OK... I’m a big 2A supporter, as most on this site are, and I practice what I preach, if you know what I mean. I’m not kidding, and I’m a long-time poster - so cut me a little slack on your responses, please.
I don’t personally see a good use for suppressors, unless you’ve left your earmuffs at home... Muffs are cheaper, and if I’m shooting, I make sure to have them. If you want a suppressor, fine. But it sure does seem like a stretch to justify them as hearing protection. This bill title doesn’t look like a win to me.
Convince me.
Do you wear earmuffs when you hunt?
It will help The noise that all the suburbanites whine about when the buy property and build their McMansion 1/4 mile from a 100 year old Gun Club.
Not if you buy ear muffs for everyone within earshot of your weapon.
Muffs and plugs stink for hunting, even the ones with mics. I have a set of Pro Ears and have tried using them while deer hunting; I can’t hear as well as I can with my ears and they add additional movement if you keep them off your ears until its time to shoot.
Now a silencer does nothing for the crack if you are using a supersonic round, but this is why .300 blackout has become very popular, its .30 cal and subsonic (no crack).
It'll protect the hearing of hunting dogs.
It will eliminate the $200/per suppressor tax stamp.
One anecdote of mine:
Awhile back I took my adult daughter to an indoor range. She used both ear plugs and ear muffs and the shooting noise still bothered her.
Suppressed guns would substantially reduce the noise.
If you have to use your firearm in self defense in your car, house, or other enclosed space it will help save your hearing and that of any nearby family. I don’t care about the hearing of the bad guys. If you are doing your job right, they will end up with no hearing anyhow.