Silencer Opponents Stomped By Washington Post Fact Check
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Silencer Opponents Stomped By Washington Post Fact Check

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Oldsmar, FL (Tampa Bay)
    Posts
    30,151

    Default Silencer Opponents Stomped By Washington Post Fact Check

    Surprising, given the anti-gun and extreme Liberal editorial policy of the Washington Post.

    Giffords Group For Lies About Silencers

    Posted at 9:52 am on March 20, 2017 by Bob Owens, Bearing Arms

    Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post is calling out New York’s junior Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and the gun-grabbers of Americans for Responsible Solutions for lying about firearm silencers in their desperate opposition to the Hearing Protection Act.

    “You know what protects your hearing better than a silencer? Ear plugs.”
    — Americans for a Responsible Solution, in a tweet, March 13

    “When someone gets shot by a gun with a silencer, it’s quiet. Witnesses might not hear. Police will be less likely to track down the shooter.”
    — Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), in a tweet, March 14

    Congress is preparing to debate the so-called Hearing Protection Act, which would streamline the purchase of suppressors for firearms. To buy a suppressor, more popularly known as a silencer, one must meet a number of requirements that result in a nine-month approval process (including submitting fingerprints and a photograph) and a $200 tax stamp. (A silencer generally costs hundreds of dollars, and can easily top $1,000.) The legislation would make buying a suppressor as easy as buying a firearm (with an instant background check), and do away with the tax stamp and federal registration.

    We obviously take no position on whether this proposed law would be good or bad, but we were curious about this pair of tweets. Americans for a Responsible Solution (ARS), in its tweet, further noted that the law “would make it easier for active shooters to inflict serious harm on our communities without being detected by trained law enforcement professionals.”

    What’s the impact of a suppressor on firearm noise? Does it actually make the firearm quiet or is that simply something you see in the movies?

    Kessler goes on to challenge and dissect claims made by spokespersons for Gillibrand, Americans For Responsible Solutions, and the Violence Policy Center (another gun control group we’ve busted for falsifying reports in the past), with a little help from yours truly.

    I don’t want to steal too much of Kessler’s thunder, so read the whole article at the Washington Post, and share it with your friends, especially those who got their education on silencers from the movies.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ilencer-quiet/
    211 BC: I swear by Jupiter Optimus Maximus .... in the army of the consul Gnaeus Fulvius Centumalus Maximus and for 10 miles around it I will not steal anything worth more than a denarius in any one day.

    2016 AD: To enhance our community's aggregate through multi-platform metrics of media synergy catalyzing integrated outcomes of macro-disciplines toward inclusive methodology paradigms generating positive algorithms of unwavering commitment to our children, the flag, and God.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Pennsylvania where Johnny Reb got new shoes !
    Posts
    1,523

    Default

    Strange times we live in indeed !
    The Wash Po actually publishing an article about firearms that debunks some of the anti gun groups BS.

    Never thought I'd see it !

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    central Ks
    Posts
    3,919

    Default

    Perhaps the ComPost is trying to move away from publishing Fake News..............................
    I don't always venture out into the sub-freezing darkness, but when I do, it is hunting season, and I carry a Browning. Stay hungry my friends.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    GunBoards.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    3,284

    Default

    Cans are not regulated at all here,walk into a gunshop and buy one off the shelf like you would a scope or sling.They are a non-issue in crime hardly if ever being used by crims......in fact 99% of their use is by hunters,to save their own hearing and not disturb game or pests they are shooting.Anyone who says they are a danger is simply living in fantasy land.........they are absolutely of NO consequence in a criminal sense.And besides,anyone with a lathe and a basic understanding of machining can easily make them....

  6. #5
    Clyde's Avatar
    Clyde is offline Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    74,244

    Default

    Surely no one thinks that Dim-Libs would be silenced by mere facts. Or the example of another English-speaking nation.

    Never been clear to me just why suppressors got slapped with Class Three restrictions back in '34. Movies and J. Edgar's irrational fears got the basic auto-weapon restrictions through, but suppressors?
    Absent comrades (sound of breaking glass)

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    732

    Default

    Silencers in the USA have gotten the Hollywood treatment: Everything the general public "knows" about silencers is a lie manufactured by the movie industry. The first lie being the word "silencer", because silencers are anything but SILENT. The best designs have the ability to drop the considerable noise of a gunshot a few decibels. Nothing more. They should actually be called "mufflers" because that is what they really are. They work on exactly the same principles as a automobile or lawnmower muffler. Not exactly silent, but helpful in the salvation of ones' hearing and keeping the background noise of the neighborhood to be no more than a dull roar.
    Forget the Hollywood movie silencers with that barely above a whisper "poof"! They do not exist in the real world. The only place where such things exist is in the make believe world of Tinsel Town.

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    N Mexico
    Posts
    5,930

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by caerlonie View Post
    Cans are not regulated at all here,walk into a gunshop and buy one off the shelf like you would a scope or sling.They are a non-issue in crime hardly if ever being used by crims......in fact 99% of their use is by hunters,to save their own hearing and not disturb game or pests they are shooting.Anyone who says they are a danger is simply living in fantasy land.........they are absolutely of NO consequence in a criminal sense.And besides,anyone with a lathe and a basic understanding of machining can easily make them....
    Are they cheaper as a result? In the USA a good suppressor costs as much as a Glock handgun.
    "Saigon Tea, 60 P, you no buy you di di DI!"

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shooterike View Post
    Silencers in the USA have gotten the Hollywood treatment: Everything the general public "knows" about silencers is a lie manufactured by the movie industry. The first lie being the word "silencer", because silencers are anything but SILENT. The best designs have the ability to drop the considerable noise of a gunshot a few decibels. Nothing more. They should actually be called "mufflers" because that is what they really are. They work on exactly the same principles as a automobile or lawnmower muffler. Not exactly silent, but helpful in the salvation of ones' hearing and keeping the background noise of the neighborhood to be no more than a dull roar.
    Forget the Hollywood movie silencers with that barely above a whisper "poof"! They do not exist in the real world. The only place where such things exist is in the make believe world of Tinsel Town.
    Depends on what you are trying to silence. Trying to silence say a military M2 30.06 will not work very well, but silencing a .22 sub-sonic is very effective, and a shot cannot be heard from a few metres away.
    The British produced the De Lisle carbine during WW2 based on a Lee Enfield action firing a .45 ACP. round. It was very useful in commando raids, and in South East Asia.

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    3,284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ammolab View Post
    Are they cheaper as a result? In the USA a good suppressor costs as much as a Glock handgun.
    Yes....especially for me,as I work for a company that makes and fits suppressors,its all I do all day,apart from a bit or re-barrelling or similar tasks.Our .22 cans run between $70-100 and the centerfire around $250-300 for most calibers.Really big cans,I have to make individually on my lathe....biggest I have ever done was for a .50 BMG,I know that cost the buyer around $1000 but it was well worth it considering the amount of machining time I had to put into it not to mention the cost of materials suitable for a caliber like that.It would have been around 4" wide and 3ft long.The other main advantage,is that cans take a lot of the recoil out of hard kicking rifles,as they generally incorporate muzzle brakes in their design as well.You could expect a recoil reduction of maybe 30-40% on a rifle and on something like a 7mm rem mag a very common hunting caliber that is well worth having.BTW Hollywood aside they can,on certain firearms,quieten down the noise to almost nothing....a .22 rifle using subsonic ammo can be very quite indeed with a can fitted,and .410 shotguns can be made pretty darn quiet also if suppressed correctly.....but with most calibers firing super sonic cartridges the best you can achieve is taking some of the noise away,but still enough to be a useful reduction.

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    468

    Default

    It never fails to amaze me that US law is so backward on this topic. Suppressors are unrestricted and encouraged even in England, where shotgunners use them for hunting extensively.

    this change needs to happen. And soon.

  12. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    732

    Default Silnce is GOLDEN

    Quote Originally Posted by Austen View Post
    Depends on what you are trying to silence. Trying to silence say a military M2 30.06 will not work very well, but silencing a .22 sub-sonic is very effective, and a shot cannot be heard from a few metres away.
    The British produced the De Lisle carbine during WW2 based on a Lee Enfield action firing a .45 ACP. round. It was very useful in commando raids, and in South East Asia.
    I was speaking in general terms. You are correct in your observations. The .22 sub-sonic from a silenced Ruger auto pistol is very quiet. The same cartridge fired from an ordinary .22 bolt rifle is at nearly the same level. The downside is that it is lacking in power for really useful work. I knew Col. George Chinn who was very knowledgeable on all small arms, especially machineguns. We discussed silencers on a number of occasions. Mostly concerning details of design. The De Lisle is a famous design, but probably not as quiet as you think. Mitch WerBel's MAC .45 with a can, is in the same class and full auto! The most interesting silenced weapon I ever saw was a German bull pup "rifle" in 9mm. It used a regular Luger magazine to feed a small bolt action akin to that of the Spanish "Destroyer" police carbine. The silencer was built on to the barrel and off set to the bottom with a total length of 14-16 inches. A German 1930s hunting type scope was fitted. The entire package would easily fit into brief case. Unfortunately, I never had the opportunity to fire it, so I can not report on how well it was silenced.

  13. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,218

    Default

    My experience is limited to building homemade ones from "those" books 40 years ago, going out in the woods one dark night. Used an M1911. Pretty darn quiet, IMHO they'll do nicely. Biggest disadvantage to the home made ones is they're rather bulky. Make sure they're on tight. No doubt we'll be seeing a push for legislation banning "forbidden" knowledge.
    Yes, the Hollyweird treatment, aka post production dubbing. Cf "The Rifleman" and his 10 shot Winchester M1892.

  14. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    3,284

    Default

    Cans should be tightened onto the rifle firmly,and ideally the thread should be cut onto the muzzle by fitting the can to the rifle it is going on.It should be a smooth but firm fit not like the fit on a bolt+nut you would buy in a hardware store.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •