Home  /  Suppressors

Suppressors

Hearing is important. Not spooking or stressing out animals is important. Mitigating noise complaints helps keep ranges alive and active. Australian shooters need suppressors (also known as silencers, moderators, bang bang quieters).

Suppressor legislation is on a state level within each state or territory’s weapons/firearms acts and regulations. This page will have letter templates you can copy and paste into your word processor, fill out your own name, fill out your state elected representative, and email it to them. This is the only way we will get suppressors legalised.

Queensland:

Dear Sir/Madam [LAST NAME]

I, [YOUR NAME HERE], am writing to you to address a concern I have that involves firearms and specifically a health issue caused by the disallowance of sound moderating devices. 

Firearm sound moderating devices, also known as suppressors or silencers, are restricted to the weapons category “R” class as per the Queensland Weapons Categories Regulation 1997, Section 8(h). I am writing to you to request this be reviewed and changed. I believe that the shooting community would benefit by the use of these devices and would not be a cause for public concern.

It is common knowledge that the discharge of a firearm produces a loud noise, approximately 140 decibel (dB) up to 170+ dB, which may cause distress or harm to the user or bystanders without hearing protection1. At times, the level of noise produced can produce a noise that is guaranteed to cause hearing damage2. For context, a typical petrol lawn mower will idle at approximately 80-85 dB and emergency services sirens are approximately 120 dB. Wearable products, called Hearing Protective Devices (HPD’s), exist to help mitigate these noises and everyone is encouraged to wear them while using firearms. HPD’s come in the form of over the ear protection, known as “ear muffs”, and inner ear protection, known as “ear plugs”. Individually, these HPD’s can reduce the sound by up to 24 dBs, and while wearing both is advised, used in conjunction these will only reduce the sound by up to 29 dBs3. This means that in perfect conditions and using both forms of hearing protection, a shooter may be damaging their hearing with each shot. Efficacy of HPD’s can be compromised by the use of glasses, being bumped, or incorrectly worn.

A well-designed suppressor may reduce the level of noise produced by firearms, however contrary to what most media portrays, the resultant noise is still quite audible – just is able to reduce the noise to a level that won’t immediately cause hearing damage. The typical suppressor will reduce the sound produced by approximately 17-24 dBs4-6. Meaning that the sound produced by a firearm with a sound moderating device attached is still considerable, hence the allowance is not a concern for public safety, it is a vastly more effective tool to manage the effects of hearing damage when used in combination with HPD’s.

The quality-of-life impacts from hearing damage are very real, with the Australia Department of Health outlining hearing loss as a cause for illnesses such as depression and tinnitus. I strongly believe that the government should be looking beyond media hype to the future and should allow its citizens the same tools that are readily available in other parts of the world, to better protect their hearing and overall health.

To conclude, I am requesting sound moderating devices be removed from being classified as a category “R” weapon and reclassified as a tool that can be purchased with a category AB and/or H firearms licence.

Kind Regards,

[YOUR NAME HERE]

[ADDRESS]

[PHONE NUMBER]

References

  1. Meinke, D.K., et al., Prevention of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss from Recreational Firearms. Seminars in hearing, 2017. 38(4): p. 267-281.
  2. Saedi, B., et al., Transient threshold shift after gunshot noise exposure. B-ent, 2013. 9(2): p. 133-9.
  3. Abel, S.M. and N.M. Armstrong, The combined sound attenuation of earplugs and earmuffs. Applied acoustics, 1992. 36(1): p. 19-30.
  4. Lobarinas, E., et al., Differential effects of suppressors on hazardous sound pressure levels generated by AR-15 rifles: Considerations for recreational shooters, law enforcement, and the military. International Journal of Audiology, 2016. 55(sup1): p. S59-S71.
  5. Murphy, W.J., et al., The reduction of gunshot noise and auditory risk through the use of firearm suppressors and low-velocity ammunition. International Journal of Audiology, 2018. 57(sup1): p. S28-S41.
  6. Stewart, M., What to Know About Firearm Suppressors and Hearing Loss. ASHA leader, 2018. 23(3): p. 18-20.

Victoria:

Dear Sir/Madam [LAST NAME]

I, [YOUR NAME HERE], am writing to you to address a concern I have that involves firearms and specifically a health issue caused by the disallowance of sound moderating devices. 

Firearm sound moderating devices, also known as suppressors or silencers, are prohibited in Victoria as per the Victorian Firearms Act 1996, Division 10, Section 57. I am writing to you to request this be reviewed and changed. I believe that the shooting community would benefit by the use of these devices and would not be a cause for public concern.

It is common knowledge that the discharge of a firearm produces a loud noise, approximately 140 decibel (dB) up to 170+ dB, which may cause distress or harm to the user or bystanders without hearing protection1. At times, the level of noise produced can produce a noise that is guaranteed to cause hearing damage2. For context, a typical petrol lawn mower will idle at approximately 80-85 dB and emergency services sirens are approximately 120 dB. Wearable products, called Hearing Protective Devices (HPD’s), exist to help mitigate these noises and everyone is encouraged to wear them while using firearms. HPD’s come in the form of over the ear protection, known as “ear muffs”, and inner ear protection, known as “ear plugs”. Individually, these HPD’s can reduce the sound by up to 24 dBs, and while wearing both is advised, used in conjunction these will only reduce the sound by up to 29 dBs3. This means that in perfect conditions and using both forms of hearing protection, a shooter may be damaging their hearing with each shot. Efficacy of HPD’s can be compromised by the use of glasses, being bumped, or incorrectly worn.

A well-designed suppressor may reduce the level of noise produced by firearms, however contrary to what most media portrays, the resultant noise is still quite audible – just is able to reduce the noise to a level that won’t immediately cause hearing damage. The typical suppressor will reduce the sound produced by approximately 17-24 dBs4-6. Meaning that the sound produced by a firearm with a sound moderating device attached is still considerable, hence the allowance is not a concern for public safety, it is a vastly more effective tool to manage the effects of hearing damage when used in combination with HPD’s.

The quality-of-life impacts from hearing damage are very real, with the Australia Department of Health outlining hearing loss as a cause for illnesses such as depression and tinnitus. I strongly believe that the government should be looking beyond media hype to the future and should allow its citizens the same tools that are readily available in other parts of the world, to better protect their hearing and overall health.

To conclude, I am requesting sound moderating devices be removed from being classified as a prohibited item and reclassified as a tool that can be purchased with a category AB and/or H firearms licence.

Kind Regards,

[YOUR NAME HERE]

[ADDRESS]

[PHONE NUMBER]

References

  1. Meinke, D.K., et al., Prevention of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss from Recreational Firearms. Seminars in hearing, 2017. 38(4): p. 267-281.
  2. Saedi, B., et al., Transient threshold shift after gunshot noise exposure. B-ent, 2013. 9(2): p. 133-9.
  3. Abel, S.M. and N.M. Armstrong, The combined sound attenuation of earplugs and earmuffs. Applied acoustics, 1992. 36(1): p. 19-30.
  4. Lobarinas, E., et al., Differential effects of suppressors on hazardous sound pressure levels generated by AR-15 rifles: Considerations for recreational shooters, law enforcement, and the military. International Journal of Audiology, 2016. 55(sup1): p. S59-S71.
  5. Murphy, W.J., et al., The reduction of gunshot noise and auditory risk through the use of firearm suppressors and low-velocity ammunition. International Journal of Audiology, 2018. 57(sup1): p. S28-S41.
  6. Stewart, M., What to Know About Firearm Suppressors and Hearing Loss. ASHA leader, 2018. 23(3): p. 18-20.

South Australia:

Dear Sir/Madam [LAST NAME]

I, [YOUR NAME HERE], am writing to you to address a concern I have that involves firearms and specifically a health issue caused by the disallowance of sound moderating devices. 

Firearm sound moderating devices, also known as suppressors or silencers, are prohibited in South Australia as per the South Australian Firearms Act 2015, Part 7, Section 39. I am writing to you to request this be reviewed and changed. I believe that the shooting community would benefit by the use of these devices and would not be a cause for public concern.

It is common knowledge that the discharge of a firearm produces a loud noise, approximately 140 decibel (dB) up to 170+ dB, which may cause distress or harm to the user or bystanders without hearing protection1. At times, the level of noise produced can produce a noise that is guaranteed to cause hearing damage2. For context, a typical petrol lawn mower will idle at approximately 80-85 dB and emergency services sirens are approximately 120 dB. Wearable products, called Hearing Protective Devices (HPD’s), exist to help mitigate these noises and everyone is encouraged to wear them while using firearms. HPD’s come in the form of over the ear protection, known as “ear muffs”, and inner ear protection, known as “ear plugs”. Individually, these HPD’s can reduce the sound by up to 24 dBs, and while wearing both is advised, used in conjunction these will only reduce the sound by up to 29 dBs3. This means that in perfect conditions and using both forms of hearing protection, a shooter may be damaging their hearing with each shot. Efficacy of HPD’s can be compromised by the use of glasses, being bumped, or incorrectly worn.

A well-designed suppressor may reduce the level of noise produced by firearms, however contrary to what most media portrays, the resultant noise is still quite audible – just is able to reduce the noise to a level that won’t immediately cause hearing damage. The typical suppressor will reduce the sound produced by approximately 17-24 dBs4-6. Meaning that the sound produced by a firearm with a sound moderating device attached is still considerable, hence the allowance is not a concern for public safety, it is a vastly more effective tool to manage the effects of hearing damage when used in combination with HPD’s.

The quality-of-life impacts from hearing damage are very real, with the Australia Department of Health outlining hearing loss as a cause for illnesses such as depression and tinnitus. I strongly believe that the government should be looking beyond media hype to the future and should allow its citizens the same tools that are readily available in other parts of the world, to better protect their hearing and overall health.

To conclude, I am requesting sound moderating devices be removed from being classified as a prohibited item and reclassified as a tool that can be purchased with a category AB and/or H firearms licence.

Kind Regards,

[YOUR NAME HERE]

[ADDRESS]

[PHONE NUMBER]

References

  1. Meinke, D.K., et al., Prevention of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss from Recreational Firearms. Seminars in hearing, 2017. 38(4): p. 267-281.
  2. Saedi, B., et al., Transient threshold shift after gunshot noise exposure. B-ent, 2013. 9(2): p. 133-9.
  3. Abel, S.M. and N.M. Armstrong, The combined sound attenuation of earplugs and earmuffs. Applied acoustics, 1992. 36(1): p. 19-30.
  4. Lobarinas, E., et al., Differential effects of suppressors on hazardous sound pressure levels generated by AR-15 rifles: Considerations for recreational shooters, law enforcement, and the military. International Journal of Audiology, 2016. 55(sup1): p. S59-S71.
  5. Murphy, W.J., et al., The reduction of gunshot noise and auditory risk through the use of firearm suppressors and low-velocity ammunition. International Journal of Audiology, 2018. 57(sup1): p. S28-S41.
  6. Stewart, M., What to Know About Firearm Suppressors and Hearing Loss. ASHA leader, 2018. 23(3): p. 18-20.

Tasmania:

Dear Sir/Madam [LAST NAME]

I, [INSERT NAME HERE], am writing to you to address a concern I have that involves firearms and specifically a health issue caused by the disallowance of sound moderating devices. 

Firearm sound moderating devices, also known as suppressors or silencers, are restricted as per Tasmanian firearms ACT 1996 section 118 subsection (1). I am writing to you to request this be reviewed and changed. We believe that the shooting community would benefit by the use of these devices and would not be a cause for public concern.

It is common knowledge that the discharge of a firearm produces a loud noise, approximately 140 decibel (dB) up to 170+ dB, which may cause distress or harm to the user or bystanders without hearing protection1. At times, the level of noise produced can produce a noise that is guaranteed to cause hearing damage2. For context, a typical petrol lawn mower will idle at approximately 80-85 dB and emergency services sirens are approximately 120 dB. Wearable products, called Hearing Protective Devices (HPD’s), exist to help mitigate these noises and everyone is encouraged to wear them while using firearms. HPD’s come in the form of over the ear protection, known as “ear muffs”, and inner ear protection, known as “ear plugs”. Individually, these HPD’s can reduce the sound by up to 24 dBs, and while wearing both is advised, used in conjunction these will only reduce the sound by up to 29 dBs3. This means that in perfect conditions and using both forms of hearing protection, a shooter may be damaging their hearing with each shot. Efficacy of HPD’s can be compromised by the use of glasses, being bumped, or incorrectly worn.

A well-designed suppressor may reduce the level of noise produced by firearms, however contrary to what most media portrays, the resultant noise is still quite audible – just is able to reduce the noise to a level that won’t immediately cause hearing damage. The typical suppressor will reduce the sound produced by approximately 17-24 dBs4-6. Meaning that the sound produced by a firearm with a sound moderating device attached is still considerable, hence the allowance is not a concern for public safety, it is a vastly more effective tool to manage the effects of hearing damage when used in combination with HPD’s.

The quality-of-life impacts from hearing damage are very real, with the Australia Department of Health outlining hearing loss as a cause for illnesses such as depression and tinnitus. I strongly believe that the government should be looking beyond media hype to the future and should allow its citizens the same tools that are readily available in other parts of the world, to better protect their hearing and overall health.

To conclude, I am asking that sound moderating devices be removed from the firearms ACT 1996 section 118 subsection (1)  and reclassified as a tool that can be purchased with a category AB and/or H firearms licence

Kind Regards,

[YOUR NAME HERE]

[ADDRESS]

[PHONE NUMBER]

References

 

  1. Meinke, D.K., et al., Prevention of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss from Recreational Firearms. Seminars in hearing, 2017. 38(4): p. 267-281.
  2. Saedi, B., et al., Transient threshold shift after gunshot noise exposure. B-ent, 2013. 9(2): p. 133-9.
  3. Abel, S.M. and N.M. Armstrong, The combined sound attenuation of earplugs and earmuffs. Applied acoustics, 1992. 36(1): p. 19-30.
  4. Lobarinas, E., et al., Differential effects of suppressors on hazardous sound pressure levels generated by AR-15 rifles: Considerations for recreational shooters, law enforcement, and the military. International Journal of Audiology, 2016. 55(sup1): p. S59-S71.
  5. Murphy, W.J., et al., The reduction of gunshot noise and auditory risk through the use of firearm suppressors and low-velocity ammunition. International Journal of Audiology, 2018. 57(sup1): p. S28-S41.
  6. Stewart, M., What to Know About Firearm Suppressors and Hearing Loss. ASHA leader, 2018. 23(3): p. 18-20.
%d bloggers like this: