ATF issuing suppressors for the ‘health and safety’ of its agents, but what about us?
Once again, ATF is treated better than the rest of the country.
by Lee Williams
The ATF admitted it issues $1,300 rifle suppressors for the “health and safety” of its law enforcement agents, “due to the extensive training and quarterly firearms qualifications they must complete,” according to our story published Wednesday.
But those three words chosen by the ATF—health and safety—set off a bomb among readers, and rightly so, because of how those of us who aren’t ATF agents are treated if we want to protect our own health and safety.
Why do law-abiding Americans have to pay $200, submit a federal application, and jump through a series of legal hoops just to purchase a single silencer? Besides, most of us shoot a lot more than at quarterly firearms qualifications, so our hearing is at serious risk.
One reader pointed out that suppressors are safety devices for the ATF but are considered a privilege for those of us who aren’t ATF agents. Unfortunately, he is 100% correct. The ATF is completely wrong in its reasoning.
We can all agree that suppressors offer a tremendous boon to health and safety, but shouldn’t civilians receive the same benefits as our lowliest federal agents? We should be able to purchase them anywhere, anytime we want, without any federal forms, waiting periods or especially $200 fees.
Doesn’t the American public deserve the same level of health and safety that ATF agents receive, especially since we’re already funding theirs through our tax dollars?
If the ATF is correct and suppressors are true health and safety devices, why isn’t there one included in the box with every new gun purchase? The ATF already requires gunmakers to include padlocks and keys with every new sale. Why not suppressors, too?
Why do American citizens have to take second place to federal agents?
Don’t we have the same right to safeguard our own health and safety?
H.R.404 - Hearing Protection Act
Just four months ago, Congressman Ben Cline (R-VA) reintroduced the Hearing Protection Act (HPA), which was designed to reduce “the overly burdensome barriers required to purchase a firearm suppressor to ease access for law-abiding citizens simply trying to obtain the hearing protection they need.”
“Americans who enjoy hunting and target shooting should be able to do so safely and legally without facing burdensome government regulations,” Rep. Cline said. “The Hearing Protection Act will reclassify suppressors, making it easier for law-abiding gun owners to protect their hearing while enjoying recreational activities. It’s time to ensure that our Second Amendment rights are upheld, allowing responsible citizens to enjoy their freedoms without unnecessary obstacles.”
As it stands now, Cline’s bill has 76 cosponsors, and every single one is a Republican. The bill was assigned to the Committee on Ways and Means, and the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period of time that will be determined by the Speaker of the House,
The bill drew strong support from the gun community, including the American Suppressor Association (ASA), the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the National Rifle Association (NRA), and the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF).
While representatives from all of the organizations were quoted in the bill’s press release, no one said anything better or more relevant than Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF’s senior vice-president and general counsel.
“Congressman Cline’s Hearing Protection Act will have the federal government recognize firearm suppressors for what they are. These are accessories to a firearm that make recreational shooting and hunting a safer experience,” Keane said. “These safety devices reduce the report of a firearm to a level that won’t cause instant and permanent hearing damage. Despite Hollywood’s depictions, they do not mask the sound of a firearm. The focus should be on removing barriers to safe and responsible use of firearms and dedicating resources to ensuring firearms are safeguarded from those who should never possess them. Strict regulatory control of firearm accessories, and the parts of those accessories that have no bearing on the function of a firearm, is unnecessary and not the wisest use of federal resources. NSSF thanks Congressman Cline for his leadership for ensuring safe and responsible use of firearms and dedicating necessary resources where they are most needed.”
The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn’t be possible without you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation to support pro-gun stories like this.
As usual, Mr. Williams gets to the heart of the matter.
The listing of “silencers” as NFA items is a ridiculous infringement on the right of the People foisted by congress on the tax paying citizen who is forced to provide these safety accoutrements for government but denied by government to the People without burdensome regulation and cost.
We already know "what about us?" And it is this, "Strict regulatory control of firearm accessories,"
"CONTROL" is the answer to our question, and we cannot expect any Democrat, or some RINOs to roll back or relinquish any of said "CONTROL"
Silencers or mufflers, which is all they are, were added to the NFA for dubious reasons, which my understanding was game wardens were weary of people using them to jack game during the Depression.
But our lawn mower has to have a "silencer" our automobiles, and why? For the same reasons quoted here by Lee as well as ATF.
Some of our regulations, besides being un-Constitutional, are redundant, ridiculous, and stupid.