Buying A Suppressor Might Soon Be Easier Than Ever

Up until now, buying a suppressor has been quite difficult. Due to heavy regulations, suppressors (aka silencers) have been exceedingly harder to obtain – much to the disdain of the American public.

That’s because suppressors are exceedingly useful, and are in high demand now more than ever. That’s because they suppress (or silence) every shot, making the noise much softer than without using a suppressor. This has a number of benefits, including making the hunting experience more enjoyable, and making it easier to remain sneaky and avoid detection.

Not to mention, research is now showing that suppressors can be helpful in saving shooters’ hearing. Thanks to the silencer’s blast-deafening qualities, marksmen and hunters alike can enjoy firing off round after round, without worrying about accumulating hearing loss over time.

However, up until now, shooters have had to deal with long wait times, tons of paper work, and expensive tax stamps while waiting to obtain this impressive firearm accessory.

Fortunately, the tides appear to be changing, and, thanks to recent events, shooters may soon find that…

Purchasing A Suppressor Might Soon Be Easier Than Ever

The SHARE Act (Sportsman Heritage and Recreational Enhancement) is working hard to ensure that suppressors become far easier to obtain for all Americans.

To show their efforts, they’ve brought a package of hunting and fishing reforms (including the Hearing Protection Act) to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

Thanks to their hard work, the SHARE Act won a Republican-heavy vote (22-13), where gun control advocates and Second Amendment supporters met with lawmakers regarding the issue.

The package in question seeks to drop suppressors altogether from National Firearms Act regulations. It also seeks to completely remove the $200 transfer tax from purchases, and to refund stamps that buyers have paid within the last two years.

The package also commands that suppressors to be known as Title I weapons, which will allow shooters to purchase them after conducting a National Instant Criminal Background Check.

Committee chair Rob Bishop was one of the Republicans onboard with the package and its motivations. He states, “The SHARE Act removes bureaucratic roadblocks that inhibit Americans’ access to outdoor sporting activities on federal lands and reigns in federal encroachment on Second Amendment rights.”

This is a very exciting time in history, as this is the first time that Congress is taking a vote to remove suppressors from the National Firearms Act since their initial regulation in 1934.

Unfortunately, gun control activists are against the package and its motivations.

“Silencers distort the sound of a gun, and in the wrong hands, they put people’s safety at risk,” argued John Feinblatt, president of Everytown. “NRA leadership and their friends in Congress have gone behind closed doors to try to prop up lagging gun sales by making it easy for anyone to buy a silencer without a background check. This sham bill is a giveaway to the gun lobby, which cannot be allowed to use Congress to put profits ahead of public safety.”

Although the bill is officially moving forward, the Hearing Protection Act still has quite a ways to go. For instance, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee can either delay or derail a floor vote, by demanding the bill’s reviewal by their committee.

A successful House vote will then send the bill to the Senate, where they will address the issue of suppressor deregulation.

3 Responses
  • Earl Metzel
    September 17, 2017

    It’s about time for everyone’s sake.

    • Greg W.
      October 10, 2017

      I do not agree. I believe in the right to own guns, however, this law if allowed to proceed ( remember, the NRA only cares about money and gun sales ) will be a dream come true to terrorist and any individual wishing to do harm to law enforcement, or any anyone. Think about the consequences of silencers getting into the hands of criminals. Keep the law as it is. The public will be much safer.

  • CARY
    September 19, 2017

    Can`t afford one BUT i wouldn`t have to turn the tv volume up to 60/65 if some stupit tax wasn`t involved.