- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
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 on 5/12/25 at 5:50 pm
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
This post was edited on 5/22/25 at 6:45 am
Posted on 5/12/25 at 5:57 pm to finchmeister08
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 on 5/13/25 at 8:43 am to finchmeister08
Silencers aren't firearms.
Posted on 5/13/25 at 9:27 am to TheBoo
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

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 on 5/13/25 at 10:03 am to Diseasefreeforall
“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 on 5/13/25 at 10:12 am to cgrand
quote:
probably in a movie and probably shown in use by a murderer or a spy
like most all guns?
Posted on 5/13/25 at 2:40 pm to bbvdd
I'm pretty sure Elmer Fudd was my first exposure to guns as a toddler.
Posted on 5/13/25 at 3:14 pm to finchmeister08
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 on 5/13/25 at 4:12 pm to rmc
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?
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 on 5/14/25 at 7:13 pm to finchmeister08
quote:
single shot trusts
Still don't even know what this is and why you would buy one.
Posted on 5/14/25 at 7:54 pm to Jack Ruby
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.
Silencer Shop handles does all of it.
Posted on 5/14/25 at 10:49 pm to TheBoo
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 on 5/15/25 at 11:42 am to Twenty 49
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 on 5/15/25 at 5:37 pm to finchmeister08
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 on 5/15/25 at 8:49 pm to bbvdd
they want to redirect the stamp cost to conservation

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 9:32 pm to finchmeister08
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?
What do i need to do to get one and what will it cost me? How long will it take?
Posted on 5/15/25 at 9:54 pm to Theotherpikecounty
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.
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 on 5/16/25 at 7:04 am to bbvdd
Silencer shop sets up the trust for you or thats separate ?
This post was edited on 5/16/25 at 7:05 am
Popular
Back to top
