So help me understand this. Gun owners need silencers to protect their hearing and that of others at

[phylny]

the range, but I have no protection from their bullets. Is that about it?

[Soxfan58]

1. Yes, and now

You wont be able to hear the shots until it is too late.

[octoberlib]

2. They can wear earplugs. Period.

[UCmeNdc]

3. Ha! Ha! That is the most stupid B.S. excuse I have ever heard.

[aikoaiko]

4. You could wear a bullet-proof vest.

That would offer some protection.

[phylny]

31. Perhaps a suit of armor? To protect my head and limb arteries? nt

[aikoaiko]

36. Maybe, but what a burden for you.

It may not be worth it.

[phylny]

37. True. I wouldn't want my body to get in the way of someone's need to have enough guns to kill

hundreds or thousands of people. Think of the guns!

[7962]

5. Regardless of the 2nd, it would have no bearing on a damn silencer.

Its not an "arm". Its an accessory. Fuck those guys

[Lee-Lee]

6. Actually under the law they are defined as "firearms"

Have been since 1934

[Voltaire2]

7. there is no constitutional barrier to regulating silencers, which is why congress

is going to pass a law deregulating them. This will of course make it easier for the next white guy with an arsenal to kill even more people.

[ashredux]

8. And.....no constitutional barrier to regulating Airplanes either.....

But we do!

[Voltaire2]

9. well no shit, that was my point.

But don't point that at to this congress or they might further deregulate airplanes.

[7962]

46. But we have no "right" to own an airplane.

And I didn't know a silencer was considered a "firearm". Thats dumb as hell

[Orrex]

10. It's like motorcycles being so loud to protect the drivers' safety

The louder bike, we're told, is more easily noticed by other drivers, so the cyclist can ignore other basic, common sense safety measures like a helmet and protective clothing.

Or something.

[Adrahil]

11. The two things are unconnected.

Sound suppressors do not make a weapon more deadly. And the weapon itself remains quite loud.... just not loud enough to instantly damage your hearing.

Most people have never heard a gun fired with a suppressor, and ar shocked at how loud a "silenced" weapon is.

[SunSeeker]

21. Wrong. The two are indeed connected.

When a gun has silencer, it makes it a lot harder to determine where the shots are coming from....and thus harder to pinpoint where the killer is, and where to run to avoid getting shot. Silencers enable murder. There is no legitimate reason for a civilian to own one. Why can't these idiots just wear earplugs or any of the myriad of noise-canceling headphones/ear protectors made for shooters?

[Adrahil]

24. I've gone into this before...

I'm an "idiot" that uses a suppressor for hearing protection. I ALSO wear ear muffs. Why? Because guns are LOUD. REALLY LOUD. With a suppressor and Muffs, I can get the sound levels down to about 105 dB. Still loud, but not dangerous to my hearing.

I have damaged hearing already, so I want the maximum protection I can get, and still hear what's going on around me. Suppressors are freely available in many countries where guns are heavily regulated because of this reason.

And here's the thing, the sound the victims in Vegas heard was 90% the supersonic CRACK of the bullet passing through the air, which a sound suppressor CANNOT suppress. And the report the gun DID make would have bounced off the pavement and other high rises making it difficult to trace the origin of the shot. Know how the police found out where he was? Muzzle flashes. Lucky thing he didn't have a more effective flash hider.

[kcr]

30. Do you use your gun to commit mass shootings?

I don't give a shit what you use your silencer for, assuming you're not a mass murderer. Get it? That's what's so hard for gun advocates to get, for some reason. You can take your gun to sleep with you and caress it and lovingly call it George if you want to. Who cares? It's not about you.

[Adrahil]

32. Then what point are you arguing? I'm missing it. NT

[kcr]

33. Yes, it's obvious you're missing it.

Your need to have a silent gun does not outweigh the public's need for safety. It's a pretty easy concept. I think those who can't get it don't want to.

[Adrahil]

34. I'm trying to have a reasonable conversation with you.

No need to get snarky.

As I've said, these devices do NOT make a gun silent. They DO contribute to hearing safety.

You wanna show me actual evidence that these devices threaten public safety, I'm all (hearing protected) ears. All I've seen so far is outcome based reasoning. You've decided on the outcome, evidence be damned.

[kcr]

35. I'll snark all I want. It's my defense mechanism against ridiculous arguments

Such as gun silencers do not make a gun silent. What is the purpose of gun silencers? We're not idiots. We know what they're for. No, they do not make them completely silent. That doesn't mean they don't serve their purpose. And whatever need you feel you've convinced yourself you have for them does not outweigh our need to be able to hear where and when guns are blasting away.

[Adrahil]

39. Oh for fuck's sake.

Average sound level of an unspressed gunshot: 165 dB.

Average maximum sound suppression of a sound suppressor: 30 dB

Average Sound level of suppressed gunshot: 135 db.

That's louder that a freaking lightning bolt hitting outside your house.

Here's a fact checker article on the subject:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/03/20/are-firearms-with-a-silencer-quiet/?utm_term=.4e9d8db81311

So stop talking absolute rubbish about a subject you obviously know nothing about.

[SunSeeker]

42. Wrong. From your own article:

This gets us to the other issue — whether a suppressor makes it “quiet,” as Gillibrand tweeted, and harder for law enforcement officials to detect, as she and ARS suggested.

A 30-decibel reduction in theory means an AR-15 rifle would have a noise equivalent of 132 decibels. That is considered equivalent to a gunshot or a jackhammer. A .22-caliber pistol would be 116 decibels, which is louder than a 100-watt car stereo. In all likelihood, the noise level is actually higher.

So what are opponents of the law talking about?

“We aren’t necessarily talking about being out in the middle of the woods deer hunting where it is extremely quiet. Instead, gun crimes often occur in cities and in other very noisy places,” said Marc Brumer, a Gillibrand spokesman. “The shots would be heard by law enforcement or witnesses at the gun’s typical decibel level, but they often cannot be heard when a silencer is added. There are many sounds in cities that are far louder than a gunshot masked by a silencer.”

A nightclub, he noted, has a sound level of 155 decibels, while a subway is 102 decibels. (Actually, while sound levels as high as 155 decibels have been detected in night clubs, that’s not an average and would be very damaging to a person’s hearing.)

“Relative to their normal decibel level, particularly in those urban environments where gun crime often occurs, I outlined in previous email, silencers make guns impossible to hear over many common sounds and therefore ‘quiet,’ ” Brumer said.

[Adrahil]

43. But I thought they were "Silent?"

Have you ever even seen one in real life, much less used one?

[SunSeeker]

44. I never said they were "Silent."

The point is silencers make the gun harder to hear. Depending on the background noise level, it could be the difference between hearing the gun and not hearing the gun.

[SunSeeker]

41. Get better ear muffs. Or a better hobby. Fishing is very quiet.

And no, the cops didn't figure out what room he was in because of the muzzle flash. They figured it out when the smoke from his assault rifles set off his room's smoke detector.

[stillsoleft]

12. Then they can rent them from range

Only ranges can buy them. Sorry silencer manufacturers

[paleotn]

13. Pardon my naivity...

...but I thought they were only for mob hits.

[gordianot]

14. Subsonic (silenced) bullets have no use in target practice.

They do work out well for mob hits.

[Adrahil]

25. I do own some subsonic .22LR rounds.

Combined with a suppressor, they make my .22LR rifle pretty quiet. I have them to deal with wounded critters in the neighborhood without panicking all the neighbors. A few years ago, a coyote badly wounded a feral cat and the poor thing was lying in my back yard with its guts hanging out crying in agony. I put it out of its misery and buried it, but panicked the neighbors.

I do not, however, use them for target practice or plinking.

[Hortensis]

15. Is concern about 3.5 million Americans in bad trouble being silenced?

[Not Ruth]

16. Single payer and silencers are legal in France

Wonder if the GOP will put them in the same bill

[octoberlib]

17. Why should anybody be able to buy armor piercing bullets? You'd think cops would be raising

holy hell about this.

[hack89]

18. Did you actually look at the proposed legislation?

it is not clear to me how it makes armor piercing bullets legal. Can you explain it to me? Thanks.

[atreides1]

19. Here's the section!

Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement Act

TITLE XVI—LAWFUL PURPOSE AND SELF-DEFENSE

SEC. 1601. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the “Lawful Purpose and Self Defense Act”.


SEC. 1602. ELIMINATION OF AUTHORITY TO RECLASSIFY POPULAR RIFLE AMMUNITION AS “ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION”.
Section 921(a)(17) of title 18, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in subparagraph (B)(i), by striking “may be used” and inserting “is designed and intended by the manufacturer or importer for use”;

(2) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by inserting “by the manufacturer or importer” before “for use”; and

(3) in subparagraph (C), by striking “the Attorney General finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” and inserting “is primarily intended by the manufacturer or importer to be used in a rifle or shotgun, a handgun projectile that is designed and intended by the manufacturer or importer to be used for hunting, recreational, or competitive shooting”.

What can you define from this?

[hack89]

20. I guess that is my point.

it hard to look at that and see the intended results.

[Adrahil]

26. This is a result of....

The current law defining armor piercing bullets in such a way that the BATF can classify almost any centerfire rifle cartridge as "armor piercing." That because soft armor (Kevlar) was designed to stop handgun bullets. Almost ANY centerfire rifle cartridge can penetrate soft body armor, including just about any kind of hunting cartridge.

[Lee-Lee]

40. Here is what that is

The initial law was intended to ban actual billers designed to be fired from a pistol an penetrate soft body armor. That's good intent.

Almost any rifle ammo will go through a vest, of any design. Your great grandfathers 30-30 lever action will.

The way the law was written it can, and has been in the past interpreted by the BATFE to mean if there was even one pistol sold in a caliber that they could classify tge caliber as a pistol caliber and apply the law to that caliber.

As technology has progressed new alloys are used in hunting rounds that are not the century's old lead and copper design. These are not made or intended to be armor piecing pistol rounds but because of how the law is written they are under it.

For example the US Military is now using ammunition that has no lead at all in order to be more environmentally sensitive and not have problems with lead pollution at ranges. It's not armor piercing and not made to be- they have a different round for that- but under the law that ammonia would be classed as AP so civilians can't buy it.

[NickB79]

23. Because every deer rifle uses bullets that can penetrate armor?

Seriously, a 100-yr old lever-action .30-30 that Grandpa hunted deer with fires a round fast enough to defeat body armor.

It's never been clear how you ban all ammo that can pierce body armor without instantly banning almost all hunting bigger than rabbits, squirrels and ducks.

[Break time]

45. Most high powered

Rifles will penetrate body armor, a knife will penetrate body armor and an arrow will go through like a hot knife through butter...

a couple of classes will actually stop high powered rifles and even armor piercing rounds
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type III (Rifles). This armor protects against 7.62mm full metal jacketed (FMJ) bullets (U.S. military designation M80), with nominal masses of 9.6 g (148 gr), impacting at a minimum velocity of 838 m/s (2750 ft/s) or less. It also provides protection against Type I through III-A threats. Type III body armor is clearly intended only for tactical situations when the threat warrants such protection, such as barricade confrontations involving sporting rifles.

Type IV (Armor Piercing Rifle). This armor protects against .30 caliber armor piercing (AP) bullets (U.S. military designation M2 AP), with nominal masses of 10.8 g (166 gr), impacting at a minimum velocity of 869 m/s (2850 ft/s) or less. It also provides at least single-hit protection against the Type I through III threats. Type IV body armor provides the highest level of protection currently available. Because this armor is intended to resist "armor piercing" bullets, it often uses ceramic materials. Such materials are brittle in nature and may provide only single-shot protection, since the ceramic tends to break up when struck. As with Type III armor, Type IV armor is clearly intended only for tactical situations when the threat warrants such protection.

[avebury]

22. They need silencers to make them more efficient killers -

of humans and animals as they mow them down.

Only in the US is there a Congress willing to consider passing a bill that makes mass murder more easy for the shooter and harder for law enforcement to deal with active shooter situations. I wish that there was a way to hold them accountable in criminal and/or civil court when someone inevitably uses silencers when he/she commits mass murder.

[Sunlei]

27. If Congress drops more regs relating to silencers, shooters & poachers will be impossible to "hear"

only thing stopping some evil assholes in USA is fear of being caught. (heard shooting)

[MineralMan]

28. Nobody needs a silencer for a firearm.

Lots of firearms owners, though, would like to have them. It's one more accessory to add to their mountain of accessories. It also lets them play "secret agent man" more effectively.

None of this stuff is about need. It's all about WANT.

They want silencers and they want them NOW! Sadly, there's no trap door to the garbage bin for those Veruca Salts.

[Adrahil]

38. I'd agree it's about wants, but...

Of all the things get riled up over about guns, sound suppressors shouldn't be on that list, IMO.

Most people have no idea that these devices do not actually silence weapons at all. The exception to this could be small caliber handguns using sub-sonic ammo, so I guess if someone was really worried, they could put a minimum sound level and firearm has to produce, suppressor or not.

[tenderfoot]

29. Now now. You wouldn't want people to go deaf when they're getting shot at.

eom