Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am not anti-gun but could someone explain the need for silencer legislation to me
Here is what the sponsor said
Duncan argues that silencers are used by hunters and target shooters to limit potential hearing loss from gunfire. Duncan introduced a stand-alone silencer bill, dubbed the “Hearing Protection Act," in January. That legislation currently has 160 co-sponsors, including several
Could a silencer be used on the weapons used in the LV massacre. If so how many more victims would there have been
I am not anti-gun but could someone explain the need for silencer legislation to me
Here is what the sponsor said
Duncan argues that silencers are used by hunters and target shooters to limit potential hearing loss from gunfire. Duncan introduced a stand-alone silencer bill, dubbed the “Hearing Protection Act," in January. That legislation currently has 160 co-sponsors, including several
Could a silencer be used on the weapons used in the LV massacre. If so how many more victims would there have been
Of course it can. Even a rock can be used in that attack. In a venue like that, a truck would be far more deadly.
A silencer does NOT silence the gun like what the left and Hollywood want you to believe. The sound of gunfire would lose a few decibels and it's still FREAKING LOUD for any supersonic ammunition - bullets fly faster than the sound causing a sound boom. Subsonic ammunition can be suppressed much better, but subsonic ammunition is not as deadly as the supersonic at that distance.
How many more victims would it cause if the gunfire was slightly quieter? Nobody knows.
However, if the point is to save lives, I suggest we ban alcohol as alcohol has zero legitimate use and kills more people each year than guns. At least silencer can protect hearing and it's environmental friendly.
Mass murders like that are extremely rare events - we have better chance being stricken by lightening. It's not wise to form a policy based on extremely rare events.
Life-long hunter here...never saw the need for a silencer...would not some ear protection work..if that's that issue?
Sounds like a spurious excuse to me.
I guess that the thought that silencers might make murder easier to get away with--never crossed their minds?
I am not anti-gun but could someone explain the need for silencer legislation to me
Here is what the sponsor said
Duncan argues that silencers are used by hunters and target shooters to limit potential hearing loss from gunfire. Duncan introduced a stand-alone silencer bill, dubbed the “Hearing Protection Act," in January. That legislation currently has 160 co-sponsors, including several
Could a silencer be used on the weapons used in the LV massacre. If so how many more victims would there have been
Life-long hunter here...never saw the need for a silencer...would not some ear protection work..if that's that issue?
Sounds like a spurious excuse to me.
I guess that the thought that silencers might make murder easier to get away with--never crossed their minds?
Suppressors and AR-15s are great to hunt wild hogs.
Of course it can. Even a rock can be used in that attack. In a venue like that, a truck would be far more deadly.
A silencer does NOT silence the gun like what the left and Hollywood want you to believe. The sound of gunfire would lose a few decibels and it's still FREAKING LOUD for any supersonic ammunition - bullets fly faster than the sound causing a sound boom. Subsonic ammunition can be suppressed much better, but subsonic ammunition is not as deadly as the supersonic at that distance.
How many more victims would it cause if the gunfire was slightly quieter? Nobody knows.
Sure, I guess...of course, pulling the load on a round until it's sub-sonic...and firing from a point-blank distance..would ensure both silence and effectiveness, but who'd think of that?
Our special forces uses suppressed rounds...not silent..but if you were next door, you'd not hear a thing.
A sub-sonic .22 with a silencer can be very quiet indeed.
The question is why do we need to make this legal...are we to believe that protecting the hearing of a few enthusiasts..who have other options...is worth making murder easier?
What kind of trade-off is that for a healthy society?
Heard hogs go down HARD. Never thought of an AR15 for that purpose. Guess it kind of makes sense for hogs. Have a hunting friend. Hogs = mean + smart + tough + will charge you. Course from a stand... They dont climb trees.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
