Hearing Protection Act - reintroduced

[CP]

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/367?r=21

H.R.367 - To provide that silencers be treated the same as long guns.   

Write to your Congressman a Senators and tell them to support this 

[Fl0und3rz]

Sweet!

[JimmyHoffa]

Wonder how it affects manufacture?  Guessing you could build your own?

[Fl0und3rz]

For your critters:

A Democrat's guide to why firearm sound suppressors ("silencers") should be made easier to obtain.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/5/405370/-

http://www.nssf.org/factsheets/PDF/Suppressors.pdf

[Seahawk12]

[garrett89]

No, it should treated as an OTC no questions asked. It doesn't fire bullets or make them anymore deadly.

[Stein]

Common sense firearm rules, a strong majority support protecting the citizen's hearing.  Let's do it while people are still voting without reading anything other than the title of the bill.

[Lucky1]

 
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wudrI7LA_YQ

We have a opportunity to make a difference.

[csaaphill]

My first reaction is no for that means background checks for these as well correct? Are they legal to own now? If not they should be but should not have to get a back ground check to own.
I read the text but doesn't say much so not sure what all this is supposed to do.
If it make it legal to own where there was none then I guess but I sure as heck don't want to go through a background check to own one.
Any better info on what this actually does?
Also I read it said is subject to registration and all that crap? so??
If this removes silencers off the NFA list then hell yeah, but if not then ?

[Scvette]

My first reaction is no for that means background checks for these as well correct? Are they legal to own now? If not they should be but should not have to get a back ground check to own.
I read the text but doesn't say much so not sure what all this is supposed to do.
If it make it legal to own where there was none then I guess but I sure as heck don't want to go through a background check to own one.
Any better info on what this actually does?
Also I read it said is subject to registration and all that crap? so??
If this removes silencers off the NFA list then hell yeah, but if not then ?

From what I understand,and I've been wrong before. It will be just like buying a firearm,fill out the 4473 and that's it. I hope that's all it is. I know if it passes my wife won't be happy,I need/want about 5 different ones.

[CP]

Finally got a noncommittal response from Rick Larsen on this Bill.  He’ll keep my “thoughts in mind should this legislation come before the House for a vote.”

Still stuck in the Judiciary and Ways & Means committees but the bill now has 141 sponsors including 2 from Washington State. 

I’m writing to Rick again to encourage him to show true Democratic leadership and co-sponsor this bill.

[CP]

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The House Committee on Natural Resources has scheduled a hearing for the morning of June 14, in which the Federal Lands Subcommittee will hear a discussion draft of the Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement (SHARE) Act. The SHARE Act, which is being championed in a bipartisan manner by Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus (CSC) Co-Chairs Representative Jeff Duncan (R-SC), and Representative Gene Green (D-TX), is a comprehensive package that covers a wide range of hunting, fishing, and outdoor related issues.

Included in the legislation is Title XVII, a strengthened version of the Hearing Protection Act.

https://naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/discussion_draft_--_share_act.pdf

[Fl0und3rz]

Awesome!

[lokidog]

Hopefully this does not get derailed by the horrible attack in Virginia this morning.   

[csaaphill]

I'd like to see the NFA done away with, and remove the ban on making Machine guns is America.

[Bushcraft]

I'd like to see the NFA done away with, and remove the ban on making Machine guns in America.

That might be a step too far.

Nope.

[Special T]

Baby steps.. that is how the left wins.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Bushcraft]

Baby steps.. that is how the left wins.

Agreed.  We could learn a lot from their tactics and adopt our own set of Saul Alinsky's "Rule's for Radicals".

[csaaphill]

Baby steps.. that is how the left wins.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[csaaphill]

Best thing to happen in a long time if it did get done away with. Most unnecessary law there ever was. because the reason it was passed had already been repealed in the first place two years prior.

[CP]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/09/13/republicans-push-gun-silencer-bill-democrats-fire-back.html


Published September 13, 2017

Lawmakers on Tuesday debated the merits of a Republican-backed bill that would make it easier for individuals to buy gun silencers.

Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., introduced the measure in the Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement Act, the Hill reported. The provision calls for a less extensive and instant background check.

Duncan’s bill is reportedly dubbed the Hearing Protection Act. The debate was reportedly delayed after the shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., in June in a park in Arlington, Va.

Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., reportedly said it seems that sportsmen “have to choose between damaging their hearing and being able to hunt, shoot, target practice.”

Democrats said the bill is dangerous, and would make it more difficult to determine where shots are being fired in an active-shooter situation.

“We should not make it easier for anyone to obtain these weapons of war,” Rep. Jimmy Gomez, D-Calif., said, according to the report.

David Chipman, a senior policy adviser of Americans for Responsible Solutions, a pro-gun control group, was invited to the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Federal Lands hearing, the Hill reported.

Chipman said the bill “would make silencers more readily available to criminals because for the first time in 80 years private parties could sell these guns without background checks on the internet and in gun shows and this has never been the case before.

The National Rifle Association’s lobbying arm supports the measures, saying suppressors are “harmless and very rarely used in crime” and that the joint bill would end the “cumbersome and lengthy application process.”

A similar measure failed in 2015. But supporters are optimistic this time with President Donald Trump in office.

The GOP lawmakers say the bill aims to “cut through the red tape” of owning a suppressor and, if passed, would remove the accessory from the scope of the National Firearms Act. They also say it would replace the “outdated” federal application process with the “instantaneous” National Instant Criminal Background Check.

Critics point to a February 2013 situation in which fired Los Angeles police Officer Christopher Dorner killed four people in a series of attacks over 10 days that targeted law enforcement officials. They argue the fatal attacks might have been stopped earlier had Dorner not been using silencers.

“There’s no evidence of a public health issue associated with hearing loss from gunfire,” Kristin Brown, of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, told the Los Angeles Times earlier this year. “There is evidence of a public health crisis from gun violence, and we think that’s where legislative efforts should be directed.”

[Gringo31]

Anyone have a best guess on what this means, timelines or chance of passing?

[CP]

Anyone have a best guess on what this means, timelines or chance of passing?

The best chance of passing is in the tack-on to the SHARE act, which is headed to the House floor now. 

See:

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,218111.0.html

[Gringo31]

Thanks CP!