https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-...pressor-regulations/

Their legislation seizes on the hearing protection afforded by suppressors and is titled, Silencers Help Us Save Hearing (SHUSH) Act.

Suppressors are currently under the purview of the National Firearms Act (NFA) and Cloud and Lee explain that this creates myriad steps for law-abiding citizens to follow/fulfill in order to get an accessory that has no barrel, no trigger, no action, no magazine capacity nor ability to accept a magazine. The steps for acquisition include, but are not limited to, filling out ATF forms, being fingerprinted and provided those prints to an FFL, being photographed and providing those photos to an FFL as well, paying a $200 federal tax, and undergoing a background check/suppressor registration process that can take 9 to 12 months.

The SHUSH Act remedies this quagmire by:

[Removing] suppressors from the National Firearms Act (NFA) and Gun Control Act (GCA), treating them as standard firearm accessories.
[Prohibiting] states from imposing taxes or registration requirements on suppressors.
[Ending] the $200 transfer tax and streamlines the acquisition process for law-abiding Americans.
The SHUSH Act would also “[permit] active and retired law enforcement to carry concealed suppressors.”

More at link

that and the bill with national reciprocity for carry/transport would be exceptional...

Thats great - wonder if it will pass

I wonder if the president can just order ATF to remove those items once the new Director is sworn in?

Long overdue and hallelujah. The return to freedom once lost is exquisite.

I’m 99% on board. He lost me when they split into different classes of citizens at the end.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:
I’m 99% on board. He lost me when they split into different classes of citizens at the end.

Agreed.

I guess I don’t understand the need for the clause. In a defensive situation noise isn’t the first thing I’d be worried about and I’d expect that a can would both make it harder to find a good concealment holster and slow the draw, neither of which seems desirable. Beyond that, if they’re just a firearm accessory, wouldn’t they be irrelevant to carry? I have trouble imagining a situation where I’d want to carry a desert eagle chambered in 50 action express, but I can’t see why there needs to be any special rule about it. You’re an American. Carry what you want with whatever accessories you want and drive on.

On the Federal level, GREAT!
Unfortunately, on the State level, I don't think it's going to make a difference.

I'm still screwed and can't have any fun toys until I leave this Commie state.

I’m assuming that would also be the case in CA, where they are just verboten, period.

I’d love to have suppressors available, I think it would help introduce people, especially youngsters, to shooting, with less flinch.

Would not be relevant for carry, as noted above.

Nice, bu I’ll celebrate when it passes.

If this actually happens, I’ll go suppressor shopping like I buy donuts for the family. Buying two dozen. I’ll take two of these, four of that kind one .50 cal maple bar, three of the Bavarians, six jelly filled 5.56 KAC suppressors, half dozen 9mm, a couple plain 22lr and the rest in 45acp

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
I’m assuming that would also be the case in CA, where they are just verboten, period.

I’d love to have suppressors available, I think it would help introduce people, especially youngsters, to shooting, with less flinch.

Would not be relevant for carry, as noted above.

Not quite period. A friend who I have been doing some long distance shooting with is a responsible party on a company he represents’ SOT. As a result he can legally possess and use cans in commiefornia. Not only that, he can share with folks while he is present. As my Tikka has M18-1 thread, it wasn’t as simple as spinning off the brake and spinning on the can, but the Dead Air M18-1xHUB adapter arrived the other day, so things should be quieter next time he come out.

Well, good for you, slosig. But of course every loophole like that just highlights the injustice of CA law.

Nice. This would be a great first step.

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
Well, good for you, slosig. But of course every loophole like that just highlights the injustice of CA law.

No argument from me on that one.

I'm all for it. It's a start.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
that and the bill with national reciprocity for carry/transport would be exceptional...

Amen!!

I love my congressman Michael! He is such a humble servant and easily approachable, I've met him out at restaurants a few times. Just wondering, if it was deemed unconstitutional to have the tax stamp in the first place, can I get some refunds?

SBR would also be appreciated.

^^^^^^with the giggle switch

quote:

Originally posted by flesheatingvirus:
Nice, bu I’ll celebrate when it passes.

Same. Not going to get hyped up any time soon.

I would buy 5 immediately however, upon becoming federal law. I think there would be extended wait times up to a year. Everyone would be buying them.