Tim15856 wrote:

So, you don't agree with even the European gun laws that consider silencers not a big deal? Well anti-gun nuts (yes Goose, that is directed at you) don't want to listen to the other side either. I've given you a link to a left wing site that has no problems with silencers yet you choose to ignore it. That's your prerogative to put your fingers in your ears and say la-la-la-la. BTW, the silencers are mostly to keep noise down for neighbors. IIRC, the one story I read about an outdoor gun range in I think Germany required the use of silencers to keep noise down for people living near by.

and that's why everybody should have a "suppressor" for all their guns here in the good ol' U.S. of A.

Who said everyone should have one for all their guns? You guys really go off the deep end with your logical fallacies when it comes to guns.

 
Still haven't answered my questions, Tim.

Deflection is not an answer.

Rongone wrote:

 
Still haven't answered my questions, Tim.

Deflection is not an answer.

I answered your question, but let's look at this from another angle. I once read that a big difference between Napoleonic code and our system of law is that with Napoleon, everything is considered illegal unless specified as legal, whereas with our system, everything is legal if not declared illegal. I don't know about the Napoleonic code, but I do know that in our supposed free society, everything is supposed to be legal unless a law bans it. Under our system, you don't have to justify owning a huge SUV to me. You don't have to justify owning a 40k sq ft house or a large size drone. So, I don't have to justify why I would want a silencer. It rests on your shoulders and thereby the government to justify as to why I shouldn't have one. So far you have not come up with any convincing argument as to why not. But even then, that isn't the issue here. If I so choose I can go to http://www.silencershop.com/ and buy a silencer for "every gun" I own. I have not read the bill, but I've read that all it does is remove it from being a class III device, which puts it in the same category as a machine gun. You would still have to go through the same background check as you would when buying a gun.

http://www.outdoorhub.com/stories/2015/02/04/4-things-people-get-wrong-silencers/

You can try left wing websites, but facts are facts. This link says that putting a silencer (and the proper term is suppressor)  on a .45 will reduce noise from 162 db to 133 db, not what I'd call a whisper. I haven't heard of any of them that reduce the sound by more than 50%. So how about you trying to justify as to why they should still be class III devices, a list that they were added to in 1934.
 

Tim15856 wrote:

Rongone wrote:

 
Still haven't answered my questions, Tim.

Deflection is not an answer.

I answered your question, but let's look at this from another angle. I once read that a big difference between Napoleonic code and our system of law is that with Napoleon, everything is considered illegal unless specified as legal, whereas with our system, everything is legal if not declared illegal. I don't know about the Napoleonic code, but I do know that in our supposed free society, everything is supposed to be legal unless a law bans it. Under our system, you don't have to justify owning a huge SUV to me. You don't have to justify owning a 40k sq ft house or a large size drone. So, I don't have to justify why I would want a silencer. It rests on your shoulders and thereby the government to justify as to why I shouldn't have one. So far you have not come up with any convincing argument as to why not. But even then, that isn't the issue here. If I so choose I can go to http://www.silencershop.com/ and buy a silencer for "every gun" I own. I have not read the bill, but I've read that all it does is remove it from being a class III device, which puts it in the same category as a machine gun. You would still have to go through the same background check as you would when buying a gun.

http://www.outdoorhub.com/stories/2015/02/04/4-things-people-get-wrong-silencers/

You can try left wing websites, but facts are facts. This link says that putting a silencer (and the proper term is suppressor)  on a .45 will reduce noise from 162 db to 133 db, not what I'd call a whisper. I haven't heard of any of them that reduce the sound by more than 50%. So how about you trying to justify as to why they should still be class III devices, a list that they were added to in 1934.
 

 
Tim, here is my original questions from post #9 addressed to Common Sense (who has decided not to answer or just ignore me). I will emphasize the questions that should require a simple answer.

"Common Sense: perhaps you can enlighten me as to exactly why and for what purpose a reasonable law abiding citizen would want or need one of these "suppressors".

Thanks."

So, since you jumped in to critique my motives for asking such questions, you still refuse to give reasonable, rational, simply stated answers as to the "why" and "what purpose" plus "want or need" for an individual to possess a "suppressor". To advocate that the main purpose for a person to purchase a "suppressor" is for their personal hearing protection is ludicrous, especially when one considers the myriad of wearable hearing protection devices available to everyone. I would suggest that the main reason and purpose behind utilizing a "suppressor" on a deadly weapon is to enable the shooter to surreptitiously fire a weapon without drawing attention to him/herself.