Gun Muffler (Silencer/Suppressor) Status Map of the United States

Gun Watch ^ | 13 June, 2016 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Map at American Suppressor Association

Many American gun owners and shooters do not know that it is legal to own and use silencers, suppressors, or perhaps the most descriptive term gun mufflers, in the United States.  There are only a handful of states that cling to the antiquated notion the suppressors should be banned because ... guns....  There is no logical or rational argument to be made for that position, but it persists.

The states where suppressors are banned are the same tiny minority that persist with unreasonable and likely unconstitutional restrictions on the ownership and carry of firearms for personal protection.  Silencers are more suited to hunting and target practice.  The map shows that irrational hatred of firearms is what is driving the legislation. 

The eight states that still ban gun mufflers for non-government agents are: California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Rhoad Island.  All but one, Illinois, have highly restrictive "may issue" concealed carry regulations, and Illinois only adopted a "shall issue" law after loosing a legal fight in the federal circuit court.

While the map does not show it, New Hampshire recently changed their law to restore the right to hunt with suppressors, making 40 states where hunting with suppressors is legal.

The reasons for legal gun muffler ownership are so obvious, that passing legislation is mostly a task of educating the legislators.  This is not always and easy task, but it is straight forward.  In the recent bill in New Hampshire, the legislature listed these findings of fact. From bill HB 500:

2 Findings. The legislature finds that:

I. Firearm suppressors lessen the report of a firearm by approximately 30 decibels, thereby allowing hunters to more fully enjoy and participate in the sport.

II. Hunting with sound suppressors will help to lessen the hearing damage many hunters suffer from.

III. Hunting with a sound suppressor allows new, inexperienced hunters to hunt without ear plugs or ear muffs enabling them to hear important instructions from their mentors (parents, grandparents, or other responsible adults) who are hunting with them.

IV. Suppressors decrease the chance of asymmetrical hearing loss or shooters ear.

V. Hunting with suppressors lessens the ambient noise heard by neighbors who may be on adjoining property where hunting is taking place. While it does reduce the noise level of a firearm, the firearm is still loud enough so that a neighbor will know someone is shooting.

VI. In the 34 states that allow some form of hunting with suppressors not a single state has moved to repeal this practice. It makes for safer shooting and better neighbors.

VII. Firearm suppressors are heavily regulated by the federal government, which requires a $200 tax be paid, a background check conducted, fingerprints be given, sign off by a local chief law enforcement officer, and approximately a 9-month wait to get the paperwork completed before taking possession of a suppressor. This virtually guarantees that abuses with legally owned suppressors are extremely rare.

 Once legislators are made aware of these facts, legislation removing burdensome bans on silencers and hunting with silencers often passes both houses with bipartisan support at 90%.  It is hard to get 90% support for anything. 

Illinois appears the next state that is likely to remove its antiquated ban on gun mufflers.  The House passed the bill, but the legislature adjourned before the Senate voted on it.  There is still a chance for the Senate to vote, as the legislature will need to reconvene for a summer Session.  The NRA-ILA has a handy system to take action if you are so inclined.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Link to Gun Watch

[marktwain]

If Donald Trump wins the White House, there is a good chance that gun mufflers will be removed from the NFA, and placed in the same legal category as rifles and shotguns.

That is the strategy.

[mountn man]

If Donald Trump wins the White House, there is a good chance that gun mufflers will be removed from the NFA, and placed in the same legal category as rifles and shotguns.

What is your proof of this?

[CodeToad]

“What is your proof of this? “

Trump has common sense and gets it.

What proof do you have that he won’t support it?

[NorthMountain]

ROFL!!!

Has Trump ever said anything about suppressors? Ever?

[CodeToad]

NO one said he did, so the ROFL is on you, dummy.

We said he has common sense. Jeez, you’re dumb.

[lacrew]

I suppose they are legal, but I believe (in my jurisdiction) I have to get the sheriff’s permission to buy one.

[NorthMountain]

NO one said he did

So you have no rational reason to believe he would support sane legislation on suppressors. You have only your own hopes and dreams, which you have projected onto him.

ROFL!!!!

[wastoute]

Federal law requires FBI approval and an NFA stamp costing $200 and is non transferable.

[baltimorepoet]

I know of the sheriff’s permission, $200 tax stamp etc, waiting period.

Do you get the sheriff’s permission first I assume, before filing a $200 tax stamp? (otherwise you could be out $200) Is that how it works?

I have a Glock 17 with a threaded barrel, and I’ve toyed with the idea of getting a Gemtek silencer for it.

[null and void]

Still, one can hope. Or do you wish to deprive us of hope?

For the record, I don’t think he will.

Especially after the coming assassination attempt(s).

[marktwain]

Interview with Josh Waldron, CEO of Silencerco, on suppressor legislation:

http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2016/06/an-interview-with-josh-waldron-ceo-of.html

[556x45]

The map is a bit out of date. NH now allows hunting w/ suppressors.

[mountn man]

I've had enough Hope and Change from the other side. Moronic people projecting foolish beliefs, based on their own wants and desires, with no evidence.

I refuse to listen to the same type on our side.

I'm a conservative.

I want facts, reason and logic, not fallacies built on hope and emotions.

[NorthMountain]

Do you expect it to pass before the next presidential election?

"No. This is an education effort. This is getting everyone spun up, so that when we do get Trump in the White House, he is going to be the guy that signs that bill, and he will sign that bill."

What is your strategy; to announce Trump support, or to ask for Trump support during the presidential campaign? He has come out strongly in favor of the Second Amendment, but he has not referenced the NFA particularily.

He hasn't, no. We don't imagine that he will get that deep in the weeds, and come out in favor of smaller issues, other than overall Second Amendment support."

You do not expect that to be an issue in the presidential campaign?

"I don't think so. That is just too particular, and he needs to be more broadly focused.

The good news is that his sons put pictures on social media of them shooting our products. I know that the Trump family has fun with suppressors and they understand the process of getting a suppressor with the NFA branch. A lot of the problem is that it is a very complicated process, and when you go in and have five minutes with a legislator, it is a lot to teach them about. With the Trump family, they are already spun up, so it will be relatively easy. We are excited about it."

"He (Trump) is a little bit crazy. But I am a little bit crazy, so I relate to him."

Me again: So DONALD Trump (the one running for President) hasn't said anything about suppressors. Hopes. Dreams. Have fun with 'em.

[marktwain]

You are correct about the map. Good eyes.

From the article:

“While the map does not show it, New Hampshire recently changed their law to restore the right to hunt with suppressors, making 40 states where hunting with suppressors is legal.”

[Yo-Yo]

If Donald Trump wins the White House, there is a good chance that gun mufflers will be removed from the NFA, and placed in the same legal category as rifles and shotguns.

I agree that if such legislation were to reach his desk, President Trump would no doubt sign it.

I'm not so sure that the silencer manufacturers would want the race to the bottom in pricing that would result, however.

I would expect, though, that if silencers were removed from the NFA then we would see a huge increase in sales of solvent trap adapters.

[marktwain]

Considering that the words are from the man most responsible for reforming silencer laws in a dozen states, and whose company has a market share of 65% of the suppressors sold in the United States, I think they have a bit more weight than mere hope and dreams.

What reason do you have to believe that Trump would veto such a bill?

[Yo-Yo]

I suppose they are legal, but I believe (in my jurisdiction) I have to get the sheriff’s permission to buy one.

That requirement goes away on July 13th, when the new NFA rules go into effect. All that will be required after that date is that you inform your local LEO of the NFA application, but your LEO does not have to sign off.

[marktwain]

It is the American Suppressor Association, which represents American suppressor manufacturers that has pushed to have the legislation introduced, and is pushing for passage:

"From the time we have started until now, there were 18,000 then, we are now selling about 18,000 silencers every month, just SilencerCo.

In the last five years, this has been the fastest growing segment of the firearms industry."

Do you fear that removal of suppressors from the NFA (National Firearms Act) will cut into your profit margin?

"I don't think so.  We don't get to take full benefit of the economies of scale. We have to order materials on a small batch basis. As we increase the number of suppressors going out the door we decrease the amount that it costs us.  We haven't pushed it to the level where are seeing those economies of scale."

Lets talk about the Hearing Protection Act, the HPA, on the national level.   There are now about 42 states that have done away with most legal impediments, at the state level, to owning a suppressor."

We are talking about the market for suppressors increasing a multiple of 50 to 100 times.

[marktwain]

There likely would be an increase in solvent trap adaptors.

But why use a makeshift when for $100 bucks you can have a piece of solid technology that will give good service for decades?

Or, better yet, why not purchase a rifle designed with the suppressor as integral, and only adding $100 to the price?