Republicans in Congress are making another effort to deregulate firearm suppressors, devices designed to protect shooters’ hearing, which other civilized countries have not only permitted but encouraged for years.
Introduced by U.S. Rep. Mike Lee, R-Utah, the “Silencers Help Us Save Hearing Act,” aka SHUSH Act, would change current law and treat silencers the same as other firearms accessories.
Senate cosponsors of the SHUSH Act include Republican Sens. Rick Scott of Florida, Pete Rickets of Nebraska, Roger Marshall of Kansas and John Curtis of Utah. The measure is being supported by the NRA, the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR), GOA and the NSSF.
“Despite what Hollywood may lead you to believe, silencers aren’t silent, and they aren’t just for secret agents,” Sen. Lee said in a press release announcing the legislation. “They are a vital tool for hearing protection for countless marksmen and gun enthusiasts across America, and making them prohibitively difficult to obtain is an assault on the Second Amendment. The SHUSH Act eliminates federal regulation of silencers and treats them as the non-lethal accessory that they are.”
Aidan Johnston, director of government affairs for GOA, said the measure is much needed for hunters, shooters and the Second Amendment.
“Gun Owners of America applauds the introduction of the ‘Silencers Helping Us Save Hearing Act’ (SHUSH) Act,” Johnston said. “The SHUSH Act would not only remove suppressors from the federal regulations of the National Firearms Act but also treat suppressors as any other firearm accessory—free from the infringing background check process. Sen. Lee’s bill will not only benefit hunters and sport shooters but also take much-needed steps for gun owners to restore the rights protected by the Second Amendment.”
While Rep. Lee pushes his SHUSH Act, Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, has introduced the Hearing Protection Act, S. 364, in the U.S. Senate. The act would remove firearm suppressors from the list of definitions under the 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA) so purchasers would only have to undergo the same background check as when purchasing a firearm.
Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel, said his organization is wholeheartedly backing the measure.
“Senator Mike Crapo’s Hearing Protection Act will have the federal government recognize firearm suppressors as accessories to a firearm that make recreational shooting and hunting a safer experience,” Keane said. “These safety devices reduce the report of a firearm to a level that won’t cause instant and permanent hearing damage. Despite Hollywood’s depictions, they do not silence the sound of a firearm.”
Keane further said that the focus should be on removing barriers to safe and responsible use of firearms and dedicating resources to ensuring actual firearms are safeguarded from those who should never possess them.
“Strict regulatory control of firearm accessories, and the parts of those accessories that have no bearing on the function of a firearm, is unnecessary and not the wisest use of federal resources,” he said. “NSSF thanks Sen. Crapo for his leadership for ensuring safe and responsible use of firearms and dedicating necessary resources where they are most needed.”
Congress could pass this with a simple majority vote. On the other hand would it not require 2/3rds vote to pass the Senate? Many socialist states have/or in process of banning ‘threaded barrels’, ‘pistol grips’, ‘things that go up’, etc..
After Luigi the NYC assassin wannabe, it’ll be a cold day in hell before we ever get permission to own a can here.
If it gets to the point where they are as regulated as standard capacity magazines federally it really would not matter.
73 days…How will you honor their sacrifice?
Whose sacrifice?
shart heard ’round the world.
By not getting arrested and continuing to coordinate various progun actions in my state in defiance if whatever nonsense they cook up this year. Now quit spamming your bunker hill larp.
I was thinking a cup of tea would be nice.
But I’m dressing up like a Native American just in case I get seen drinking it.
Won’t go into effect in California.
no, but at least if it goes into effect nationally, it can join the long list of basically ignored gun laws in the state of CA. Not even the police enforce the 10 rnd magazine laws unless they’re already in the process of arresting a guy for some other crime.
Passes the acronym test ✔️
A 4473 is more than enough to purchase a can, anything more no can do.
I live for the day that the 4473 is jettisoned as what it is: Infringement. But until that day, I’m with you on that.
+2
I’m afraid it wouldn’t help us in Illinois anyway the corrupt politicians in Chicago ruin it for the rest of us in the lower part of the state.
I’m no proponent of suppressors for myself as at my age I’ve come to enjoy the sound of shooting and don’t want to either alter my guns, or have them lengthened by a can, particularly my handguns. If, however, others wish to use them, I have absolutely no problem and I can’t see any reason for people to fill out a 4473 to obtain one. It’s harmless on its own unless someone gets bashed over the head with it.
I’d also suggest that Americans be able to construct their own, provided they accept all responsibility should their contraption cause some sort of damage or injury to others. (I have a pal whose AR suppressor ended up about 25 yds down range…)
I suggest we all move carefully, however. The unintended consequences of using suppressors could easily morph into becoming a requirement, particularly in the various commie enclave states, which would undoubtably end participation in the 2nd Amendment by masses of firearms owners. Before anyone mocks such a possibility, I can remember a time not so far back when people, even in NYC or Chicago, would’ve scoffed at the notion that they would ever be unable to own firearms.
Regarding that last paragraph, yeah I could see spiteful “safe hearing” regulations being put in place in states like mine including high decibel assault noise. Even joking it’s too close to the truth.
Safe I feel your pain. Literally.
Yea, that would be sadly what CA would do too. They’d require you to use a suppressor but they would outlaw threaded barrels. They’re pretty good that way in the Golden state.
Yes, that’s what states like Commiefornia and the People’s Republic of New Jersey like to do. They’re been trying a sneaky way to ban all ammunition:
1) Ban all lead ammunition as “toxic.” Once that ban passes, then…
2) Ban all lead-free ammunition as “armor piercing.” Ammo ban complete!
I think California already tried this, but then they got caught when someone pointed out that banning all ammunition might, just might, be a slight infringement on the 2A.
Meanwhile, the PRNJ bans hollow-point ammunition “because scary-looking,” with the usual exemption for law enforcement. The ban on hollow-point ammo combined with the ban on magazines over 10 rounds has led to more people in the PRNJ buying .45 ACP pistols because when you’re limited to 10, that nearly equalizes the capacity of .45 and 9mm pistols, and because a 9mm FMJ won’t expend, but at least a .45 FMJ won’t shrink.
Are they still allowing the critical defense/duty type rounds with the polymer plug and/or the screwdriver tip copper solids or did they address those work arounds?
The powers that be tremble with fear when the Big Dog states like Nebraska and Kansas come to the table.
No corn for you.
Please note that Mike Lee is a U.S. senator from Utah. He is not a representative.
Isn’t Mike Lee a senator? Not a representative.