Conversation with an Englishman on Silencers

Gun Watch ^ | 2 February, 2014 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Use of Silencers is encouraged in Europe Photo Courtesy Gun World

At the Shot Show in January of this year, I sat next to an Englishman who wrote for a UK hunting magazine.  We talked about gun laws in the UK and in the US, and the subject turned to gun mufflers, AKA silencers or suppressors.  I was interested to learn that gun mufflers were relatively easy to obtain, and were in fact encouraged by the police.   Having a suppressor for your rifle was considered to be polite, and a way to reduce noise pollution.   Virtually all air guns had suppressors.

My new British friend turned to me and said: "I never have understood the United States regulation of suppressors.  What is the purpose of making them so hard to obtain and own?

I could not answer him.  The best speculation that I have found is that there was some mention of suppressors being used for poaching, as a reason for putting gun mufflers in the same category as machine guns, but it was always only a hint.  I have never seen that purpose mentioned in the arguments for the National Firearms Act of 1934.

It is easy to see the purpose of the now completely irrational ban on short barreled rifles and shotguns.   When one of the major purposes of the original act was to make handguns illegal for most people, and registered and licensed for the  remaining few, it made sense to make the conversion of rifles and shotguns into pistols illegal.   But gun mufflers?  What was the point of that?

Maybe it was just legislative strategy, a trade-off item that was available to be taken out to allow some other provision to be included.   Maybe it was simply that the Roosevelt regime was grabbing for all the power it could.  Likely, we will never know.   Clearly, it was one of the greatest public health blunders by the federal government, ever.  Millions have lost hearing because of the extreme regulatory and financial barriers placed on gun mufflers.

Europe is ahead of the United States when it has come to the reasonable use of gun mufflers.   The Finnish Supreme Court has ruled that it is a constitutional right to make, buy, sell, trade and use gun mufflers in that country.

One would think, with the second amendment in the United States Constitution, the same would apply here.

But, as my British friend observed, it doesn't; and it does not make any sense.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch 

[marktwain]

The regulatory burdens placed on gun mufflers never made any sense. But then, that is the case with most gun control laws.

[Lurker]

The harsh regulations regarding suppressors has been a public health disaster.

[hoosierham]

The fear is that silent guns will be used to commit murders and illegal killing of animals.The fact is that loud bangs annoy people and attract attention.The noise means gun enthusiasts will face neighbors’ pressure to cease such annoying activity.

It is not illogical from a certain point of view.

[Doctor 2Brains]

I have a suppressor for my CZ-75B. LOVE IT..... And who can use the thing without feeling like James Bond?

[Paladin2]

They should allow them, for the children, of course.

[Georgia Girl 2]

“It is not illogical from a certain point of view”

Yes if you are a law abiding citizen. It never seems to occur to the progressive nannies that criminals don’t abide by the law. If they want a suppressor they just buy one on the street or make one in their garage.

[american_ranger]

Think how much quieter Chicago would be if the gang bangers could use silencers?

Chicago might even start attracting tourists again (After they taught the bums not to urinate in public.)

[sinsofsolarempirefan]

Wow, I never realise it was an issue in the US, silencers are a common sight at the rifle range I go to.

[meatloaf]

My understanding is that silencers were originally regulated because of concerns about poaching. Use for quiet assinations came later.

[marktwain]

“Wow, I never realise it was an issue in the US, silencers are a common sight at the rifle range I go to.”

Silencers are heavily regulated in the United States, the same as machine guns. Some states outlaw them completely. In the U.S., there is no “right” to a suppressor. You have to fill out copious paperwork, send it to the local police official, who can arbitrarily veto it, have your fingerprints taken, send $200 and the paperwork to the federal agency, the BATFE, and then have them take about six months to a year and a half to approve it.

If you want more than one, you have to do the above all over again.

[gusty]

Their use for assassination is pure Hollywood. I can’t think of one political assassination were one was used, even Mafia hits just use the old loud bang.

[meatloaf]

You are 100% correct. It’s 80 years later and the original reason isn’t common knowledge.

[marktwain]

Yes. A building acts as a giant suppressor.

[lurk]

Sound suppression would make guns safer, and fewer people would die. It is the loud noises that make guns so dangerous.

[lcms rev]

I wonder if there’s enough momentum to get gun mufflers decriminalized. There are so many times when I would much rather use a suppressor or have one available than have to use ear protection. There are some situations when a suppressor would be much more convenient than ear protection. Home defense is the first scenario that comes to mind.

[S.O.S121.500]

Yes. A building acts as a giant suppressor.

---

As does a feather pillow.

[Secret Agent Man]

as does a 2 liter soda bottle (once).

[R. Scott]

The suppressor in the picture looks a bit short

[marktwain]

I thought it looked rather large for a .22 rimfire.

[R. Scott]

On second look it is a .22, it even has one of those “evil” high capacity magazines.