National Trump on Gun ‘Silencers’ Like One Used in Virginia Beach Shooting: ‘I Don’t Like Them at All’

[DuneHopper]

^ Indeed. And under US law, the device is defined as a "silencer" or "muffler". Since the inventor called it that and that is how it is defined legally, I tend to use that word. To each their own though.

Not a been fan of the legally defined...... I think the term Silencer is far more politically dangerous. It gives antis the impression no sound is made. And that is being sold to the masses as this. So right or wrong name, its a bad reference as it is not accurate.
But hey that's just me, we have enough gun stereotypes.

 

[CountryGent]

You'll be fine with a Form 1.... I'm 7.5 months into my Form 4 wait on an individual trust. Just contacted my dealer yesterday, he said based on the returns he's getting now I've probably got 3 to 5 months left....

Ugh. The wait on NFA builds and transfers is such a pain. There are people who think all firearms should be registered. Well, based upon the dumpster-fire that is the NFA process, I'm pretty sure that would be a thousand times worse.

 

[coyote223]

Has anyone even produced any proof, that a "silencer" was actually used? Or are we just expected to take their word for it? They plan to keep us completely in the dark like Vegas,,,

 

[Jcon268]

I wasn't unhappy to see them go.

It's the legal gymnastics they used to get them banned that ticks me off. Just because it doesn't affect you or any other given person doesn't make it ok. It also sets a dangerous precedent that anti gunners will gladly refer to when they hold the majority and have a president of their choosing.

 

[Steel Head]

It's the legal gymnastics they used to get them banned that ticks me off. Just because it doesn't affect you or any other given person doesn't make it ok. It also sets a dangerous precedent that anti gunners will gladly refer to when they hold the majority and have a president of their choosing.

I don't disagree with you on the precedent.

 

[HB of CJ]

I for one just keep telling myself that in spite of how crazy things are, can I imagine how bad things might have been if That Woman had been elected President? Yes, I can. Oh boy.

 

[CountryGent]

It's the legal gymnastics they used to get them banned that ticks me off. Just because it doesn't affect you or any other given person doesn't make it ok. It also sets a dangerous precedent that anti gunners will gladly refer to when they hold the majority and have a president of their choosing.

Agreed. And having read the ruling, I would be hard pressed to find another recent document (legal or otherwise) that involved so much mental gymnastics. I, personally, had no use for bumpstocks, but I don't like the government taking people's property, and the precedent set is indeed quite dangerous.

 

[oneharmonic]

I for one just keep telling myself that in spite of how crazy things are, can I imagine how bad things might have been if That Woman had been elected President? Yes, I can. Oh boy.

Instead of thinking about hypothetical situations, why not consider the facts? Obama never used his executive authority to ban bump stocks, even though he could have. Obama let the ATF act independently and make their own determination. The ATF determined bump stocks were legal.

Then Trump came along, signed an executive order for the ATF to declare bump stocks as machine guns, and had them banned.

 

[bikemutt]

Instead of thinking about hypothetical situations, why not consider the facts? Obama never used his executive authority to ban bump stocks, even though he could have. Obama let the ATF act independently and make their own determination. The ATF determined bump stocks were legal.

Then Trump came along, signed an executive order for the ATF to declare bump stocks as machine guns, and had them banned.

Presidential and legislative reactions rarely take place in a vacuum. How many high-profile crimes involving the use of a bump stock did President Obama have to deal with? Answer is zero. How many times did President Clinton have to deal with the loss of the World Trade Centers and a the loss of a considerable number of innocent Americans? Answer is zero. But, President Bush gave us TSA. I'm not suggesting I agree with what Trump did concerning bump stocks, I don't. The point is that comparing what one President did not do with what another President did when the circumstances were completely different is a stretch.

 

[jbett98]

Obama was obsessed with passing his health care act, everything else was a distraction.

 

[Tom Louis]

How many times did President Clinton have to deal with the loss of the World Trade Centers and a the loss of a considerable number of innocent Americans? Answer is zero.

Bill Clinton was President when the World Trade Center was attacked the first time in February of 1993. Over one thousand injured and six killed. He was also President two years later when the Oklahoma City bombing occurred. One hundred sixty eight killed.

 

[bikemutt]

Bill Clinton was President when the World Trade Center was attacked the first time in February of 1993. Over one thousand injured and six killed. He was also President two years later when the Oklahoma City bombing occurred. One hundred sixty eight killed.

Good eye.

My point still stands though; Clinton couldn't make bombs any more illegal than they already were. If the 9/11 attackers had used bombs Bush couldn't have made bombs any more illegal either.

 

[Ura-Ki]

I was wondering the same thing. Everything I've read thus far is that they confirmed he legally bought the handguns, but they haven't determined the legal status of the silencer. If it was on the registry, presumably that would be super easy to check.

Still no word, and no photos! And YES, the registry can be checked in about an hours time!

The only reason the NFA is such a S-L-O-W process is the number of people actually processing the paperwork and issuing the stamp and papers. the entire process takes less then 5 min work, and it's by an unnamed sealed order within the dept that keeps it slow! Imagine if the process went as fast as a regular BGC? ( Which it actually does) how many more would be processed? See a pattern? Same as any other NFA transfer, so we wait, and wait, and wait some more, and then wait again!

I'm still waiting as fast as I can for another Can! My 8th!

 

[Longbeard]

Trump on Gun 'Silencers' Like One Used in Virginia Beach Shooting: 'I Don't Like Them at All'

Not good.

This seems like another MK Ultra brainwashing:
Project MKUltra - Wikipedia
Its "too convenient" that whenever a particular firearm, option, becomes popular its used in a mass
shooting. Also look at the Hegelian Dialectic which is: "Problem-Reaction-Solution" or the elites
create a problem, they know how the public will react , and they have a ready made solution. Its
used to control societies.
The Hegelian Dialectic and its use in Controlling Modern Society
Sorry about the heavy reading.

Blessings,
Longbeard

 

[Ura-Ki]

This seems like another MK Ultra brainwashing:
Project MKUltra - Wikipedia
Its "too convenient" that whenever a particular firearm, option, becomes popular its used in a mass
shooting. Also look at the Hegelian Dialectic which is: "Problem-Reaction-Solution" or the elites
create a problem, they know how the public will react , and they have a ready made solution. Its
used to control societies.
The Hegelian Dialectic and its use in Controlling Modern Society
Sorry about the heavy reading.

Blessings,
Longbeard

Beem saying it since Sandy Hook, its all a chit show to convince the sheeple that we need to dissarm Americans for our own safety!
Brother @nammac amd I were just discussing this very thing! Sadly, its not out in public, and quickly dismissed as tin foil when it does get discussed

 

[GWS]

If you're worried about executive overreach, a principled Democrat (who believes there are limits to executive authority) is better than a Republican who thinks himself a monarch.

LOL
It sounds like you have forgotten who Trump's opponent was in 2016.
A "principled" Democrat will be pretty hard to find at any point in time.

 

[CountryGent]

The latest report I read was the silencer was legally owned.

Linda Kuehn, a Virginia Beach police spokeswoman, said Monday that the gunman's silencer was purchased legally.

 

[Longbeard]

Beem saying it since Sandy Hook, its all a chit show to convince the sheeple that we need to dissarm Americans for our own safety!
Brother @nammac amd I were just discussing this very thing! Sadly, its not out in public, and quickly dismissed as tin foil when it does get discussed

As I always say: "Slaves aren't allowed to own swords..."
People in power will always seek to disarm the masses.
LB

 

[GWS]

OK folks, as a former frenzy buyer I'd like to put my 2 cents in on this. I was the guy who ran off to the store any and every time a potential ammo tax or restriction was brought up
5 cent per bullet tax? Off to the store or internet
Background checks for ammo?
No more mail order direct to your house?
When I moved up here I had better than 2 tons of ammo and reloading components to move. My knee is a ruin, from earlier injuries and now made worse from all the heavy lifting. I've hardly done any shooting because of it. I'm an O. Henry story.
My point is chasing after every potential threat isn't really healthy and it's a very long process to go from "I don't like them." to banning. There are already a ton of laws and an onerous process to acquire a suppressor. This is totally different from bump stocks which had no federal laws about them one way or the other.
My bet is nothing will happen. If there has been any talk about "silencers" on the news, I've certainly missed it, so I think this will blow over. They want our guns after all. Suppressors are moot if they get our guns.
That said, I am keeping an eye on things and will be contacting my congressperson et al, if I'm wrong.

 

[RVTECH]

Gun rights advocates say silencers don't make firearms more deadly. But for Dewar, the confusion led to precious seconds ticking by while a mass murderer rampaged through the building.

This part is nonsensical. What i am 'hearing' is the antis are in a left handed way accepting shootings are going to take place and are using the reported sounds of the shots being mistaken for other things so they are using this as a tactic to support a ban on them? It's a backwards way of approaching this.