Republican Congress very recently approved mega bullet magazines and silencers.

[Tensor101]

Why? What for? We dfon't want the crazies to be able to obtain them. Y/N? These weapons are not needed for personal defense. The 2nd Amendment does not apply to this just like it does not apply to hand grenades. Y/N? Maybe the Senators are too chummy with the gun companies. Y/N?

 

[dmpi]

In Seattle we're overrun with teens gangs using glock switches and nobody cares. Seriously... nobody cares. With all the talk from the left about gun violence it's easy to see that it's just a political maneuver to selectively enforce and strip the constitutional right from law abiding citizens.

 

[Cosmo]

Why? What for? We dfon't want the crazies to be able to obtain them. Y/N? These weapons are not needed for personal defense. The 2nd Amendment does not apply to this just like it does not apply to hand grenades. Y/N? Maybe the Senators are too chummy with the gun companies. Y/N?

Sound suppressors make indoor firearm discharges less disorienting, which is useful when dealing with assailants and later identifying police commands so you don't shoot them and they don't shoot you. They function in many ways like mufflers do, increasing one's situational awareness and preventing hearing loss. But at some point liberals decided the former should be meltdown-worthy, while the latter should be mandatory.

 

[bythoughts]

Some people don't believe in the 2nd Amendment period, but if you do believe in it, do you believe it protects one or two kinds of flintlock popular in 1791, or do you believe it allows people to have dangerous weapons in general so they can defend themselves against groups who would destroy democracy? There is a conflict here, but if you go for the latter, then it makes sense to let people design and build guns the way they see fit.

That said, I'll admit the silencers are likely to be a huge pain in the rear. (Yeah, I know they're "suppressors", but I don't care. Their aspiration is to silence, and that's how things are usually marketed) I have a neighbor who was testing a bunch of guns one day, and I heard him apparently put on a silencer and suddenly the noise level went way down. This was certainly a step in the right direction so far as noise pollution is concerned. But I did also hear one of those faint little shots in the middle of the night a week later, and I figure the local deer population might have decreased by one. I'd feel worse about that if we harvested anywhere near the amount of deer meat the environment can clearly sustain, but it is still a real human concern if people are going to be shooting at night. And of course we know that in mass shootings, people already mistake guns for fireworks, and this won't make it easier. Still, despite misgivings, when a constitutional right goes up against a mix of vague concerns, it ought to come out unscathed.