President Trump will Pass the Hearing Protection Act

Gun Watch ^ | 16 November, 2016 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

In 1934, the Franklin Roosevelt administration was able to pass omnibus gun control legislation, with massive infringements on the Second Amendment.  It was the National Firearms Act.  The law was primarily designed to eliminate the private ownership of handguns. That was too much of a direct assault on the Second Amendment for Congress, which removed handguns from the bill. The remainder of the act passed, creating a bizarre law with unintended consequences.

For obscure and unknown reasons, gun mufflers, also known as silencers, or suppressors, were included in the act. Silencers immediately changed from being a $10 accessory, available over the counter, to becoming an item requiring a federal tax stamp costing $200.  The tax stamp required an intrusive and time consuming application process. $200 in 1934 would be $3,600 today.  As another measure, $200 was 5.7 ounces of gold in January, 1934.  That was by legislative fiat.  In December of 1933, it would have been 10 ounces of gold.  If you use gold as the standard, 5.7 ounces of gold would be worth $7,400.  It was common for a day laborer in 1934 to be paid $1 a day.  People worked long days, six days a week. The tax on a silencer was about the yearly pay of a minimum wage worker of the time. It was not a tax.  It was a prohibition.

The rest of the world did not share America's self imposed prohibition on gun mufflers.  In the rest of the world, silencers were regarded as a useful accessory, something that the neighbors appreciated because it reduced noise pollution.

In Europe, silencers are far less regulated than they are in the United States.  In New Zealand, a 12 year old can walk into a hardware store, pay $20, and walk out with a perfectly serviceable commercial silencer.

Inflation has whittled away at the prohibitionist tax on silencers in the United States.  $200 dollars is now 28 hours at minimum wage instead of a year's worth of labor.  People understand the damage done to unprotected ears by close proximity to gunfire.  Silencers have become essential safety equipment in many circumstances.

A growing movement has risen up to place silencers in the same regulatory environment as ordinary rifles and shotguns.  It removes the prohibitory tax and the burdensome, unnecessary regulations. Legislation has been introduced in Congress by Matt Salmon (R) Arizona.

It The Hearing Protection Act. It keeps the federal regulation that states refer to when they require federally sanctioned ownership for legal possession of silencers in many. That regulation becomes the same as for ordinary rifles and shotguns.

When legislators are informed of the bizarre history of U.S. regulation and prohibition of these safety devices, they have no problem passing corrective legislation.  Josh Waldron, one of three founders of the American Suppressor Association, says that when legislators become informed, 90% of both Democrats and Republicans vote for  the reform legislation.

The Hearing Protection Act will pass.  It only needs to be presented to Congress.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
 
Link to Gun Watch

[redfreedom]

“- - I want my incandescent light bulbs back too.”

Same here. It’s such an absolutely mind numbing stupid a$$ law for the feds to have. I can see this being a state law, but for the feds to have such a law is really over reach.

But then again a mind numbingly stupid RINO signed the bill into law.

[Jed Eckert]

If they’re $20 other places, why do they cost $500-$1200 here even before I pay the tax stamp? Grrr.

Because of the absurd Federal regulations placed on the manufacturers: Special licenses, an absurd amount of record keeping,serial numbers for each suppressor etc.

[umgud]

NJ citizens are different from VT citizens?

[wrench]

A bow or crossbow is even more quiet. Silencers do not break any law, it is the criminal that does.

Your argument is the same type the gunrabbers are using.

Go after the criminal, not the hardware, please.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

You can buy incandescent bulbs today -- you just have to order "rough service" bulbs. That's is the loophole around that extremely stupid law.

Standard Shape Light Bulbs

I've got plenty of regular incandescent bulbs stashed away. I've had it with the God damned totalitarians telling me how to live.

[spintreebob]

Drain the swamp.

Eliminate the ATF. Get the Feds out of Acohol, Tobacco and Firearms. Let the states set and collect all related taxes. Let the states do whatever they want within the Constitution.

Shift ATF agents to the FBI. Get the FBI out of bank robbery. It is a State and Local crime.

Feds should focus on terrorism, cybercrime, political corruption.

Drain the swamp. Get the Feds out of Transportation.
Let the States set and collect all gas, tire, airport taxes and control spending of the money.

Drain the swamp.

[marktwain]

Because of the regulation and taxes, American silencers have become the best in the world. They will last nearly forever, because no one is going to go through the trouble to get a silencer that only lasts a year or two.

Also, a silencer that works for a .223 will also work for a .22 LR, but not the other way around.

Another problem is that silencers are produced in small numbers because of the regs. If produced in mass quantities, economies of scale kick in.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

"So personally, I’m against silencers."

Fortunately, there are no such things as gun silencers.

Noise suppressors, or mufflers, yes; but, no silencers. Except, of course, in Hollywood.

[glorgau]

I see not using a silencer as a good thing,

Sort of like those people with no muffler on motorcycles - loud pipes save lives. Especially at 3 am when everyone else is trying to sleep.

[redfreedom]

I’m not going after hardware, or anything else for that matter. I merely stated my concern for personal safety in the woods and especially for near our home.

Actually, silencers or no silencers have little to do with infringing on our right to bear arms because a silencer is not a firearm, nor does having or not having one restrict the use of a firearm. My point is, this is an issue that could be left up to individual municipalities or states. It’s really another one of those issues the feds had no business getting in to begin with.

I do not like gun grabbers anymore than the next person.

[IronJack]

Those are laws passed by a government terrified of its own citizens.

[Moltke]

a bizarre law with unintended consequences

John Ross, please pick up the white courtesy phone.

[RandallFlagg]

I see what you did there.

[marktwain]

silencers were not part of 1934 NFA, they were added to NFA in 1938.

---

An interesting claim. I have not been able to find an article substantiating it. The National Firearms Act was passed in 1934, then the Federal Firararms act in 1938.

Could you please cite a source (a link would be great!) that shows that silencers were not in the 1934 law, but were in the 1938 law? My understanding is the 1938 law required Federal Firearms licenses for mailing pistols across state lines, generally.

Thanks.

[marktwain]

Firararms should be Firearms

[xkaydet65]

The times dictated the legislation. Organized crime had taken over vities in the 2ps. These criminals availed themselves of all sirts of exotic weaponry. Silencers were considered, like Tommy Guns and sawed offs to be the tools of the trade for these criminals. Cops were often outgunned if they were a mind to confront the lawlessness. So silencers, the tools of furtive killings, and sawed offs, and Tommy Guns, and other AWs like BARs were declared illegal. O Tempora O Mores.

[wrench]

The ATF classifies suppressors as firearms. They are protected by the 2nd Ammendment, and restricting their use injures the user and restricts the utility of firearms in general.

I have permanent hearing loss from firearms use from before the time hearing protection was widely recommended.

[Moltke]

...and it wasn’t unintended. :-)

[trebb]

Will it preempt state laws?

Does OSHA? Just guessing it can be made to Trump State laws....

[21twelve]

“Counties and cities could easy enforce them.”

That’s the only thing I see wrong with making it a law. Someone will take it from “If you want one you can have one” to “You have to have one.”

I suppose if it means a gun club can stay open - then that should be up to the gun club. But I don’t want to be told I have to put a silencer on my well-balanced over/under shotgun to go shoot trap. (I’m not even sure how that would work!)