|Suppressor + Hunting: About as natural and obvious as Peanut Butter + Jelly|
On Tuesday, April 9, 2013, NC Senate Bill 201 is scheduled to be discussed. If passed, this bill would allow the use of lawfully possessed suppressors for hunting in NC. If you know anything at all about guns and suppressors, and you have an IQ anywhere higher than your shoe size, you would automatically know that hunting with suppressors is a no brainer. There's really no reason to waste each others time preaching to the choir, as they say. What we need to do... and do it NOW, is share our knowledge and enthusiasm about this topic with the powers that be who hold the power to make this bill a reality.
I've composed a letter that you are welcome to use if you'd like. Just copy my letter below in an email, sign (type) your name, and email it to as many representatives in NC as you can. Or, write your own email. Or call. Whatever you do... just urge them to support SB 201.
This is very important! Do it now! Thank you.
Below is a list of legislators who are supposed to hear the bill on April 9. That's tomorrow, folks. Email them now. The letter for you to use is below the names:
Sen. Andrew C. Brock (Co-Chairman)
Phone: (919) 715-0690
Sen. Brent Jackson (Co-Chairman)
Phone: (919) 733-5705
Sen. Bill Cook (Vice Chairman)
Phone: (919) 715-8293
Sen. Austin M. Allran
Phone: (919) 733-5876
Sen. Chad Barefoot
Phone: (919) 715-3036
Sen. Stan Bingham
Phone: (919) 733-5665
Sen. Angela R. Bryant
Phone: (919) 733-5878
Sen. Daniel G. Clodfelter
Phone: (919) 715-8331
Sen. Joel D. M. Ford
Phone: (919) 733-5955
Sen. Fletcher L. Hartsell, Jr.
Phone: (919) 733-7223
Sen. Eleanor Kinnaird
Phone: (919) 733-5804
Sen. Gene McLaurin
Phone: (919) 733-5953
Sen. Ronald J. Rabin
Phone: (919) 733-5748
Sen. Bill Rabon
Phone: (919) 733-5963
Sen. Shirley B. Randleman
Phone: (919) 733-5743
Sen. Tommy Tucker
Phone: (919) 733-7659
Sen. Trudy Wade
Phone: (919) 733-5856
Sen. Michael P. Walters
Phone: (919) 733-5651
To Whom it May Concern:
As you probably already know, on April 9, 2013, Senator Shirley Randleman's Senate Bill 201 is scheduled to be heard. If passed, this Bill would allow for the use of lawfully possessed suppressors while hunting.
I implore you to support this important piece of legislation.
There is a plethora of information freely available today which reinforces the reasons for using firearm suppressors while hunting. Books and articles have been written, studies have been done, and other state governments... and even other countries have overwhelmingly concluded, based on their findings, that hunting with a suppressor-equipped firearm makes absolute sense. No matter how you slice it, there are practically ZERO downsides to using a suppressor while hunting. Because time is of utmost importance, I'll save you the trouble of conducting your own research, and provide a list of reasons right here.
Suppressors are regulated at the federal level, falling under the purview of the NFA Branch of the BATFE. They have always been legal for private ownership at the federal level. Individual states may or may not allow private ownership. North Carolina does allow private ownership.
Up until now, however, hunting with a suppressor has not been legally possible due to some ambiguous wording in NC General Statue 14-288.8, as well the "Manner of Take" for hunting regulations and restrictions. The wording of the law notwithstanding, the true facts of what suppressors really are and what they do, are completely contrary to the perception of the populace in general.
Here are some facts:
1. Suppressors are mufflers. They’re just like what's on your car. If your car was not equipped with "suppressors", it would sound like a lot like a machine gun.
2. Suppressors do not silence firearms. Hollywood's depiction of "silencers" is laughably incorrect. The blast is still very evident, but the sound pressure is reduced to a safer level.
3. Firearm reports (blasts) are dangerous to human hearing. Hearing loss is progressive. It never restores itself.
4. A suppressed firearm sounds roughly the same to the hunter as it would sound (and feel) if the hunter were wearing passive ear protection like earplugs or muffs. Therefore, no need for the hunter to wear hearing protection if he or she is using a suppressed firearm.
5. Suppressors also benefit those around the hunter. No need to wear ear protection, even if you're not the hunter. People living in neighborhoods close to hunting grounds will be much less annoyed/scared/upset/etc. if hunters used suppressors. They will still hear something, but it won't be a tremendous blast.
6. Suppressors were added to the NFA's list of "weapons" to be regulated in 1934 under the assumption that people would use them to poach their neighbor's livestock. There never has been any evidence to support that claim by the Congress of 1934, nor today. And there are still 100s of thousands of suppressors in use today in the USA,… most in states that DO allow suppressed hunting, yet poaching with suppressors simply does not happen.
7. Individuals who own suppressors are in the top-tier of the law-abiding class of the population. They do not commit crimes.... especially with suppressors. Yes, this statement is more subjective than fact. However, here are reasons for my claim:
a) Concealed Carry permit holders are 13% times LESS likely to commit ANY crime than the general population -- and this is not compared to stats of the "criminal class", it is compared to members of the general population like you and I, who have no interest in breaking the law.
b) 99% of suppressor owners also possess their Concealed Carry permit. Therefore, it can be said that suppressor owners are “cleaner” than your average babysitter.
c) The only study I've ever seen on the criminal use of suppressors found that between 1995 and 2005, out of 40,000 homicides which were committed in the USA, only .001% of them involved suppressors. That’s 4 out of 40,000. That is practically a non-consequential number. There are many more seemingly safe activities that we don’t ever consider regulating yet result in many more deaths. For example, many more people during that time-frame drowned in their bathtubs. In my opinion, any regulation of suppressors is unwarranted based on the available statistics.
8. England changed their laws to require that suppressors be used by hunters (in certain locales). Why? The HSE (Health Safety Executive) conducted a study of suppressors,\ and discovered that their government would spend less money for restorative hearing procedures for their citizens if sportsmen would use suppressors. A suppressor costs a lot less than years of hearing aids, funded by tax dollars.
9. Almost all branches of the US Military now use suppressors in training and combat to protect soldiers hearing. Because of many years the military gave no regard to hearing protection, the VA (Veterans Administration) spends billions of dollars every year forhearing aids for our veterans. Over time, the VA will spend less money for hearing procedures because of the recent proliferation of suppressor use in the military.
10. Firearm and suppressor owners are very politically savvy. We keep track of who votes or does not vote to protect our 2nd amendment rights. Please continue to support legislation that reinforces the attitudes of the constituents you represent.
I could go on, but hopefully, this is enough for you to get a good idea of my position on the virtues of suppressors. And I speak for thousands of other lawful American and North Carolinian hunters as well.
Please support SB 201.