"Silencer's" or suppressors, why are they so hard to buy?

Recently, there is a push for a new law about suppressors.
Hearing protection act.

There's a wall-long mural in the manufacturing area of SilencerCo, in West Valley City, Utah, that shows a crowd of people with muzzled mouths. One's holding a sign that says, "Fight the Noise." Another says: "Guns don't have to be loud." As a leading manufacturer and seller of gun silencers — or suppressors, as they're more accurately called — SilencerCo wants to quiet guns. Congress may soon help in the effort. Silencers are one of the most heavily regulated products in the gun industry. Lawmakers are pushing legislation that would loosen those long-standing federal regulations, making silencers easier to buy for the general public.

Being a shooter, I would love to have the ability to purchase suppressors for some of my firearms. The process now is lengthy and expensive. You have to fill out the paperwork, pay a $200 tax stamp on each suppressor, and then pay for the suppressor and wait about 9 months. All to make you weapon a little less loud. The amount of noise reduction isn't a lot for most, but for a .22lr, it's significant. And that is what I like to shoot due to cost per round. (I'm cheap) So ATS, can you come up with a good reason why we shouldn't change the law and allow "silencers" to be sold over the counter?

a reply to: network dude

Its because people watch movies and think a silencer actually silences the firearm. So, politicians appease the ignorant and make money in the process.

a reply to: network dude

In an emergency there are a few way's to make one out of a two litter soda pop bottle.Never tried it myself & they do not look like much,but was told they work.

First question is why do you need a silencer in the first place?

a reply to: TheLotLizard

To keep the noise down in a survival situation.Say you do not want to be heard.

originally posted by: Feltrick
a reply to: network dude

Its because people watch movies and think a silencer actually silences the firearm. So, politicians appease the ignorant and make money in the process.

I agree, the movies are the problem. The mass amounts of uneducated folks who watch these films (including people who contribute to the laws) take it as reality.

So, since they don't want people to own silencers but can't completely outlaw them, they make you jump through unnecessary hoops while paying a good fee to make you think twice about trying to purchase/own one.

originally posted by: ericendtimes
a reply to: TheLotLizard

To keep the noise down in a survival situation.Say you do not want to be heard.

You’re going to be heard with a silencer or not... unless it’s a 22 then you’re not going to even be able to incapacitate someone at range.

If they don't silence the firearm, then what is the point in them?

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
First question is why do you need a silencer in the first place?

That's easy... Because firearms are loud.

The Hearing Protection Act Bill is in process as we speak, [fingers crossed]

originally posted by: Hotdawg
If they don't silence the firearm, then what is the point in them?

they reduce the noise enough that you don't go deaf.

a reply to: TheLotLizard

Was not sugesting it is best option in most case's.Just responding to what I have heard.I do not own one,live in the sticks so good chance no one hears me anyway.

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
First question is why do you need a silencer in the first place?

Well I would like one for my 22, I have about a mile of farm land behind the house and could easily construct a bullet stop and practice here.
I have not done so because my neighbor is an older lady and I don't Want to annoy the crap out of her.
With a suppressor the noise would likely be well within a tolerable level for her.

But it's just to bothersome and expensive.

IMHO, banning them in the first place was a quick and easy victory for anti-firearm people.

Now you have to pay $200 and wait most of a year, and do all sorts of paperwork to get one- which destroys the industry. What would cost $100 tops starts out over $650 before extortion.
People making them without paying the extortion fee go directly to jail.

To review:
-more taxes
-more inmates in the profitable prison industry
-less freedom

Sounds like it's a win for nobody, to me.


And for what? To make firearms more dangerous? Now in addition to having a tool that can easily kill somebody, in order to use it you need to remove one of your keenest senses, reducing your awareness of what's going on around you.

You'd think they would all have suppression built right in these days, removing the requirement for hearing protection- making the operators more aware of their surroundings during use.

I think it's absolutely ridiculous that any tool would have laws set in place to make it less safe to use.... but here you see the bureaucracy at work. Not only is it against the law to make your firearm safer to use, it's a felony that will land you in prison.
Unless, of course, you pay the extortion fee.

It all makes perfect sense, right?

Meh...just go old school, cheap and plentiful




ETA: Found this interesting, because my intial thoughts were silencers give advantage to criminals, but it turns out criminals don't really use silencers.

It's not hard to imagine how they could be deployed for bad purposes. Yet there are some 900,000 registered silencers in this country, and they are rarely used in crimes. Chicago has a lot of bloodshed, including 762 homicides and more than 3,500 shootings last year, but silencers figure in little or any of it. Anthony Guglielmi, a spokesman for the Chicago Police Department, told me, "We seldom recover silencers. Sometimes you may get a gun with a makeshift silencer, but even that is rare." A report last year by the VPC cites a handful of shootings in which silencers were used. But the paucity of examples confirms that they are not of great interest to criminals. An earlier study by Paul A. Clark published in the Western Criminology Review found only two federal court cases involving the use of a silencer in a murder between 1995 and 2005.

Source

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
First question is why do you need a silencer in the first place?

I like to shoot and my neighbor works third shift. If I had a suppressor, I could shoot and not bother him.

originally posted by: TheLotLizard

originally posted by: ericendtimes
a reply to: TheLotLizard

To keep the noise down in a survival situation.Say you do not want to be heard.

You’re going to be heard with a silencer or not... unless it’s a 22 then you’re not going to even be able to incapacitate someone at range.

the bill is called "the hearing protection bill", want to guess why it's being brought forth?

a reply to: waftist

Nice smith & wesson.Model 66 ? Hard to tell from photo.

Mean while in uk, i got warned by police and confiscated my leatherman tool during a fishing trip. Just because the blade in it, bit large..

a reply to: caterpillage
With a suppressor on a .22 she will never ever hear it from the distance she stays from you. FFS, it sounds like firecrackers just from the end of the block! After ten blocks or so it does not even register.
a reply to: Hotdawg
They suppress the sound, hence why they are called suppressors and not silencers. The best suppressors though you will only hear the cycling of the action, and a very mild rapport for munitions under .30 cal. Bigger ballistics will still be audible, but not nearly as much. Did you see the thread on the integrally suppressed .50 cal muzzle loader from last week?
maxim 50 the first internally suppressed muzzle loader

a reply to: TheLotLizard


Because they look cool.And no,I do not own a gun.