Suppressor Bill

[FireInTheWire]

So your post raises a question for me. First please don't think I pretend to know everything. I don't! I learn by asking questions and listening.

My understanding is that in a sniper situation (longer shots) they make the firearm slightly less accurate. Is this not true?

Interesting.... that has been the first time I've heard that. While I have no scientific data to prove otherwise, I don't see how that could be possible.

What I think you might be hearing is the rumor that a can will throw off you point of impact if you sighted in without one. For instance, if you sight your rifle in at 100yrds without the can on your rifle, then put the can on, you'll be low or high... etc. I do think that is possible. But, if you sight in with the can on your rifle, it will not affect your accuracy.

 

[AndiTurner]

Interesting.... that has been the first time I've heard that. While I have no scientific data to prove otherwise, I don't see how that could be possible.

What I think you might be hearing is the rumor that a can will throw off you point of impact if you sighted in without one. For instance, if you sight your rifle in at 100yrds without the can on your rifle, then put the can on, you'll be low or high... etc. I do think that is possible. But, if you sight in with the can on your rifle, it will not affect your accuracy.

Go up a couple of posts to ToddnJoyce . Their explanation makes total sense to me! And yes, I would never shoot a firearm I hadn't sighted in with all accessories attached! Thanks for the assist!

 

[FireInTheWire]

more so than the sound signature

Let me run another variable by you.

Would you agree you would find someone in a canyon say.... 1200yrds away quicker without a can? I thought the reduced sound signature was one of the biggest factors. Without that sonic crack, it's very hard to pinpoint the POF.

 

[Darkpriest667]

The bill REQUIRES a declaratory judgement and even if they wanted to, they couldn't go buy any old suppressor. First the declaratory judgement THEN it must me wholly made in Texas down to the unmachined metal. That doesn't exist to my knowledge at THIS time.

Let Paxton be the first one to buy one. That's all I'm saying. I am against the NFA (or any government regulations for the most part) but the BATFE has consistently shown they will kill you if you violate it and refuse to surrender your property. Let the politicians put their heads on the line first.

 

[G O B]

If possession of parts to make a suppressor is a crime, then every person in possession of a plastic water or soda bottle is in violation of the law!

 

[EZ-E]

If possession of parts to make a suppressor is a crime, then every person in possession of a plastic water or soda bottle is in violation of the law!

Or an oil filter.

Interesting.... that has been the first time I've heard that. While I have no scientific data to prove otherwise, I don't see how that could be possible.

What I think you might be hearing is the rumor that a can will throw off you point of impact if you sighted in without one. For instance, if you sight your rifle in at 100yrds without the can on your rifle, then put the can on, you'll be low or high... etc. I do think that is possible. But, if you sight in with the can on your rifle, it will not affect your accuracy.

I had my Grendal sighted in without my can, then put the can on & my group shrank.

So your post raises a question for me. First please don't think I pretend to know everything. I don't! I learn by asking questions and listening.

My understanding is that in a sniper situation (longer shots) they make the firearm slightly less accurate. Is this not true?

Barrel whip can be more prevalent with added weight to the end of the barrel & that can change your point of impact depending on barrel length & barrel diameter. You could be an 1" off or 12" off at 100 yards. In some scenarios you might not have any change of impact.

 

[AndiTurner]

Let Paxton be the first one to buy one. That's all I'm saying. I am against the NFA (or any government regulations for the most part) but the BATFE has consistently shown they will kill you if you violate it and refuse to surrender your property. Let the politicians put their heads on the line first.

Well, if you are in Houston this weekend, I'm sure Rep Oliverson would comment on this. (I think I know the answer but it isn't for me to publicly comment on!)

 

[AndiTurner]

Or an oil filter.






I had my Grendal sighted in without my can, then put the can on & my group shrank.



Barrel whip can be more prevalent with added weight to the end of the barrel & that can change your point of impact depending on barrel length & barrel diameter. You could be an 1" off or 12" off at 100 yards. In some scenarios you might not have any change of impact.

You all are a font of wisdom! Thank you so much!!!

 

[FireInTheWire]

I had my Grendal sighted in without my can, then put the can on & my group shrank.

Yes it can do that too. If your gun likez the change in harmonics.

 

[toddnjoyce]

Let me run another variable by you.

Would you agree you would find someone in a canyon say.... 1200yrds away quicker without a can? I thought the reduced sound signature was one of the biggest factors. Without that sonic crack, it's very hard to pinpoint the POF.

I don’t know. lots of variables, to include echo in that scenario and electronic acoustic detection systems, so Let’s go simple. The eye is more likely to see a flash in an accurate location before it will hear a supersonic crack which may or may not be directional…the canyon walls may influence how/where the sound wave travels.

For muzzle flash, the canyon is not likely to impact how/where the light wave travels. You either see it or you don’t (minus edge case of reflection off a wet surface) Make sense?

 

[FireInTheWire]

 

[FireInTheWire]

I don’t know. lots of variables, to include echo in that scenario and electronic acoustic detection systems, so Let’s go simple. The eye is more likely to see a flash in an accurate location before it will hear a supersonic crack which may or may not be directional…the canyon walls may influence how/where the sound wave travels.

For muzzle flash, the canyon is not likely to impact how/where the light wave travels. You either see it or you don’t (minus edge case of reflection off a wet surface) Make sense?

Yes it does. I guess I've been suppressed for too long and I'm down-playing the amount of flash that comes out the end of a barrel. And yes, your eye would pick up on that pretty quick.

Thanks Todd.

 

[Txhillbilly]

My understanding is that in a sniper situation (longer shots) they make the firearm slightly less accurate. Is this not true?

Not true at all. The only difference in accuracy is the bullets point of impact between shooting the gun with or without the suppressor. That comes from changing the barrel harmonics from adding a weight to the end of the barrel.

 

[Sam7sf]

Isn't there a US law against marijuana but it's "legal" in some states?
How would this be different?

Great question.

Short answer: gotta love bullshit such as nothing being consistent and government doing what they want.

Long answer: read a 4473. Weed is still a federally controlled substance. Batf regulate all states for nfa items because it’s nfa. This is the basic similarity.

Unfortunately people pick and choose what and when they enforce a law and even more unfortunately a suppressor seems to be seen as a bigger evil than drugs.

Again: I’m ok with an asteroid impact.

 

[AndiTurner]

You all are so terrific! Thank you for all the insight and information!!!!

 

[motorcarman]

Let Paxton be the first one to buy one. That's all I'm saying. I am against the NFA (or any government regulations for the most part) but the BATFE has consistently shown they will kill you if you violate it and refuse to surrender your property. Let the politicians put their heads on the line first.

FIRST they will kill your dog!!!!!!!!!!(Then You!)

 

[Sam7sf]

Let Paxton be the first one to buy one. That's all I'm saying. I am against the NFA (or any government regulations for the most part) but the BATFE has consistently shown they will kill you if you violate it and refuse to surrender your property. Let the politicians put their heads on the line first.

Did not want to like your post because it’s true.

 

[Sam7sf]

@no2gates
A good read to help understand the head scratching hypocrisy

Is Cannabis Federally Legal Now?

Laws around cannabis can be confusing. Individual states have their own laws and regulations surrounding the plant and its products. Now, legislation

cannatechtoday.com

Note right off the bat the feds acknowledged state rights but left weed as a controlled substance. Sounds like making a deal with the devil.

Another trick the feds might do but some states do word in law about cbd but cbd is just an isomer away from being something to land you in jail. My point is again hypocritical bs.

I get what Paxton is trying to do but it’s not the answer. State wise the aggressive short term answer is for a governor to refuse to enforce any nfa crimes. The long term answer is for the gca to be repealed and we cut federal funding.

 

[AndiTurner]

@no2gates
A good read to help understand the head scratching hypocrisy

Is Cannabis Federally Legal Now?

Laws around cannabis can be confusing. Individual states have their own laws and regulations surrounding the plant and its products. Now, legislation

cannatechtoday.com

Note right off the bat the feds acknowledged state rights but left weed as a controlled substance. Sounds like making a deal with the devil.

Another trick the feds might do but some states do word in law about cbd but cbd is just an isomer away from being something to land you in jail. My point is again hypocritical bs.

I get what Paxton is trying to do but it’s not the answer. State wise the aggressive short term answer is for a governor to refuse to enforce any nfa crimes. The long term answer is for the gca to be repealed and we cut federal funding.

Well, as I said, these are all good questions /comments for the bill Sponsor- Representative Tom Oliverson who will be at our (TSRA) booth in the foyer of the main entrance of the Houston Convention Center on Saturday at 2 PM!

 

[Sam7sf]

Well, as I said, these are all good questions /comments for the bill Sponsor- Representative Tom Oliverson who will be at our (TSRA) booth in the foyer of the main entrance of the Houston Convention Center on Saturday at 2 PM!

I say this as respectful as possible but the one thing politicians need to do is stop with the career lip service. Things are so bad we don’t need more laws or promises. We need people who will publicly refuse to acknowledge the feds; to call them unconstitutional thugs.

Guns, taxes, spending, its time to leave the union.