Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

senate Bill S. 202

SHUSH Act: Should Gun Silencers be Deregulated at the Federal Level?

Argument in favor

Silencers protect the hearing of hunters and recreational shooters, and this bill would make it easier for law-abiding people to access them while keeping background checks in place to prevent them from getting into the wrong hands.

Rentedmule's Opinion
···
10/25/2019
Stop regulating things. This is a muffler on a car. Protect shooters hearing. Stop watching movies and shoot a suppressed weapon you won’t worry about anyone being silent.
Like (72)
Follow
Share
Joseph's Opinion
···
10/25/2019
The majority of the ones voting nay are probably doing so because the only suppressors the have seen are the ones in movies and television.
Like (41)
Follow
Share
Charles's Opinion
···
10/25/2019
They don’t silence but they do protect hearing.
Like (40)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

Federal deregulation of silencers would enrich the gun industry and make it easier for silencers to get in the wrong hands, thereby threatening public safety by making it difficult for first responders to identify active shooters.

TheDarkSide's Opinion
···
10/24/2019
First, no citizen requires a silencer. Second I cannot support anything conservative Mike Lee advocates because the NRA is in his pocket.
Like (91)
Follow
Share
burrkitty's Opinion
···
10/25/2019
NO TO DEREGULATION. The hearing protection argument is TOTAL BS. Noise cancellation earmuffs and earplugs are CHEAPER and MORE EFFECTIVE at protecting hearing and all the professionals know that! That’s why they all wear PPE. Suppressing muzzle flash and report to avoid detection by others is what suppressors are for. No civilian needs that.
Like (72)
Follow
Share
Thelma's Opinion
···
10/25/2019
Law abiding citizens can use ear protection, they don’t need silencers.
Like (55)
Follow
Share

What is Senate Bill S. 202?

This bill — known as the SHUSH Act — would deregulate firearm suppressors (aka silencers) at the federal level by treating any person who acquires or possesses a silencer as meeting any federal registration or licensing requirements for that silencer. The $200 transfer tax on silencers would be repealed, and the bill would preempt state or local laws that tax the transfer of silencers. Additionally, it would allow qualified current and retired law enforcement personnel to carry a concealed firearm equipped with a silencer in accordance with state law.

Under current law, individuals are required to go through a registration process with the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) before acquiring a silencer which can take about nine months.

The bill’s full title is the Silencers Help Us Save Hearing (SHUSH) Act.

Impact

Individuals who would acquire and use a suppressor; companies that make suppressors; and state governments.

Cost of Senate Bill S. 202

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

More Information

In-Depth: Sponsoring Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) reintroduced this bill from the 115th Congress to eliminate federal suppressor regulations:

“Suppressors can make shooting safer for the millions of hunters and sportsmen that exercise their constitutional right to use firearms every year. The current process for obtaining a suppressor is far too expensive and burdensome. Our bill would remove these unnecessary federal regulations and make it easier for firearms users to protect themselves.”

Outdoor Life's John Haughey wrote approvingly of this bill in July 2017, when Sen. Lee introduced it in the 115th Congress: 

"In addition to proposing a bill that makes sense in the real world, the bill’s two Senate sponsors are clearly advocating on behalf of constituents’ financial interests—which is their job in a representative democracy, despite the conjuring of sinister overtones by gun control zealots."

When this bill was introduced in 2017, gun control groups such as Everytown for Gun Safety condemned it, arguing that "silencers pose a significant danger in the wrong hands": 

"Silencers pose a significant danger in the wrong hands, making it harder for bystanders or law enforcement to identify and react quickly to gunshots. In an active shooter situation, for example, hearing and recognizing a gunshot can be a matter of life and death. But radical legislation would repeal all federal laws on firearm silencers, making it legal for convicted felons, domestic abusers, and other people with dangerous histories to buy silencers. These core public safety laws have kept silencers out of criminal hands for decades, without blocking access for law—abiding citizens. The gun lobby presents this legislation as an attempt to protect shooters’ hearing, but silencers are not the most effective or the safest way to do so. Widely available ear protection products work better than silencers to protect hearing and safety — which is why the U.S. military relies on them, not on silencers, to protect soldiers’ hearing. Lawmakers should join law enforcement officers and major law enforcement organizations in rejecting the SHUSH Act and the gun lobby’s dangerous pursuit of profit over safety."

David Chipman, senior policy adviser for the Giffords Law Center for Prevent Gun Violence and a retired ATF special agents, argues that this bill is "reckless," and would make police officers' jobs more dangerous:

“The only people that benefit from this bill are gun lobbyists and criminals who want easier access to deadly weapons. That’s why this irresponsible legislation couldn’t get passed when Republicans had complete control of Congress. Instead of making it easier for firearms that could be used in ambushes and other attacks to enter our streets, Congress should focus on making the job of police officers who are trained to serve and protect our communities and families safer.”

There are five Senate cosponsors of this bill in the 116th Congress. A House version of this bill, introduced by Rep. Steve King (R-IA), has no cosponsors.

Last Congress, this legislation had the support of nine Republican cosponsors in the Senate and didn't receive a committee vote. The House version — introduced by Rep. King with the support of 21 Republican cosponsors — also didn't receive a committee vote.


Media:

Summary by Eric Revell

(Photo Credit: gsagi / iStock)

AKA

SHUSH Act

Official Title

A bill to provide that silencers be treated the same as firearms accessories.

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The house has not voted
  • The senate has not voted
      senate Committees
      Committee on Finance
    IntroducedJanuary 24th, 2019
    Stop regulating things. This is a muffler on a car. Protect shooters hearing. Stop watching movies and shoot a suppressed weapon you won’t worry about anyone being silent.
    Like (72)
    Follow
    Share
    First, no citizen requires a silencer. Second I cannot support anything conservative Mike Lee advocates because the NRA is in his pocket.
    Like (91)
    Follow
    Share
    NO TO DEREGULATION. The hearing protection argument is TOTAL BS. Noise cancellation earmuffs and earplugs are CHEAPER and MORE EFFECTIVE at protecting hearing and all the professionals know that! That’s why they all wear PPE. Suppressing muzzle flash and report to avoid detection by others is what suppressors are for. No civilian needs that.
    Like (72)
    Follow
    Share
    Law abiding citizens can use ear protection, they don’t need silencers.
    Like (55)
    Follow
    Share
    No. What’s next, hand grenades?
    Like (46)
    Follow
    Share
    The majority of the ones voting nay are probably doing so because the only suppressors the have seen are the ones in movies and television.
    Like (41)
    Follow
    Share
    They don’t silence but they do protect hearing.
    Like (40)
    Follow
    Share
    No absolutely not. Deregulating human hunting weapon accessories. Do u want more dead kids? Apparently so.
    Like (36)
    Follow
    Share
    Gun silencers should be banned at the Federal level, not deregulated.
    Like (31)
    Follow
    Share
    I am a shooter. I have been a shooter since 1960. I use hearing protection. I used hearing protection with silenced weapons in the military. I have never in my entire life felt the need for a silencer on civilian owned devices. You only need a silencer if you need to NOT be detected by something that might shoot back: like PEOPLE. We need restrictions on silencers and weapons of war at ALL levels.
    Like (30)
    Follow
    Share
    Horrible idea.
    Like (29)
    Follow
    Share
    They have no lawful purpose and hinder detection of illegal shooters. If YOU want to shoot something buy a smaller weapon or use personal hearing protection.
    Like (27)
    Follow
    Share
    There is too much false information about suppressors. They simply do not reduce noise even remotely as much as Hollywood says. Primarly reduces noise enough to make shooting a bit safer.
    Like (26)
    Follow
    Share
    Sound suppressors don’t kill people they save ears. Please let us have them.
    Like (23)
    Follow
    Share
    Definitely. Deterring the purchase of anything by attaching taxes to those items is unconstitutional and just another way to get more of our money out of our pockets. Our government, instead, should begin managing our taxed money much more responsibly. For people who do not understand how silencers actually function, they do not make the weapon silent. They only cut down on the noise and do not eliminate it by any means. Silencers also do not improve accuracy or enhance precision.
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    Gun silencers should be *banned* at the federal level.
    Like (18)
    Follow
    Share
    Absolutely not! Civilians do not need silencers. Stop deregulating good policies that protect citizens. Start regulating more. Like stopping the gun show loop hole!
    Like (17)
    Follow
    Share
    Hello, NRA. Get your money out of our government.
    Like (17)
    Follow
    Share
    2nd amendment doesn’t refer to silencers. Do the right thing.
    Like (17)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes, absolutely!
    Like (16)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE