Started By
Message

Hearing Protection Act and SHORT Act Watch Thread.... HPA is now in the Senate!!!

Posted on 5/12/25 at 5:50 pm
Posted by finchmeister08
Member since Mar 2011
38037 posts
Posted on 5/12/25 at 5:50 pm
This post was edited on 5/22/25 at 6:45 am
Posted by Jcorye1
Tom Brady = GoAT
Member since Dec 2007
75081 posts
Posted on 5/12/25 at 5:57 pm to
I don't understand who they thought would like this. Anti gunners are going to hate any less barrier to entry, and pro gunners are going to be pissed it's still on the NFA for no reason.
Posted by TheBoo
South to Louisiana
Member since Aug 2012
5139 posts
Posted on 5/13/25 at 8:43 am to
Silencers aren't firearms.
Posted by Diseasefreeforall
Member since Oct 2012
6748 posts
Posted on 5/13/25 at 9:27 am to
At first after the silencer was invented in 1902 it was described as an ingenious invention by the press but eventually the media turned to fearmongering over its use.

That and the belief that using one for hunting was not sporting led them to be regulated around the country, in some places the penalty for possessing one was harsher than for illegally possessing an actual firearm, which eventually got them included in the NFA in 1934.

If anybody wants all the details, this is a very comprehensive article:

Recoil magazine


Posted by cgrand
HAMMOND
Member since Oct 2009
43546 posts
Posted on 5/13/25 at 10:03 am to
“silencer” has been synonymous with criminality for over 100 years. It’s a hard stigma to overcome. Think about when you first became aware of such a thing…probably in a movie and probably shown in use by a murderer or a spy
This post was edited on 5/13/25 at 10:04 am
Posted by bbvdd
Memphis, TN
Member since Jun 2009
27066 posts
Posted on 5/13/25 at 10:12 am to
quote:

probably in a movie and probably shown in use by a murderer or a spy


like most all guns?
Posted by deeprig9
Unincorporated Ozora
Member since Sep 2012
70614 posts
Posted on 5/13/25 at 2:40 pm to
I'm pretty sure Elmer Fudd was my first exposure to guns as a toddler.
Posted by rmc
Truth or Consequences
Member since Sep 2004
27166 posts
Posted on 5/13/25 at 3:14 pm to
quote:

Is there a legitimate logical reason why suppressors should be more regulated than actual firearms?


I used this prompt on Grok.

quote:

No, there isn’t a strong logical basis for regulating suppressors more heavily than firearms. Suppressors, often misnamed "silencers," don’t make guns silent; they reduce noise to safer levels, typically by 20-30 decibels, making them comparable to heavy machinery or power tools. A .22 rifle with a suppressor still produces around 110-120 dB, far from silent. Firearms, by contrast, are the actual lethal instruments, capable of causing harm regardless of noise.

The primary argument for stricter suppressor regulation stems from their portrayal in media and early laws like the National Firearms Act of 1934, which lumped them with machine guns due to fears of poaching or assassinations. Yet, suppressors don’t enhance lethality, range, or accuracy—they just mitigate hearing damage and noise pollution. In countries like Norway or New Zealand, suppressors are sold over the counter, with no evidence of increased crime. In the U.S., they’re rarely used in crimes; FBI data shows only a handful of suppressor-related incidents annually, compared to thousands of gun crimes.

Regulating suppressors more strictly than firearms—like requiring ATF approval, $200 tax stamps, and long wait times—lacks a rational basis when the firearm itself is the primary tool of harm. If anything, suppressors could be seen as safety equipment, reducing risks to shooters and bystanders. The counterargument often hinges on hypothetical misuse (e.g., stealth in crimes), but this isn’t supported by data and applies equally to unregulated items like pillows or improvised mufflers. Logic suggests regulation should focus on the weapon, not an accessory that primarily protects hearing.


I know all of this but I decided to see what AI said. It is insane that suppressors are more heavily regulated than firearms themselves.
This post was edited on 5/13/25 at 3:15 pm
Posted by finchmeister08
Member since Mar 2011
38037 posts
Posted on 5/13/25 at 4:12 pm to
There’s an unnamed company lobbying to keep them on the NFA. Who benefits the most from them being in the NFA?


Reddit believes it’s Silencer Shop. If they get removed from the NFA, their trust business becomes obsolete.

How many of you schmucks have bought “single shot trusts” for each of your silencers?
Posted by finchmeister08
Member since Mar 2011
38037 posts
Posted on 5/14/25 at 5:58 pm to
Posted by Jack Ruby
Member since Apr 2014
25405 posts
Posted on 5/14/25 at 7:13 pm to
quote:

single shot trusts


Still don't even know what this is and why you would buy one.
Posted by finchmeister08
Member since Mar 2011
38037 posts
Posted on 5/14/25 at 7:54 pm to
It’s a trust that’s only allowed one item and the ability to add trustees after the fact. Is basically a quick way register as a trust without having to keep up with documents in the front end.

Silencer Shop handles does all of it.
Posted by Twenty 49
Shreveport
Member since Jun 2014
20124 posts
Posted on 5/14/25 at 10:49 pm to
quote:

Silencers aren't firearms.


That was the precise logic used by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals when it recently rejected a Second Amendment challenge to a conviction for violating federal law against possessing an unregistered suppressor. Dude in Jefferson Parish had a kit made suppressor, unregistered and with no serial number.

A silencer/suppressor is not an arm within the meaning of the 2A, so there is no 2A protection from federal laws governing them. US v Peterson, decided by a panel of 3 judges appointed by Republican presidents.
Posted by Landmass
Premium Member
Member since Jun 2013
21275 posts
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:42 am to
quote:

decided by a panel of 3 judges appointed by Republican presidents.


I really wish we had a right-wing party and not just a left-wing party and another left-wing party masquerading as a right-wing party.
Posted by bbvdd
Memphis, TN
Member since Jun 2009
27066 posts
Posted on 5/15/25 at 5:37 pm to
Seeing a post in Instagram saying it’s Silencer Central and they have the receipts showing they paid 50k to support keeping the tax.
Posted by finchmeister08
Member since Mar 2011
38037 posts
Posted on 5/15/25 at 8:49 pm to
they want to redirect the stamp cost to conservation

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
Posted by finchmeister08
Member since Mar 2011
38037 posts
Posted on 5/15/25 at 8:56 pm to
Posted by Theotherpikecounty
pike county
Member since Aug 2014
571 posts
Posted on 5/15/25 at 9:32 pm to
Explain to me like i know nothing (because i dont).

What do i need to do to get one and what will it cost me? How long will it take?
Posted by bbvdd
Memphis, TN
Member since Jun 2009
27066 posts
Posted on 5/15/25 at 9:54 pm to
Depending on where you’re looking to buy one.

My LGS has a silencer shop kiosk and all my info. I can walk in and buy one, silencer shop takes a week to 10 days to get all the paper work filled out and sent it. My last 2 (I filed as individual on them) took 3 and 4 days to get approved.

Cost will depend on what you’re buying.

Rimfire will cost 300-400
Pistol can go from 600-1000+
Rifle can go for up to $1500 (.30 cal). Bigger than .30 may be more but I don’t have one and haven’t looked at their prices.

Then $200 for the stamp.
Posted by Theotherpikecounty
pike county
Member since Aug 2014
571 posts
Posted on 5/16/25 at 7:04 am to
Silencer shop sets up the trust for you or thats separate ?
This post was edited on 5/16/25 at 7:05 am
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 5Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram