• NRA Wants to Ease Laws on Buying Gun Silencers
    43 replies, posted
[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;52285187]Goddamit Hollywood Suppressors Trope, In real life you still can hear the gunshot, it just a bit softer so you don't damage your hearing firing it.[/QUOTE] They only need to fit a suppressor onto a machine gun and fire at some targets on a shooting range while the people who are skeptical watch and more importantly listen. Demonstrations are always good for cleaning up misunderstandings.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;52289496]A suppressor makes it significantly less loud, and is the difference between double earpro and single earpro. On top of this, it reduces lateral sound movement, so you're not blowing the hell out of the guy next to you in the other lane on the range. I'd absolutely put a suppressor on every modern rifle I have, because I always feel like a dick when i'm shooting .300 winmag next to a guy who's plinking .22, cause you're effectively blowing them the fuck out.[/QUOTE] You are right, the sound disipates enough so that people 'nearby' will be safer. But my post explicitly states that for the Operator of the firearm it's does not, which was in reponse to the post I quoted. No matter what you do, you will not be able to bring a gun down to safe DB levels, yes it'll be significantly less loud, but it is still too loud because you are just too close to the gun, end of story. If you are shooting at a range inside then you are fucked anyway because the sound has no where to go but reverb around. The highest rated earplugs you can get have a 39db Noise Reduction Rate (highest NRR iv'e ever seen is 36, custom moulded to my own ear costing just under £100), and noise reduction is not as simple as subtraction, it's incrimental and involves subtraction / dividing which right now im too tired to explain beyond the following example which i know off the top of my head. In a room with 100db's, if you have earplugs with a 33 db NRR plugs, that does not lower the sound in your ear to 67db's, it actually lowers the sound to about 87db. you get around 13db total reduction. Say you also had 36 Rated NNR ear muffs too, again, it's not as simple as adding the 2 NRR totals together. It actually comes out at around 39 db total. So im guessing thats maybe 20db. And this is without taking into account that plugs and muffs unless moulded to the user do not get same as the test NRR or the fact that sounds can simple bypass the ear canal entirely and by just traveling through the skin and bone in your head to reach the ear drum. To go a little further with this A Supressed. 22 Rifle taken from [URL]https://crimefictionbook.com/2015/04/28/how-loud-is-a-silencer/[/URL] apparantly still clocks in at 116db That is a supressed shot from the rifle that everyone in here is saying is quiet, at 110db, most peoples ears will give them pain sensations, the bodys subtle way of saying "get me the fuck out of here", with double ear protection from the above thats down to mid 90db's. Ultimately, the risk is yours to take, but as somone speaking from personal experience, do not fuck your ears up by thinking you are above the damage, you won't know how loud is too loud for you till it's too late, 85 is the 'agreed' number from all the specialists in the world who know these sort of things and even then alot of them still argue that is still too high and that repeated exposure to +85dbs means you can withstand that noise level for less and less each time. Don't do what I did, heed my advice and do all you possbibly can, in all walks of life to keep your ears safe, you only get 1 pair and if you fuck them, thats it. - Wrote this at 4am, possiblt got mistakes in it which ill correct tommorow ... if i remember :v:
[QUOTE=Funion;52285259]I dunno. A gunshot in a neighborhood is pretty identifiable, whereas with a silencer it sounds like a door slamming or a book slapping hard down on a desk. Waiting 10 months to be approved is probably overkill though, so perhaps just reducing it to the quick background check in addition to photographs and fingerprints would be sufficient.[/QUOTE] it still sounds distinctly like a gun, and the truth is just about anything makes an effective suppressor. bottles of water, cats, potatos, oil filters, there isn't much that you can put on the end of a gun that won't make it quieter.
[QUOTE=butre;52289926]it still sounds distinctly like a gun, and the truth is just about anything makes an effective suppressor. bottles of water, cats, potatos, oil filters, there isn't much that you can put on the end of a gun that won't make it quieter.[/QUOTE] [video=youtube;7t_pcWPdSDs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7t_pcWPdSDs[/video] (it's a .22 so it's still quiet but just showing how cheap the adapter is)
[QUOTE=bitches;52285246]Too bad that rural America considers firearm registration an equal sin.[/QUOTE] Thats because it is. Firearms registration is unconstitutional. Not from or in rural America either btw
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52290289]Thats because it is. Firearms registration is unconstitutional. Not from or in rural America either btw[/QUOTE] if theres a bunch of good reasons for firearm registration but the only argument against it is its unconstitutional, then maybe you should revise your constitution.
[QUOTE=Pat.Lithium;52290370]if theres a bunch of good reasons for firearm registration but the only argument against it is its unconstitutional, then maybe you should revise your constitution.[/QUOTE] But there are no good reasons for a firearms registration, and any ones that you may think you have have had an even more relevant negative to go along with it. The primary one has been stated already.
[QUOTE=Revenge282;52290442]But there are no good reasons for a firearms registration, and any ones that you may think you have have had an even more relevant negative to go along with it. The primary one has been stated already.[/QUOTE] what reason was that? things i can think of that are bad: - [B]it'll eventually lead to great restrictions or outright bans on certain firearm categories.[/B] this isn't a bad thing but it seems when people are told what type of guns they can't have they get uppity. more about this in the next point - [B]it'll lead to confiscation of weapons bought before the introduction of the registry.[/B] while this is true, maybe set a period after it is introduced or like 5 years where previously owned weapons won't be confiscated as long as they were legally able to own the firearm previously. then when this time is up maybe legislation will be different and they can keep the guns. - [B]criminals are going to get guns anyway.[/B] and yeah they will, guns are hard to get here, automatic weapons are outright illegal no matter who you are but there was a shooting yesterday with a machine gun. however i believe that it will lead to lower gun crime. there are countries where you can get a gun almost as easily as in the states, but it has to be registered. and per 100 people they have lower gun crime. and i'd like to sit here all day and debate it but its not my country and therefore not my issue. its up to the people of the united states to decide what is best for them. also i'd like to add that i think that there shouldn't be restrictions on buying a suppressor. if you can buy the gun, you should be allowed to buy a suppressor.
[QUOTE=Pat.Lithium;52290529]what reason was that? things i can think of that are bad: - [B]it'll eventually lead to great restrictions or outright bans on certain firearm categories.[/B] this isn't a bad thing but it seems when people are told what type of guns they can't have they get uppity. more about this in the next point - [B]it'll lead to confiscation of weapons bought before the introduction of the registry.[/B] while this is true, maybe set a period after it is introduced or like 5 years where previously owned weapons won't be confiscated as long as they were legally able to own the firearm previously. then when this time is up maybe legislation will be different and they can keep the guns. - [B]criminals are going to get guns anyway.[/B] and yeah they will, guns are hard to get here, automatic weapons are outright illegal no matter who you are but there was a shooting yesterday with a machine gun. however i believe that it will lead to lower gun crime. there are countries where you can get a gun almost as easily as in the states, but it has to be registered. and per 100 people they have lower gun crime. and i'd like to sit here all day and debate it but its not my country and therefore not my issue. its up to the people of the united states to decide what is best for them. also i'd like to add that i think that there shouldn't be restrictions on buying a suppressor. if you can buy the gun, you should be allowed to buy a suppressor.[/QUOTE] #1 is a bad thing because you don't get these right back. I cannot think of an instance where the people who were supposedly supposed to "compromise" actually gained anything from gun legislation, except for when previous legislation expires. #2 is correct, but (I may be wrong, and I hope someone can confirm/deny) I am pretty sure that this kind of protect was included in some places where this kind of registration was implemented, only to be overturned later on. What other purpose would that list serve to those people? I promise you, a registry is shockingly useless to catching any kind of criminal activity. #3 The registry doesn't prevent gun crime. Other factors such as mental health and poverty/education are probably the main factors at play there. The US sucks abysmally at both of those.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52290289]Thats because it is. Firearms registration is unconstitutional. Not from or in rural America either btw[/QUOTE] What part of the Constitution would make this illegal
This makes a lot of sense. I'd love to be able to get a suppressor for a .22 or something so I could plink in the backyard without bothering the neighbors too much.
[QUOTE=Pat.Lithium;52290529]however i believe that it will lead to lower gun crime. there are countries where you can get a gun almost as easily as in the states, but it has to be registered. and per 100 people they have lower gun crime.[/QUOTE] Correlation ≠ causation. I can almost guarantee you those countries don't have the same societal problems we have.
[QUOTE=Pat.Lithium;52290529]what reason was that? things i can think of that are bad: - [B]it'll eventually lead to great restrictions or outright bans on certain firearm categories.[/B] this isn't a bad thing but it seems when people are told what type of guns they can't have they get uppity. more about this in the next point - [B]it'll lead to confiscation of weapons bought before the introduction of the registry.[/B] while this is true, maybe set a period after it is introduced or like 5 years where previously owned weapons won't be confiscated as long as they were legally able to own the firearm previously. then when this time is up maybe legislation will be different and they can keep the guns. - [B]criminals are going to get guns anyway.[/B] and yeah they will, guns are hard to get here, automatic weapons are outright illegal no matter who you are but there was a shooting yesterday with a machine gun. however i believe that it will lead to lower gun crime. there are countries where you can get a gun almost as easily as in the states, but it has to be registered. and per 100 people they have lower gun crime. and i'd like to sit here all day and debate it but its not my country and therefore not my issue. its up to the people of the united states to decide what is best for them. also i'd like to add that i think that there shouldn't be restrictions on buying a suppressor. if you can buy the gun, you should be allowed to buy a suppressor.[/QUOTE] Adding some additional things to Revenge's post: #1, The government would never stop trying to restrict different types of weapons until there are none left. In Massachusetts at least, pretty much every semi-automatic rifle is now prohibited unless it's an M1A or a Mini 14 with dainty little 5 round magazines. The best part about this is it's not even a real law which was passed, but just an "enforcement notice" by the attorney general of the state. Also weapons now need a fucking 10 lbs trigger pull. #2, Ex post facto laws are supposed to be prohibited already, but that didn't the government of Louisiana from going full retard and confiscating everyone's guns in warrant-less door to door raids during hurricane Katrina. #3, Not only are criminals going to get guns, but a registry can actually help them to obtain weapons if leaked or hacked into. This is what happened with the New York SAFE act. Now every criminal in that area has a convenient list of who owns firearms and where they live etc... Alternatively, burglars now know who not to break into if they want to avoid a possible confrontation with any legally armed homeowners.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.