I would be THRILLED for the US to enact gun regulations similar to those of New Zealand or Germany. Finally, common ground!
19 Likes
God, I hated that movie when it came out. The Matt Helm books were grittier and more realistic than the Bond books (which, of course, is why this song sounds like a bad Bond title song). At least the series eventually spawned Austin Powers.
2 Likes
It is simple when you realize the nra is for manufactures and not owners.
3 Likes
watch without thinking about the books… they are enjoyable pure 60’s bachelor pad super spy cheese.
2 Likes
A suppressor makes the gun much harder to conceal. If there were an advantage to criminals using them, they would be doing so.
But once again, a suppressor does not make anyone stealthy. A muffler does not make a Harley silent, just more bearable. It is about the same with guns.
Silenced Hollywood guns are essentially a fake thing, like shooting at cars and having them explode into huge fireballs. When people base their perceptions of reality on film tropes, they end up having pretty unrealistic expectations.
2 Likes
The NRA has been pushing for making it easier for people with a history of mental illness to buy a firearm ever since Wayne LaPierre was diagnosed with a nervous disorder many years ago.
I can’t believe the GOP are already politicizing this horrible, horrible event! They could have at least waited a respectful amount of time before (not) passing legislation related to firearms control.
This naked and disgusting pandering is a direct affront to the second amendment.
It’s too soon, folks. Let the victims grieve.
3 Likes
This is a shallow argument used too often. What criminals actually do, versus what they would do if competent, is rarely the same thing. Ease of access is typically a factor.
In what way is the public interest served by making the sound of firearms more bearable? It certainly has nothing to do with the Second Amendment.
3 Likes
The public interest in making firearms slightly quieter serves the public interest in exactly the same way that requiring mufflers on Harleys does.
2 Likes
…the hearing cancellation is really just delayed out of respect for those shot today
Wouldn’t it be more respectful to have the hearing today and decide that silencers should continue to be regulated?
1 Like
Both, The point is that the reality doesn’t match the perception of the truly silent high caliber shot seen in popular media.
As others have pointed out, they’re pretty pointless in controlled situations like ranges etc… where range commands are generally going to be shouted or over a loudspeaker (can still hear them through ear muffs). A suppressor would be awesome for less rigidly controlled situations like hunting where, as others have pointed out, it’s best for everyone if you can have as many senses assessing the totality of the situation at all times.
And it’s not that they don’t work, the difference is more like “holy crap, now I have permanent hearing damage” to “holy crap that was still loud, but non-damaging”.
This is my rifle
This is my gun
This is for shooting
This is for fun
2 Likes
That’s not true. You need the same license for buying/owning a suppressor as you need for buying/owning a gun.
From wikipedia:
In Germany, a suppressor is treated the same in the eyes of the law as the weapon it is designed for. Accordingly, suppressors for air guns, which can be purchased by anyone over 18 years of age, can as well be purchased by anyone over said age. Since, amongst other things “good cause” must be shown to be issued a license to own a firearm in Germany, the same “good cause” requirement exists for suppressors for these firearms. This requirement is handled very varyingly across the States of Germany. The State of Bavaria accepts the possession of a valid hunter’s license as “good cause” to own an unlimited number of suppressors, while North Rhine-Westphalia does not accept hunting as a “good cause” at all. Baden-Württemberg accepts “active exercise of hunting” as “good cause”, but only allows the purchase of one suppressor.
Btw there is a difference in german law between being allowed to own a gun (somewhat allowed with good cause) and being allowed to carrying it around (almost never allowed).
It’s true! I grew up on a farm there and have found a silencer very useful for pest control. With a silenced, subsonic 22 you can maybe get two or three rabbits before they work out what’s going on and scatter, without a silencer you get one shot and no do-overs.
That sounds like a horrible pain in the arse, if I’m being honest. I don’t kill animals because it’s fun or challenging, it just needs doing, so I’ll take the option with the nice point-and-click interface thanks. Plus I think rabbits are going to notice an arrow flying through the air more than a lead slug. They are also very sensitive to any movement on the horizon, so I’m not sure how you’re supposed to fire a bow while lying prone in the grass.
Me too! Licensing, storage and handling regulations, special dispensation and background checks required for anything fancier than a bolt-action, they all seem like good ideas.
9 Likes
You agree to ammunition that leaves traceable ids when fired, and I’ll agree you can have a silencer.
1 Like
True silenced guns exist. See the Forgotten Weapons video a few posts above. I thought about posting that particular one myself but got sidetracked. However silenced guns, in the true sense of the word, are fairly uncommon and require very specialized setups and their application is fairly narrow. A supressor on the other hand is pretty easy to install and use, but like you said, it doesn’t magically make a gun the perfect murder weapon. It just makes it easier to shoot because of the slightly decreased noise level. In Europe they’re legal and people aren’t running around using them to murder each other, it’s mostly hunters and range shooters.
I should have been more specific. But this is what the proposed law changes do here, allow suppressor purchases without Additional regulation. You would still need a background check.
LOL. What is your logic for that? Having a suppressor doesn’t make one more or less likely to commit a crime.
And there is already ballistic finger printing, allowing one to ID a bullet fired from a barrel by matching the grooves the rifling carves into it.
Which they should be. If you can own a gun, owning a suppressor shouldn’t be any more restricted that the fire arm. I’d be fine going through the NICS check for a suppressor.
But Germany has examples of how laws like this come to be, where popular opinion of objects being overly dangerous get them black listed. Ninja stars were banned because of this, even though their knife laws are fairly unrestricted.
1 Like
I’m sorry but that’s wrong too.
I recently bought a Kizer Feist Knife. It has a 7,5cm short blade but it locks in place once opened and therefore I had to tighten the pivot bolt to prevent one hand opening to stay compliant to the law.
Do I have to quantify what “fairly” means?
I didn’t say they didn’t have classes or some restrictions.
My point is you can carry a regular pocket knife, or own a larger fixed blade knife - all of which dramatically more dangerous than ninja stars.
Though your list adds the butterfly knife, which is restricted in a lot of countries because you can whip it around and make it all scary looking, even though it’s less dangerous and slower to deploy than a fixed blade or a regular pocket knife with a thumb assist. (Though some of them are double edged, so that is what gets them into trouble.)
The slingshot guy did a great video on German laws… let me find it.
1 Like
