SilencerCo’s New Maxim 50, Promptly Met by Anti-Gun Legal Challenges
September 22, 2017Earlier this week, SilencerCo made news by announcing the market’s first integrally-suppressed black powder rifle. Known as the Maxim 50, SilencerCo’s rifle enjoys black powder’s somewhat less stringent restrictions. In most states, it, like any other black powder gun, is not considered a fiearm at all. Similar to air rifle suppressors, the Maxim’s “moderator” (as SilencerCo calls it) is also an unregulated parts of the rifle’s barrel – meaning no $200 tax stamp and no wait (or Form 4473) to own the Maxim.
n all, it’s an intriguing concept. One of the most significant limitations to silencer ownership is the paperwork and, of course, the tax. The Maxim 50 bypasses both. It isn’t a perfect solution, though. First, the rifle is very limited in terms of approved powders and ammunition. Second, cleaning the Maxim is an involved process that requires “extremely hot water” to be poured into the bore from both ends. Then, a handful rounds must be fired through the moderator to ensure that its internals are dry, lest they may rust. SilencerCo advises that this process should be repeated every 50 or 60 to account for the grime that builds up when using black powder. However, In some states and municipalities, the Maxim 50 may well be the only way to hunt with a suppressor, or own a suppressed firearm at all.
That’s precisely why a few virulently anti-gun states have, less than 24 hours after the Maxim’s introduction, already moved against it. According to SilencerCo:
Upon launching the Maxim 50, SilencerCo received several immediate legal challenges from authorities and lawyers in the states of New Jersey, Massachusetts, and California. Since we have no desire to place any consumer in a situation where they may get arrested and charged with a felony because their state defines a firearm differently than the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE), we have placed orders from those states on hold and are refunding customers pending legal confirmation. We will update our customers as soon as we have multiple source verification.
This turn of events quite clearly knocks the wind out of SilencerCo’s sails. In now-removed social media posts, the Maxim 50 was touted by the company as a 50-state-legal suppressor. While I can’t speak for every state that is involved or may become involved in this dispute, but to think that the Maxim 50 will be legal in every state is naïve. New Jersey, for example, treats black powder rifles as firearms and requires the same FID cards for black powder and centerfire rifles alike. There, the Maxim shares (il)legal classification with integrally-suppressed, centerfire rifles. The Maxim’s prospects in the Garden State don’t look promising. At the same time, both California and Massachusetts are well accustomed to banning specific firearms and types of firearms by name. Even if their challenges fail, they should be expected to waste no time drafting and easily adopting legislation to address the Maxim 50.
Make no mistake, SilencerCo has devised a very intriguing product. Pricey as it may be ($999), the Maxim 50 is the first of its kind and will hopefully bring new suppressor owners into the fold. It is not, however, a 50-state-legal silencer, and sadly, it never really stood a chance at being one.