Majority of Minnesota House votes for use of firearm suppressors in state

Protecting a shooter’s hearing is the goal of a bill that was passed Thursday by the House.

Sponsored by Rep. Mark Anderson (R-Lake Shore), HF1434 would allow firearm suppressors to be used in Minnesota.

Following the 89-40 vote, the bill heads to the Senate where Sen. Paul Gazelka (R-Nisswa) is the sponsor.

Rep. Mark Anderson

“This would bring Minnesota into the American mainstream by joining 39 other states that currently allow possession of sound suppressors for firearms,” Anderson said.

A common misconception is that firearm suppressors make a gun silent.

“What they do is reduce the sound from a rifle or from a pistol from instantly ear-damaging to just really, really loud,” Anderson said. “A typical suppressed rifle is about eight times louder than a jackhammer.”

Among the steps needed to acquire a suppressor is a federal background check. The federal government has allowed suppressors since 1934. “There won’t be a rash of James Bond-style shootings,” Anderson said. It is a federal felony to illegally possess a suppressor.

In committee, supporters said this bill would benefit hunters, people living near shooting ranges and firearms instructors, who say it can sometimes be had to communicate with their students.

“Like a seat belt, they don’t completely prevent injury, but they do reduce the risk and severity of ear damage,” Anderson said.

A pair of background check requirement amendments (here and here) put forth by Rep. Raymond Dehn (DFL-Mpls) were rejected.

“This is a bill which is dangerous to kids and other people in my area,” said Rep. Joe Mullery (DFL-Mpls). He also said the use of suppressors would impact ShotSpotter, a technology that is activated by the sound of gunfire and identifies the location of where the shots were fired.

Rep. Tony Cornish (R-Vernon Center) said a Minneapolis Police Department sergeant told him there are already problems with the technology.

“A .22 possibly with a muffler on it might not work, but we haven’t found any used in crimes anyway,” Cornish said. “He said that ShotSpotters right now might not work in an environmentally occluded area, like a park with a lot of trees, in alleys, certain buildings, inside of a car in a drive-by if it’s a small-caliber weapon.

“Also, this person told me that if a firearm with a suppressor was used and entered into the database than that sound would be recognized. … ShotSpotters can still work.”