Jump to content
Chucktshoes

Suppressors may be next on Trump’s list

Recommended Posts

In the wake of the reports that the VA Beach shooter used a suppressor on one of the guns, Pres. Trump was asked if he thought they should be restricted and his response was “I don’t like them at all.” Remember what happened the last time he took a negative view of a firearm accessory? We got the bumpstock ban. 

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2019/06/luis-valdes/are-suppressors-next-trump-i-dont-like-them-at-all/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point, it doesn't bode well for the suppressor crowd. Remains to be seen how this all shakes out. Bump stocks, suppressors, one piece at a time. Next, mags, barrels, triggers....?

Personally, I have no need for either, maybe some do. I like my guns just the way they are. They shoot well, reliable, hit the target. That's all I ask for. JMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as the bumpstock ban, I always thought that those things should be illegal to operate/own without proper training and a license (kind of like a car). But that's just based on my viewing of youtube videos....

But my opinion on ownership is rather archaic. I think you should be given firearms training in first grade as a pre-req.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wondering when someone was going to broach the subject.  NFA items used in crimes is a rarity.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not sure how this would work with current NFA legislation. It’s different than other guns cause they do have a list of who owns them and where you live. Can’t lose them in a boating accident 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am wondering if it really was a suppressor or one of the fake ones you see around on cheap tactical guns. If it was a fake, I bet no one will admit it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 You can be assured that now that the gun grabbers know that he doesn't like them, they will go after them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I happen to own a .22 suppressor. In all honesty I only bought it to help out a friend who had just gotten his Class 3 SOT. I hardly ever use the thing and its a real PITA to clean. 

However, I also have a rather severe hearing loss that came from all those years of listening to diesel engines. So I certainly see the good side of them too. I guess any hope for deregulation is gone. 

It never ceases to amaze me how when one nut job does something crazy that there is suddenly an outcry to pass laws to punish thousands of law abiding citizens who have done nothing wrong. 

So far there has been absolutely no proof what so ever that this nut actually did use a suppressor. Until there is, I call BS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Grayfox54 said:

It never ceases to amaze me how when one nut job does something crazy that there is suddenly an outcry to pass laws to punish thousands of law abiding citizens who have done nothing wrong. 

Remember criminals always follow the law though. Wait, if they did they would be law abiding citizens. So we would have to pass more laws to make them criminals. Then if they still follow those, more new laws!......Repeat...

I feel we are somewhat in the middle of the loop above. Soon your copies of Guns and Ammo will have to be hidden away like you are some highschooler with a porn mag. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all the holes we have to jump through,  the multiple background checks one with the FBI , surely to hell it won't be as easy as banning the bump stocks for them, witch was horse crap but whatever. I have them and I enjoy using them, especially my daughter shooting her 22. Trump Jr was all for cans when we had a chance on getting them off the list. Yes I know that doesn't mean anything about Daddy,.just saying. Unless you build something specifically to be super quite and use the right ammo you aren't going to be hiding from the cops sniping folks off, even with that probably not. They are a blast to use, I love shooting and they just make it better! Now I have to go get a few more in the works. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, billmeek said:

My take is that this will make it a lot harder to ever get the Hearing Protection Act passed... as it should have been done in 2016 when rinos had the majority across the board.  

Fixed that for you.!!!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the HPA is dead as a doornail. We might think it died when the Dems took the house but that’s not true. It was never really alive in the first place. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's no shock that Trump says things off the cuff. Bombard the White House with emails calling him on it and it may make a difference. Do nothing but complain on a firearms forum will guarantee nothing positive gets done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, E4 No More said:

Bombard the White House with emails calling him on it and it may make a difference. .

Why that IS doing something and I support contacting your reps.

A. I doubt he ever sees any of it

B. I doubt he gives a rat's ass even if he does. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that didn’t take long. The anti’s have a new focus.

I really don’t use them because the cost is freaking ridiculous due to them being illegal. I refuse to pay $1000 for a $100 item. That cost would fall like a rock if they were legal. I suspect that may now be on hold.

Maybe Trump with comment further after he talks with Jr. :)

 

"This killer planned it and had a distinct advantage with a silencer." @NBCNews law enforcement expert Jim Cavanaugh on the Virginia Beach shooting suspect.

Democrat presidential candidate Seth Moulton suggests American’s freedoms should be limited based on need: “We should not have suppressors, you don’t need a suppressor, I mean that’s, that’s something like, you know, assassins need to use

The shooter who killed 12 people in a government office building in Virginia Beach used a firearm equipped with a suppressor that muffles the sound of gunfire. It’s the nightmare scenario that gun-control advocates have warned about amid efforts in recent years to ease restrictions on the devices, which they say can help shooters escape detection and inflict more carnage.

NRA's shameless new grift: Pushing silencers like the one the Virginia Beach shooter used. After Virginia Beach, NRA rushes to tell the world silencers are safe — because its only goal is to boost sales.

Donald Trump Jr. even made a video back in September 2016 in which he fired a silencer-equipped automatic pistol such as was used to such devastating effect in Virginia on Friday.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I guess I won't go through the hassle to get one now, I'll just wait and see what happens next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ronald_55 said:

Why that IS doing something and I support contacting your reps.

A. I doubt he ever sees any of it

B. I doubt he gives a rat's ass even if he does. 

I disagree. Like all political offices they measure the public's temperature by the number of contacts - both positive and negative - on a subject. He's going into the next election and does NOT want to piss-off his base.

EDIT: Your "reps" can be easily outnumbered, but a veto is just by one person.

Edited by E4 No More

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, E4 No More said:

Like all political offices they measure the public's temperature by the number of contacts - both positive and negative - on a subject. He's going into the next election and does NOT want to piss-off his base.

Didn't seem to stop him from banning bump stocks. I seriously doubt he will listen to anyone on suppressors. He's going to do whatever he wants and we'll all stand by and watch it happen. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Big difference between bump stocks and Suppressors.  Bump stocks were always in question as legal or not.  Suppressors are not legal without application and approval.  Apples and oranges comparison.  Can't as easily take away something codified in law and clearly known what is legal or not.  It will take Congress to change it and I don't see that happening right now.  Lawsuits will last years if anything is forced.  I am not losing any sleep over this.

Edited by Hozzie
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hozzie said:

Big difference between bump stocks and Suppressors.  Bump stocks were always in question as legal or not.  Suppressors are not legal without application and approval.  Apples and oranges comparison.  Can't as easily take away something codified in law and clearly known what is legal or not.  It will take Congress to change it and I don't see that happening right now.  Lawsuits will last years if anything is forced.  I am not losing any sleep over this.

That's not my understanding of bump stocks. Didn't the ATF previously say they were fine? They had been in use for many years with their blessing. It wasn't until Trump decided he wanted them gone that the the DOJ suddenly decided they were out.

Pretty scary when they can just "amend" the rules as they see fit. 

"On December 18, 2018, Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker announced that the Department of Justice has amended the regulations of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), clarifying that bump stocks fall within the definition of “machinegun” under federal law, as such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger."

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/bump-stocks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference is they essentially changed it to mean bumpstocks were machine guns with the Machine Gun being the critical differentiation which made them illegal.  They can't change a suppressor to be anything other than a suppressor I don't think without changing actual law.  

They were certainly bipolar on bumpstocks, but it's still apples and oranges as far as I am concerned.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Erik88 said:

That's not my understanding of bump stocks. Didn't the ATF previously say they were fine? They had been in use for many years with their blessing. It wasn't until Trump decided he wanted them gone that the the DOJ suddenly decided they were out.

Pretty scary when they can just "amend" the rules as they see fit. 

"On December 18, 2018, Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker announced that the Department of Justice has amended the regulations of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), clarifying that bump stocks fall within the definition of “machinegun” under federal law, as such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger."

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/bump-stocks

:bs: Trump didn’t ban bump stocks or make them illegal. They were illegal the first day they were invented. You think just because some dumb azz sitting in an ATF office decides a bump stock is legal everything is okay? He was an idiot and it clearly violated the intent of the law. “Amend the rules as they see fit” you have to be kidding me; that is exactly what happened to make them available. Sure, lets have the ATF decide what’s legal and have no recourse. We’ll see how that works.

“It wasn't until Trump decided he wanted them gone that the the DOJ suddenly decided they were out.”  More :bs:. A guy climbed up in a building and cut loose with automatic weapon fire killing 58 people and wounding 422. That is why they are gone; had nothing to do with Trump.

Edited by DaveTN
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "tactical advantage" the guy in VA Beach had was that he was armed and the victims were not. The suppressor (if it really was a suppressor) was irrelevant. And he was killed by the responding officers so we have incontrovertible proof once again that ARMED good guys are what stops armed bad guys. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Cruel Hand Luke said:

The "tactical advantage" the guy in VA Beach had was that he was armed and the victims were not. 

Exactly. There was a criminal that had made his mind up to commit multiple murders; all laws at that point are worthless. They needed something to make him unable or unwilling to fire his weapon at them, and they didn’t have that; it cost them their lives.

The other thing here, just like the Vegas shooter, is that this doesn’t appear to be a nut case with nothing to live for, or a violent mental case. If there were any warning signs no one is talking about them yet.

Edited by DaveTN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


The Fine Print

Tennessee Gun Owners (TNGunOwners.com) is the premier Community and Discussion Forum for gun owners, firearm enthusiasts, sportsmen and Second Amendment proponents in the state of Tennessee and surrounding region.

TNGunOwners.com (TGO) is a presentation of Enthusiast Productions. The TGO state flag logo and the TGO tri-hole "icon" logo are trademarks of Tennessee Gun Owners. The TGO logos and all content presented on this site may not be reproduced in any form without express written permission. The opinions expressed on TGO are those of their authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the site's owners or staff.

Before engaging in any transaction of goods or services on TGO, all parties involved must know and follow the local, state and Federal laws regarding those transactions. TGO makes no claims, guarantees or assurances regarding any such transactions.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to the following.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines