Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, filed the bill in the lame-duck House last Friday to be considered by the House Judiciary Committee before the end of the 118th Congress, scheduled for Dec. 20. I expected. HR 10145, known as “Protecting Americans' Right to Silence” (PARTS), is a law issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) that states that the parts that make up a firearm's silencer (or suppressor) are themselves silencers. It negates the claim. They are all included in the “machine gun'' category of the National Firearms Act of 1934.
ATF overreach
Currently, ATF regulations require purchasers of such suppressors and their parts to register with ATF and pay a $200 tax. The ATF is taking up to 90 days to process the paperwork so owners can get their suppressors.
Pflueger said:
Suppressors make hunting and all shooting sports safer. They help military personnel, law enforcement, recreational shooters, and more alike.
Unfortunately, we have seen the Biden-Harris Administration's ATF attempt to criminalize tools and accessories that actually make firearm use safer.
Criminalizing suppressors will only make their manufacture and use nearly impossible….
We don't want to see suppressors weaponized like pistol braces. We are not going to turn law-abiding gun owners into criminals….
My bill would prevent that blatant overreach and protect Americans' Second Amendment rights.
Of course, this only scratches the surface of what is really needed to “protect Americans' Second Amendment rights.”
Ear doctors support suppressors
But days earlier, Pflueger's bill received an unexpected and welcome boost from the 13,000-member American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS), also known as ear doctors. After reviewing three separate studies, the research group concluded that the use of suppressors is “an effective way to reduce the risk of hearing loss, especially when used in conjunction with traditional hearing protection measures (i.e., earplugs and earmuffs). ” concluded.
There are political motives behind this study, and perhaps timing as well. One of the doctors involved in the announcement, Dr. Timothy Wheeler, also happens to be the founder of Physicians for Responsible Gun Ownership. The organization denies that its conclusions or timing are politically motivated, saying that “opinions are not intended to be, and should not be treated as, legal, medical, or business advice.” There is. But Mr. Wheeler was more blunt:
This is always a big problem for audiologists because there are many different types of hearing loss, some of which can be treated with surgery and some with medicine.
However, noise-induced hearing loss is permanent and cannot be treated. It's a type of inner ear hearing loss seen with gunshots…
Suppressors reliably reduce the impact of gunfire and impulse noise by approximately 30 decibels.
If you oppose making this useful firearm accessory available to those who benefit from it, you are opposed to protecting them from hearing loss.
Time may be running out to take up Pflueger's bill before the end of the 118th Congress, but he said he will reintroduce it once the 119th Congress begins in January, if necessary. I promised. The hope is that the more Second Amendment-friendly House and Senate will sit and take action on the bill. This bill is the first of many needed to fully protect the Second Amendment rights of American gun owners from the Constitution's anti-gun policies. A.T.F.
