Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Silencers: The NRA’s latest big lie
Salon ^ | Dec 30, 2012 | Alexander Zaitchik

Posted on 01/10/2013 3:30:52 PM PST by Second Amendment First

Silencers: The NRA's latest big lie

A gruesome holiday season exercise: Think of some firearms and accessories that might have added to the body counts of Aurora and Newtown. More starkly, imagine the means by which coming Auroras and Newtowns will be made more deadly.

The exercise starts with a militarized baseline, as both shooters unloaded designed-for-damage rounds from high-capacity magazines loaded into assault rifles. Improving their killing efficiency would require one of two things: the ability to shoot more bullets faster, or more time. A fully automatic machine gun would provide the first. More minutes to hunt, meanwhile, might be gained by employing a noise suppressor, those metallic tubes better known as silencers. By muffling the noise generated with every shot by sonic booms and gas release, a silencer would provide a new degree of intimacy for public mass murder, delaying by crucial seconds or minutes the moment when someone calls the police after overhearing strange bangs coming from Theater 4 or Classroom D. The same qualities that make silencers the accessory of choice for targeted assassination offer advantages to the armed psychopath set on indiscriminate mass murder.

It should surprise no one that the NRA has recently thrown its weight behind an industry campaign to deregulate and promote the use of silencers. Under the trade banner of the American Silencer Association, manufacturers have come together with the support of the NRA to rebrand the silencer as a safety device belonging in every all-American gun closet. To nurture this potentially large and untapped market, the ASA last April sponsored the first annual all-silencer gun shoot and trade show in Dallas. America’s silencer makers are each doing their part. SWR Suppressors is asking survivalists to send a picture of their “bugout bag” for a chance to win an assault rifle silencer. The firm Silencero — “We Dig Suppressors and What They Do” — has put together a helpful “Silencers Are Legal” website and produced a series of would-be viral videos featuring this asshole.

This Silencer Awareness Campaign is today’s gun lobby in a bottle. The coordinated effort brings together the whole family: manufacturers, dealers, the gun press, rightwing lawmakers at every level of government, and the NRA. Each are doing their part to chip away at federal gun regulation in the name of profits and ideology. Together, they plan to strip the longstanding regulatory regime around silencers, and reintroduce them to the gun-buying public as wholesome, children-friendly accessories, as harmless as car mufflers.

In case you’re wondering, the answer is yes, the gun lobby’s grand strategy rests grotesquely on fake concern for child hearing health. Among the opening shots in the campaign was a feature in the February 2011 issue of Gun World, “Silence is Golden,” penned by the veteran gun writer Jim Dickson. “One only has to look at children in the rest of the world learning to shoot with silencers, protecting their tender young ears, to see what an innocent safety device we are talking about here,” writes Dickson. “To use an overworked propaganda phrase, legalize silencers ‘for the sake of the children.’” [Emphasis mine.]

Proponents of healthy hearing will be heartened to know the NRA shares Gun World’s concern for America’s tender young ears. The organization officially entered the silencer-awareness fray in November of 2011, around the time the Utah-based American Silencer Association was founded. It’s opening statement took the form of an article posted to its lobbying division website: “Suppressors: Good for our hearing… And for the shooting sports.” With this piece, the NRA finally acknowledged the relationship between health care costs and guns.

“Billions of dollars are spent every year in our healthcare system for hearing loss conditions, such as shooting-related tinnitus,” explained the NRA. It was a very important point that had long been overlooked in the gun control debate; because if there is a single pressing gun safety issue in America today, it is the hearing, comfort and convenience of recreational shooters who find orange earplugs unsightly. The NRA is also extremely concerned about the fright children may receive from shooting or standing near the reports of high-caliber weapons. These jolts could have a lasting and detrimental developmental impact, possibly imbuing America’s impressionable and tender young brains with the notion that guns are loud, dangerous things. The NRA firmly believes that American freedom is best served by giving 9mm gunfire the feel and sound of a toy cap gun. As the NRA’s Lacey Biles put it during last April’s Dallas Silencer Shoot, silencers are good for “getting younger folks involved [in guns]. They’re less afraid of the loud bang.”

For these reasons, the NRA believes America must “move to eliminate the laws, regulations and policies that discourage or prohibit suppressor use.”

And move we have. The NRA has enjoyed state-level success chipping away at restrictions on the use of silencers around the country, an effort that has proceeded largely unnoticed in the shadows of higher-profile battles over the spread of Concealed Carry and Stand Your Ground laws. Silencers are currently legal with permit in 40 states, a growing number of which are rescinding bans on their use while hunting.

The gun lobby’s silencer campaign has bigger prey in mind than state hunting laws. Silencers are among the few accessories regulated by the National Firearms Act. To purchase or transfer a silencer, you must acquire a special license, enter the serial number in a federal registry, and pay a $200 fee. (The fee, which equaled a de facto ban in 1934, has not been adjusted for inflation in 79 years.) For gun extremists who struggle with introductory-level American history and political theory, the licensing regime is half Stamp Act, half Yellow Badge. What most outrages the manufacturers about the regime is that it works. By licensing silencers, tracking and taxing their exchange, the government has kept them from flooding the market like so many other military-market gun accessories with cameos in recent massacres and serial sniper attacks. “Simple licensing requirements weeds out both blatant criminals and a certain kind of stockpiling insurrectionist who refuses to engage with the federal government,” says Ladd Everitt of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. “The law has been effective.”

Aside from offering a very expensive alternative to earplugs, what conceivable sporting or personal-defense purpose is served by pouring silencers into a gun market dominated by semi-automatic pistols and assault rifles? If history offers any useful clues, and it usually does, the answer is none. The history of the silencer is a twentieth century tale populated by Mafiosi hits, hidden snipers, and special ops ambush teams. It all adds up to decades worth of “negative branding baggage” that the gun lobby is now trying to scrub away like a used car-salesman winding back the speedometer on a lemon.

The silencer began innocently enough. When Hiram Percy Maxim patented the first silencer in 1908, he was just a nice fellow working in the family business, a guy who simply enjoyed finding ways to make loud things quiet. Among Maxim’s many other inventions was an early muffler design for car engines. A quarter-century later, silencers still hadn’t acquired the bad rep they have today. Their best-known criminal use at the time of the 1934 law was as an aid in late-night poaching.

Society did not form its lasting perceptions of the silencer in the decades of Percy’s .22 pistols and midnight pig poaching. The image the NRA must scrub is the one that formed early in what might be called the Second Silencer Age, when a new breed of steel “cans” emerged and became associated with rapid, discreet, controlled killing. The silencers the gun lobby is trying to mainstream can make ninjas of high-caliber handguns, long-barrel sniper rifles, and assault weapons, all commonly featured in military-themed silencer ads. The Second Age that produced these tools was commenced not by a charming dynastic American industrial engineer with wide interests like Percy Maxim. Rather, it was born in the rural Georgia kill-gadget lab of a notoriously cracked and ruthless CIA black ops contractor, known in gun circles as the Wizard of Whistling Death.

* * *

Mitch WerBell gained his reputation for cold-blooded efficiency during his days with the CIA’s wartime precursor, the OSS. After the war he maintained his ties to the Agency as a man who could be depended on to figure out how make problems go away. His accomplished his revolutionary leap in silencer technology in 1967, during a short break from international intrigue. The previous year, federal agents raided WerBell’s mercenary training camp in Florida, where he was in the final stages of preparing an army of Miami-based Cubans to invade Haiti and oust “Papa Doc” François Duvalier.

WerBell patented his silencer under the name of his boutique weapons development firm, SIONICS, or Studies In the Operational Negation of Insurgents and Counter-Subversion. WerBell’s silencer was the first to successfully muffle automatic and semi-automatic weapons fire. On some weapons, the silencer also increased accuracy and power. Knowing he had a big breakthrough on his hands, WerBell convinced a group of rich investors that his invention would make them new fortunes, and just maybe win the Cold War for the West along the way. Oddly, the gang of investors included the eccentric and liberal antiwar philanthropist Stewart R. Mott. According to some accounts, WerBell sold Mott by telling him the principles behind the silencer could be adapted to lawn mowers and other devices to reduce suburban noise pollution.

WerBell’s silencer not only decreased the volume of the gun’s report and increased its accuracy; it also reduced the powder flash of machine gun fire, opening up new possibilities for nighttime ambush and assassination missions. WerBell packed his silencer and flew to Indochina, where he wowed American and South Vietnamese brass. Orders from the Pentagon soon followed, and in 1968 WerBell began large-scale production of his silencers under a SIONICS subsidiary he named Environmental Industries, a sarcastic reference to his intended contribution to solving the strains of overpopulation.

The timing of the new silencer’s introduction to Vietnam was just right for business. By 1968, the U.S. had pivoted from away from its early strategy that included an effort to “win hearts and minds,” and had embraced a model of search-and-destroy exemplified by the death squads of the CIA’s Phoenix Program. The M-16s carried by these special units were retrofitted with SIONICS silencers. They soon reported increased lethality and accuracy in ambushes and targeted killings. In his out-of-print 1978 masterpiece, “Spooks,” former Harper’s editor Jim Hougan reports that Green Beret officers singled WerBell’s invention out for praise in Congressional budget hearings.

According to Hougan, WerBell consumed the Army’s official kill counts like a 12-year-old reads box scores. From his compound in Georgia, he relished Pentagon data demonstrating his silencer’s economy and lethality. In the late 1970s, he boasted to Hougan that Army rifles equipped with his silencers helped kill nearly 2,000 Vietcong in the first six months, and reduced the number of bullets per kill to one-point-three rounds, a feat he boasted was “the greatest cost-effectiveness the Army’s ever known.” Whatever the actual numbers, the SIONICS silencer was widely recognized as a huge advance in the science of killing. WerBell emerged from the shadows to become a patriotic cult hero to the fathers of those now agitating for silencer deregulation. In 1972, WerBell played a starring role in David Truby’s admiring study of these new tools and their uses, “Silencers, Snipers, and Assassins: An Overview of Whispering Death.”

WerBell didn’t stop tinkering after reinventing the silencer. He also developed the gun he thought his silencer deserved. The result was the ultimate greaser. The ultra-sleek and compact MAC 11 weighed and sized little more than a conventional pistol and spat 14 bullets per second, or 850 a minute. Had WerBell been working today, he might have produced a semi-automatic version for the civilian market. In the early 1970s, the Pentagon was the only game in town. WerBell fought hard for but failed to land a massive contract to make the MAC a standard-issue weapon. Had he succeeded, SIONICS might be a household name today. (This is how gun empires are born. Gaston Glock designed his first gun competing in an open tender bid to produce a sidearm for the Austrian Army.)

The Pentagon’s rejection was the first of two that deepened WerBell’s bitterness at the government he served for so long. As he courted clients among foreign intelligence agencies, the State Department denied him an export license, arguing that the spread of WerBell’s silencers was likely to increase the risk of assassinations around the world. A sign of saner times gone by, there was in the early 1970s no American Silencer Association to help WerBell market his products to preppers with “bugout bags,” and no Wayne LaPierre or Chris Cox to strategize state and national-level assaults on the National Firearms Act. Instead, WerBell the Wizard of Whistling Death hit the road to peddle his remaining inventory on the global grey and black markets. He sold his wares out of a suitcase like the house-calling gun dealer in Taxi Driver, shooting up stacks of telephone books before giddy prospective clients who marveled over the little machine gun emitting such seductive sibilance, ssyyyt ssyyyt ssyyyt, the contract killer’s lullaby.

Before leaving the sideshow stage of history, WerBell made one last lunge for greatness. His hopes of building a gun empire stymied, in 1972 WerBell began planning an amphibious invasion of a tiny Bahamanian archipelago known as Abaco, which was home to a small separatist movement. WerBell enlisted financial support from real estate mogul and Libertarian Party leader Mike Oliver, whose Phoenix Foundation existed to seed utopic Libertarian projects like the one WerBell imagined on the beaches of Abaco — an independent global tax haven, home of SIONICS headquarters, and the Undisputed Silencer Capital of the World. As with his planned invasion of Haiti eight years prior, WerBell was still training his mercenaries when the whole thing fell apart from infighting and a surprise visit from the Feds.

* * *

Telling Mitch WerBell’s story is just a long way of demonstrating why the new NRA-backed Hearing Heath First! silencer-promotion campaign is a particularly hideous and towering architectural example of the Gun Lobby’s Nouveau Bat Shit Style, which if not ridiculed and condemned is guaranteed to crash down on all of us, leading to new and yet more lethal mutations in our national plague of gun violence.

There are very good reasons why the silencer industry is contending with a nasty case of Vietnam Syndrome. The reason the public associates silencers with death squads, assassination raids, and mafia hits is because these were the uses WerBell had in mind when he engineered them. They are also the uses to which they are best suited and most needed, if that’s the word. It wasn’t all that long ago that even the Freaks of Fairfax understood that the silencer’s dark reputation was deep and well deserved. As recently as 2000, the NRA showed a rare sensitivity for public perceptions and forbade a silencer manufacturer from exhibiting its wares at the NRA’s national convention. Kevin Brittingham, of the silencer maker Advanced Armament Co., says the NRA’s executive office called him before the millennial year convention in Charlotte and told him not to come. “We don’t want the news media focusing on your table and putting guns in a bad light,” the NRA explained.

A decade later, the NRA has cozied up to the industry view that everyone should have a silencer, and that the days are over when WerBell’s toys were the accessory love that dare not speak its name. The NRA now sees the widespread negative view of silencers as a branding problem to be corrected through advertising and public relations.

Toward this end, the gun lobby is on multiple fronts advancing the argument that silencer-phobia is the product of popular culture demonization and sensationalism.

“Unfortunately, too many Americans (including some gun owners) still fall victim to the unfair portrayals of silencers by Hollywood,” the NRA-ILA gently chides its members. Gun World’s Jim Dickson, meanwhile, prays for an America that allows its film industry to assist in “the transformation of an innocuous safety and noise-reduction device to a sinister assassin’s tool in the public mind.”

If anybody reading this needs one more nudge before abandoning in finality the idea of any kind of “dialogue” with the gun lobby, I suggest reading the NRA and the gun press bleat about the way violent movies have besmirched the good name of the honorable American silencer. They’re pointing to the same Hollywood gun makers routinely employ to product-place its wares, from best-selling pistols to fully automatic shotguns. (In 2011, Glock handguns made corporate cameos in 15 percent of No. 1 films.) The gun lobby pointing to Hollywood is as rich as Wayne LaPierre censuring video games, which thrives at the service of the gun-industry in ways we’re just now beginning to understand.

If the current campaign succeeds in delisting silencers from NFA regulation, the gun lobby likely won’t wait long before targeting the remaining regulatory regimes limiting the circulation of fully automatic machine guns and even hand grenades. Do not be surprised when you see a 2014 Gun World feature extolling freshwater blast fishing as a great way to connect kids and nature, while reducing the risks of fishing with sharp steel hooks, some of which have dangerous double jags. If you can’t see the safety rationale here, or the Freedom Logic that undergirds it, then you obviously do not care about America’s children and their millions of young tender fingers.

Alexander Zaitchik is a journalist living in Brooklyn.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: alexanderzaitchik; alinskytactics; baldfacedliar; banglist; democrats; enemedia; fraud; guncontrol; liberalagenda; liberalfascism; liberallunacy; liberalmedia; liberals; mediabias; progressiveagenda; progressives; propaganda; secondamendment; zaitchik
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last
Have to post and run. Have at it.
1 posted on 01/10/2013 3:31:06 PM PST by Second Amendment First
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First
By muffling the noise generated with every shot by sonic booms and gas release . . .

Silencers can muffle the sound of the sonic boom from a supersonic bullet - a sound generated after the bullet has left the silencer's muzzle? I did not know that. This writer is as clueless in every other area as he is on physics - I just don't have time to list all the other errors.

2 posted on 01/10/2013 3:39:44 PM PST by Pollster1 (Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

I guess some people still have to wear a diaper even after they’ve reached adulthood.


3 posted on 01/10/2013 3:41:21 PM PST by RWB Patriot ("My ability is a value that must be purchased and I don't recognize anyone's need as a claim on me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

I think the federal restrictions on silencers is a leftist war on the hearing disabled.

ObamaKare should provide free silencers to shooters.

Just think of the money that would be saved on medical costs for those with damaged hearing.


4 posted on 01/10/2013 3:45:56 PM PST by Iron Munro (I Miss America, don't you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
Yeah. I caught that, too.

Another idiot that learned everything they think they know about firearms from Hollywood movies.

/johnny

5 posted on 01/10/2013 3:50:10 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

The Benefits of Using a Silencer

"One of the best examples of the effectiveness of brainwashing in this country is the transformation of an innocuous safety and noise reduction device to a sinister assassin’s tool in the public’s mind. While other countries may virtually ban guns, they tend to regard silencers as being in the category of automobile mufflers, a device to protect the hearing and prevent the disturbing the peace.

Typically, silencers have little or no regulation hindering their purchase and use abroad, but in this country, they are classed with machineguns and other National Federation Act-restricted weapons, which constitutes an effective prohibition for the general public. In England and the rest of Europe, it is very common to find permission to hunt on a man’s property linked to the provision that you use a silencer so that you don’t disturb the peace. Classically attired proper English gentlemen hunting with silencers on their rifles and shotguns are a common sight on the British hunting fields. Demand is so great that The Saddlery & Gunroom in Kent, England make an integral silencer for an over-and-under 20-gauge shotgun called the Hushpower purely for sporting use. The same is true on the Continent where dapper European gentry pursue game with the modest decorum of silenced weapons.

In South Africa, there are a number of game ranches that will not allow you to hunt unless you have a silencer on your rifle..."


6 posted on 01/10/2013 3:51:57 PM PST by EdReform (Oath Keepers - Guardians of the Republic - Honor your oath - Join us: www.oathkeepers.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First
I've got one of these 8 round killing machines. Notice the fully shrouded silencer, the military scope and the mounted night light (ok, the light isn't mounted).........


7 posted on 01/10/2013 3:52:56 PM PST by Hot Tabasco (Jab her with a harpoon or just throw her from the train......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First
The same qualities that make silencers the accessory of choice for targeted assassination offer advantages to the armed psychopath set on indiscriminate mass murder.

I am going to go out on a limb here and agree that an "armed psychopath set on indiscriminate mass murder" should not have guns. I also believe that a drunk with a blood-alcohol reading of 0.30 should not drive a speeding gravel truck on the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway. Additionally, I believe that a homosexual pedophile should not take Cub Scouts off into the woods for a "camping" trip. Finally, I believe that an African communist should not be President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.

8 posted on 01/10/2013 3:53:14 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

These clowns are worried about silencers?

A kid apparently walked into a high school today with a shotgun and shot another kid. No one noticed?

I guess armed guards at the doors wouldn’t have noticed that, so who needs them? They have no intention of preventing kids (or anyone else) from doing this?

I guess that “gun-free zone” sign worked really well.


9 posted on 01/10/2013 3:55:33 PM PST by Right Wing Assault (Dick Obama is more inexperienced now than he was before he was elected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First
So, have each teacher equiped with a call button strapped to their person. When that muffled gun begins banging away children's lives, the call is made and help is on the way.


10 posted on 01/10/2013 4:01:44 PM PST by jonrick46 (The opium of Communists: other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jonrick46

Better yet, give the teacher a gun and when that muffled gun takes aim, the teacher blows his head off and no children are killed.


11 posted on 01/10/2013 4:03:23 PM PST by Repeat Offender (What good are conservative principles if we don't stand by them?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

Here’s the truth about suppressors, folks. They are essentially specially designed lawn mower mufflers. So here’s the lunacy of the argument this idiot is making:

Noise suppressors are Federally required to be on every single internal combustion engine in the United States. Their purpose is to protect the user’s hearing. The end user of the device isn’t required to register it with the Federal government or pay an exorbitant tax own their ownership.

Noise suppressors designed for use on firearms are heavily regulated, heavily taxed, and flat out illegal at all in many, many jurisdictions. Yet they were designed for the same purpose as the ones for engines, to protect the users hearing.

This guy is an unbelievable idiot.


12 posted on 01/10/2013 4:03:48 PM PST by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First
For gun extremists who struggle with introductory-level American history and political theory

For Alexander Zaitchik, the author of this article, and this particular piece of bile:

FU, YOU ARROGANT LIBERAL SWINE. I'll match my knowledge of history and political theory against yours any time. Got any cash you might want to wager on that, you little pr!ck?

13 posted on 01/10/2013 4:04:16 PM PST by Hardastarboard (Bringing children to America without immigration documents is child abuse. Let's end it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First
Well, I am a living example. My hearing was damaged when I was a young kid in this manner. Today, I can barely hear out of my right eat and have pretty limited hearing in my left. since a silencer will cost you somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 bucks after the stamp, that made it impossible to equip our firearms with them in the 60's and 70's... which was the goal in the first place.

Had they been affordable? I'm not sure if we would have used them or not to be honest. I was trained to shoot as a bench rest shooter like my dad. We spend many hours on the range shooting an array of different wildcats. Ever tried to shoot distance from a bench with headphones on? I sort of doubt dad would let someone thread the end of the barrel on a 40x he owned and I know damn well I wouldn't let anyone do it to one of mine. But imagine you could buy that 40x custom barrel already threaded by a master? Would they have been more mainstream and part of the typical setup? 10 bucks said it would and everyone at the range would benefit from it.

My only reservation would be wondering what a device like that would do to accuracy.. and do they even make one that could survive a 25-06, 220 swift or .222 for more than a dozen shots. I've never even seen the inside of one so I can't even speak intelligently about that part of it.

14 posted on 01/10/2013 4:08:02 PM PST by FunkyZero (... I've got a Grand Piano to prop up my mortal remains)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

Just more fartgas from the brainless moonbats, barkin, barkin, barkin over technology they do not understand.

Its like a dog barking at that “big truck” rolling down the street, just because its “scary!”


15 posted on 01/10/2013 4:13:56 PM PST by ConradofMontferrat (According to mudslimz, my handle is a HATE CRIME. And I HOPE they don't like it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First
How do those oil filter silencers work?

How are they attached to the barrel?

16 posted on 01/10/2013 4:16:52 PM PST by ptsal (E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FunkyZero
It's interesting that in European countries where firearms ownership is more rigorously controlled, there is no irrational fear of "silencers". In some areas, you must have them in order to hunt or shoot on a rifle/pistol range.

Of all the hoplophobic weirdness that we have in this country on the political left, this is the most puzzling. Perhaps it's because they know that eventually, they'll be able to use "noise pollution" laws to close down ranges and hunting leases.

17 posted on 01/10/2013 4:17:23 PM PST by Charles Martel (Endeavor to persevere...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Assault

The usual armed guard at Taft HS called-in absent, since he was ‘snowed-in’ today.


18 posted on 01/10/2013 4:17:52 PM PST by carriage_hill ("I meant to say maggot, but I have a lisp.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First
Do a google search on the following sentence from the above article and see how many sites have picked up on this propaganda..........it's scary!

The exercise starts with a militarized baseline, as both shooters unloaded designed-for-damage rounds from high-capacity magazines loaded into assault rifles

19 posted on 01/10/2013 4:19:01 PM PST by Hot Tabasco (Jab her with a harpoon or just throw her from the train......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco

Sweet.


20 posted on 01/10/2013 4:23:05 PM PST by Rappini (Veritas vos Liberabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco

The gov’t requires me to use mufflers on all my vehicles. I can go to any auto parts store and buy them without any restrictions.


21 posted on 01/10/2013 4:26:40 PM PST by umgud (as a daughter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

Gotta Have one!


22 posted on 01/10/2013 4:30:20 PM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

hense my cliche’

our MSM and kids are educated at The University of IKEA


23 posted on 01/10/2013 4:30:24 PM PST by advertising guy (and as far as the Cookie Monster, was it really cookies ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

Why use subsonic ammo and a silencer (suppessor)?

Isn’t it like belt and suspenders?


24 posted on 01/10/2013 4:34:08 PM PST by 353FMG ( I refuse to specify whether I am serious or sarcastic -- I respect FReepers too much.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hardastarboard

Hear, Hear.


25 posted on 01/10/2013 4:38:29 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First
Alex at Salon will wet his panties when he finds out that the Slide Fire stock exists...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvLt8-Wf7r0

26 posted on 01/10/2013 4:39:44 PM PST by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jonrick46

Why give um a panic button and nothing else?

Give um a gun so they can go shot the SOB before he kills more.

Then they can pull the fire alarm (aka panic button) or push a panic button.


27 posted on 01/10/2013 4:44:32 PM PST by cableguymn (The founding fathers would be shooting by now..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

Alexander Zaitchik is an American freelance journalist who has written for The Nation, Salon, The New Republic, The New York Observer, Rolling Stone, Mother Jones, The International Herald Tribune, Wired, The San Francisco Chronicle, and The Believer. He has been on staff of the New York Press, served as an investigative reporting fellow at the Southern Poverty Law Center, and founded the online magazine Freezerbox (1998 - 2008). Zaitchik has also held editorial roles at the Prague Pill and the Russian tabloid The eXile.

His book, Common Nonsense: Glenn Beck and the Triumph of Ignorance, was published by Wiley & Sons in June 2010.[1]

He is another card-carrying Lefty, no surprise, he supports Einsteins like Obama, Biden, Pelosi and Feinstein to have armed guards and for us to “trust” them.


28 posted on 01/10/2013 4:46:27 PM PST by wac3rd (Somewhere in Hell, Ted Kennedy snickers....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Charles Martel
It's interesting that in European countries where firearms ownership is more rigorously controlled, there is no irrational fear of "silencers". In some areas, you must have them in order to hunt or shoot on a rifle/pistol range.

Amazing, isn't it? Goes to show we need to take back areas we lost.
29 posted on 01/10/2013 4:46:45 PM PST by Red in Blue PA (When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance Becomes Duty.-Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

Somewhere in all my info I have an article on how to make a silencer out of a two liter soda pop bottle. For a while, there was a piece sold you could clamp on your firearm to accept a soda bottle.


30 posted on 01/10/2013 4:47:35 PM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar (Click my name! See new paintings!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jonrick46
When that muffled gun begins banging away children's lives, the call is made and help is on the way.

Yeah, after about 15 minutes and 20 or so dead kids.

31 posted on 01/10/2013 4:51:45 PM PST by Real Cynic No More
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

Silencers are legal in France. What more needs to be said?


32 posted on 01/10/2013 4:55:28 PM PST by TigersEye (Who is John Galt?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

“Alexander Zaitchik is a journalist living in Brooklyn.”

Clueless in NYC...


33 posted on 01/10/2013 4:56:16 PM PST by BlessingsofLiberty (Remember Brian Terry...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First
Salon provides us with a perfect demonstration of how we no longer have any common ground with these people.

There are no grounds for a rational, fact-based discussion with people like this. They don't want a discussion, much less a debate -- they'd lose the argument. Instead, they want to demean, ridicule and belittle their opponents.

Moreover, nine times out of ten they don't have any idea what it is they're talking about.

Spoiled children...

34 posted on 01/10/2013 4:56:29 PM PST by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

Just more lies from the dirtbags at Salon.


35 posted on 01/10/2013 4:57:29 PM PST by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Real Cynic No More

The picture of the Walther P22 with the subsonic ammo is bogus........subsonic Rem 22 shorts do not cycle in that gun.......personal experience.


36 posted on 01/10/2013 4:58:44 PM PST by Michigan Bowhunter (Fix Bayonetts!!!!!!! Time to fight!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: 353FMG
Why use subsonic ammo and a silencer (suppessor)?

Isn’t it like belt and suspenders?

No. The suppressor quiets the muzzle blast from the gun. Subsonic ammo doesn't create the sonic "crack" sound of supersonic ammo.

37 posted on 01/10/2013 5:00:13 PM PST by Nachoman (Wisdom is learned, cynicism is earned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

... nor should you.

These people are certifiably paranoid.


38 posted on 01/10/2013 5:07:29 PM PST by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

It must be awful for the author to go through life afraid of everything.


39 posted on 01/10/2013 5:11:24 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (The one thing that Hollywood gets right about guns is that criminals will always get them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco
How many people have you assassinated lately?

Admit it, the urge is irresistible when you're holding that in your hand. /s

40 posted on 01/10/2013 5:11:54 PM PST by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Nachoman

Then why not use supersonic ammo with a silencer? Isn’t it all about em vee square?


41 posted on 01/10/2013 5:12:41 PM PST by 353FMG ( I refuse to specify whether I am serious or sarcastic -- I respect FReepers too much.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

My tagline.


42 posted on 01/10/2013 5:13:44 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (The only thing that Hollywood gets right about guns is that criminals will always get them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

“I think the federal restrictions on silencers is a leftist war on the hearing disabled.”

It was passed during the Great Depression due to game wardens worries about poachers more easily evading them if silencers were not outlawed..

In Europe, silencers are readliy available. However, telescopic sights are restricted, due to fears of snipers.

Hint to gun grabbers: America has tens of millions of scoped rifles owned by skilled marksmen.


43 posted on 01/10/2013 5:14:29 PM PST by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is necessary to examine principles."..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 353FMG
Noise from a firearm comes from 3 different sources.

1) the action. That is not very loud.

2) the chemical explosion of the powder. That's what suppressors supress.

3) supersonic crack of a bullet as it exceeds the speed of sound. A suppressor does nothing for that significant noise.

/johnny

44 posted on 01/10/2013 5:18:10 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First
Don't worry. It's probably not the muffled shot that is going to kill you.

Next!

45 posted on 01/10/2013 5:18:43 PM PST by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FunkyZero

“...and do they even make one that could survive a 25-06, 220 swift or .222 for more than a dozen shots...”

Just about any cartridge you can name can be equipped with a silencer.


46 posted on 01/10/2013 5:19:06 PM PST by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is necessary to examine principles."..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FunkyZero

It depends on the design. Suppressors with steel or copper wool in the baffles will not stand more than a few rounds of fire from a high powered rifle. But the kind with baffles similar to those used in automobile mufflers will last many thousands of rounds.


47 posted on 01/10/2013 5:22:21 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (The only thing that Hollywood gets right about guns is that criminals will always get them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

Even in Europe silencers are common.


48 posted on 01/10/2013 5:22:59 PM PST by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ptsal

There is a threaded adapter that fits on your barrel and on the filter. I have read that if you are shooting a .22, it will last you many thousands of rounds, but if you are shooting a higher powered handgun or rifle, the filter will last only a few. You then have to send the silencer back to the manufacturer and THEY will replace the filter for $25. I have read that is because once the oil filter is attached to the adapter, it is legally a part of the suppressor and the owner cannot modify it.


49 posted on 01/10/2013 5:30:52 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (The only thing that Hollywood gets right about guns is that criminals will always get them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: 353FMG
Then why not use supersonic ammo with a silencer? Isn’t it all about em vee square?.

No. A bullet usually doesn't reach maximum velocity until it has exited the muzzle. Not all rounds are effective at subsonic velocities, so their use is impractical with some guns. But the supersonic "crack" will seem to occur away from the gun which provides some tactical advantage to the shooter.

50 posted on 01/10/2013 5:47:25 PM PST by Nachoman (Wisdom is learned, cynicism is earned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson