We already know where Sen. Chris Murphy stands on the issue of gun suppressors; he opposes them, obviously, seeing as the loud bang a firearm makes when it’s fired is an inherent safety feature.
The effectiveness of that distinctive warning noise is so great, it can send people stampeding from a crowded mall suffering only minor injuries, even when police later determine that no shots were actually fired.
So where does the AP stand on the issue of suppressors? Why, obviously the news organization takes no position either way, though its latest report kicks things off by calling silencers “the stuff of legend, wielded by hit men and by James Bond.”
There are nearly 1M silencers in circulation in the US. The gun industry wants to make it even easier to buy them. https://t.co/3MyeiJeGGv pic.twitter.com/3AxXcGtWMx
— AP Politics (@AP_Politics) February 13, 2017
?????? great !
— NYINDEPENDENT?? (@JONEEFRY) February 13, 2017
good. Why would it be hard to get them?
— Andrew Westmoreland (@drewwest_press) February 13, 2017
https://twitter.com/ChaosApathy/status/831196965048348672
Note: James Bond isn’t real, nor is his silencer.
Apparently anybody can write an article about silencers. They don't even have to be unbiased or factual. Fantastic.
— Kyzilla (@kbent88) February 13, 2017
you know that "silencers" don't make guns silent, or even quiet, right? RL isn't a Bond movie.
— Living 518 (@Falze_AMB) February 13, 2017
there's nothing sinister about a silencer.
— rich (@richjmadrid) February 13, 2017
Have you ever fired a silenced weapon? It isn't quiet at all. It also makes the gun harder to conceal if that's a worry.
— Just Dave (@hokieheel2) February 13, 2017
https://twitter.com/30Dawgfan/status/831200105487298560
https://twitter.com/phil8000/status/831206785671393282
this is dumb. And indicative of a culture that watches too many war movies. They don't sound like they do in a movie.
— rich (@richjmadrid) February 13, 2017
https://twitter.com/citizenrobertk/status/831208508578205701
https://twitter.com/breddy_gud/status/831199199312084995
https://twitter.com/OceanaVsEurasia/status/831533306936250368
Not only does the gun industry want to make it even easier to buy a suppressor; people who manufacture and sell suppressors would like to make it easier for gun owners to buy them. Lindsay Nichols, senior attorney with the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, blows that conspiracy wide open, telling the AP that people can see “this is really about profits for the gun industry” and not protecting gun owners’ hearing.
But say a manufacturer sells to a receptive public a product that does both: protects hearing and makes a profit for the company. That’s bad … how?
Nice to see you reporting the positive aspects of suppressor deregulation. Finally something that makes sense!
— You can’t make this crap up. (@cantpretendtoo) February 13, 2017
Suppressor are very sensible for home defense, competitions, & indoor shooting range training. Why the extra charge/wait? @EdgarCointreau
— ♿FU? (@BrokenRazer) February 13, 2017
Join the conversation as a VIP Member