Supreme Court to rule on US Army vet’s ‘unconstitutional’ gun suppressor this week after national controversy

Supreme Court to rule on US Army vet’s ‘unconstitutional’ gun suppressor this week after national controversy

Gun Rights

Silencerco Osprey 9, SWR Octane 45 and Silencerco Saker 5.56, with other weapons. (DickClarkMises/Wikimedia Commons/Released) The fate of a disabled U.S. Army veteran convicted of possessing an untaxed firearm suppressor is in the hands of the Supreme Court, which is slated to issue a decision this Thursday. Jeremy Kettler has been appealing to the higher courts since his November 2016 conviction in Kansas of possessing a suppressor he purchased to avoid worsening his hearing loss suffered during his military service – possession that allegedly violated the National Firearms Act (NFA), according to Guns.com in January. Jeremy Kettler v. United States GOA Files Case Before SCOTUS To Fight Parts Of The NFA https://t.co/nP3LE0BPDx — William Olson (@Olsonlaw) January 16, 2019 Kettler failed to pay a $200 tax and file ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) paperwork to register the suppressor, which he purchased from a local Army-Navy surplus store. The owner of the store, Shane Cox, was not licensed to manufacture such accessories, and was also found guilty for illegal manufacture and marketing. Although federal law requires silencers to be registered per the NFA, Kansas state law says that all firearms, accessories and ammo manufactured and possessed inside the state are exempt from federal law. The suppressors were stamped with “Made in Kansas,” and both Kettler and Cox argued that they were acting in accordance with Kansas’ Second Amendment Protection Act. Kettler noted this point in his appeals, arguing that the NFA was “an invalid exercise of Congress’ […]

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.