President Donald Trump has already successfully gotten more gun control done than his predecessor, Barack Obama. But he doesn’t seem to want to stop at banning bump stocks. He’s now “seriously” considering banning silencers.
The media is taking aim at Trump over the shootings and he responded in a manner that would make any Democrat smile. “Well, I’d like to think about it,” Trump said in an interview with Piers Morgan on ITV’s Good Morning Britain. “I’m going to seriously look at it.” While Trump said he didn’t “love” the idea of a ban, he also was unhappy to see the frequency and severity of mass shootings in the United States, according to Bloomberg.
The shooter used two legally bought .45 caliber handguns, with a suppressor, in the attack. The shooter was shot and killed by police.
Virginia’s Democratic governor, Ralph Northam, said Tuesday he will summon lawmakers back to the state Capitol to consider a package of gun-control legislation. Republicans control the state’s legislature, however, if Trump is showing some support for more gun control, it’s possible other Republicans will follow in lockstep. Northam’s proposals include a ban on silencers and high-capacity magazines. He also seeks to limit handgun purchases to once a month – meaning the government will be tracking your purchases. Translation: handgun registration.
A ban on silencers will literally do nothing to stop mass shootings. No gun law will stop mass shootings, but silencers only make the sound quieter. It’s as pointless as a bump stock ban.
There’s a lot of talk of gun control once again and everyone claiming they have authority over the lives of others seem to think the blame lies on the shoulders of those who have committed no offense and violated no one’s rights. But the power-hungry politicians are all too happy to trample all over our rights and punish good people for the acts of psychopaths.
I told ya so! And by the way, they are SUPRESSORS not SILENCERS. You watch too much TV…
Besides, this is totally stupid, any idiot can make a suppressor. That tells you who this is aimed at… YOU! Orange Julius strikes again!
“When Hiram Percy Maxim invented the suppressor, he referred to it as the ‘Maxim Silencer’ in his patent and marketing materials.”
I think that gunsplaining, beyond the point of illustrating a simple principle, is a form of obfuscation.
This is often done by gun store owners, who consider it to be for wards of the state but not for the independent.
“When Hiram Percy Maxim invented the suppressor, he referred to it as the ‘Maxim Silencer’ in his patent and marketing materials.”
I think that gunsplaining, beyond the point of illustrating a simple principle, is a form of obfuscation.
This is often done by gun store owners, who consider it to be for wards of the state but not for the independent.
Feck dat red-headed Bastud. He got his last click(vote) outta me. At least with the Dems you know you pretty much know what them feckers will do.
Well then lets ban car and truck mufflers, Sure we need to hear them coming at us. Just too quiet. Make some stressful noise.
Politicians are afraid they will be shot more easily for their treason, if suppressors are lawful. About a half dozen of em on my list.
Earth-friendly, ergonomic, comfort mufflers, from recycled materials, and made with love, are still perfectly legal, I think. (I’m good enough, smart enough, and doggonit, people like me brand.)
Gotta look at the big picture here. Remember when Trump played Feinstein telling her, “we should take a look at your AR-15 ban again, Diane” to her glee. Well, what happened there? Nothing! Just because Trump SAYS he’s seriously considering it means nothing. Just give him a chance and see what actually occurs as a result.
For those Trump voters who wouldn’t vote for him again out of principle, have fun saluting President Sparticus Booker. That’s where your high morals will get you. Period!
Look at your approved BATFE Form 4 (5320.4 Revised September 2017), “Genius.”
Read Box 4b, “Type of Firearm.”
How do you pronounce S-I-L-E-N-C-E-R?
I pronounce it “suppressor” because it doesn’t silence ANYTHING. It suppresses it. Why are they sold as “suppressors”? ATF are asshole morons.
Have at a look at the maxim silencer patents to clear up your confusio
Apparently the Orange Base Backstabbing Cuck Master also watches far too much TV and Hollywood movie baloney.
Suppressors do NOT erase the sound of a muzzle blast. They simply suppress it to a decibel level that is less harmful to the human ear. Oh, and from the articles I read about the incident – the shooter only had one suppressor, not two.
Which I immediately thought – how convenient. Right at the same time, there is legislation circulating inside Congress to finally allow private citizens who wish to protect their hearing when spending time at a gun range – to legally purchase and use suppressors, the virulently anti-Gun Communist cockroaches rub their magic aladdin’s lamp, and PRESTO!
We have a mass shooting where a ‘silencer’ is used. One instance of this occurring, and all of a sudden that legislation is now dead and the Orange Base Backstabbing Cuck Master is ‘seriously thinking about banning suppressors’ for every law abiding citizen in the entire nation?
Why is it that every wet dream of the gun grabbing Communist cockroaches always seems to have these kinds of miraculous ‘gifts’ magically appear every time there is a piece of legislation that is pro-Second Amendment and which is actually a health and safety enhancing measure that would benefit law abiding gun owners?
Do you use toilet paper, mouthwash, have some bacon and coffee for breakfast? Hopefully, no too-big-to-fails run out of money. Hopefully, these won’t turn up in a fake shelter-in-place drill.
Noone can possibly be following these narratives, and believe he is in favor of your natural right to self defense.
In spite of the message taught by many Christians, I swear, I have never personally seen someone turn over a completely new leaf, to undergo some transformation of their basic character. You’re telling me, a fatalist, that it randomly occurs to someone to shoot 50 people. He has gone through his whole life, up to that point, a completely normal person, so has credible access to all of the resources he would need to pull this off. And, you were giving him moral support, the whole time, without any serious apprehensions.
Do I judge people. Yes, I do. I wake up, and I hate 10 things before breakfast. I hate enablers.
Welcome to your own personal reality (ie., HELL, Matrix, etc.).
From there all points are meaningless to most everyone else except yourself.
Hell, you can make a silencer on a 3D printer now.
CNC milling devices, on the open market, can recreate a functional, metal padlock key, from a photo. Also, engine blocks, and the guns in formal gun factories.
I guess, plastic has it’s uses, but I consider our fixation on plastic printers to be controlled opposition.
No offense is intended toward present company, per se.
Trump has never lived a day in his life as an ordinary middle class citizen. Not one day. He was born into excessive wealth, silver spoon in mouth, and that means he can’t possibly relate to the middle class and poor people. At all.
He was never even exposed to middle class or poverty through a sibling or relative either. He has no concept of their struggles. His entire family is wealthy. Given that, how would he know what our needs and concerns are. Think about it.
He never attended public schools, private schools only, and was chauffeur driven to school everyday. He never sat on a school bus. The point is that it’s become glaringly obvious he does not relate to regular, normal people.
Trump has always had bodyguards because when he was growing up in the 40s and 50s it was feared that a child from a wealthy family could be kidnapped for ransom.
It’s obvious that he has never had a need for a gun and even though he said he owned a gun, to connect with his audience, he has never owned one, nor would he know how to use it. He doesn’t need to know how to use it and never will need to know.
He doesn’t relate to why we or anyone would need a gun. He has also had a lifetime of security staff and body guards even before the presidency. He doesn’t relate to us and our needs.
I can see he wants to outlaw guns without him coming right out and saying so. So he instead he plays word games and talks out of two sides of his mouth, but make no mistake he is getting the ball rolling on banning guns.
Hillary would have been worse and we’d surely been in deep shit by now if she were POTUS, but he is on their side, he’s an elitist. He is not on our side and he is not going to MAGA. We have to stop making him out to be the person/president he is not. We are only fooling ourselves.
It’s a shame that several years in his true colors become more apparent daily. He was a NY Democrat for decades. Why anyone thought he supported the working class is surprising but the fear of Clinton caused a trap to be set. Now he will just spend the next 2 years trampling more and more rights, the MAGA crowd will find ways to keep shining his boots and carrying the water. Hopefully there is a legit challenge by an actual Republican but as fear based as the Trump campaign has gone to, it’s doubtful most will wake up before he strips far more rights from us.
Submitted the morning of June 6th, posted on June 10th. That’s why readership and web traffic here is down.
Nothing is more mindblowing to most plebs than Cornucopianism and doing it your own special way. There is this implicit understanding of shortage and rationing of what can be common and guileless. I have no particular intentions of harming myself or other people or their property, in spite of our sumptuary laws. Eat as many scoops as feels right nor none at all, if you don’t feel like it. Why the eternal struggle.
A silencer on Peolsi’s mouth would be a better use of resources.
Not complying with ANY more infringements on the 2nd.
People are saying its time to shoot red coats again!
I’m not giving up anything I own. don’t care what kind of policy they come up with.
Attack the US Citizen again, meanwhile TSA is ushering illegal aliens onto domestic flights without any form of required ID. Laws and papers are for serfs only.
No one who serves within any position/office WITHIN our governments – state or federal (general) – has any delegated authority over the people and their own weapons.
US Constitution, Second Amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
INFRINGE, verb transitive infrinj’. [Latin infringo; in and frango, to break.
1. To break, as contracts; to violate, either positively by contravention, or negatively by non-fulfillment or neglect of performance. A prince or a private person infringes an agreement or covenant by neglecting to perform its conditions, as well as by doing what is stipulated not to be done.
2. To break; to violate; to transgress; to neglect to fulfill or obey; as, to infringe a law.
3. To destroy or hinder; as, to infringe efficacy. [Little used.]
Infringed; INFRING’ED, participle passive Broken; violated; transgresses.
Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822): “For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution.”
Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846): ” `The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right.”
Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402 (1859): “The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the “high powers” delegated directly to the citizen, and `is excepted out of the general powers of government.’ A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power.”
Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, at 560, 34 Am. Rep. 52, at 54 (1878): “To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm … is an unwarranted restriction upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege.”
18 U.S. Code § 241: Conspiracy against rights: If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured— They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping (the term “kidnapping” means an offense that has as its elements the abduction, restraining, confining, or carrying away of another person by force or threat of force) or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 696; Pub. L. 90–284, title I, § 103(a), Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 75; Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, § 7018(a), (b)(1), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4396; Pub. L. 103–322, title VI, § 60006(a), title XXXII, §§ 320103(a), 320201(a), title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1970, 2109, 2113, 2147; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, §§ 604(b)(14)(A), 607(a), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3507, 3511.)
18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law: Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 696; Pub. L. 90–284, title I, § 103(b), Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 75; Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, § 7019, Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4396; Pub. L. 103–322, title VI, § 60006(b), title XXXII, §§ 320103(b), 320201(b), title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(H), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1970, 2109, 2113, 2147; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, §§ 604(b)(14)(B), 607(a), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3507, 3511.) https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law
Summary: Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
For the purpose of Section 242, acts under “color of law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official’s lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.
The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.
652. Statute of Limitations for Conspiracy: Conspiracy is a continuing offense. For statutes such as 18 U.S.C. § 371, which require an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, the statute of limitations begins to run on the date of the last overt act. See Fiswick v. United States, 329 U.S. 211 (1946); United States v. Butler, 792 F.2d 1528 (11th Cir. 1986). For conspiracy statutes which do not require proof of an overt act, such as RICO (18 U.S.C. § 1961) or 21 U.S.C. § 846, the government must allege and prove that the conspiracy continued into the limitations period. The crucial question in this regard is the scope of the conspiratorial agreement, and the conspiracy is deemed to continue until its purpose has been achieved or abandoned. See United States v. Northern Imp. Co., 814 F.2d 540 (8th Cir. 1987); United States v. Coia, 719 F.2d 1120 (11th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 973 (1984).
An individual’s “withdrawal” from a conspiracy starts the statute of limitations running as to that individual. “Withdrawal” from a conspiracy for this purpose means that the conspirator must take affirmative action by making a clean breast to the authorities or communicating his or her disassociation to the other conspirators. See United States v. Gonzalez, 797 F.2d 915 (10th Cir. 1986).
How about executing the criminals?
make your own.
they sell already threaded “mock” silencers, you can machine the internal discs to complete a very effective one for less than 100.00 total including the mock silencer
Man! I didn’t hear that coming! At my age I certainly won’t give mine up and won’t have any trouble stopping those who may try to come get them. I believe the insanity has gone on long enough and those who wish to take our only means of defense must be stopped.
I am nonviolent. I don’t believe in violence as a cure. It is a disease. People who resort to violence are often drug addicts on prescription antidepressants. Stop the criminals from passing out antidepressants and homegrown violence will be cut in half.
Stop allowing financial money seeking migrants to overwhelm us and the statistics of gun violence, and other forms of violence will drop by half again.
Women take their place as queen in their kitchen and men as king of domesticity; parents discipline their children and show some respect for their ancestors: then, and only then will gun violence in America stop.
Ban silencers, more deafness, that’s all.
You want a sensible gun silencer law? Require gun owners to use a silencer at the indoor gun range. Or, at least put up a sign asking patrons to use a noise suppressor as a courtesy.
.
Duh, why not just a set of ear protection that reduces the report of the firearm when you squeeze the trigger.
Restrictive France of all places allows silencers on .22 rifles for chicken farmers to kill rats and not disturb the egg laying chickens. The silencers are permanently attached to the rifle.
First violence is not a disease. What an asinine thing to say. Second there are roughly 22,000 and 30,000 gun laws, and last time I checked people kill people, not an inanimate object.
If I’m not mistaken some company makes a piece that threads onto your barrel and then a car oil filter screws onto that. It’s big and dooky but works. Also read somewhere an sks can be wired with a coat hanger enabling full auto. What is drumpf gonna ban oil filters and bailing wire.
You can only pick around the periphery for so long until you get to the core. That bone is getting devoid of easy meat. The “Shall Not Be Infringed” along with its intent has been successfully marginalized. Each regulation / ban tends to add justification for subsequent restriction; it’s, “boiling a frog”.
You can make a suppressor out of an automotive oil filter, if your so inclined. Next !
You can make a disposable suppressor out of an automotive oil filter, if your so inclined. Next !
Hmmm, just wondering, if and when, will they be grandfathered in or what ? I just ordered one for my .22. Hmm
Why not ban mufflers on automobiles? That makes about as much sense as banning suppressors. Noise reduction benefits all recreational and competitive shooters. There is nothing nefarious about decible reduction.
Give TRUMP a break ! He can’t be 100% right all the time
When are you geniuses gonna wake up and realize trump is part of the NWO. Wilber Ross managing director of Rothschild Inc (Trumps secretary of commerce pick), Steve Mnuchin (Trumps secretary of treasury) former Goldman Sachs. Mike Pompeo Bilderberg attendee same goes for General Mattis, Bilderbeg attendee. If you think Trump is gonna save us you still have a long way to go to waking up, times running out Gents. And Just for the record I hate the lefty’s
Why not ban pants? I”m sure the shooter was wearing them.