After Las Vegas massacre, the sound of silencers
Gun laws in America are already so weak, it must be tough to find ways to make them even looser. But you’ve got to give gun lobbyists credit. They’ve come up with some new ideas and found allies in Congress to promote them, even as the nation mourns the 58 people mowed down at a music festival in Las Vegas.
At the top of the wish list: a push to make it easier to buy gun silencers and harder to restrict armor-piercing bullets.
These ideas would, at best, place the convenience of gun owners over the safety of the public. At worst, they would put innocent people and police officers in graver danger.
The changes are tucked into a measure called the Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement (SHARE) Act. The innocuous title tries to hide its most controversial content.
The proposal getting the most attention is a move to make it easier to buy silencers, or as its sponsor, Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., disingenuously calls it, the “Hearing Protection Act.” Duncan’s effort happens to coincide with a push by gun makers to sell more accessories, as firearms sales have dipped.
Silencers have been available to hunters and others under the National Firearms Act since 1934. But Duncan and the NRA think it’s too cumbersome to buy one. Buyers must pass a criminal background check, turn over their fingerprints to the government, and pay a $200 fee. Silencers are registered, and transfers are tracked.
Instead, silencers would be treated like other firearms, with buyers subject to instant background checks. The problem? The system has gaping holes that have allowed criminals, domestic abusers and the mentally ill to buy guns from unlicensed dealers without a background check.
A coalition of top law enforcement groups says the change could put silencers in the hands of criminals, make it easier to ambush police, and make it harder to hear gunshots. The louder the gunfire, the easier it is for authorities to locate active shooters.
Silencers don’t actually mute gunshots in the way they’re portrayed in movies, but they certainly lower the decibel levels. Supporters of the measure assert that hunters need them to protect their hearing. But when opponents argue that silencers will make it harder to hear gunshots, those same supporters insist it isn’t so. Sorry, you can’t have it both ways.
The same sportsmen’s measure would also make it more difficult to restrict armor-piercing ammunition, often called “copkilling bullets.” Their sale was restricted in 1986 by a law championed and signed by President Reagan, who said, “Certain forms of ammunition have no legitimate sporting, recreational or self-defense use and thus should be prohibited.” Reagan had that right.
Two days after the Las Vegas massacre, a group of House Democrats called on House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to ensure that the SHARE measure won’t be taken up.
The best Ryan could muster was, “I don’t know when it’s going to be scheduled.”
Curbing gun violence should be at the top of Congress’ agenda. Instead, at the gun lobby’s behest, it is looking at weakening existing restrictions. Pathetic.