I suspect that ultimately this will end up before SCOTUS. We’ll have to wait to see what happens.
To the Supreme Court where it would be determined if suppressors are arms.
Same court where one member won’t define what a woman is. 
If its not a firearm, then its a part..ok
Why does the BATF regulate them then?. They dont regulate parts, persay.
If the feds regulate it and says you can own one a state cant override the feds. I know much more involved but isn’t this why we bitch about the ATF and some states laws.
Who’s actually in charge of this circus?
Maybe we need to rebrand these tubes as a legally required muffler which is required on all “internal combustion” devices.
OH GOD WE’RE DOOMED! (you know that right?)
It would be classified as an “add-on”, not something required for basic function, and they would say “Oh, but you don’t NEED it.” It would fall into the same litigation as any aftermarket sight on a sidearm in Commiefornia.
If is makes us better shooters, the Leftists don’t want it.
I would counter their arguments with this: Suppressors save my hearing so I can hear longer and not have to have Medicare pay for my hearing aids. Looking at it that way, it saves them money so they can spend more on stupid things.
There you go using logic again. Saving money from the medicare government subsidized program would reduce the flow of money available for kickbacks. There’s no incentive for that. The more people are dependent on government funds, the more opportunity there is for politicians to skim off the top.
weird they are required to be serialized and background checked and form 4473 if they aren’t arms, eh?
Let’s hope the F all the way off up the chain on appeals and we get suppressors for all