Posted on 03/14/2017 1:28:47 PM PDT by Kaslin
People who kill with guns do not care how loud the shot is. They know that by the time even the cops get there, they will be gone from the scene. They also know that no one is going to go rushing to the sound of a gunshot, they also know many people are scared of hearing a gunshot. Movies exaggerate how silent a suppressed firearm is.
If stupidity was painful she’d need a constant IV drip of morphine.
And since a fair number of criminals use the Spray and Pray method of shooting, they could use a roll of paper towels duct taped to the end of the barrel to suppress the noise. Is Gillibrand going to call for the licensing of paper towels? Same goes for carpet remnants or anything else of a similar nature.
I’m more concerned about oppressed firearms.
How many cases do the police solve where they never heard the gun being fired in the first place? Probably in the 99.99% range would be my guess. So her argument is just plain stupid on the face of it.
OK I am not seeing why this is a priority. Really? We have real issues. This is not one.
Another important point is that houses are very good suppressors/silencers.
Think of the volume of a silencer. Think of the volume of a house.
The sound of a gunshot from the outside of a house, is much less than the sound of a gun with a suppressor/silencer.
OK I am not seeing why this is a priority.
It should be a priority, maybe not primary, but certainly secondary
1. It shows that the Trump administration is serious about the Second Amendment and rolling back stupid and counterproductive gun laws. It is hard to off serious arguments against this reform
2. It revitalizes the gun industry for probably the next 20 years. Where silencers are commonly available, nearly all shooters have them, for safety, hunting, and target shooting. Nearly all of Europe has them. Any child with money can buy them over the counter in New Zealand.
3. It makes it easier to recruit noise adverse people into the gun culture. A suppressed/muffled gun is just easier to shoot. A suppressed .22 is a real pleasure to use for instruction.
4. It limits range conflicts with anti-Second Amendmet types.
These are all great reasons, all work to our political benefit. Passage of the HPA would cement Second Amendment Supporters to Trump (and conservatives) for a generation.
I got it.
You can still hear a suppressed firing of a gun. It is just a little bit quieter. Anyone saying otherwise is a liar.
Thats crap. Silencers are not something that Trump should care about. He did not get elected promising silencers. And frankly you could not elect George Washington on a platform to bring back legalized silencers.
If some republican sticks that in a bill the press and the democrat party are going to have a field day. And frankly all the hunting fishing people here in Wisconsin love their guns but I have never heard one person say, I wish we could have silencers.
Suppressed guns are a good way to get gun control. People understand hunting. People understand personal defense. Gangs understand silencers. You’re a very dangerous person, and nobody should listen to you.
It is true that Trump did not run on reforming the stupid NFA law on silencers.
But it is a very easy law to pass, because the opposition has no credible way to oppose it.
Reforms have been passed in state after state after state. Even the BATF is likly behind it, because it makes sense.
Gun Mufflers/suppressors/silencers are easy to make, yet they are almost never used in crime. I think BATF found something like two cases a year where they were used in violent crime.
Here is something the Second in Command at the BATF put forward:
“Current law strictly limits the sale of gun silencers, devices that are attached to or part of the barrel of a gun that reduce noise and visible muzzle flash. While it is legal to buy silencers in most states, a purchase requires a nine-month waiting time and a special $200 tax. The gun industry and the NRA have long complained about these restrictions under the National Firearms Act, the law that regulates machine guns, and are lobbying for legislation to make it easier to buy silencers.”
From the Washington post, about the white paper.
Here is an easy link to the Ammoland article excerpted on Freerepublic. There is a link to the white paper there.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3522065/posts
Do some research on the issue.
I think you will change your mind.
New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand dumb and dumber to think she could get away with this lie.
- People understand that having to fire a gun in self defense is deafening (especially indoors) and that suppressors are not intrinsically evil.
- Gangs don't care one way or another - they kill people in broad daylight, in front of witnesses. They rely on public intimidation, not stealth.
- Trump has very little political capital invested in this issue, it's totally aside from his main agenda. However, if Congress puts this bill on his desk, he'll sign it because he knows that it makes our domestic enemies very uncomfortable.
- The Democrats at the state and local level have been fairly successful in killing re-zoning requests related to construction of new shooting ranges by using the "noise pollution" argument. If this bill becomes law, they'll have to come up with new tactics. Go to a Wisconsin gun shop and ask the guys about *that*.
It's ironic, you must admit. The left has been yammering on about "noise pollution" for years. Along comes a proposal to actually cut excess noise... and they immediately oppose it. IMO, Trump is the one who could have a field day with this.
But the alterations of the sound protect your hearing from being damaged. It also makes a difference when it comes to hearing you do target practice or hunting a considerable distance away.
Guns are used far more often to murder people than any of the silent weapons you mentioned. However, out of countless murders involving guns, only a miniscule number such as one or two in an entire year, a small fraction of one percent, involve using a suppressor on the gun. Most murders involving a firearm are cases where the killer doesn’t care if the gunshot is loud and heard. The killer is long gone from the scene when the cops show up.
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.