- Jul 1, 2011
- 27,739
- 21
Boy, you can say that again
Houston Jim Pruitt Against Silencers.
- Thread starter matefrio
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Most likely he felt safer going to Mexico with a gun for personal protection. Sounds like an auto accident got him a closer look by authorities than intended.
Unless there is some proof they were there to sell the guns, and I doubt it, I'm personally not going to go down that road any further.
Unless there is some proof they were there to sell the guns, and I doubt it, I'm personally not going to go down that road any further.
And this means he gets a pass for being an anti 2nd amendment Rudd and hypocrite? Why is that? So . . . If you suck up to one segment of your customers and throw the rest f us under the proverbial bus tats alright as long as you are sucking up to government?
No way.
But he did speak against a class of owners. Ths is what the NRA allowed to happen in 1986 with the Hughes amendment, in 1989 with the import ban and the 1994 awb. The fact that one group of gun owners arbitrarily decides that their discipline is legitimate and another groups interests are not legitimate is typical and unforgivable!
It is a shame that he owns a gun shop.
- Jul 1, 2011
- 27,739
- 21
How did the NRA allow these regs? No matter their stance on any given matter, they are not the judicial system and can't allow nor deny regulations.
Kinda wondering that myself...
Yeah do that. I am sure my cousin will blow steam out his ears and come completely unglued when the old man rags on this trouble maker who came in the store and did not know shit about what is going on, what he said, what he means, etc. LOL.
I may have to grab a few cold ones and go over to his place, log in and let him read your post. That might be entertaining.
I believe the NRA supported the 1986 Hughes amendment. The 89 import ban and the awb.
The NRA may have somewhat opposed the awb, but the opposition was ineffective due to the infighting between huntng fudds, the sportsmen who use single shot shotguns, double guns and bolt.
The NRA may have somewhat opposed the awb, but the opposition was ineffective due to the infighting between huntng fudds, the sportsmen who use single shot shotguns, double guns and bolt.
I can totally see why using a silencer/suppressor is conducive to hunting. (especially if you miss your first shot haha)
It may also be great for pot shot target practice if you have a big enough yard.
But there is definitely something sinister about a guy walking the streets with a silencer on his conceal & carry weapon.
It's like the difference between a guy carrying a regular pocket knife and a guy carrying a large spike handled, curved, barbed and viciously and serrated blade.
One would have to question his intentions.
It may also be great for pot shot target practice if you have a big enough yard.
But there is definitely something sinister about a guy walking the streets with a silencer on his conceal & carry weapon.
It's like the difference between a guy carrying a regular pocket knife and a guy carrying a large spike handled, curved, barbed and viciously and serrated blade.
One would have to question his intentions.
They did not vigorously oppose due to the fudds and traditional sport shooters running the organization.
How long does the knife need to be before you'd need to question the person's intentions? How many spikes on that handle? How deep do the serrations need to be before they cause concern? Would you like to ban those out right or provide licenses to make sure the person carrying the knife is trustworthy, competent and trained?
Who would you give the authority to question that person's intentions? What criteria would you use to judge that intent? How would you penalize someone who doesn't meet your criteria? If it's an outright ban what is the punishment? If not a ban where and when could a person carry one?
Jack over there thinks all knives should be banned so he'll use your fears and add his fears to pass stricter laws than you intended but they're all for the good of everyone right?
- Jul 1, 2011
- 27,739
- 21
I understood your meaning. My point is no matter how vigorous the NRA's fight for or against any given issue, ultimately they are not in control.
Let me ask you this, if you can see it, it's not concealed, or how else would you know he had it? In that case he may be brandishing it or doing something else that would make you feel threatened, and those are probably crimes in themselves. So if he were taking the same actions without a suppressor, would you feel him sinister also???
(Just a guess, are you from GB??)
Regarding the NRA.....
When they claim to be "the" guardians of the second amendment, but then don't fully support the second amendment or firearms owners, it riles people up.
I am a member of the NRA. I support the NRA. But I am somewhat leary of them, as they are a political organization.
That's why I am also a member of the GOA.
Best I can tell, those boys don't pull any punches. They support firearm owners....all of them.....all the time. No, they aren't as effective because they are smaller.
When they claim to be "the" guardians of the second amendment, but then don't fully support the second amendment or firearms owners, it riles people up.
I am a member of the NRA. I support the NRA. But I am somewhat leary of them, as they are a political organization.
That's why I am also a member of the GOA.
Best I can tell, those boys don't pull any punches. They support firearm owners....all of them.....all the time. No, they aren't as effective because they are smaller.
Why should I sacrifice (what's left of) my hearing if I have to defend myself?
It's just a muffler. It doesn't really silence a gun (though it can come real close on some .22s); it just makes it not not as loud, sometimes it's enough of an effect that you don't get hearing damage on the first trigger pull without hearing protection.
What I wish people would start doing is focusing on behavior instead of equipment. The equipment doesn't matter - there are people out there equipped to kill another human being without even using a weapon.
Good guess.
I think if he was brandishing it with the silencer on I would automatically assume he was on a hit. Maybe I seen too many movies.
If I was a police officer and I searched him and found it I would question his intentions, yes.
I think if he was brandishing it with the silencer on I would automatically assume he was on a hit. Maybe I seen too many movies.
If I was a police officer and I searched him and found it I would question his intentions, yes.
The only thing dangerous about a suppressor(silencer) is if you remove it from the gun and hit someone with it. They are no more sinister then the muffler on a car. They have gotten this movie stigma about them(like most other firearm stigma) that don't hold up in real life.
