Overnight, the Government of the United Kingdom released its long-awaited response to public consultation on the use of sound moderators. In a written statement to Parliament, Minister for Policing and Crime Prevention, Dame Diana Johnson MP, announced that the UK Government will move to remove the licensing requirement for sound moderators.
This marks a major policy breakthrough, following years of careful and effective advocacy by our friends at the British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC). Speaking after the announcement, BASC’s Executive Director of Communications and Public Affairs, Christopher Graffius, said:
“The announcement comes off the back of years of lobbying work, and we are glad the government has listened to the reasoned arguments put forward.”
The UK Government has now formally recognised that:
“There are strong arguments in favour of removing sound moderators from firearms licensing controls… these items are a firearms accessory that present no danger in themselves to the public.”
Sound moderators are a valuable tool for wildlife management and offer clear health and safety benefits to shooters, especially hearing protection and reduced recoil.
So, Why Can’t We Victorians Have Nice Things?
In Victoria, a lack of understanding of what sound moderators are (and are not), combined with a cynical scare campaign from prohibitionist groups, has created a public policy deadlock that defies logic.
Gun control activists continue to exploit their social licence to make exaggerated and misleading claims, which are too often repeated uncritically by the media and accepted at face value by policymakers.
Take this comment from Stephen Bendle of the Alannah & Madeline Foundation, published in The Age in 2022:
“Silencers make guns more deadly. They make it harder to hear a gun being fired, and that’s dangerous for the community and police.”
This is pure alarmism, unsupported by evidence and driven by ideology rather than expertise. If policy makers take any notice of it at all, it should be only to reject it with the contempt it deserves.
So, What’s the Real Story?
As the UK Government has rightly acknowledged, sound moderators are simply accessories, tools that provide real-world benefits in a range of shooting and wildlife control contexts.
These tools are standard equipment for recreational hunters and land managers in New Zealand, the UK, much of Europe, the USA, and Africa. The benefits are clear:
- Hearing protection: Moderators reduce sound pressure by 20–35 dB, significantly lowering the risk of long-term hearing damage.
- Animal welfare and efficacy: Less disturbance improves opportunities for follow-up shots or harvesting multiple animals.
- Reduced recoil: Improves shooter comfort, confidence, and target reacquisition—especially with larger centrefire rifles.
- Noise amenity: Lower sound impact on nearby properties and wildlife.
And crucially, there is no credible peer-reviewed criminology or crime data suggesting that sound moderators pose any meaningful risk to public safety or are misused by criminals.
What’s in a name—Does a Sound Moderator by any other name still smell as sweet?
In Australian legislation, these devices are still called “silencers,” a term originally coined (somewhat inaccurately) by their inventor, Hiram Maxim. Maxim invented car mufflers at the same time, which is essentially the same tool as a muffler (moderator, silencer, suppressor) on a firearm.
But language matters:
- “Silencer” sounds sinister, evoking Hollywood villains and criminal use. Prohibitionists use it deliberately to stoke fear.
- “Suppressor” is more accurate and has been adopted widely by firearm users, trainers, and law enforcement in the U.S.
- “Moderator” is the preferred term in the UK and much of Europe. It fits neatly within the public health and wildlife management narrative.
We’ve used “sound moderator” here because it reflects the UK usage, and because it’s the term most consistent with truth and common sense.
As the Bard wrote, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. But if you let it be branded a “toxic weed,” how many people will want to plant it?
SSAA Victoria: We’ll keep fighting for common sense
SSAA Victoria’s Hunting Development Manager, David Laird, welcomed the UK announcement and congratulated BASC on its success:
“This is a massive step forward for common sense. BASC’s work shows what’s possible when facts and reason are allowed to lead policy. The UK Government has recognised that sound moderators are a benefit, not a threat, and it’s time Australia followed suit.”
“We’ll keep making the case here in Victoria. Whether you call them suppressors, silencers, or moderators, they’re a public health tool, a wildlife management tool, and a smart choice for responsible shooters.”