Jump to content
45Doll

Coleman & Menendez Are Forever Busy - Ban Silencers

Recommended Posts

I've learned so many new things from reading the linked article.

"Silencers are dangerous weapons'.

The devices are also called 'mufflers'.

They reduce the 'kickback of a gun'.

They increase the ability to 'fire rounds more quickly'.

They 'increase shooter's accuracy'.

The proposed ban is called the HEAR act, when the I'M DEAF act might be more accurate.

And why the hell are there exemptions only for some atomic energy personnel and current and former law enforcement personnel?

  • FacePalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They cite five incidents in the past dozen years in which suppressors were used in mass shootings incidents to justify the urgent need for this legislation.  The ignorance of our legislators about firearm and related issues is astounding.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Old Glock guy said:

They cite five incidents in the past dozen years in which suppressors were used in mass shootings incidents to justify the urgent need for this legislation.  The ignorance of our legislators about firearm and related issues is astounding.

And the article even mentions there are over 900,000 silencers registered under the National Firearms Act.

Also, of the five incidents cited, one used a homemade silencer, one case was a presumed use of a silencer, though none was recovered when the shooter was arrested, and one wasn't a shooting at all, the man was arrested for buying a silencer from an undercover officer.

So TWO incidents in which the shooter might not have used a silencer (but still could have used the gun) had this law been in place.  

  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, 10X said:

And the article even mentions there are over 900,000 silencers registered under the National Firearms Act.

Also, of the five incidents cited, one used a homemade silencer, one case was a presumed use of a silencer, though none was recovered when the shooter was arrested, and one wasn't a shooting at all, the man was arrested for buying a silencer from an undercover officer.

So TWO incidents in which the shooter might not have used a silencer (but still could have used the gun) had this law been in place.  

900k sounds like, I dunno, .... COMMON USE?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...