Monday, October 26, 2015

House Republicans are attempting to make it easier to purchase silencers for guns. Wait, what?

Courtesy of HuffPo:

House Republicans on Thursday introduced a bill that would eliminate a federal tax on gun silencers and would weaken licensing requirements that currently make the devices more difficult to buy than most firearms. 

The Hearing Protection Act of 2015, proposed by Rep. Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.) and co-sponsored by 10 of his colleagues, would do this by removing silencers, which are also called suppressors, from the purview of the National Firearms Act, instead putting them in the same regulatory category as long guns. As its title suggests, the bill's sponsors are framing it as an effort to keep shooters from damaging their ears.

In 1934, in the wake of Prohibition-era violence carried out by heavily armed bootleggers and gangsters, sound-suppressing devices were included on a list of NFA weaponry and other hardware, alongside firearms like machine guns and short-barreled shotguns. Today, purchases of silencers are still subject to a $200 fee, which covers an extensive FBI background check that can take months to complete. 

People looking to buy items covered by the NFA must also go through a specific federal registration process, which is more stringent than the one that governs gun purchases from a Federal Firearms License holder. To get a silencer, for example, a buyer must submit a certification from a local law enforcement official vouching that the silencer will be used for lawful purposes.

And the Republicans want to change that?

You know I watch a lot of movies, and I cannot think of one movie where a silencer was NOT used in the attempt to take a person's life.

There are already a number of products sold to help protect the hearing of gun owners.

A gun silencer seems to me to be more designed to keep the shootee from hearing the gunfire, rather than to protect the hearing of the shooter.

 This seems insane to me.


  1. Anonymous6:26 AM

    Seems insane because it is!

    1. Boscoe8:28 AM

      OMFG they actually called it the "Hearing Protection Act"... as if it's about caring SO much about people's health... But then, it IS the party that actually had the balls to name an act designed to deregulate air polluting factories "the Clear Air Act".

  2. Another case of GOP thinking: what is another stupid idea to make guns MORE accessible that we can put forward...on the road of our party's annihilation?
    Are these bills distractions while they are planning/doing something else? Attention-getting devices for a party with no governing plans or ideas?

  3. Anonymous6:47 AM

    A little O/T
    "this year’s carnival-like GOP presidential primary makes one event, in retrospect, stand out as a crucial turning point on the road to upheaval: the 2008 embrace of then-Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be a heartbeat from the presidency."

  4. Jim in Texas6:54 AM

    Yeah, that's the problem with all these mass shooting, all right. They're just too damn NOISY!

  5. Leland7:42 AM

    Anyone wish to bet they have NOT checked with the Police Chief's association about this?

  6. Anonymous7:49 AM

    Also to keep other citizens from hearing the gunfire.

    Also, might this change gunshot detecting equipment that police use in the cities? Some cities use sensors to detect shots fired. Will this make it so that gunshots go undetected?

  7. "The Hearing Protection Act of 2015"
    Speaking as someone who actually is seriously hearing impaired, I would like to slap the snot out of the hypocritical lying sociopath who came up with the name for this bill.

  8. Anonymous8:05 AM

    The GOP never saw a law that said "you cannot have" without wanting to eliminate it. I wonder what they think of the 10 Commandments!

    1. Well, to be honest, they've ignored or warped quite a few of those.

      Adultery and bearing false witness come immediately to mind. There's also the coveting one. And stealing.

      But you know those commandments. They are so Old Testament.

  9. Anonymous8:09 AM

    Insane is exactly what the GOP is. Every dang one of them...they checked their brains at the door of the latest Koch roundup/ALEC conference.

  10. Anonymous8:20 AM

    ot LOL

    So true! The GOP’s dysfunction all started with Sarah Palin

    Former Chief of State Daley: Current GOP ‘Dysfunction’ All Started With Palin

    Women Should Go To Prison For Abortions Just Like Those Who Kill Bald Eagles

  11. Anonymous8:35 AM

    Turning us all into idiots:

  12. Anonymous10:39 AM

    When I saw the headline, I sarcastically thought that they were doing it to cut down on noise pollution. Then I read what it was called and double checked its validity because it sounded too much like an Onion headline. These people are nuts!

  13. Anonymous11:31 AM

    This truth:

  14. Anonymous1:22 PM

    Check this story, Gryphen. Just when you thought the stories couldn't crazier:

  15. Anonymous5:29 PM

    You watch too many movies. I'm guessing those aren't documentaries on NFA devices. First, they aren't as quiet as you think. The sound, even with subsonic ammo is about like a hand clap. Way quieter than a rifle shot but still not the whispered "whiiiip" you hear on the movies. I believe there are some very exotic and expensive suppressors that are used by the military that come close to that but they are way out of pretty much everyone's price range.

    They aren't cheap. I own several and a 10/22 with an integrated suppressor. Average price for thread on is probably $500-600 for pistol suppressors and over a grand for rifle. Also figure several hundred to convert the barrel to threads. The tax stamp isn't that big a deal for anyone who can afford something that isn't really necessary in that price range but it is a PITA. The same background check as you went through for the firearm would suffice.

    They are not for assassinating anything or anyone (although a red squirrel population around a certain cabin might disagree).

    What they are useful for is shooting without the need for hearing protection, not disturbing your neighbors, and not making a lot of unnecessary noise when shooting targets or other things during hunting season. Are they necessary? No they aren't but they do make shooting in certain situations more polite and convenient.

    1. If you do away with the checks then those that bypass the checks when buying a weapon will also bypass the checks for a silencer.

      Sorry, but cost or no cost they simply aren't necessary. Their only purpose is to silence a handgun and the majority of handguns are used in the commission of a crime.

      Ear protection can be worn while shooting targets in a designated safe area.

      If the neighbors are being disturbed, then maybe it's time to stop shooting guns where they disturb the neighbors.

      The law as it stands is fine. If it costs and extra $200 in fees and a little inconvenience, then so be it. It's the price you pay.

      I'm sick of the right wing undermining regulations and eliminating sources of revenue that are paid by people that can well afford to pay them.

    2. Anonymous3:03 PM

      mlaiuppa STFU. You know nothing. Nothing.

  16. Anonymous5:33 PM


  17. Now, why would any law abiding handgun owner need a silencer? Silencers are for killing people. Not hunting. And they're so bulky it would only hinder concealed carry.

    And the Constitution only talks about arms. Silencers are not arms (Ammunition isn't arms either.) So the Constitution doesn't guarantee the right to own a silencer.

    I guess I don't need to ask where the NRA stands on this.

  18. Anonymous8:22 AM

    They are doing it because they can, no rational reason needed, just like most of what they push.


Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.