Proposed "hearing Safety" Bill

[mrmackc]

Pro-Gun Representatives Introduce Hearing Protection Act to Reform Outdated Suppressor Laws

 

On Thursday, Rep. Matt Salmon (R-AZ) introduced H.R. 3799, the Hearing Protection Act (HPA). Joining him were 10 co-sponsors, including Representatives Frank Guinta (R-NH), John Carter (R-TX), Mike Kelly (R-PA), Chris Collins (R-NY), Glenn Thompson (R-PA), Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), Trent Franks (R-AZ), Mia Love (R-UT), Doug LaMalfa (R-CA), and Chris Stewart (R-UT). The HPA would remove sound suppressors from regulation under the National Firearms Act (NFA), leaving them to be treated as ordinary firearms subject to the usual NICS check and Form 4473 for dealer sales. Their primary function is to reduce the muzzle report of the firearm to which they are attached, protecting the hearing of the firearm’s operator and reducing noise and disturbance to those in nearby vicinities. 

Currently, suppressors (misleadingly referred to as “silencers” in federal law) are subject to the NFA’s cumbersome and lengthy application, “CLEO sign-off,” and $200 taxation provisions. This is so, even though the devices themselves are completely harmless. Their primary function is to reduce the muzzle report of the firearm to which they are attached, protecting the hearing of the firearm’s operator and reducing noise and disturbance to those in nearby vicinities. Unlike their portrayal in popular movies and television shows, the devices do not render firearms all but soundless. They do, however, make them safer and quieter to operate, reducing the sound that reaches the shooter by about the same degree as a pair of earplugs or earmuffs.  

Although they have been subject to heightened regulation under federal law since 1934, suppressors have become increasingly popular in recent years, as more and more hunters and firearm enthusiasts have discovered their benefits. Suppressors may be legally obtained in 41 states, and they are lawful for hunting in 37. Ironically, regulation of suppressors is one area where American gun owners are at a relative disadvantage to their counterparts in other countries. Many European nations, for example, place no regulations on their acquisition or use. Here in the U.S., it is inconsistent, to say the least, that while mufflers are legally required or commonly included on a various noise-producing tools – including cars, lawn mowers, and chainsaws – the law discourages their use on firearms.  

Suppressors may be legally obtained in 41 states, and they are lawful for hunting in 37. Ironically, regulation of suppressors is one area where American gun owners are at a relative disadvantage to their counterparts in other countries. Many European nations, for example, place no regulations on their acquisition or use. 

Suppressors are also considered “firearms” under the federal Gun Control Act of 1968, and they would continue to be so under the HPA.  This means that their commercial manufacturers and dealers would have to be licensed, background checks and record-keeping requirements would continue apply to retail sales, and people with serious criminal histories or prior mental health commitments or adjudications still could not possess them. They would, however, be more readily available to law-abiding gun owners who could benefit from their use.

To ensure the pendency of the HPA does not discourage people from acting on their rights to acquire suppressors in the meantime, the Act would also allow those who acquire a suppressor after October 22, 2015, but before the Act’s effective date, to obtain a refund of the NFA’s $200 tax.

The NRA heartily supports the HPA and thanks Rep. Salmon and his cosponsors for their leadership in this important effort.  In addition, as a leading voice in the industry, the American Suppressor Association has provided valuable insight to the creation of the Hearing Protection Act.

We urge you to contact your representative and ask him or her to support the Hearing Protection Act. “Suppressors benefit all involved in the hunting and shooting sports,” said NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox. “It’s time to bring the law in line with modern technology.”

 

[shepp]

I hope they secede!! Granted they're all republicans (which really don't mean much) I'm surprised to see NH, NY and Cal on the list of supporters 

[survivalshop]

I hope they secede!! Granted they're all republicans (which really don't mean much) I'm surprised to see NH, NY and Cal on the list of supporters 

Probably the word Suppress confused them & they think they are actually getting rid of firearms or suppressing them ?

Edited October 25, 2015 by survivalshop

[blue109]

Yeeeessssssssssss. Imagine the innovation if anyone can buy them with no hassle. Tons of companies coming up with new designs. 

[shepp]

Yeeeessssssssssss. Imagine the innovation if anyone can buy them with no hassle. Tons of companies coming up with new designs. 

driving the price down I'd have ten of every color!! 

 

Good point SS lol

[Sisco]

What!?  Can't hear you!

Edited October 24, 2015 by shepp

[Sisco]

Make that " can't"

[shepp]

There you go ;)

[Magwa]

Bout freeking time I hope they stay the course and make it work....

[blue109]

Bout time we learned some lib tactics. "What kind of person would vote against a common sense hearing protection bill? What do you have against people's health? "

[planeflyer21]

Bout time we learned some lib tactics. "What kind of person would vote against a common sense hearing protection bill? What do you have against people's health? "

Outstanding!!

[slugger43]

So, if they are going to treat them like firearms, any chance some innovative manufacturer will develop an 80% suppressor?   Hahahahahaha!

[ChaseFan9]

I believe there's a link to some solvent trap kits for sale that you might wanna check out, very entertaining comments.

 

So if this passes, we won't need a tax stamp to build one, just like an 80%er?  I've been waiting my whole life to hear that :D

[Rsquared]

It's about damn time. After going through the "wait-time" for all of the suppressors that I've bought, it's nice to hear some common sense on the subject. There's no reason that they should be an NFA item. Just because some of the politico's have seen too many Hollywood movies....or are just gun-hating bleeding heart liberals to begin with...doesn't justify why these devices are regulated to the extent that they are. They think that just because you can screw a can onto the end of a rifle (or pistol), it'll make you wanna go rob your local convenience store.

 

Now I won't hold my breath on this. But it's at least nice to hear it brought up.

 

We'll see I guess.

[washguy]

Talk about a prick tease.....this is a good one!  it wont pass into law though    Wash

hope im wrong!

Edited October 25, 2015 by washguy

[Armed Eye Doc]

Write to your legislators and ask them to support and cosponsor the bill.  They won't know if they aren't told.

I'm cynical enough to believe  that they won't care since it isn't close enough to an election for most people to remember when they vote.  But I still sent an email. 

[survivalshop]

 You will still have to pay , the Gov. won't want to lose a dime .