Democrats introduce legislation to ban gun silencers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Steve S. said:
I am an avid gun owner and shooter but I can understand the other side’s fear - it is real and I understand why they have that fear. Is their fear reasonable or logical, to a degree yes it is.
Click to expand...

I agree. The fact that no one who knew the shooter knew that they were about to commit a random mass murder and that it could happen anywhere randomly without warning is frightening on a personal level for most people. The fact that some history of mental health problem and some sort of violent behavior on the part of the murderer is usually revealed in retrospect further frightens people since they would hope that those warnings are the triggers to prevent the murderer from acting, yet they didn't.

This isn't the same as the oft stated "don't go stupid places, with stupid people, doing stupid things, and stupid stuff won't happen to you" where we opine that you can avoid a large number of lethal threats by staying out of areas where murders are concentrated and by obeying the law. These random shootings are unexpected catastrophes that personally responsible behavior on your, my, everyone's part doesn't protect the responsible person. And that is our problem.

Anyone can feel threatened by these random acts of mayhem that they simply can't avoid by being personally responsible. That fear (not crippling hysteria inducing fear, but reasonable apprehension) moves them to look for solutions that are broad brush and expansive. We can explain the statistics that show you are more likely to die by being struck by lightning than in a random mass shooting, or that these random mass murders occur in clusters, the first triggering the next and next, that then die out for years before another cluster pops up, or that "the police/government/family/school/community" should have recognized the clear warning signs that in retrospect were there and "done something" and that it was the individual not the item that killed those people and instilled fear in many others. The problem is that none of that alleviates the apprehension that motivate people to want "something" to be done to prevent random mass murder that they or their family might get caught up in from occurring at all. Since it doesn't appear that being personally responsible or someone knowing a history of problems with the murder or the process to prevent these murderers from buying a gun legally or taking it from a family member didn't stop them from killing multiple people unexpectedly, they look to what can be controlled. The easiest thing to control is the means of carrying out the murders (especially since the laws and systems to control the person didn't work).

Isn't this how terrorism works? Conduct a random attack that produces as high a death count as possible with the means at hand and then do it again and then again showing the government can't protect you from these random attacks so as many people as possible become fearful. The goal of the terrorists is to get concessions for their cause and the results are usually restrictions on freedom of the people in an attempt to stop the fear and deaths. We're familiar with the infringements of the government on the innocent citizens of our country in the name of preventing terrorists randomly attacking us.

So don't be surprised when people have anxiety over a random mass shooting. They now expect that no one who had a clue that there was a potential problem could have or did act to try to stop it in time and the systems we currently have to prevent them accessing the means to carry it out didn't work. They are open to regulating the guaranteed rights under the BOR to alleviate that anxiety and feeling of threat as most people called for after terrorist attacks. And our responding with "shall not be infringed" doesn't play to their anxiety in face of the fact that random mass shooting does mean random.
 
Last edited:
Responding and acting in fear and anxiety always leads to no good. There is no such thing as a zero defect perfectly safe world. The pursuit of such a utopia leads to dysfunction and oppression.
 
Tommygunn said:
experts are notoriously bad at predicting just who will actually become violent.
Click to expand...
The actual number of before the fact accurate predictions (either way) is: Zero.
As in No, none, not a single, ever, Mental Health Expert has ever correctly predicted violence before the fact.

The evidence that the preemptive actions taken actually prevented violence is, at best, circumstantial.
 
John_R said:
Yes, because criminals always go through ATF hoops and pay tax stamps so they can have quieter drive-by shootings. The sheer illogic of this shows me that it's not serious at all, it's just to mess with us.
Click to expand...
The problem with that staement is that these ignorant morons only know what has been spoon-fed to them, and actually think they're "speaking truth"
 
When a person has reached a point in their mind that they no longer value being here and that not being here is more comforting to them, there is very little society can do to stop their final deed. In turn, if that person has an anger toward others and wants a reckoning or revenge, there is simply nothing available to stop them from a horrible act. Once a person decides that death is their final goal and others will pay a price, Katie bar the door - they then become unstoppable and predicting these acts is impossible.
So, you control the thing (weapon) by minimizing or eliminating the availability - just like most will kill a snake or spider - they do not understand the thing and all they know is fear so elimination is the only acceptable outcome.
I am an avid gun owner and shooter but I can understand the other side’s fear - it is real and I understand why they have that fear. Is their fear reasonable or logical, to a degree yes it is. Common possession and ownership of firearms that can literally reek havoc on multiple innocents with volumes of flying lead scares many people and it should because it naturally invokes fear, whether we like it or not, it is a very normal human reaction because it happens and they see it and it is uncontrollable and it is unpredictable and they become afraid.
So in summary, these scared people don’t give a damn what the 2A says or guarantees, they just want the fear to go away, they don’t want to be afraid anymore. I am an avid gun owner and shooter and I understand their fear - it is quite real and quite normal - I am not afraid and I do not live in fear but I do not know how to teach that mindset - I do not know how to help them.
I understand your point of view, but I have a question. Why do those people who are paranoid about gun owners the majority who obey the law, are not so afraid of the small group of criminals who commit the crimes?
total estimated gun owners in the U.S. 100,000,000 +/-?, total guns 400,000,000, ammo who knows? that is ten times the words combined armies (remember when the press was wetting their pants because Saddam had a 1,000,000 man army) 100 times the total US police forces.
The US had over 15,000,000 hunters in the past. "Just say no"
Edited to remove Vulgar word.
 
hk940 said:
When a person has reached a point in their mind that they no longer value being here and that not being here is more comforting to them, there is very little society can do to stop their final deed. In turn, if that person has an anger toward others and wants a reckoning or revenge, there is simply nothing available to stop them from a horrible act. Once a person decides that death is their final goal and others will pay a price, Katie bar the door - they then become unstoppable and predicting these acts is impossible.
So, you control the thing (weapon) by minimizing or eliminating the availability - just like most will kill a snake or spider - they do not understand the thing and all they know is fear so elimination is the only acceptable outcome.
I am an avid gun owner and shooter but I can understand the other side’s fear - it is real and I understand why they have that fear. Is their fear reasonable or logical, to a degree yes it is. Common possession and ownership of firearms that can literally reek havoc on multiple innocents with volumes of flying lead scares many people and it should because it naturally invokes fear, whether we like it or not, it is a very normal human reaction because it happens and they see it and it is uncontrollable and it is unpredictable and they become afraid.
So in summary, these scared people don’t give a damn what the 2A says or guarantees, they just want the fear to go away, they don’t want to be afraid anymore. I am an avid gun owner and shooter and I understand their fear - it is quite real and quite normal - I am not afraid and I do not live in fear but I do not know how to teach that mindset - I do not know how to help them.
I understand your point of view, but I have a question. Why do those people who are paranoid about gun owners the majority who obey the law, are not so afraid of the small group of criminals who commit the crimes?
total estimated gun owners in the U.S. 100,000,000 +/-?, total guns 400,000,000, ammo who knows? that is ten times the words combined armies (remember when the press was wetting their pants because Saddam had a 1,000,000 man army) 100 times the total US police forces.
The US had over 15,000,000 hunters in the past. "Just say no"
Edited to remove Vulgar word.
Click to expand...


Humans feared others long before the invention of firearms. Once humans ....or what ever pre-human proto-ape developed tribal behaviour, they became what is called "ethnocentric," and fear of strangers evolved. It didn't help that some people learned how to kill and thus justified the fear one tribe had for another. We believe humans are the only species that make war.
Untrue.
Ants make war on other species of ants - - - even taking prisoners and enslaving them.
Chimpanzees (far more closely related to humans than insects) make war as well, one tribe against another, usually to capture female chimps.
So we ought not feel so "all alone" on this third rock from the sun.
We cannot avoid fear of the unknown, it's in our genes. But we need to learn to better manage it and understand it.
 
We have become adept at using the fear to control others. It is a powerful force in our lives today. If we don't use the right deodorant, if we don't drive the proper car, if we don't go to church every Sunday, we will be doomed. Once the fear loses its grip, the lives of quiet desperation settle in and eventually there is social upheaval. History is rife with examples.
 
Mk VII said:
They are widely used here, and becoming more common.
Click to expand...
Yes. Other countries as well recognize them as ordinary firearm accessories and encourage their use for the hearing health and public noise reduction benefits. There have been bills introduced here to take them out from being classified as an NFA item, but they've never gone anywhere.
 
rust collector said:
We have become adept at using the fear to control others. It is a powerful force in our lives today.
Click to expand...

With many of the posts along these lines, there is a line in the movie "Dune" (1984) that seems to fit what so many have said here.
"Fear is the mind killer."
As we have seen in large numbers of people and politicians, their "fear" has so warped their thinking that they have no logic left to reason out a true, proper, and legal solution.
 
AlexanderA said:
I don't see the vast majority of the antigunners thinking it through that deeply. For the most part, these are well-meaning people that don't know much about guns. They respond emotionally to what they see on the news. Let's be careful not to join the "tin-foil brigade." It just makes us look bad.
Click to expand...
Sir/Ma'am, you are somewhat humorous. These rabid anti-gunners are *not* well meaning, nor are they responding emotionally. This is all a carefully planned charade. What they do not know however, and can never fully take into account; is the American citizen.
 
RETG said:
Prepare yourself, this is only the start. I believe the Democrats are going to throw out everything they can in regard to many subjects, including gun control measures, in the next year. Hoping that something will pass and get signed into law. They are afraid that after next year's election, they will not have the majority.

Personally, I could see suppressors, AWB, large mags and background checks to be the only ideas that have a chance of passing. I hope I am wrong, but too many weasels on the right that could sway too far left, while there are not enough of strong characters on the left to step up and say NO.

Time will tell...
Click to expand...
some of this is just to distract from what they are really doing. Most are symbolic as anything with real teeth would mean that a majority of their voters would be in prison.
 
hso said:
It didn't get anywhere in 2019 when it was introduced and there aren't enough votes to pass it now since there are senators on both sides of the aisle that won't support banning suppressors.
Here's a link to the 2021 bill. https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/pu...15BF6623D53A52A052A37E62FE775194.hear-act.pdf

Here's the thread in Activism with guidance on what might be done to suppress this legislation. https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/2021-hear-act-to-ban-and-buyback-suppressors.887351/ (please remember that Activism is a work space and very focused on what to do constructively to oppose Anti legislation and support Pro2A legislation).

As we, but not everyone, know suppressors are already NFA regulated and registered items requiring not only a background check, but Chief LEO approval, suppressors are legal in 42 states and legal to hunt with in 40 states, the Europeans and the 42 states treat them as hearing protective devices for shooters and as a courtesy for others, and that anyone supporting the legislation will be on the wrong side of the states and an embarrassment for supporting banning a federally regulated and registered firearms devices that require federal background checks and LE approval for the improved safety of users and those nearby.

In addition to Feinstein and Menendez, the HEAR Act is also cosponsored by Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Alex Padilla (D-Calif.).

Note that there is NO other sponsorship than these well known extreme Antis.

While suppressors may rarely be used in murders that is so rare it is below people being murdered by asphyxiation (another overused movie trope).


This bill is also supported by Everytown for Gun Safety and the Violence Policy Center.
Click to expand...
Hiram P Maxim (his father invented the Maxim/Vickers MG) invented the suppressor. That was the base from which the automotive muffler was designed. Do we not also ban the muffler?

BTW Hiram P Maxim is the father of amateur radio in the US. His home is the headquarters for the ARRL
 
  • Like
Reactions: hso
Will Studd had a show Cheese Slices. He went to different dairies and stores around the world. Went to an artisanal producer in England and they went out hunting for dinner. The farmer had a very upscale rifles, scope and suppressor. He explained to Will, that was to not annoy the surroundings. Will took a shot at game but being a novice got a scope ring over his eye. Took it as a good sport.
 
N9NWO said:
Do we not also ban the muffler?
Click to expand...

I get your pointments but is a bad analogy.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is requiring that new electric vehicles emit an audible sound when traveling at less than 19 mph because silent cars are killing people in parking lots (said tongue in cheek)

https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/quietcar_finalrule_11142016.pdf


theotherwaldo said:
Don't try to argue about guns with people that get most of their facts from bad old movies and video games... .
Click to expand...

I get that too.

However, if we dont, what will prompt them to change their mind and get real facts instead of emotional nonesense facts from msm?

I REFUSE!!!

Yes, I refuse to disengage the other side and will continue to try to educate with facts to sway thier emotional misinformed opinion.


Empathy over sympathy. If you engageand actually listen and try to understand... empathy over sympathy. If youre empathic and present facts, you'll be more effective than if you are just sympathetic spewing facts that don't resonate.

I feel that if we give up trying to get more on our side through empathy and thoughtful conversation appealing to thier emotion with facts then we have surrendered.

I refuse to surrender by giving up engagement.

Like the lottery, if you don't play, you can't win.


Emphasis added below.

The act or capacity of entering into or sharing the feelings of another is known as sympathy.

Empathy, on the other hand, not only is an identification of sorts but also connotes an awareness of one's separateness from the observed. One of the most difficult tasks put upon man is reflective commitment to another's problem while maintaining his own identity.
—Journal of the American Medical Association, 24 May
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
VA sheriff vows to deputize residents in response to expected gun control legislation
Replies
19
Views
1K
D.B. Cooper
D.B. Cooper
A
  • Locked
Democratic lawmakers introduce gun control bill that would ban magazines holding more than 10 rounds
2
Replies
44
Views
2K
Robert
Robert
F
  • Locked
Fox News Poll: Two Thirds Of American Gun Owners Would Defy A Federal Gun Ban
Replies
10
Views
822
PRM
PRM
A
  • Locked
Democrat Chris Murphy Introduces Universal Background Check Bill
Replies
1
Views
332
GEM
G
Old Hobo
  • Locked
Banning semi-autos and magazines via taxation
2 3
Replies
55
Views
2K
hso
hso
Back
Top