Armory Sponsor
Posted: 11/14/2002 5:05:24 AM EDT
|
They regulate silencers, I assume, because they are "assasin's tools" and want guns to have a sound signature to alert people nearby. But an unsilenced .22 isn't that loud. An unsilenced .223 is near defening. How about a law that says silencers are still restricted, but devices that lower the sound to no less tha X decibels is ok, with X being a very audible but not harmful level? |
|
[rant] I'll only be happy when the M_____ F_____s let me put mufflers on my guns. I mean, I'd sure as hell be facing a ticket if I took the muffler off my car. Government mandated noise pollution is such complete Bulls___! Sorry, this is the one aspect of gun control that pisses me off most. I mean, how are you supposed to recruit people (antis) into shooting if it's such a loud, obnoxious experience (for the uninitiated). I mean, who the hell would ever want to drive or ride in a car if it didn't have a muffler. But I guess maybe that's the point; the antis are afraid they might enjoy shooting with a suppressor. Couldn't have that. I don't care about your irrational fears; keep your M_____ F___ing laws off my guns! [/rant] Ah, that feels better; thanks for reading. |
|
My point is, this is something that could get done, especially with the current political climate. All the bonuses, safty, noise pollution reduction, without the only anti- argument. We could even bill it as an environmental/health issue. Let's put a noise limit on them. Nothing above X decibles. |
Silencers were banned because of fear they would be used for poaching not because of "assasins" they were regulated first during the great depression and people thought that they would be used by people who were hungry and needed food. Saw that one on the Discovery Channel!  If you guys want a silencer so bad just pony up the cash and get one. Its not that big a deal. |
|
Try living in Canada, s.2 says that anything that can fire a bullet (i.e. a barrel) is a firearm. s.84 says a device intended to muffle the report of a firearm. But says nothing of the firearm itself having a lower report (i.e. integral suppressor or permanently affixed muzzle suppressor) I guess those screw on ones kill too many people s.2 "firearm" means a barrelled weapon from which any shot, bullet or other projectile can be discharged and that is capable of causing serious bodily injury or death to a person, and includes any frame or receiver of such a barrelled weapon and anything that can be adapted for use as a firearm; s.84 "prohibited device" means (c) a device or contrivance designed or intended to muffle or stop the sound or report of a firearm, |
Suppressor-- American-Manufacture "Triple-X"; 10" long and 1 5/8 OD, contains all muzzle blast, and is emitted as a mellow "PUH" from muzzle. Moderator-- Bowers "MOUT"; measures 6" long and 1" OD,,, reduces sound signature to the shooter, still loud... but this unit projects the "boom" out forward of me, it is louder than the full size "Triple-X". 
|
|
it will be a cold day in hell before the law restricting supressors is ever turned back it will be a cold day in hell before any gun law is actively turned off is an integral supressor considered a supressor? How is this law worded? If you build a barrel with the supressor structures machined into it, couldn't it just be considered "a barrel"? |
www.american-manufacture.com |
Armory Sponsor