to the barrel. Well, if the barrel can be removed, either by unscrewing it, or taking a hack saw to it, you now have a silencer that could be used on a regular firearm. That is why none of the marker manufactures are producing silenced markers.
RowanPaintball hasn't added any friends yet.