We at Eureka Outdoors believe that if we want to see any change in legislation, then we need to do something. We need to advocate. We need to contact our local representatives and make a case as to why and how the legislation should be changed. We don't believe in whinging on the internet.
As such, here is a letter we recently sent to one of our local members in Queensland (with details removed for privacy reasons):
Dear Minister
Subject: A look into firearm sound moderating devices (suppressors)
My name is Daniel and I am a resident within your electorate. I am writing to you today to address a concern I have with the current Weapons Act 1990. In particular, the regulation of noise moderating devices, known as suppressors. I wish to present to you the actual science behind how they work, and especially how they don’t work, and have done so in good faith. This is not about weakening Australia’s stringent gun laws, rather it is about ensuring we are able to use the right tools in the right circumstances.
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 the consideration that 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. In this letter you will find; the effects of noise and why current hearing protection is not adequate, how these devices, which shall be referred to as just “suppressors”, work and the difference they make to shooting, the health benefits they will bring, the contribution to conservation efforts, and the contribution to the economy that legalisation would bring using survey data. I request that you read this in good faith, with the understanding that I wish to balance the needs from our community and public safety.
It is common knowledge that the discharge of a firearm produces a loud noise, approximately 140 decibel (dB) up to 170+ dB(1), which may cause distress or harm to the user or bystanders without hearing protection. At times, the level of noise produced can produce a noise that is guaranteed to cause hearing damage(2). 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 dBs(3). 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 dBs(4-6). 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. We 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.
Conservation efforts will benefit greatly from the use of firearm suppressors. Ground shooting is a common form of feral animal control, with those authorised to use suppressors being able to induce a greater reduction in targeted animals than those who are not, in similar environments and conditions(7). National conservation plans, such as the National Feral Deer Action Plan, also recommend the use of firearm suppressors as a best practice management tool(8). The suppressor helps by reducing the loud “crack” produced by the firearm, which will generally frighten surrounding target species into fleeing, whereas with that noise mitigated, the remaining animals are able to be taken out, resulting in higher rates of success. Allowing primary producers, professional shooters, and recreational hunters have access to these devices will enhance the contributions to biosecurity and integrated pest management.
Lastly, in June of 2023, Firearm Owners United, a recently shutdown advocacy organisation, ran a month-long survey asking the shooting and hunting community for their thoughts on suppressors. The survey resulted in 100% of Queensland participants answering that they would buy at least one suppressor. 78% answered they would buy them for both recreational shooting and sports/target shooting, and 21% would use them solely for recreational shooting purposes. 27% answered they would buy 3 suppressors, while 26% answered they would buy more than 5(5+)(9). As Queensland currently has just over 200,000 individual licensees, this data infers that just over half of Queensland’s law-abiding firearm owners would purchase 480,000 suppressors after legalisation. Using pricing estimates from New Zealand, where suppressors are currently legally purchasable using a standard firearms licence for an average of $300, this would net an $144-million contribution to the economy. This does not include those who indicated they would purchase one, two, four, or five. As there are manufacturers in Australia, they would be able to ramp up production, creating jobs, and boosting local economies.
To conclude, I am asking for you and the LNP Government to consider working with current firearm organisations and dealers to find a way to allow these devices to be owned in Queensland by appropriately licensed and vetted individuals.
Thank you for your time,
Daniel
References
1. Meinke DK, Finan DS, Flamme GA, Murphy WJ, Stewart M, Lankford JE, et al. Prevention of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss from Recreational Firearms. Seminars in hearing. 2017;38(4):267-81.
2. Saedi B, Ghasemi M, Motiee M, Mojtahed M, Safavi A. Transient threshold shift after gunshot noise exposure. B-ent. 2013;9(2):133-9.
3. Abel SM, Armstrong NM. The combined sound attenuation of earplugs and earmuffs. Applied acoustics. 1992;36(1):19-30.
4. Lobarinas E, Scott R, Spankovich C, Le Prell CG. 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):S59-S71.
5. Murphy WJ, Flamme GA, Campbell AR, Zechmann EL, Tasko SM, Lankford JE, 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):S28-S41.
6. Stewart M. What to Know About Firearm Suppressors and Hearing Loss. ASHA leader. 2018;23(3):18-20.
7. Comte S, Thomas E, Bengsen AJ, Bennett A, Davis NE, Brown D, et al. Cost-effectiveness of volunteer and contract ground-based shooting of sambar deer in Australia. Wildlife Research. 2022:-.
8. Group NW. National Feral Deer Action Plan. 2023.