The Hearing Protection Act

Speaking of gun rights legislation, HR 3799 is in committee in Congress. It would remove suppressors and "silencers" from the National Firearms Act, making them readily available for use by individuals. As someone who both shoots guns and rides motorcycles, all I have to say is -- what did you say? I couldn't quite hear you.


raven said...

At our local range, in operation since 1921, (now closed due to politics) a guy wanted to build a box about four foot square to surround a firing point for his .50, so the sound would be baffled and directed upward. He ran this by the DA and was advised that under WA state code, it would be considered a silencer. Go figure.

It is interesting that in Europe, the source of all things good WRT firearms law according to the left, suppressors are considered a off the shelf item, and a neighborly thing to have, as a way to ameliorate the noise. Yet over here, they magically transform into a sinister device only of use to criminals and sociopaths.

The entire NFA of 34 should be tossed out, it is blatantly unconstitutional. Even the arguments in Miller prove it, if I read the ruling correctly, they ruled against Miller because the firearm he had was purportedly NOT suitable or customary as a MILITARY small arm, and thus not covered under the militia reading. Any sane individual would see this as implying that arms suitable for the military would be allowed- like light machine guns etc. As usual, they want to have the cake and eat it too.

We had a case here in Washington where a man was convicted of having a "dangerous weapon" (a 3" paring knife) on his person. He contested it under second amendment grounds claiming it was a "arm", and should not be infringed- upon which the appeals court decided it was NOT DANGEROUS enough to be an "ARM". It was "dangerous" enough to get him convicted, but not "dangerous" enough to have a 2nd amendment protection. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Getting damned hard to cut up an apple these days.

This sort of thing is why I have an absolute loathing for laws banning objects- whats the term-"malum prohibitum" or something like that? Some folks you can trust, and some you can't, and the ones you can't, you can't keep from having whatever "the badness" flavor of the day is anyway.

Ymar Sakar said...

There's a good reason they ban stuff like that, Raven. Check out how many guns are being smuggled out of California, using Democrat political connections. They have always been part of the military industrial complex, bribing their way around, and is precisely why they blame the MIC on their political enemies.

They know exactly how corrupt their own practices are and wish any probes be directed at other people.

They ban guns, because when they sell those guns to drug cartels and foreign terrorists, it becomes more... profitable.