Maybe we should write to any left wing congress critters also:
This article is eight years old but still relevant:
A Democrat's guide to why firearm sound suppressors ("silencers") should be made easier to obtain.Or if nothing else "borrow" some of the arguments.
Firearm suppressors, colloquially and inaccurately known as "silencers", are basic safety equipment when operating a firearm, as their use prevents both hearing damage and reduces the noise pollution of firing ranges. Due to a little-known section of Federal law called the National Firearms Act, their possession has been all but criminalized.
(This article refers to these devices by the correct "suppressors" instead of the more colloquial and inaccurate "silencers", as they do no such thing.)
Suppressors have the benefit of both decreasing the likelihood of hearing loss and decreasing noise pollution from hunting and shooting ranges. In the UK, Europe, and Scandinavia, they recognize the health and environmental benefits of suppressors, so they are sold over the counter without much regulation at all.
Democrats, as the party that pushes for safer health and environmental regulations, should embrace any effort to lessen the regulations surrounding firearm suppressors, preferably by making them subject to the same regulations as ordinary firearms - a simple instant background check and no onerous tax. This is called a "Title I" firearm. Let's explore a bit...
BTW the author makes a good argument for wearing electronic earmuffs while hunting outdoors.
First for hearing protection and, although not mentioned, IMHO sound amplification of quiet possible targets or other hunters.