Gun industry works to rebrand silencers as hearing-protection accessories

[applegrove]

Gun industry works to rebrand silencers as hearing-protection accessories

Reuters/The Guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/08/gun-industry-silencers-suppressors-hearing-protection-congress

"SNIP...........


The US gun industry is trying to shake off the Hollywood hitman image of the gun silencer and rebrand it as a hearing-protection device in a campaign to roll back regulations that date to the 1930s.

Industry lobbying has led to more than a dozen states legalizing silencers for hunting since 2011. Now gun advocates are pressing Congress to repeal a Depression-era law that requires a months-long screening process for silencer buyers – far more scrutiny than gun buyers face.

Sales of silencers – or “suppressors”, as the industry prefers to call them – are booming. The number of silencers registered with the US government more than doubled to 792,282 in February 2015 from 360,534 in March 2012, according to the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

Despite their name, silencers can only quiet a gunshot to the level of a jackhammer – not much use for James Bond-style hit jobs.



...........SNIP"

[Hoyt]

1. Just another popular accessory for the millions of Zimmermans in America.

[HassleCat]

2. Your last sentence is correct.

Noise suppressors on ordinary firearms are of little use to criminals, terrorists, etc. They reduce the amount of noise, but only from very loud to just loud. That said, using subsonic ammunition, readily available for .22 caliber firearms, does allow a silencer to make the gun very quiet. A criminal could also hand load subsonic ammunition for other calibers. That's why they're strictly regulated, as they should be. There is no compelling reason to repeal the law. Shooting can be done in a location where the noise will not bother anyone.

[Canadian Interloper]

3. No NRA in Canada

[applegrove]

4. Oh they are here in Canada. Don't you remember the quebec

government has had to take the Harper government to court to get their long gun registry information that Harper wanted to destroy? That was NRAESQUE on the Harper government's part.

[Canadian Interloper]

5. "ESQUE"

Fact is, the gun lobby up here is a very pale shadow of the lobby that owns the U.S. Congress.

[Paladin]

6. Appearances count, not hearing protection.

Gun owners want silencers, because they think silencers make their firearms look more badass. Further evidence of the increasingly childish nature of gun ownership and usage (as if any further evidence was necessary).

[Marengo]

7. And the evidence backing your statement is...?

"Gun owners want silencers, because they think silencers make their firearms look more badass."

Is that all gun owners, or a subset? Can you provide a link to the research which proves this assertion?

[Paladin]

8. Why lookee there: Gun Control & RKBA is your favorite DU group.

49% of your recent posts, situated there. End of discussion.

[flamin lib]

9. It is appalling to me that gunners who so rigorously require proof, research and

endless veracity of all things gun can be so easily manipulated by gun manufacturers. Gun makers oppose "smart guns" not because they are unreliable but because it would require a change to the factory floor which still looks like it did in 1840. Gunners drink up the coolaid even after being shown the proof, research and veracity of those providing it.

Now it's suppressors which don't really do much on even modest caliber guns. Only the smallest, lightest calibers can be "silenced" and then if it's not sub-sonic the bullet makes as much noise as the report on an un-suppressed gun.

Gunners will eagerly accept any sales pitch given them by the gun companies regardless of how stupid and expensive the gadget is.

On the bright side there's a $200 fee to own one, so it will at least provide some revenue for the government so many of them hate.