Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Sen. Crapo Introduces Hearing Protecting Act in U.S. Senate

Last week, we told you about Congressman Jeff Duncan's introduction of H.R. 367, the Hearing Protection Act.

We can now report that Senator Mike Crapo has introduced a virtually identical Senate counterpart. Crapo's bill, S. 59, would restore your right to purchase a suppressor the same way you would purchase most firearms.
Suppressors are lumped by the U.S. in the same category as machine guns and sawed-off shotguns, requiring elaborate background checks and transfer fees -- even though at their core, suppressors are nothing more than elaborate tubes that muffle sound.

In other countries, however, the availability of suppressors is treated as a "public health issue." In anti-gun countries like Britain, France, and Norway, their purchase is encouraged as a public health measure -- and as a matter of politeness.

Contrary to Hollywood portrayals, a suppressor does not "silence" a weapon. It does, however, decrease the sound level by around 30-35 decibels.

They are effectively banned because of an historical anachronism -- and because gun grabbers are unwilling to make the slightest concession to common sense, even if their gun control transparently damages public health.

The Crapo bill has the support of the incoming president's oldest son, Donald Trump, Jr. And, if we can demonstrate support by gaining Senate cosponsors, it will put us in a position to add it to a non-filibusterable must-pass bill.

So, for the time being, the task is to encourage a majority of Republican senators to sign on as cosponsors to S. 59.



Contact your congressman and senators asking them to support these bills!

i'd be amazed and thrilled if this becomes law!

The Senate will be the issue. The House companion bill was introduced earlier and will pass with ease.

Am I going to have to buy new guns and get the barrels threaded on the ones I have? This could get expensive.

If this comes to pass I wonder how long it will be before they're required on every gun like mufflers on a car. I wouldn't want one of the ugly things on every gun I own.

I will not hold my breath waiting in Communist Mexifornia.

Never Gunna Happen.

As if that schit hole you live in would ever make them legal.




Dave

There's no logical reason to keep them on the NFA list.

Even the loss of $200/stamp by the ferals by delisting them will be offset by the massive sales and the 11% excise tax.

Look forward to the day. Glad I don't live in a chithole

Please wipe the stupid [bleep] grin from your collective face as you enter the American Golden Age!


Do be kind enough to drag the rest of us along with you.

S.59, with 8 sponsors, stalled in Senate Finance Committee.

H.R.367, with 100 sponsors, stalled in House Ways and Means Committee, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.

The only real expense currently is the $200 federal tax for each suppressor. Where I live (Williamson County,Texas) you also have also create a trust for each suppressor.

Hope the price comes down too.

This being my problem too.

No surprise here. It's all about the $$. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out that the income generated by the $200 tax stamp is less than the combined salaries of the govt employees, draggin' their as*es in the approval process. Get rid of the tax stamp and the employee's and it's win-win.

Slightly off topic but has anyone seen any proposal to lighten restrictions on SBRs? I mean, even if they were treated more like a pistol, that would be a step in the right direction.

HAH!

You think you have problems converting to silencers?

I don't think this will go anywhere. There have been too many years of the movies and TV telling us that "silencers" are only used by criminals, starting with 1930s Film Noir detective movies.