Posted on 01/10/2013 3:30:52 PM PST by Second Amendment First
Silencers can muffle the sound of the sonic boom from a supersonic bullet - a sound generated after the bullet has left the silencer's muzzle? I did not know that. This writer is as clueless in every other area as he is on physics - I just don't have time to list all the other errors.
I guess some people still have to wear a diaper even after they’ve reached adulthood.
I think the federal restrictions on silencers is a leftist war on the hearing disabled.
ObamaKare should provide free silencers to shooters.
Just think of the money that would be saved on medical costs for those with damaged hearing.
Another idiot that learned everything they think they know about firearms from Hollywood movies.
/johnny
The Benefits of Using a Silencer
"One of the best examples of the effectiveness of brainwashing in this country is the transformation of an innocuous safety and noise reduction device to a sinister assassin’s tool in the public’s mind. While other countries may virtually ban guns, they tend to regard silencers as being in the category of automobile mufflers, a device to protect the hearing and prevent the disturbing the peace.
Typically, silencers have little or no regulation hindering their purchase and use abroad, but in this country, they are classed with machineguns and other National Federation Act-restricted weapons, which constitutes an effective prohibition for the general public. In England and the rest of Europe, it is very common to find permission to hunt on a man’s property linked to the provision that you use a silencer so that you don’t disturb the peace. Classically attired proper English gentlemen hunting with silencers on their rifles and shotguns are a common sight on the British hunting fields. Demand is so great that The Saddlery & Gunroom in Kent, England make an integral silencer for an over-and-under 20-gauge shotgun called the Hushpower purely for sporting use. The same is true on the Continent where dapper European gentry pursue game with the modest decorum of silenced weapons.
In South Africa, there are a number of game ranches that will not allow you to hunt unless you have a silencer on your rifle..."
I am going to go out on a limb here and agree that an "armed psychopath set on indiscriminate mass murder" should not have guns. I also believe that a drunk with a blood-alcohol reading of 0.30 should not drive a speeding gravel truck on the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway. Additionally, I believe that a homosexual pedophile should not take Cub Scouts off into the woods for a "camping" trip. Finally, I believe that an African communist should not be President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.
These clowns are worried about silencers?
A kid apparently walked into a high school today with a shotgun and shot another kid. No one noticed?
I guess armed guards at the doors wouldn’t have noticed that, so who needs them? They have no intention of preventing kids (or anyone else) from doing this?
I guess that “gun-free zone” sign worked really well.
Better yet, give the teacher a gun and when that muffled gun takes aim, the teacher blows his head off and no children are killed.
Here’s the truth about suppressors, folks. They are essentially specially designed lawn mower mufflers. So here’s the lunacy of the argument this idiot is making:
Noise suppressors are Federally required to be on every single internal combustion engine in the United States. Their purpose is to protect the user’s hearing. The end user of the device isn’t required to register it with the Federal government or pay an exorbitant tax own their ownership.
Noise suppressors designed for use on firearms are heavily regulated, heavily taxed, and flat out illegal at all in many, many jurisdictions. Yet they were designed for the same purpose as the ones for engines, to protect the users hearing.
This guy is an unbelievable idiot.
For Alexander Zaitchik, the author of this article, and this particular piece of bile:
FU, YOU ARROGANT LIBERAL SWINE. I'll match my knowledge of history and political theory against yours any time. Got any cash you might want to wager on that, you little pr!ck?
Had they been affordable? I'm not sure if we would have used them or not to be honest. I was trained to shoot as a bench rest shooter like my dad. We spend many hours on the range shooting an array of different wildcats. Ever tried to shoot distance from a bench with headphones on? I sort of doubt dad would let someone thread the end of the barrel on a 40x he owned and I know damn well I wouldn't let anyone do it to one of mine. But imagine you could buy that 40x custom barrel already threaded by a master? Would they have been more mainstream and part of the typical setup? 10 bucks said it would and everyone at the range would benefit from it.
My only reservation would be wondering what a device like that would do to accuracy.. and do they even make one that could survive a 25-06, 220 swift or .222 for more than a dozen shots. I've never even seen the inside of one so I can't even speak intelligently about that part of it.
Just more fartgas from the brainless moonbats, barkin, barkin, barkin over technology they do not understand.
Its like a dog barking at that “big truck” rolling down the street, just because its “scary!”
How are they attached to the barrel?
Of all the hoplophobic weirdness that we have in this country on the political left, this is the most puzzling. Perhaps it's because they know that eventually, they'll be able to use "noise pollution" laws to close down ranges and hunting leases.
The usual armed guard at Taft HS called-in absent, since he was ‘snowed-in’ today.
The exercise starts with a militarized baseline, as both shooters unloaded designed-for-damage rounds from high-capacity magazines loaded into assault rifles
Sweet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.