• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

ATF needs suppressors for “health and safety”

Chuck is a ****ing idiot. When the guy next you on the rifle range is shooting a .338 Lapua, you want him to have a suppressor. I love shooting suppressed. Easier on the ears. Just a PITA to clean afterwards. Suppressed .22LR is great for training beginners.
 
How gun nutters "debate."
I see that you cannot counter my position. Chuck has no ****ing idea how suppressors work or the actual impact. They don't make guns silent.
 
I see that you cannot counter my position. Chuck has no ****ing idea how suppressors work or the actual impact. They don't make guns silent.
You have no "position." Got evidence? Or just barstool bloviation?
 
You have no "position." Got evidence? Or just barstool bloviation?
My comment was about Chuck’s lack of knowledge on suppressors. Chuck’s own words prove his lack of knowledge.
 
My comment was about Chuck’s lack of knowledge on suppressors. Chuck’s own words prove his lack of knowledge.
Sure. Ipse dixit. (refers to an assertion made without proof, relying solely on the authority or statement of the person making it. It's often used to criticize arguments that lack evidence or logical reasoning, essentially dismissing them as unsubstantiated claims based on someone's say-so.)
 

You don't say...
 
Nothing about suppressors for pistols?

I agree, there’s no valid reason for suppressors to be controlled under NFA, but do believe they should require a 4473.
 
Nothing about suppressors for pistols?

I agree, there’s no valid reason for suppressors to be controlled under NFA, but do believe they should require a 4473.

What's your reasoning for that?
 
Nothing about suppressors for pistols?

I agree, there’s no valid reason for suppressors to be controlled under NFA, but do believe they should require a 4473.
That is the proposal in the One Big Beautiful Bill. Since the NFA is a tax, the OBBB removes the tax, suppressors are no longer under the NFA and are classified as firearms under the GCA of 1968. So, a 4473 would be required.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…