Welcome To The Club, Huskers

Not that I'm aware of.

 

Then why your question about being put on a list?

 

I'm not worried about it because I did not give them my name to put on their list of gun owners.

Not that it matters much because im probably on a list someplace already. But why encourage them?

 

No its not.

 

Out of sight, out of mind.

 

Even with my MI CPL (yes I’m on that list) I’ve purchased at my LGS with no questions asked and no purchase delay… that alone put me on another list. I don’t worry about it, it wouldn’t do any good.

 

No it probably won't change anything.

But they are doing the wrong thing and violating people's right to privacy and I will not enable or encourage them.

No good ever comes from doing the wrong thing.

 

Come to think of it - there was some questions in the paperwork and my identity confirmed. “They” like lists…. I do what I have to by law and don’t look back.

 

You don't even know enough to know how loudly everyone is laughing at your post in this thread

 

A crossbow would be a much better choice or a knife or better yet a garrote.

Can you cite a case for the last time someone was prosecuted for using a suppressor to kill someone?

 

You forgot pillow over the face.

 

Yep, very deadly…. so are vehicles. Anyway, can you answer the question?

ETA: kinda messed up the tags, but you’ll all get it, I think.

 

It'd be as silly as if somebody claimed nobody needs a car that has more than three tires, seats more than one passenger, has a range of more than 50 miles, or can go more then 25 mph....

Oh wait....

 

Yes, and no knife should be sharper than a butter knife.

I’s just looking for an answer to the question about when was the last time a suppressor was used in murder.

 

I'm looking forward to @Gdawg007's answer.

 

Why it was just last week on Magnum P.I..

 

A suppressor can be used to reduce report and concussion. And flash. Anyone can choose to reduce those things for ANY reason. The poster I responded to claimed ONLY HOODLUMS AND THUGS HAD LEGITIMATE USE FOR SUPPRESSORS.

All I’ve done is explain to the ignorant that is a false statement and a false premise. I have NEVER claimed suppressors can not be used for nefarious purposes. It’s a fact they almost never are, but that’s a difference subject. My point has ONLY BEEN TO REFUTE A FALSE CLAIM ABOUT SUPPRESSOR USERS made by another poster.

No, neither suppressors nor muff or in ear protection reduce sound much. That’s why if one is shooting a lot you must use a COMBINATION of methods to avoid damage. I don’t care if you act condescending. It’s your right. But your opinions are so far incorrect. Shooting prairie dogs doesn’t mean I’m the only one who knows guns. But the folks I’m posting to do not know anything about guns while pretending to. You may know more than them. We shall see.

Muzzle flash is an “it depends”. It depends on the total volume of the suppressor compared to the cartridge capacity. The powder type makes a difference. The actual barrel length relative to the optimal barrel length for that cartridge. And on if it’s first round fired or subsequent rounds quickly after an initial round. Often first rounds are brighter than flash without a device. Same reason as first rounds often register higher dB than subsequent rounds with suppressors.

Now, if you want to say I’m being dishonest please post where I’ve claimed suppressor’s attributes can’t be misused! I’m simply correcting disinformation from other PF members. If you feel you want to make a case suppressors are highly used and desired by criminal elements go ahead. Show some data. But it has nothing to do with the conversation I was having correcting false claims about suppressors being only for thugs. It’s quite the opposite actually.

 

I don't know if they are highly desired or not by criminals or not. The data does show they are rarely used in crimes. But of course, that data also shows that it's the most mundane of firearms that are used in most crimes because they are relatively cheap and easy to get. Suppressors are neither cheap nor easy for a criminal or one intending to be a criminal to get. Moreover, most crimes are not well planned out and are in the heat of the moment. Taking the time to attach a suppressor or keeping one on a weapon you are trying to conceal may negate that heat of the moment use. The usefulness of a suppressor for a criminal is debatable as well given it won't be any mystery that people are being shot regardless.

Another form of misinformation is acting like weapons aren't dangerous or deadly. Or omitting a useful purpose for a weapon or device that can be attached to it. This is a common argument used whenever someone sees an issue with our current gun laws or culture but it's a tired and invalid one. I'm all for pointing out the legitimate uses.

 

Are you? Hmm, that's a little sad.

 

I think one could kill someone with a butter knife.

Are you saying it's never been used in a murder? The answer is rarely, but not never. Given there's only 1.3 million suppressors compared to the many times more guns out there, it's also a matter of the odds.

ATF: 1.3 Million Silencers in U.S. Rarely Used in Crimes (freebeacon.com)

But you are mistaken in my intent. I'm merely pointing out they CAN be used to make the detection of a shooter, regardless of target, harder to locate. Do you deny that's their intended purpose? Anymore than you deny a gun's intended purpose is to kill? Unless you spread your butter with a gun...which would be really effing weird if you did and I would judge you for that.

 

@557: You've deployed thoughtful, articulate & well-informed takedowns of the stupendously ignorant. I commend your contributions, while simultaneously pointing out that you're essentially arguing with a flat-earther. Ignorance is bliss, and the member in question is the most blissed-out dude since the psychedelic flower children at Haight-Ashbury in the 60s.

@Cybred: Americans securing a tactical advantage over criminals by virtue of their CCW privileges - do you regard that to be good or bad?

 

The intended purpose is to reduce the sound level of the report.

 

Cool that you included some humor about spreading butter with a gun. But overall I see you’re trying to cover your tracks about suppressors and what you’ve said previously about them here.

To answer one of your questions that needs to be cleared-up and that you need to understand is that guns, even though they have a potential to kill, are not exactly carried by law abiding citizens with that specific intent in mind and would hate to have to use one to its full potential, Guns have been used many times to prevent a crime or physical attack, and without a shot fired.

 

LOL. A criminal can wrap a gun muzzle in a towel and effectively suppress the shot. This is documented to have happened. Suppressors are certainly cheap and easy to get if you are not law abiding. Ridiculously easy and cheap.

If anyone is interested in learning more, here’s a peer reviewed study.

https://www.westerncriminology.org/documents/WCR/v08n2/clark.pdf

Some of the conclusions.

Yes firearms are “deadly”. Shovels are great for digging holes and moving dirt. I use both regularly in my profession. Ya’ll are literally hiring me to do killing you wish to avoid doing for yourselves. I’m attempting to do it as humanely as possible for target animals and non target animals and people. It’s annoying to be told I’m a thug after being hired by someone without the balls to do their own killing. But it’s understandable. People swallow garbage like from this guy and just don’t know any better.

 

That's not how fear of the unknown works. I can't see it, therefore its on the mind.