maybe that's 'cause they're subject to such rigorous government control? What, and this is crazy, if we regulated all guns in a meaningful way, instead of trying to ban a few of them?
Replies
It's not even that particularly rigorous. It's essentially a normal background check (NCIS), you have to submit fingerprints, a photo, and pay a $200 tax. The fingerprint and photo do very little to actually increase the likelihood that the background check catches something.
aug 29, 2025, 5:13 pm • 2 0 • view
The fact is, suppressors do very little to actually "silence" a firearm in 90% of cases, which makes their utility in most common types of gun violence minimal. Many EU countries - like Germany, Finland, and Czechia allow unregulated sales of suppressors for a reason.
aug 29, 2025, 5:24 pm • 3 0 • view
Whatever dude. Crooks and crazies don't do the process. Dudes who do, make sure the suppressor isn't stolen Machine guns are similar, and they're easier to cover.
aug 29, 2025, 5:59 pm • 0 0 • view
If you’re proposing a gun registry for all firearms similar to how the ATF manages suppressors and fully automatic firearms, I already support that. But the registry for suppressors is not what’s preventing them from making mass shootings more dangerous.
aug 29, 2025, 4:43 pm • 18 0 • view
I just said, "meaningful regulation," A national database is a hard sell.
aug 29, 2025, 4:50 pm • 0 0 • view
You said we should regulate all firearms as we regulate suppressors. It’s a hard sell but I don’t think one that’s inherently harder of a sell than any other gun regulation. It’s really just centralizing the records we’re ahead have, that are falsely obfuscated by legislation.
aug 29, 2025, 4:55 pm • 6 0 • view
Nah, the wait and extra expense is typically what makes them rare, with a variety of pleasant consequences, like they are rarely used in crimes.
aug 29, 2025, 4:47 pm • 2 0 • view
Agree on the first part, but they just don’t do anything that enhances lethality in crimes. There’s no reason for mass shooters to use them.
aug 29, 2025, 4:51 pm • 3 0 • view
Lethality is enhanced if detection, and police arrival are delayed. Lethality is enhanced if people have less time to run away.
aug 29, 2025, 6:01 pm • 1 0 • view
And now we're back to "the problem with a lot of anti-gun advocates is they don't know what they're talking about" because this is again not how suppressors work. A suppressed AR-15 sits somewhere between "a jet taking off" and "jackhammer" in terms of noise, and still sounds exactly like a gun.
aug 29, 2025, 6:11 pm • 6 0 • view
And now we're back to the strawman, because you didnt read the thread, Izzy.
aug 30, 2025, 12:04 am • 0 0 • view
Depends on weapon, cartridge, suppressor, ambient noise and intermediate barriers. Doesnt take all that much to muffle a subsonic small or medium caliber pistol or carbine.
aug 30, 2025, 12:06 am • 1 0 • view
Subsonic rounds are typically quieter than rounds with normal loads fired from a suppressed gun, as well as having less recoil. And they're widely available without any regulation. So what mass shootings have taken place with subsonic rounds, in order to harness this supposed advantage?
aug 30, 2025, 12:17 am • 0 0 • view
Virginia Beach City Hall, for one.
aug 30, 2025, 12:41 am • 0 0 • view
Unless you're proposing just banning or otherwise placing the same restrictions on all firearms from black powder muzzle loaders to compact pisols to automatic rifles, we're going to need to properly define and articulate those regulations.
aug 29, 2025, 6:44 pm • 0 0 • view
And all of that is precluded by the fact there are legitimate uses for firearms unrelated to hurting humans. Farmers/ranchers use them for pest control, some people do hunt for food and not just sport, etc.
aug 29, 2025, 6:44 pm • 0 0 • view
Sure man. There's lots of room for details. Unfortunately, one side makes proposals, arguments, and brings in real world problems that beg for solutions. The other side quotes bumper stickers and yells "no" a lot. Then wonders why they don't have a hand in crafting good gun laws.
aug 29, 2025, 8:03 pm • 1 0 • view
I genuinely don't know which side is which in that analogy, which is a good if anecdotal indication of how both sides have fucked up this issue. But yes, details matter which i believe was the point that was made way up thread. We need gun control, but it needs to be implemented in a way that
aug 29, 2025, 8:43 pm • 1 0 • view
Is productive and makes sense. That requires people who know something about firearms to be involved in the process. Personally I'd be in favor of banning all semiautomatic weapons unless you have a disability (similar to restrictions on crossbows IIRC) which means you can only use one hand.
aug 29, 2025, 8:43 pm • 1 0 • view
How are you stringing a crossbow one-handed? I’m pretty sure I can order one on amazon and have it delivered by dinner time.
aug 29, 2025, 10:59 pm • 2 0 • view
Maybe it's just the state I'm in? Maybe I'm misremembering things. Regarding the one hand, there are cranks which allow the string to be pulled back.
aug 29, 2025, 11:04 pm • 0 0 • view