ATF needs suppressors for “health and safety”

[JMB1911A1]

Democrats have really gotten people into believing what suppressors are and are not with continual lies

"Who wants a silencer? Not the average citizen. They're law-abiding. Not our police officers. They're against these provisions that allow anyone to get a silencer. The only people who want silencers are criminals because they don't want people to hear their bad, horrible, deadly deeds," Schumer said while spewing complete nonsense to the media Thursday.

yes, many average citizens would like a suppressor (not a silencer, that's movies Chuck) In fact, criminals using suppressors are very very rare.

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.

 

[poppopfox]

Chuck is a ****ing idiot.

How gun nutters "debate."

 

[JMB1911A1]

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.

 

[poppopfox]

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?

 

[CLAX1911]

You have no "position." Got evidence? Or just barstool bloviation?

Do you know what a muffler on a car is?

 

[stealthycat]

How gun nutters "debate."

you understand he's a complete liar about suppressors right ?

 

[JMB1911A1]

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.

 

[poppopfox]

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.)

 

[RF667799]

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...

 

[RaleBulgarian]

So, it is being reported that the ATF is buying suppressors for their “health and safety”.

ATF response to story:

“We can confirm that suppressors were provided to qualifying agents in the Criminal Investigation Occupation Series 1811 for health and safety due to the extensive training and quarterly firearms qualifications they must complete. For operational purposes, ATF does not comment on specific firearms used nor the number of firearms held,” ATF’s Public Affairs Division said in an email.

Sounds like suppressors should be over the shelf for all firearms owners. Most of us shoot way more often than quarterly. No one should be denied basic gun safety equipment.

ATF Issues New Suppressors Amid Controversy and Secrecy

ATF agents are quietly receiving $1,200+ HUXWRX suppressors, but questions remain unanswered as lawmakers push to cut funding and eliminate the agency.

www.thetruthaboutguns.com

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.

 

[RF667799]

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?

 

[JMB1911A1]

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.

 

[CLAX1911]

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.

Wouldn't you have to do that to get the gun?