One More Time: The Hearing Protection Act is Reintroduced in the US Senate

By • • 10 Comments • 2 minutes of reading • Gun Control, NFA, Silencers
A-TEC silencers suppressors
Image: A-TEC Silencers

From the American Suppressor Association . . .

February 4th, U.S. Senator Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) and 28 colleagues reintroduced the Hearing Protection Act (HPA) in the Senate.

“We are grateful to Senator Crapo for standing behind the millions of law-abiding gun owners with his reintroduction of the Hearing Protection Act,” said Knox Williams, president and executive director of the American Suppressor Association. “It’s absurd that our unrestrained federal bureaucracy requires Americans to jump through hoops to buy simple hearing protection devices. Momentum continues to grow for common sense reforms that would end the stranglehold of government on the rights of her people. We look forward to working with Senator Crapo and his colleagues to ensure our Second Amendment rights remain a priority.”

The Hearing Protection Act is cosponsored by Senators Marsha Blackburn, John Boozman, Ted Budd, Bill Cassidy, Kevin Cramer, Steve Daines, Deb Fischer, Lindsey Graham, John Hoeven, Cindy Hyde-Smith, Jim Justice, John Kennedy, James Lankford, Mike Lee, Cynthia Lummis, Roger Marshall, Jerry Moran, Markwayne Mullin, Pete Ricketts, Jim Risch, Mike Rounds, Rick Scott, Tim Sheehy, Thom Tillis, Roger Wicker, Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley, and Ron Johnson. Representative Ben Cline (R-Va.) introduced the companion bill in the House of Representatives.

The HPA would remove suppressors from the burdensome requirements of the National Firearms Act (NFA) and require purchasers to pass an instant NICS check, the same background check used during the sale of long guns. This change, by cutting through red tape, will make it much easier for law-abiding hunters and sportsmen to access these critical hearing safety devices. With the introduction of the HPA in both chambers, and the recent introduction of the bipartisan PARTS Act, momentum continues to build for common sense reform to firearm regulation.

Background

  • Suppressors have been federally regulated since the passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934.
  • In order to purchase a suppressor, prospective buyers must live in a state where suppressors are legal, send in an application including fingerprints and passport photos to the ATF, pay a $200 transfer tax, notify their local Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO), and wait an indeterminate amount of time for ATF to process the application.
  • Using the same science as car mufflers, suppressors help reduce noise pollution, allowing hunters and recreational shooters to be good neighbors and good stewards of the environment.
  • Often referred to as “silencers,” suppressors are widely misunderstood by the public due to this misnomer. A suppressor only reduces the sound level of a gunshot to 110-120 decibels, about as loud as a jackhammer or ambulance siren.
  • Private suppressor ownership is currently legal in 42 states, and hunting with a suppressor is legal in 41 states.

Leave a Reply to top secret Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

10 thoughts on “One More Time: The Hearing Protection Act is Reintroduced in the US Senate”

  1. top secret

    Just like the last time the Republicans controlled both houses of Congress and the Presidency, I expect nothing to happen. Or maybe they’ll use their momentum but then another convenient shooting will happen and they’ll sit on their hands and say “now’s not the right time”. And then the Dems will retake Congress and nothing will happen again.

    Reply
    1. AboutDamnTime

      Last time the Republicans had 51 senators. This time they have 53. So no, it will not pass the Senate. If you want things like this to pass the Senate, there have to be at least 7 more Republicans elected to the Senate. If the Repubs had 60 votes they could pass anything and everything they want. But unlike the old days of bipartisanship, the Democrats have decided that none of their party members is allowed to think or vote for themselves or actually represent their constituents; instead, they are only allowed to oppose anything and everything the Republicans do. If the President called for a bill to add MLK’s face to Mount Rushmore, and the R’s actually introduced that bill, the D’s would still “stand unified” and vote it down simply because of who suggested it.

      You want to put an end to that? We gotta find seven more R seats in the Senate.

      Reply
    1. Hush

      From the link posted by .40 cal Booger
      “The systematic nature of this catastrophe exposes the Biden administration’s willful negligence. While Epstein operated in secret, Biden’s team created an official government pipeline that delivered vulnerable children directly into the hands of predators. The administration’s lax vetting policies were so inadequate they routinely failed to confirm basic family relationships through DNA testing.
      Children were handed over to complete strangers based on nothing more than a sponsor’s word.”
      The scale dwarfs anything Epstein accomplished, and unlike Epstein’s secretive operation, this happened in plain sight with taxpayer funding.”

      Reply
  5. .40 cal Booger

    Whoopsie! Turns out Harris was probably approving pardons: Leaked Memo Suggests Biden Outsourced Pardon Power to Kamala Harris.

    “A newly uncovered memo has added fuel to growing concerns over former President Joe Biden’s mental fitness and ability to have carried out the basic duties of his office — this time, revealing that former Vice President Kamala Harris was reportedly handling key decisions on presidential pardons.
    …
    According to the memo, ‘The Vice President’s approval was sufficient to obtain his approval’ in the most recent batch of clemency decisions. In other words, Harris — not Biden — was effectively calling the shots.

    While Biden claimed earlier this year that he approved the ‘broad contours’ of pardons, he also admitted he wasn’t always aware of who was being pardoned.

    The White House staff had previously been advised, according to a February 2021 draft memo, that the president should personally sign all actions requiring his approval, following procedures used in the Obama-Biden administration. That guidance was reportedly ignored by 2024, with Biden deferring decisions and signatures to Harris and staff.
    …”

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2025/09/06/leaked-memo-suggests-biden-outsourced-pardon-power-to-kamala-harris-n2662852

    [note: the investigation is still on-going but so far, taking this into account, it looks like about 99% of the ‘presidential pardons’ issued in 2024 at the end of his term are invalid]

    Reply
  6. .40 cal Booger

    Not so much joy after all: LAPD Drops Kamala Harris Like a Hot Rock, Amid Criticism.

    “Despite Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s attempts to “protect” former Vice President and failed presidential candidate Kamala Harris by supplying a Los Angeles Police Department security detail, the uproar from L.A. citizens and the Police Protective League was heard above their political posturing and gaslighting.

    The Los Angeles Police Department on Saturday discontinued its protection for former Vice President Kamala Harris after heavy criticism within its own ranks that officers were being diverted from crime suppression, sources told The Times.
    …”
    LAPD union bosses were none too happy about this, and they sounded off.

    The Los Angeles Police Protective League, the union that represents rank-and-file LAPD officers, criticized the move.

    ‘Pulling police officers from protecting everyday Angelenos to protect a failed presidential candidate who also happens to be a multi-millionaire… and who can easily afford to pay for her own security, is nuts,’ its board of directors said.
    …”

    https://redstate.com/jenniferoo/2025/09/07/lapd-drops-kamala-harris-protection-detail-amid-criticism-n2193666

    Reply
Scroll to Top