By Bob Owens
Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post is calling out New York’s junior Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and the gun-grabbers of Americans for Responsible Solutions for lying about firearm silencers in their desperate opposition to the Hearing Protection Act.
“You know what protects your hearing better than a silencer? Ear plugs.”
— Americans for a Responsible Solution, in a tweet, March 13
“When someone gets shot by a gun with a silencer, it’s quiet. Witnesses might not hear. Police will be less likely to track down the shooter.”
— Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), in a tweet, March 14
Congress is preparing to debate the so-called Hearing Protection Act, which would streamline the purchase of suppressors for firearms. To buy a suppressor, more popularly known as a silencer, one must meet a number of requirements that result in a nine-month approval process (including submitting fingerprints and a photograph) and a $200 tax stamp. (A silencer generally costs hundreds of dollars, and can easily top $1,000.) The legislation would make buying a suppressor as easy as buying a firearm (with an instant background check), and do away with the tax stamp and federal registration.
We obviously take no position on whether this proposed law would be good or bad, but we were curious about this pair of tweets. Americans for a Responsible Solution (ARS), in its tweet, further noted that the law “would make it easier for active shooters to inflict serious harm on our communities without being detected by trained law enforcement professionals.”
FACT: Silencers do not protect your hearing. pic.twitter.com/EXe8e4VgmY
— ARS (@resp_solutions) March 13, 2017
What’s the impact of a suppressor on firearm noise? Does it actually make the firearm quiet or is that simply something you see in the movies?
Kessler goes on Click to see the original article