HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » benEzra » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2

benEzra

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Eastern North Carolina
Home country: United States
Current location: Eastern NC
Member since: Wed Dec 1, 2004, 04:09 PM
Number of posts: 12,148

Journal Archives

Here's a suppressor on a hunting rifle in Europe. Still damn loud.

Just not "blast snow off the roof of the shooting range" loud. First shot without suppressor, second shot with suppressor; it's still so loud that you can hear the echo off nearby structures.



A suppressed .308 in gun-control paradise, England; he starts using the suppressor at 1:04.



The only guns that can get anywhere near as quiet as a "Hollywood movie silencer" are bolt actions shooting very slow subsonic bullets out of full-length rifle barrels, which are fairly quiet even unsuppressed; out of a shorter barrel, suppressed pistol rounds sound more like an unsuppressed .22 shooting subsonics. Here's a New Zealand resident shooting a reproduction De Lisle carbine (Lee Enfield bolt-action rechambered for .45 ACP, shooting fat subsonic rounds from a long barrel at maybe 850 ft/sec):



A Remington 700 in .300 Blackout (probably in the USA):



I'd like to own one, but financially I doubt I'd be able to unless prices come down. Under the current rules, the tax alone is $200, plus the considerable cost of the suppressor.

So your position is that parents shouldn't be allowed to teach their kids to shoot?

Or is it that teaching kids to shoot "riot guns" and "sniper rifles" and "assault weapons" is OK, but not pistols?

Question: What states in the USA *don't* allow parents to take their 14-year-old to the range and shoot a pistol under their direct supervision?

Oh, come on. If they killed 200 a year, you'd still be trying to ban them. (n/t)

Well, portraying the *least* powerful rifles as the *most* powerful...

is kind of a big screwup, if it were actually a screwup.

I would say that it's a deliberate misrepresentation when the gun control lobby does it, but that's just me. An AR-15 isn't just "not high powered"; it's one of the least powerful rifles on the market, and one of the least misused of all weapons.

You do know that twice as many people are killed by bicycles as are murdered using rifles, right? Even shoes and fists kill more people than rifles do, per the FBI.

So a convicted felon who can't so legally much as touch a gun or a single round of ammo...

who is then served a restraining order that makes him doubly prohibited, gets his girlfriend to illegally buy and give him a non-automatic, low-velocity, low-ish powered rifle, which he uses to shoot innocent people in a posted no-guns zone.

This proves that the most popular civilian rifles in U.S. homes must be banned and confiscated from non-felons and the mentally competent, even though rifles remain the least misused of all weapons in America (less than 300 murders/yr out of 12,000+), and even though banning said rifles wouldn't do anything whatsoever to address criminal gun misuse or mass shootings.

If you want to know how the U.S. gun control lobby has been continually shooting itself in the foot since the early 1980s, there you go.

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2