50 killed, 200 Injured in Las Vegas Shooting

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I turned 20 in an environment where getting shot at was unremarkable.

[Baruch]

Any place at all where people gather together for any reason can become a target of these kinds of murderous assholes. We can't protect everyone all the time - so what the hell do we do? Do we, as Bill O'reilly said, just accept this danger as the price of freedom? Do we turn America into a police state? Do we try to decrease the number and lethality of weapons?

I don't know if anyone has good answers for this tragic situation - I sure as hell don't.

There is no safety in life ... it always ends in death.  So live as best you can, while you still can.  You could be dead tomorrow, but ruin what time you have thru excessive worry or rationalizing.  The bullet you hear going past you ... is a bullet that missed you.  People want utopia, but they only produce dystopia.

[PopeyesPappy]

Why does the average person need any of the following: fully automatic weapon; magazines or clips that hold more than 10 rounds; unregistered weapon; why not licence them all?  Those rules seem only sensible to me.  I'm sure others could be added.  And allowing any and all weapons to have silencers only makes them more dangerous.  Why would the average person need a silenced weapon?

I don't have any objections to the first part of what you have to say here that couldn't be overcome with well thought out legislation. Having said that let's talk about silencers.

First off the term silencer is a misnomer. They don't silence anything. The correct term is suppressor because that's what they do. They reduce the amount of noise made by a discharging firearm. Even suppressed firearms are still quite freaking loud.

Your average off the shelf legal to buy without a tax stamp AR-15 chambered for the 5.56 NATO cartridge is going generate somewhere between 165 and 170 db of sound when it fires. That's way above the pain threshold, and capable of causing permanent hearing damage if you are exposed to that level of noise for any sustained time interval. The only thing most civilians are likely to experience in their lives that generates the same sound level as a gun shot is a first generation airbag going off.

Suppressors work by giving the rapidly expanding gases generated by burning gun powder a place to expand into which slows them down before they exit the muzzle. They do nothing to reduce the loud crack you hear when a bullet exits the barrel at greater than the speed of sound. Most but by no means all bullets have a muzzle velocity faster than the speed of sound.

The best of the suppressors designed and marketed for the 5.56 NATO cartridge are around 1.5" in diameter and run 6" to 10" in length. They produce 30 to 35 db of total noise reduction. That means the average 5.56 AR with a suppressor is still going to generate between 130 and 140 db's of noise when it is fired. To put that in context that's louder than a rock concert (110 db) and thunder (120 db). It falls in the same range as peak stadium crowd noise (130 db), and air raid siren (135 db) and a jet engine at take off (140 db).

Sure you could build a suppressor for a bolt action 22 rimfire firing subsonic ammunition that could get the noise level down to the pfft you hear on TV or the movies, but the damn thing is going to be at least the size of a gallon milk jug. But you can't get rid of the supersonic crack from a high power rifle so there is no way to silence a supersonic round from a 5.56 without building a suppressor 500 plus yards long because that is how far the bullet travels before it drops to subsonic velocity.

Why would someone want a suppressor? Anyone who values their hearing and shoots guns should want one. Anyone that lives near a gun range is probably going to want the people shooting there to have one too. You might (or might not) be interested to learn that in countries like the UK and New Zealand, countries that have gun laws many in the US would like to model ours after, allow over the counter sales of suppressors.

Most gun crime in the US is committed with hand guns. Suppressors can make handguns quieter, but that comes at the expense of reduced concealability. That is actually a good thing as far as crime goes. They are user and observer friendly. If you are anywhere in the neighborhood you are still going to be able to hear a suppressed gunshot. Your ears just aren't going to bleed if you are close by. So let me ask you this. What the freaking hell is so terrible about suppressors that warrants making them completely illegal?

[GrinningYMIR]

I don't see a feasible reason for someone to own more than a few weapons unlicensed. I don't see a feasible reason for people to own semi-or fully automatic weapons unlicensed. Fully automatic doesn't even make sense for a citizen. Hunting a deer does not mean mowing it down with assault fire. There's a difference between bearing arms and bearing an arsenal. And there's no reason to allow drum roll magazines for AR-15's or silencers. A silencer is made for the same reason a .38 is, not for hunting, but to kill people.

I like guns, they're fascinating and I watch a youtube channel where a guy has a .50 cal sniper rifle.
There's a reason his is licensed.

[Unbeliever]

They claim they need protection from our government, or to protect their families, but I don't know what their real motivations are. I know that after these kinds of tragic mass murders the sales of guns always go way up. People manage to make good money from bad actions. I don't know why so many guns are needed by anyone, though, especially the military type of guns that are so prevalent these days. The GOP want to legalize silencers, too, but it's all insanity if you ask me.

But then, I'm a flaming liberal - so what do I know?

[PopeyesPappy]

A silencer is made for the same reason a .38 is, not for hunting, but to kill people.

Bullshit.

Here is a picture of Prince William and Kate Middleton on a hunting trip.



Notice the big ass suppressed rifle their guide is holding? Here's a picture of Kate shooting the damn thing.



I highly fucking doubt she's about to kill someone with it.

[Shiranu]

Forget the silencer for the Ar-15, why does anyone need an Ar-15 anyways? We don't live in Somalia, we don't live in Juarez, we don't need assault-rifle styled weapons on the streets. The only legitimate argument is, "They are cool!", which fair play I agree with... but how many innocent people have to murdered just so we can keep something cool before we start to ponder the worth/cost ratio?

I see the argument about the suppressors from both sides, but I think it's the wrong argument to even worry about right now. What we need to argue about is what the fuck we are going to do about the fact that I, at 16 years old, had access to a fully automatic rifle with no license, no background check, nothing. What we need to argue about is that anyone and everyone, because of the gun lobby, has access to a tool capable of killing 10, 20, 30+ people at a time from large distances away or the ability to walk into a crowd and unload on people. And please save me, "They will just use bombs!" bullshit... you cant buy bombs (more or less) at stores, they take work, they take preparation, and they don't always work... and most importantly, the ingredients all have useful purposes. A gun, outside of hunting (which you don't need an Ar or handgun for) or if you live in Somalia, has no practical use in our society, with statistics overwhelmingly showing that gun ownership puts you at higher risk of injury than lackthereof. To deny this is as wrong as denying climate change or that the world is round and doesn't even deserve a place at the table. That argument had it's chance, now it's time for the big boys to talk reality.

[GrinningYMIR]

Bullshit.

Here is a picture of Prince William and Kate Middleton on a hunting trip.



Notice the big ass suppressed rifle their guide is holding? Here's a picture of Kate shooting the damn thing.



I highly fucking doubt she's about to kill someone with it.

I highly fucking doubt that a silencer is still needed or even should he on a hunting rifle. I used to hunt with earmuffs and a BAR. A silencer screams shifty at the very least, even with the argument that it's for health reasons why would it be unlicensed? Over the counter silencer??

Keep in mind I'm in Texas, land of bringing handguns on college campuses

[GrinningYMIR]

Come to think of it, what's all the issue with licensing guns

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Come to think of it, what's all the issue with licensing guns

Come to think of it, what's all the issue with licensing guns

Government control. In the movie "Red Dawn" the commie arrive and one of the first things they do is go for the records of gun ownership. It was sublime parody that the movie makers didn't even realize.

[PopeyesPappy]

I highly fucking doubt that a silencer is still needed or even should he on a hunting rifle. I used to hunt with earmuffs and a BAR. A silencer screams shifty at the very least, even with the argument that it's for health reasons why would it be unlicensed? Over the counter silencer??

Keep in mind I'm in Texas, land of bringing handguns on college campuses

35 states allow hunting with suppressors including Texas. The only reason you don't see more of it is that they are a pain in the ass to get.



I don't hunt because I think killing things is barbaric, but I shoot all the time. I sometimes use a suppressed SBR for 3-gun competitions. A lot of people are moving that way even though it can take a year or more to get the tax stamps that are required. When I don't use the suppressor I wear earplugs and active headphones. When I'm doing that I have a hard time hearing the range officer. That's a safety concern. When I'm using the suppressed SBR I can get away with just the headphones. It makes it a lot easier to hear commands like cease fire.

[Unbeliever]

This is kind of interesting - slow motion sound suppressors:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pOXunRYJIw

[PopeyesPappy]

A controlled test of the sound suppression characteristics of several different 5.56 suppressors.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

One time, for fun, I sat a FNG down in a field and fired a .50 past him. He was shaken when it sank in that the "whee" of the bullet got to him before sound of the gun.

[Mike Cl]

I don't have any objections to the first part of what you have to say here that couldn't be overcome with well thought out legislation. Having said that let's talk about silencers.

First off the term silencer is a misnomer. They don't silence anything. The correct term is suppressor because that's what they do. They reduce the amount of noise made by a discharging firearm. Even suppressed firearms are still quite freaking loud.

Your average off the shelf legal to buy without a tax stamp AR-15 chambered for the 5.56 NATO cartridge is going generate somewhere between 165 and 170 db of sound when it fires. That's way above the pain threshold, and capable of causing permanent hearing damage if you are exposed to that level of noise for any sustained time interval. The only thing most civilians are likely to experience in their lives that generates the same sound level as a gun shot is a first generation airbag going off.

Suppressors work by giving the rapidly expanding gases generated by burning gun powder a place to expand into which slows them down before they exit the muzzle. They do nothing to reduce the loud crack you hear when a bullet exits the barrel at greater than the speed of sound. Most but by no means all bullets have a muzzle velocity faster than the speed of sound.

The best of the suppressors designed and marketed for the 5.56 NATO cartridge are around 1.5" in diameter and run 6" to 10" in length. They produce 30 to 35 db of total noise reduction. That means the average 5.56 AR with a suppressor is still going to generate between 130 and 140 db's of noise when it is fired. To put that in context that's louder than a rock concert (110 db) and thunder (120 db). It falls in the same range as peak stadium crowd noise (130 db), and air raid siren (135 db) and a jet engine at take off (140 db).

Sure you could build a suppressor for a bolt action 22 rimfire firing subsonic ammunition that could get the noise level down to the pfft you hear on TV or the movies, but the damn thing is going to be at least the size of a gallon milk jug. But you can't get rid of the supersonic crack from a high power rifle so there is no way to silence a supersonic round from a 5.56 without building a suppressor 500 plus yards long because that is how far the bullet travels before it drops to subsonic velocity.

Why would someone want a suppressor? Anyone who values their hearing and shoots guns should want one. Anyone that lives near a gun range is probably going to want the people shooting there to have one too. You might (or might not) be interested to learn that in countries like the UK and New Zealand, countries that have gun laws many in the US would like to model ours after, allow over the counter sales of suppressors.

Most gun crime in the US is committed with hand guns. Suppressors can make handguns quieter, but that comes at the expense of reduced concealability. That is actually a good thing as far as crime goes. They are user and observer friendly. If you are anywhere in the neighborhood you are still going to be able to hear a suppressed gunshot. Your ears just aren't going to bleed if you are close by. So let me ask you this. What the freaking hell is so terrible about suppressors that warrants making them completely illegal?

I do like rifles.  I could easily see myself firing them at a range.  (Loved them in the military--shot expert with a M-13; m-16; and a .38 police special.)  At that range using a suppressor makes sense.  On a pistol for the average guy, (a suppressor can easily be added quickly and are easy to conceal until then.)  I had not realized they were allowed for hunting in 35 states.  I simply think they should be regulated in some way.