H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA (Read 8727 times)

punaperson

Easy, a couple of clicks if you have previously taken actions and clicked "remember me". How could Tulsi (my rep), or anyone really, be against legalizing suppressors? (I mean an answer other than "stupid".) No matter what the current law is in Hawaii, if suppressors are removed from NFA we should be able to use them (eventually) even in this progressive socialist hellhole oppressor of our civil rights.

http://cqrcengage.com/gunowners/home

Rep. Duncan Introduces the Hearing Protection Act

Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) this week introduced the Hearing Protection Act, restoring your right to buy suppressors for your firearms.

changemyoil66

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #1 on: January 11, 2017, 09:53:46 AM »
Only thing I don't like about this bill is that I would have to buy new stuff to accommodate the suppressors.  And spend money on suppressors.

London808

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #2 on: January 11, 2017, 09:56:59 AM »
Only thing I don't like about this bill is that I would have to buy new stuff to accommodate the suppressors.  And spend money on suppressors.

No you wont. Hawaii wont legalize them soooooooo
"Mr. Roberts is a bit of a fanatic, he has previously sued HPD about gun registration issues." : Major Richard Robinson 2016

zippz

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #3 on: January 11, 2017, 10:46:37 AM »
London808, is it true you can buy suppressors in Europe over the counter with no background checks or anything?

Hawaii would have to legalize the use of suppressors before you can buy one even if this law passes.  All it does is remove the $200 tax stamp and Federal process for obtaining one.  I don't see this happening at least for the next decade.

London808

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #4 on: January 11, 2017, 11:02:53 AM »
London808, is it true you can buy suppressors in Europe over the counter with no background checks or anything?

Hawaii would have to legalize the use of suppressors before you can buy one even if this law passes.  All it does is remove the $200 tax stamp and Federal process for obtaining one.  I don't see this happening at least for the next decade.

Im not sure about the rest of Europe but in the UK i dont think they are regulated. I owned 2 that were designed for 22 rifles but used them on air rifles. they were threaded and could be screded on and off easy enough and with fit a rifle or pistol with a threaded barrel.
"Mr. Roberts is a bit of a fanatic, he has previously sued HPD about gun registration issues." : Major Richard Robinson 2016

punaperson

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #5 on: January 11, 2017, 11:20:33 AM »
A couple of articles on suppressors from Gun Watch, including that in New Zealand a 12-year-old can buy a suppressor over the counter in a hardware store for $20. Of course the civilian disarmament advocates will counter with the argument that due to that "permissiveness" there is a huge amount of crime in New Zealand committed by 12-year-olds using suppressors... except, well, there isn't any, by anyone of any age, so... GUNS! GUNS WITH SUPPRESSORS!  :crazy:

I'm sure the majority (all?) of the Hawaii legislators will oppose legalizing hearing safety devices for some absurd, illogical and totally-lacking-in-evidence "reasons"... as they do with registration, waiting periods, magazine capacity limitations, "assault pistol" bans, stun gun bans, CCW license bans lying failure to issue to a single person, etc., etc., etc.  >:(

[By the way, I did ask Senator Gabbard to submit a suppressor legalization bill (along with the "shall issue" CCW bill and the handgun mag capacity of 17 bill) but he declined, citing this national legislation (though of course it doesn't solve Hawaii's illegal status for them).]

https://gunwatch.blogspot.com/search?q=new+zealand+suppressor

Excerpt:

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.

changemyoil66

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #6 on: January 11, 2017, 01:12:33 PM »
London808, is it true you can buy suppressors in Europe over the counter with no background checks or anything?

Hawaii would have to legalize the use of suppressors before you can buy one even if this law passes.  All it does is remove the $200 tax stamp and Federal process for obtaining one.  I don't see this happening at least for the next decade.

I would rather pay $200 and be able to own one, than not owning one at all.

London808

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #7 on: January 11, 2017, 01:37:06 PM »
I would rather pay $200 and be able to own one, than not owning one at all.

thats what im saying is, Even if they make them 100% legal federally you wont ever be able to own one in Hawaii.
"Mr. Roberts is a bit of a fanatic, he has previously sued HPD about gun registration issues." : Major Richard Robinson 2016

Aloha808

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #8 on: January 11, 2017, 02:46:19 PM »
Well they are completely legal as long as the state allows its. The new bill would just remove it from the nfa and have it purchased through a 4473 form.  Not to be a downer, but as I said before it doesn't matter rght now if it does pass for Hawaii because it's still banned by law.  The law would have to be changed which takes time. I can hear the fools already, "Why can't you just wear regular ear protection when shooting a gun?"

suka

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #9 on: January 11, 2017, 02:53:19 PM »
Well they are completely legal as long as the state allows its. The new bill would just remove it from the nfa and have it purchased through a 4473 form.  Not to be a downer, but as I said before it doesn't matter rght now if it does pass for Hawaii because it's still banned by law.  The law would have to be changed which takes time. I can hear the fools already, "Why can't you just wear regular ear protection when shooting a gun?"

Greg Knudson says the noise is to too load for his cats.

« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 04:50:55 PM by suka »

whynow?

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #10 on: January 11, 2017, 08:44:32 PM »
If this law passes, then I would think everything including fittings and adapters should follow suit ,no NFA.   Since fittings are not sound suppressors should be GTG.  Lucky I saved the extra Motorcraft FL-1 oil filters from long ago. ;D
If there's an obstacle just go around it!

punaperson

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #11 on: January 14, 2017, 06:00:00 AM »
Take Action via the NRA automated system:

Full article:

Your Members of Congress Need to Hear from You on the Hearing Protection Act of 2017

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170113/your-members-of-congress-need-to-hear-from-you-on-the-hearing-protection-act-of-2017

Email action page:

https://act.nraila.org/takeaction.aspx?AlertID=1422

JHanawahine

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #12 on: January 17, 2017, 06:36:42 AM »

punaperson

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #13 on: January 17, 2017, 07:22:51 AM »
Schatz's response is exactly the lucid, well-articulated and reasoned arguments and evidence we've come to know and love from him. Could there be a sharper mind in any government anywhere (excluding the precious Joe Biden)?  :crazy:

Somehow the final phrase of his final sentence got deleted. Here, I fixed it: "I also recognize the importance of protecting both public safety and Second Amendment rights and believe that we can have both as long as you agree that Second Amendment rights extend only to ownership of a personalized RFD-chip-implanted single shot .22LR pistol acquired after extensive background checks, mental health evaluations by state-appointed and trained mental health evaluators, waiting periods of at least a month, enrollment into various government databases, unannounced home inspections to verify proper (unloaded, unassembled) storage in a high-technology safe costing at least $2.000, and the collection of hundreds of dollars of taxes and registration fees annually, per firearm.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2017, 07:31:30 AM by punaperson »

changemyoil66

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #14 on: January 17, 2017, 09:05:13 AM »
Typical BS from Schatz.  Why gun violence is so high is due to gangs.  Hawaii doesn't have a gang problem like Chicago and other cities.  The gun deaths in Chicago on X-mas were mainly gang related shootings.  So Schatz is full of it.

punaperson

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #15 on: January 17, 2017, 09:54:03 AM »
Typical BS from Schatz.  Why gun violence is so high is due to gangs.  Hawaii doesn't have a gang problem like Chicago and other cities.  The gun deaths in Chicago on X-mas were mainly gang related shootings.  So Schatz is full of it.
Recently published JAMA study (the "conclusions" are fallacious, but some of the stats are likely accurate):

https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/03/gun-violence-infectious/

"The study examined Chicago police data from from 138,163 individuals who were arrested between 2006 and 2014, nearly 10,000 of whom were also victims of gun violence. The demographics: 75 percent of those individuals were black, 82 percent were men, and 26 percent were part of a gang. On average, they were 27 years old at the midpoint of the study."

From that information the conclusion one could reach is that to avoid being a victim of a crime in which a firearm is used, avoid any contact with a black male under 30. What they don't say (at least in the free summary of the study) is that around 70% of both the shooters and the victims have a previous criminal history and/or are involved in criminal activities.

I'd be willing to wager a large sum that Mr. Schatz has near zero knowledge of any of these issues. I'd also ask him, if he believes Hawaii's laws are causally responsible for the homicide rate, how is that Vermont, which has never required any permit to carry a firearm open or concealed, has no background checks or registration for private sales, does not ban magazines of any capacity, etc., etc., etc. has a nearly identical homicide rate. Actually I have asked both him and Hirono that question and get back nothing but canned spam.

whynow?

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #16 on: January 18, 2017, 08:57:04 PM »
Anybody know if local LE possess and use sound supressors?  if they do, for what reason?   Is it to silently shoot perps as opponents to legalize presume for us civilians (silently kill); or is it for hearing protection issues? 
If it's for hearing safety, then their actions are testimony why civilians  should also freely use them and not the words they use to oppose them for the public. 

MuffinMan

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #17 on: January 23, 2017, 01:48:54 PM »



I received the exact (except for name) email today from Alfred E. Neuman (aka Schitz)


PalisadesKid

Re: H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act (suppessors). Take Action via GOA
« Reply #18 on: January 23, 2017, 04:37:45 PM »

I received the exact (except for name) email today from Alfred E. Neuman (aka Schitz)

Geez.. literally word for word cut and paste same response I got from Schatz a year ago.