Hearing Protection Act

[brutal]

I originally supported the HPA because I misunderstood what it actually would do -- probably because the proposed law is so utterly vague and doesn't address state consequences. As seen on page 3 or 4 of this thread, I provided quotes from the sponsor's General Counsel on the legal ramifications of its passing which dig into those consequential concerns. The end result is that it will effectively place NO Federal backstops against a state level ban, and only shifts the blame of unconstitutional banning and/or taxation, permitting, etc. into the state's control.

Some states already ban. CO doesn't, but I believe that's because it hasn't been a whack-a-mole issue due to the backstop of Federal regulation.

I foresee a ban in CO if the HPA passes, or at the very least a state-level version of the federal headache we now experience. As such, I wholeheartedly disavow all support for the HPA. and would encourage everyone here to do the same, until there is placed in it a provision which keeps states from taking adverse action against suppressors.

It's utterly retarded and legally ignorant (not to mention philosophically daft) to clamor for a Federal deregulation under the guise of Constitutionality, and then just shift that into State violation with a grin on one's face. If it passes as is, it would not only be a Pyrrhic victory, it would be a real life version of the devil you don't know.

Reference post # 57 in this thread . Suppressors are ILLEGAL in Co with an affirmative defense of having a " permit " for them being used to make them legal , the NFA being that permit .

Pretty simple after that no NFA no suppressors .

I've been saying the same thing, and asking relevant sponsors of the HPA, to include the ASA, to clarify, comment, and assuage our concerns. Crickets.

I get flamed as a naysayer or FUDD bringing the issue up on other venues - gun boards, bookface, etc.