Wayne LaPierre's WTF speech

Martial Arts Training Forums The Armory: Weapons, Military, LEO, and Self Defen
41

[QUOTE=DCS;2920537]What happened in 1999-2000?[/QUOTE]

Between Y2K and the doomsday apocalypse that was supposed to herald the new Millennium along with it, I think it could simply explained by the flood of doomsday predictions that occurred from 1999 to 2012. Remember when the world was going to end every couple of years and people lost their minds? The world was supposed to end in 2000 (Y2K, millenium), in 2003 (Mayan calendar) and again in 2012 (Mayan calendar part deux).

Two of the drops (2000, 2003) line up with those non-events. If you notice the trend for gun rights increased up greatly as 2000 approached, and even more so as the first Mayan apocalypse was supposed to occur (2003). Doomsday preppers were very busy building arsenals and the NRA was fanning the flames then, too.

From there it tapers off, right up to Obama’s first term in 2008, when it spikes again (people were fearing the Democrat guncontrolpocalypse, NRA was mobilized).

Then the roller coaster of ups and downs from 2008 to present could be the result of the many mass shootings, and by the 2012 Mayan apocalypse…people were pretty much convince the end of the world was NOT a reasonable justification for gun ownership.

Finally, note the lowest point and last major drop in support for gun ownership is in 2012, the year of both Sandy Hook AND the Aurora movie theater massacre. It starts to rise up through 2014 (another reflex action…people are worried the government is coming for their guns) before it begins the descent it’s currently in, from 2014 onward, where we’ve seen almost a weekly string of mass shootings like in San Bernadino, Dallas, New Orleans, Orlando, etc.

It’ll be interesting to see where this polling data goes now, considered we theoretically have a President who is pro-gun ownership. BUT, here’s a big issue…we already know Trump will sell almost any conservative cause down the river for personal gain. IF he’s willing to compromise with Dems on immigration and border security…he’ll be willing to compromise with them on guns, because he no longer needs NRA support.

In fact…does anybody even know if Trump was a member of the NRA, or owns guns, or goes shooting? He and his family all seem very much not the type.

42

[QUOTE=Pship Destroyer;2920596]In fact…does anybody even know if Trump was a member of the NRA, or owns guns, or goes shooting? He and his family all seem very much not the type.[/QUOTE]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/senior-atf-official-proposes-loosening-gun-regulations/2017/02/06/beeb1120-ec7c-11e6-9662-6eedf1627882_story.html?utm_term=.af8582717e25

43

[QUOTE=itwasntme;2920608]https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/senior-atf-official-proposes-loosening-gun-regulations/2017/02/06/beeb1120-ec7c-11e6-9662-6eedf1627882_story.html?utm_term=.af8582717e25[/QUOTE]

So Trump Jr. hunts, but did you read this part? Silencers are needed to protect people’s hearing??? Hearing Protection Act???? Come on LOL.

One supporter of relaxed regulations on silencers is Donald Trump Jr., the president’s oldest son, who is a hunter. Republican lawmakers have proposed legislation that, rather than focusing on the Second Amendment, frames the matter as a public health issue to protect the hearing of gun owners. The bill, which would eliminate the tax and long waiting period to buy a silencer, is called the Hearing Protection Act.

“Silencers are very rarely used in criminal shootings,” the white paper states. “Given the lack of criminality associated with silencers, it is reasonable to conclude that they should not be viewed as a threat to public safety.”

That’s some bullshit logic right there. “Lack of criminality associated with silencers”…yeah there’s a reason for that, genius. They’re hard to get.

Sure, there are legit uses but aren’t protecting eardrums and criminals never using silencers are non-sequitur? Earplugs/protectors work just fine, and criminals will definitely take advantage of relaxed silencer regs.

44

[QUOTE=Pship Destroyer;2920609]So Trump Jr. hunts, but did you read this part? Silencers are needed to protect people’s hearing??? Hearing Protection Act???? Come on LOL.

That’s some bullshit logic right there. “Lack of criminality associated with silencers”…yeah there’s a reason for that, genius. They’re hard to get.

Sure, there are legit uses but aren’t protecting eardrums and criminals never using silencers are non-sequitur? Earplugs/protectors work just fine, and criminals will definitely take advantage of relaxed silencer regs.[/QUOTE]

You can make silencers really easy. I don’t think they will be used much in crime. It’s kind of like an assault rifle. It “seems” like it would be a gangbanger’s preferences to off people with but hammers and knives are responsible for more murders.

[video=youtube_share;f-5v2bHwI8I]http://youtu.be/f-5v2bHwI8I[/video]

45

[QUOTE=Pship Destroyer;2920609] Earplugs/protectors work just fine, and criminals will definitely take advantage of relaxed silencer regs.[/QUOTE]
in dangerous game country earplugs could cost you life or limb. You can use the battery powered ones but if the power fails … they are just regular earmuffs again and you can’t hear a lion/panther/bear/gator/ chupacabra coming.

46

[QUOTE=Raycetpfl;2920611]You can make silencers really easy. I don’t think they will be used much in crime. It’s kind of like an assault rifle. It “seems” like it would be a gangbanger’s preferences to off people with but hammers and knives are responsible for more murders.

[/QUOTE]

Same with fists and feet.

47

[QUOTE=Pship Destroyer;2920609]So Trump Jr. hunts, but did you read this part? Silencers are needed to protect people’s hearing??? Hearing Protection Act???? Come on LOL.

That’s some bullshit logic right there. “Lack of criminality associated with silencers”…yeah there’s a reason for that, genius. They’re hard to get.

Sure, there are legit uses but aren’t protecting eardrums and criminals never using silencers are non-sequitur? Earplugs/protectors work just fine, and criminals will definitely take advantage of relaxed silencer regs.[/QUOTE]

they’re not hard to get, and they’d be a lot less hard to get if more people bought them. everybody is scared of getting put on some list though.

and how is the hearing protection act not legit? you gonna walk around the woods with earplugs in or did you just plan to throw them in when you saw your game?

48

[QUOTE=Pship Destroyer;2920596]Between Y2K and the doomsday apocalypse that was supposed to herald the new Millennium along with it, I think it could simply explained by the flood of doomsday predictions that occurred from 1999 to 2012. Remember when the world was going to end every couple of years and people lost their minds? The world was supposed to end in 2000 (Y2K, millenium), in 2003 (Mayan calendar) and again in 2012 (Mayan calendar part deux).

Two of the drops (2000, 2003) line up with those non-events. If you notice the trend for gun rights increased up greatly as 2000 approached, and even more so as the first Mayan apocalypse was supposed to occur (2003). Doomsday preppers were very busy building arsenals and the NRA was fanning the flames then, too.

From there it tapers off, right up to Obama’s first term in 2008, when it spikes again (people were fearing the Democrat guncontrolpocalypse, NRA was mobilized).

Then the roller coaster of ups and downs from 2008 to present could be the result of the many mass shootings, and by the 2012 Mayan apocalypse…people were pretty much convince the end of the world was NOT a reasonable justification for gun ownership.

Finally, note the lowest point and last major drop in support for gun ownership is in 2012, the year of both Sandy Hook AND the Aurora movie theater massacre. It starts to rise up through 2014 (another reflex action…people are worried the government is coming for their guns) before it begins the descent it’s currently in, from 2014 onward, where we’ve seen almost a weekly string of mass shootings like in San Bernadino, Dallas, New Orleans, Orlando, etc.

It’ll be interesting to see where this polling data goes now, considered we theoretically have a President who is pro-gun ownership. BUT, here’s a big issue…we already know Trump will sell almost any conservative cause down the river for personal gain. IF he’s willing to compromise with Dems on immigration and border security…he’ll be willing to compromise with them on guns, because he no longer needs NRA support.

In fact…does anybody even know if Trump was a member of the NRA, or owns guns, or goes shooting? He and his family all seem very much not the type.[/QUOTE]

You’re being stupid.
You have no valid reason to draw those conclusions.
Putting any serious weight behind the bumps in the road is silly.
Scale matters.

49

[QUOTE=itwasntme;2920616]they’re not hard to get, and they’d be a lot less hard to get if more people bought them. everybody is scared of getting put on some list though.

and how is the hearing protection act not legit? you gonna walk around the woods with earplugs in or did you just plan to throw them in when you saw your game?[/QUOTE]

Uh, because we don’t need a “Hearing Protection Act”.

What are you…a fucking liberal?

50

[QUOTE=Pship Destroyer;2920626]Uh, because we don’t need a “Hearing Protection Act”.

What are you…a fucking liberal?[/QUOTE]

don’t be dumb.

51

[QUOTE=itwasntme;2920629]don’t be dumb.[/QUOTE]

Great let’s keep the conversation intelligent.

Why does the United States need a “Hearing Protection Act”, linked to the market for silencers, led by Trump Jr, posing for a photo op in his best suit? IS the United States in such dire need of working tympanic membranes among gun owners, we now need immediate federal intervention? More gun lobby money grubbing BS.

Yeah I’m sure he hunts…just like Sarah Palin. From a fucking helicopter.

52

[QUOTE=Pship Destroyer;2920630]Great let’s keep the conversation intelligent./QUOTE]

this is difficult when you’re involved. i mean, just look at the post i quoted. you’re a terrible troll.

your use of pathos and kairos, among other things, remains horrid. i wouldn’t jump into [strike]book reviews[/strike] creative writing too quickly.

53

[QUOTE=itwasntme;2920631]
this is difficult when you’re involved. i mean, just look at the post i quoted. you’re a terrible troll.

your use of pathos and kairos, among other things, remains horrid. i wouldn’t jump into [strike]book reviews[/strike] creative writing too quickly.[/QUOTE]

Work on using the quote feature correctly first, before jumping right to the Greek words.

I mean, try answering the question.

54

[QUOTE=Pship Destroyer;2920632]Work on using the quote feature correctly first, before jumping right to the Greek words.

I mean, try answering the question.

[/QUOTE]

you didn’t ask a question, you raised a fallacy.

55

[QUOTE=Pship Destroyer;2920609]So Trump Jr. hunts, but did you read this part? Silencers are needed to protect people’s hearing??? Hearing Protection Act???? Come on LOL.

That’s some bullshit logic right there. “Lack of criminality associated with silencers”…yeah there’s a reason for that, genius. They’re hard to get.

Sure, there are legit uses but aren’t protecting eardrums and criminals never using silencers are non-sequitur? Earplugs/protectors work just fine, and criminals will definitely take advantage of relaxed silencer regs.[/QUOTE]

Actually, we very much need a Hearing Protection Act as the laws limiting access to silencers are some of the most pointless ever devised. Silencers are primarily a hearing protection device. The primary desire for silencers among gun owners for years has been hearing protection. Earplugs themselves are not adequate to protect your hearing, that is why most people double up with both earplugs and hearing muffs when shooting; two, if you have to deal with a criminal in your home, you don’t want to have to put on hearing protection as then you can’t hear the criminal. And if your family is asleep, they may not even be able to put them on. It’s a lot easier to just use a silencer.

As for criminals using silencers, that is unlikely for a few reasons:

  1. They’re too costly—criminals don’t generally use expensive guns

  2. They don’t silence the weapon. Don’t believe the Hollywood movie nonsense. Gunshots fired with silencers are still very loud, just not AS loud. All the silencer does is lowers the shot down to a more manageable level, but it in no way silencers the weapon, despite the name. So even if criminals were to use them, so what?

The Hearing Protection Act is one of the few laws that actually states exactly what it is in the name. The gun control proponents claim it is about “profits for the gun industry” due to the own lack of understanding (and oftentimes flat lies) about guns and the gun industry. Anyone who has followed this subject for years knows that it has always been about hearing protection among gun rights people. That gun control proponents are against it shows their own lack of understanding and/or willingness to mislead on the issue.

56

[QUOTE=Pship Destroyer;2920630]Great let’s keep the conversation intelligent. [/QUOTE]Yes, let’s keep the conversation intelligent. You are treading dangerously close to shitposting.

1.) Please go do research on suppressor/silencer (I’ll use silencer from now on) availability in other countries where shooting sports are allowed to exist. There are other countries where they are banned, but there are others where they are available at the hardware store.

2.) Please go do research on how much noise silencers actually reduce. The answer is: ideally to less than 140db. That is still very loud. Outside of .22lr out of a 16"+ barrel (often already hearing safe), it’ll be heard, and equipment like shotspotter should still work, assuming it had ever led to the arrest of a person who actually committed the crime being investigated–which to my knowledge, it has not.

3.) Please go research silencer construction. It is easy to do and the materials and tools needed amount to about $200 for a really nice one. Start with “solvent trap.”

The fact of the matter is that silencers are large and a pain in the ass for concealment. Criminals like small and concealable. And to not burn themselves on hot silencers. As to your point about the HPA being asinine, I agree but enjoy the irony re: Democrats wanting to make gun violence a public health issue.

57

[QUOTE=ermghoti;2920473]Gun sales are not gun owners. The same people keep buying. There are fewer gun owners coming of age than those dying.

The Gallup numbers are relatively rosy, showing the percentage of gun owners as flat over the past decade and a half, but that’s down 10% from the early 90s. Scroll down a bit.

The GSS shows ownership has declined from 49% to 32% from the early 70s to present.[/quote]

I wouldn’t put too much stock into those numbers. No one knows for sure how many gun owners there are because there is no way of recording it. The claim that gun sales currently are made up of smaller numbers of gun owners buying up more and more guns is a favorite gun control claim, but it has no hard backing as there is no way to know. Also, do not assume that support for gun rights is tied directly to gun ownership. That is no more true than saying that support for gay rights is tied to being gay.

58

[QUOTE=Cassius;2920642]As to your point about the HPA being asinine, I agree but enjoy the irony re: Democrats wanting to make gun violence a public health issue.[/quote]

You make a lot of excellent points about silencers but then you say that you agree that the HPA is asinine, why is that? It clearly is not.

59

[QUOTE=MechMan;2920645]You make a lot of excellent points about silencers but then you say that you agree that the HPA is asinine, why is that? It clearly is not.[/QUOTE]

Can’t get the above post to edit, but wanted to re-phrase my original statement as I realize it comes off rude-sounding. I meant that IMO, it is not asinine, but maybe I am missing something.

60

[QUOTE=MechMan;2920645]You make a lot of excellent points about silencers but then you say that you agree that the HPA is asinine, why is that? It clearly is not.[/QUOTE]Because I don’t think suppressors are a particularly important public health issue, and I think it is a clever poke at using the DNCs own tactics against them.

What I do think is that suppressors are cheap hollow metal tubes that have no business being regulated by or registered with the U.S. Government anymore than I think mufflers need a national registry and 12+ month wait time from purchase to possession. If pretending they are a public health essential gets us partway there, I am happy to support it, but I’m not going to pretend that has anything to do with why I believe suppressors should be removed from the NFA.