Hell freezing over. NRA and the RKBA.

[Ranb]

The gun fired and shot the man in the buttocks.

I don't think anyone including the NRA is suggesting that a gun muffler takes the place of common sense and safe gun handling. But your post suggests that some people (like you) do. Are you trolling or am I missing the point of your post?

I am not an NRA member, but if I was and thought the NRA was promoting silencers as a replacement for safe gun handling practices, I would cease to be one.

Ranb

 

[pilot padron]

No, silencers would not have prevented that.

Rubber chickens would not have prevented it either.

What does this have to do with anything?

Silencers have absolutely nothing to contribute to the safety of the sport of hunting.

Rubber chickens have absolutely nothing to do with silencers or hunting safety

Next...........

I don't think anyone including the NRA is suggesting that a gun muffler takes the place of common sense and safe gun handling. But your post suggests that some people (like you) do. Are you trolling or am I missing the point of your post?

Yes, you are missing the point of my post.

You told us that expensive silencers supposedly improve a shooter/hunters' ability to correctly aim and shoot his weapon.
Remember ??

In my opinion as well as others who use suppressed firearms, using a silencer greatly reduces noise and recoil. This is a valuable aid for novice shooters learning to use a firearm properly. It certainly worked well for my niece and brother.

You were then informed that the military uses a dummy round in a clip and detects/corrects/ prevents flinching in about 20 seconds for a cost of about 20 cents.
They have been so doing for about 200 years with great success.

PS :
1) Most hunters in my 'neck of the woods' are indeed "novices"
2) If you have any other...errr... 'evidence'.... to support your oft seen knee jerk charge of 'trolling'; please do share same

 

[Ranb]

Silencers can prevent hearing loss, therefore they can enhance safety.

I did not say that silencers were expensive; mine are cheap, $20-$60 plus tax.

While silencers can improve firearm handling, I never suggested that they were a substitute for safe handling. No one with a bit of common sense would equate the phrase "More accurate shooting in the field...." with "dog=shoots=man". When you are asking if silencers prevent careless handling of a firearm you and I both know the answer is no, so why bother to ask unless you are trolling? This is the evidence I am presenting of possible trolling.

The military has not been using dummy rounds in clips to reduce flinching for 200 years. The military did not start using fixed ammo until much later than 1811. Sticking to the facts instead of making up stuff would be good for you.

If a firearm is uncomfortable to shoot, practice with dummy rounds mixed in with live ammo is unlikely to work as well as reducing recoil to a manageable level with a silencer or muzzle brake. Use of a silencer on a heavily recoiling firearm is an acceptable alternative to switching to one that is less powerful. Maybe less time at the keyboard and more time at the rifle range will help you see this.

Ranb

 

[Spyke]

A 46-year-old Brigham City man and a friend were duck hunting Sunday about 8:30 a.m. on the north end of the Great Salt Lake near the bird refuge, about 10 miles west of Brigham City.

The two had their canoe-like boat in a shallow marsh area when the man got out of the boat to either set up or collect decoys. He laid his 12-gauge shotgun across the bow of the boat, said Box Elder County Sheriff's Chief Deputy Kevin Potter.

After the man got out of the boat, a dog inside the vessel jumped up on the bow and stepped on the gun. The gun fired and shot the man in the buttocks.

Medical crews later removed 27 pellets of birdshot.

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=18299091&title=dog-shoots-man

I really can't understand why you posted that? I read that in my local paper and thought "what ********* luck".. assuming that the dogs claws pushed the safety off..and putting aside the fact that he should have unloaded his weapon.

How is that in any way connected to this discussion on silencers?

Is it your way of saying that firearms (silenced or not) are unsafe? Just trying to wrap my head around your point.

 

[Ranb]

I have been trying to engage one of the posters in this thread in a conversation(in the thread and by PM) about the errors in his/her post. So far about all I am getting is accusations of stalking and more drama unsupported by the facts.

What is it about firearms that gets some of these otherwise rational forum members all riled up? They think they can post any kind of irrational nonsense, but supporting their claims evidence appears to be beneath them. Is it possible to have a discussion about firearm politics on this forum without it degenerating into the kind of crap that would make a birther proud?

Ranb