Houston Jim Pruitt Against Silencers.

[matefrio]

http://www.ktrh.com/player/?station...dcast&program_id=newscasts_c.xml&mid=21880311

http://www.ktrh.com/player/?mid=21880311

About 3min in.

I'm really not for it; I don't see the value of it. I see the potential of danger and threat to citizenry and police officers.

 

[Jakashh]

That sucks, his store has great customer service. Eh.

Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using Tapatalk

 

[poolingmyignorance]

I dissagree, he sucks, his store sucks, his prices are ridiculious, his customer service is moderate to poor, at best. But none of that matters. Anybody willing to go through all the trouble there all ready is to legally obtain a supressor isn't your typical criminal type. It's such an idiodic statement for a gun store owner to make, an advocate of the second amendment and who supposedly realizes that people who ignore laws against murder, would also ignore laws against guns/ suppressors etc. But yet suspects that sombody who own a legal suppresor might suddenly turn criminal of oppertunity? I, would suspect he simply got denied his title II and now wants to shit on the competition. It doesn't add up. The second amendment never was intended to ensure the rights of hunters and sports men, it was intened to allow the common man to resist tyranny. And that means a fair shake at equal arms. I guess Pruitt lost his context with his mediocer fame.

 

[stx kid]

to predator hunting and eradicating hogs this would be a huge step forward

OMG HELL YES. I would love to be able to take out those pesky cyotes that pop out and scare off that 15 pointer with a drop tine from last year.

 

[Jakashh]

Every dealing I've had with them has been great. Nothing bad to say about them.

Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using Tapatalk

 

[skinman]

I dissagree, he sucks, his store sucks, his prices are ridiculious, his customer service is moderate to poor, at best. But none of that matters. Anybody willing to go through all the trouble there all ready is to legally obtain a supressor isn't your typical criminal type. It's such an idiodic statement for a gun store owner to make, an advocate of the second amendment and who supposedly realizes that people who ignore laws against murder, would also ignore laws against guns/ suppressors etc. But yet suspects that sombody who own a legal suppresor might suddenly turn criminal of oppertunity? I, would suspect he simply got denied his title II and now wants to shit on the competition. It doesn't add up. The second amendment never was intended to ensure the rights of hunters and sports men, it was intened to allow the common man to resist tyranny. And that means a fair shake at equal arms. I guess Pruitt lost his context with his mediocer fame.

We get it that you have issues with Pruett, but WTF does not allowing the use of silencers for hunting have to do with the right to bear arms?? I don't get the correlation.

 

[Mikewood]

Pruett really never has had a clue. Silencers don't make guns silent. They just reduce the noise. We need to get people to understand that the difference in sound level is between the sound of a jet and a Harlie Davidson motorcycle. The bike is quieter but it's almost loud enough to damage your hearin and everyone in he area knows you fired it up. With few exceptions silencers are not silent.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

They are already available & legal for (almost) anybody to purchase as it is for any other purpose....what's the big deal???

 

[Charlie]

Why wouldn't someone want to hunt or target shoot with a suppressor? And I guess I need a really good explanation as to why it wound endanger law enforcement and the citizenry if the law was changed to allow hunters to use them. Unless I'm missing something, wouldn't the process of legally owning a suppressor remain exactly the same? I just don't get the uproar about this issue.

 

[matefrio]

We get it that you have issues with Pruett, but WTF does not allowing the use of silencers for hunting have to do with the right to bear arms?? I don't get the correlation.

His comment goes way, way beyond the hunting issue. "I see the potential of danger and threat to citizenry and police officers."

It's about regulating things that don't need regulating. If suppressors were easier to manufacture and own we'd have a more rights to keep and bear the arms that we choose to keep and bear.

The idea that more regulation of such items keeps us safer has proven false.

 

[40Arpent]

They are already available & legal for (almost) anybody to purchase as it is for any other purpose....what's the big deal???

The big deal is that suppressors are an NFA item....where is the logic in that?

 

[ZX9RCAM]

The big deal is that suppressors are an NFA item....where is the logic in that?

I guess I was confused, I was asking what was the big deal about using a suppressor for hunting?

 

[40Arpent]

Every dealing I've had with them has been great. Nothing bad to say about them.

I am glad to know that you have never had a clerk in his store point a handgun in your direction and pull the trigger.

 

[40Arpent]

I guess I was confused, I was asking what was the big deal about using a suppressor for hunting?

Gotcha. I want to take it a couple steps further....there is absolutely no valid reason for suppressors to be classified as an NFA item, and there is no valid reason suppressors should be banned for any type of use.

 

[Acera]

I just called the gun store and asked about this, they are in complete denial mode. "No", Chris said, "Jim owns a gun store he would never do something like that."

LOL, I recognize his voice from his years on Houston morning radio, and I have no doubt that was him in the interview.

If you get a chance, please call the store and ask about it and see if you get the same response. 832-237-4867

(BTW, a legal question about one of their practices I have seen a couple of times. When they want a do-nut and coffee they just walk next door to a bakery. When they do this they do not leave their handguns, which they open carry, at the store. They stay openly armed when they leave the store enter and conduct business at the do-nut shop, is this legal??)

 

[Martinus_Turonis]

Re: Houston Jim Pruett Against Silencers.

Sound suppressors are actually a health and safety issue. Less noise means less hearing damage and less distractions on the firing line.

However, there are a large group of folks that believe in "limited gun rights" over the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Jim Pruett has a large number of LEO customers.
There are a huge number of LEO's that would love to take away your gun rights and firearms unless you are part of an exclusive club of goverment approved individuals. It is gun control and it is contrary to the original intent of the 2nd amendment to the US Constitution.
A CHL is a form of gun control. The Texas Carry laws are unconstitutional gun control. The prohibiltions of swords, knives, and clubs violate the 2nd Amendment. NFA registrations and restrictions are gun control and a violation of the 2nd Amendment.

Jim Pruett favors gun control and does not believe in the original intent of the 2nd Amendment otherwise he would have kept his pie hole shut on this issue.

His comment goes way, way beyond the hunting issue. "I see the potential of danger and threat to citizenry and police officers."

It's about regulating things that don't need regulating. If suppressors were easier to manufacture and own we'd have a more rights to keep and bear the arms that we choose to keep and bear.

The idea that more regulation of such items keeps us safer has proven false.

 

[Acera]

Here is his email, you might drop the man a line and let him know how you feel.

jim@jimpruett.net

 

[40Arpent]

I just called the gun store and asked about this, they are in complete denial mode. "No", Chris said, "Jim owns a gun store he would never do something like that."

Are they claiming it was someone else named Jim Pruett who owns a gun store in Houston? WTF?!?!

 

[Acera]

No, I did not mention that I had heard the radio spot. Just said some buddies had let me know something about him talking against silencers, and wanted to call and find out the truth.

 

[Younggun]

I've noticed that most who aposse 2A rights have either never fired a gun/suppressed weapon or can't legally own one themselves. I would tend to believe he is butt hurt cause he can't get one so doesn't think anyone else should.

I wonder how many crimes have been commited with legally owned suppressed firearms. I bet at most you could count on one hand.