Silencer

Status
Not open for further replies.
Way to crap on someones thread, bravo

If anyone thinks something is not legal, they should do the work and look up the laws. Ignorance can be bliss, but not with this subject.

I have to add, discussing law in the open shouldn't be considered 'bad'.
Find a forum for lawyers and tell them the corp. laws that give them breaks on finances for meeting certain criteria shouldn't be discussed on the Internet.
It's almost delusional to think that certain 'things' shouldn't be discussed when it is stated in law (more than 1) that we can discuss and are allowed to own.
Reminds me of some people to who live in a delusional world and choose not to ever look outside of their little 'bubble'. Look outside the box, it will enable you to do things better, maybe even your day job.

"It is better to thought to be a fool than to speak up and remove all doubt"
 
Quote:
This thread is very strange indeed.

ZeroJunk


It's what happens when you go over to another part of the forum and insult a gentleman
there which most of us are not who adds a lot of value to the forum which most of us don't.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply, but I'm now more confused than ever.
 
There are 11 members on this thread with less than 8 posts. The only posts ever for most of them is on this thread. Most attacking a gentleman they know nothing about. I assume you think it was me that was crapping on the thread.
 
Thanks for the reply, but I'm now more confused than ever.
Click to expand...

It started out in the Gunsmith Forum, which is the only reason I saw it to begin with, with John asking a legitimate question. One of the senior gunsmiths there, who we could all learn a great deal from, doesn't like silencers for whatever reason. Some of this bunch, rather than make a case for silencers and their legality decided to go on the attack, post it in some other forums and get all these new posters, most to just attack the senior gunsmith with whatever poor manners they could come up with.
 
This has to be some sort of record for the longest *heated* discussion thread that has not been locked....


ETA: I'm gonna go back to the NFA Guns & Gear forum and play there. If you want to come play, play nice, and you will be welcomed....:)
 
So you agree that Harry Bonar insulted johnwilliamson062 when he said, “No legitamate sporting weapon or sportsman ever needs a silencer.”?

If someone is going to be so insulting as Harry Bonar is, then he needs to be prepared for the consequences. The other posters should not need to make a case for the legality of silencers. It is the person who objects to the legal use of silencers who needs to be making the case. It is un-American to suggest that a person prove something is legal. The right thing to do is prove something is illegal or inappropriate. “Innocent until proven guilty” ring a bell here?
 
"If someone is going to be so insulting as Harry Bonar is, then he needs to be prepared for the consequences."

I agree whole heartily. Coming into this thread I read the first few posts and Harry's came out of nowhere that I could tell (maybe threads where merged or modified?). Just seemed to slam someones post asking a question regarding a product they owned. Equal to me stating that no person needs a double barrel that can shoot both barrel at the same time, or no person needs more than a single shot, single barrel shotgun, etc, etc.

on an unrelated note, I'd think most assume what is said is opinion, unless verified through experience or a reference is provided. Just seems like it needs said.


(I am one of these people with few posts, mainly a lurker everywhere I 'lurk', I think the flamboyant remark(s) is what attracted so much attention)
 
Well I definitely thought Harry B was calling me a criminal/poacher. Someone else threw in immature child. I just didn't care. Never met the guy, probably never will. Even if he said it to me face it probably wouldn't phase me. In my short 23 years I have been called a lot worse than an immature poacher. If he decides not to answer any more of my questions I am sure someone else on here will. Misterwilson and MGracer were kind enough to answer the question for me this time, so I was able to get along fine without the cooperation of Harry B.
I can come up with a lot more reasons to ban Semi-auto weapons than I can silencers. Start out with if you can't put the shot where it goes the first time or cycle a pump shotgun fast enough to keep a home intruder at bay you shouldn't be given the added firepower of a semi-auto. Of course I don't agree with a semi-auto ban b/c the second amendment is not about hunting or home defense against burglars.
 
on an unrelated note, I'd think most assume what is said is opinion, unless verified through experience or a reference is provided. Just seems like it needs said.
Click to expand...

Trust me, there is a whole bunch of that in this forum, to say the least.
 
John, we have been beating this for a while. I suspect most other than enthusiast would consider the comparison between a driving a car and owning something classified under weapons of mass destruction per NC law ludicrous.
Click to expand...

It's a comparison between a very dangerous weapon (car) that can cause injury to a mass of people in one shot...and a piece of tubular metal.

If you're gonna base your entire common sense to some North Carolina Statute then you're in trouble.
 
This has to be some sort of record for the longest *heated* discussion thread that has not been locked....
Click to expand...

I just hope that all the time and energy put into this thread is also put into the voting booth. If the wrong guy wins, we may loose many of our gun rights and be posting on subjects not to our liking. Lets not loose what we have. Focus in getting the right candidate in office or we're done for.......:(
 
TPAW, I really don't mind for the time and energy spent here.
This takes very little time off my advocacy for our gun rights.
Heck, this is only one of the many forums and blogs I participate in.
Most of my time is spent contacting and voicing my opinions to our US and State Reps and senators regarding 2A. And not necesarily, in my own State.

As I posted here, in another thread:

I would rather spend my votes and effort in what really matters: Congress.

Democrats possess a field advantage in 2008, needing to defend only 12 seats, while Republicans must defend 23. In addition, five Republicans, but no Democrats, have announced that they are retiring. The open seat gap between the parties is the biggest in 50 year.

And we are well awared of how the 2 Presidential candidates have voted regarding gun control.
These 2 voted hand in hand with folks like Reid, Schumer, Edwards and Feinstein...the craddle for anti-gun anti-2nd in America.

Many would be surprised to know (by the records from the Congressional reports) which of these 2 guys have voted for more gun control.
They would be surprised.....
 
There are 11 members on this thread with less than 8 posts. The only posts ever for most of them is on this thread. Most attacking a gentleman they know nothing about. I assume you think it was me that was crapping on the thread.
Click to expand...

I suspect it's more a result of the sheer ignorance you and Mr. Boner display regarding the ownership and application of silencers that has people coming from the woodwork than anything else. You do a casual perusal of North Carolina state law and have become convinced that silencers are illegal there, and spout it at every opportunity.

Frankly, your ignorance and proclivity to defend such makes you a giant target for correction.

It is easier, in my state, to buy and obtain a silencer than it is to get a drivers license. There is no test, no eye exam, no example of proficiency required.
 
I guess as the young graduate from video games to real weapons their taste will be more influenced by what they think is cool looking. I am just behind the times. Perhaps it will eventually dawn on you that thinking silencers are unnecessary has absolutely nothing to do with supporting gun control. If you want to enhance the perception of gun owners try learning how to spell, leave out the invectives, explain your position without any name calling like scum, moronic, etc. and you will be more successful in your cause.
 
I guess as the young graduate from video games to real weapons their taste will be more influenced by what they think is cool looking. I am just behind the times.
Click to expand...
Here you are guessing at and making assumptions about others' motives again.

Funny, some of the guys that get most excited when I show up with a can at the shooting range are the old-timers who realize if they had one on their .17 HMR, .22LR, or .223 rifles, they could more easily decimate the prairie dog populations on their land.

-z
 
Last edited:
Here you are guessing at and making assumption
Click to expand...


Not really. Since VUPDblue pointed out the exception to NC law to me in the first of this thread I have been pretty much chain jerking. It's somewhat entertaining.

You should have treated Harry better.
 
Id want one

Lets take a look at the aspects of the person LEGALLY buying a silencer. There are so many steps he/she must take that if the silencer was to be used for illegal purposes they fuzz would be all over them like white on rice. Thats why THE SYSTEM IS SET UP LIKE IT IS. Why get finger printed, picture taken, live in x and such for a certain time. Know the cerial number of gun it will be used on. Someone going to commit a crime with a silencer has to go through WAY too much hassle to do something illegal! Weigh the options, use a bow or knife...silent as anything...or use a suppressed firearm....blow evidence everywhere....You get the point. Supressors are GREAT! How about the bad things about shooting.....recoil, noise, cleaning the weapon....How can we avoid these....Recoil pads, Sweet....Bore snakes, Sweet.....Supressors...Wait. Hollywood has made this one out to be a bad guys weapon of choice.

I would LOVE to have my rifles make minimal-no noise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top