Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Svifnymr]

Not sure if anyone saw, but ATF is updating the 4473 again in January. One of the revisions will be to the current question:
"Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?"

New version:
"Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?
Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or
decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside."


So, smoke pot, no gun for you!

- - - Updated - - -

Though, it is worth adding that enforcement is so lax with ATF that it probably would never matter, the law is the law and you should follow it.

[TITAN308]

Bit of a size difference. lol

[TITAN308]

So busy, but finally got some load data tested at range.

Settled on a formula that uses Accurate1680 (10.3gr charge) using a 208gr Hornady Match bullet. Gives consisted averages of 1060 range so well below sub sonic.

[Svifnymr]

Primary Arms had some black friday sales, so I picked up a cheap 7" 300blk barrel and a take-down kit to make a pistol. Hopefully they have the Law folder on sale again so I can pick it up. Takedown barrel, fold the shockwave, complete package will fit in a 8" X 9" cooler, give or take.

[zenkai]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/years...ry?id=44163755

During his eight years in the White House, President Barack Obama has addressed a nation confronted with the latest mass shooting no fewer than 14 times – a somber task he has had to endure more than any of his predecessors.

On each occasion, from the shooting in Tucson, Arizona, when Rep. Gabby Giffords was shot to the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida, this summer, Obama has offered words of condolence to the families of lost loved ones, and repeated his frustration with the lack of action on gun violence.

Four years ago today, the president had what must have been one of the more gut-wrenching moments of his presidency. Speaking just hours after 20 children and six educators were killed in Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, he urged the nation to come together and "take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics."

"The majority of those who died today were children -- beautiful little kids between the ages of 5 and 10 years old," he said in the White House briefing room, pausing to wipe a tear from his eye. "They had their entire lives ahead of them -- birthdays, graduations, weddings, kids of their own. Among the fallen were also teachers -- men and women who devoted their lives to helping our children fulfill their dreams. So our hearts are broken today."


Yet for all the words, Obama has made little federal progress toward what he has repeatedly described as "common-sense gun laws." It is, the outgoing president has acknowledged, one of the biggest regrets of his time in the White House.

[TITAN308]

Not holding my breath, but...

January 9th, 2017: WASHINGTON, D.C. – The American Suppressor Association (ASA) is pleased to announce the reintroduction of the Hearing Protection Act (HPA) by Rep. Jeff Duncan (SC-03) and Rep. John Carter (TX-31). This historic piece of legislation, which was originally introduced by Rep. Matt Salmon (AZ-05) in the 114th Congress, will remove suppressors from the purview of the National Firearms Act (NFA), replacing the antiquated federal transfer process with an instantaneous NICS background check. The HPA also includes a provision to refund the $200 transfer tax to applicants who purchase a suppressor after October 22, 2015, which was the original date of introduction.

The Duncan-Carter Hearing Protection Act will fix the flawed federal treatment of suppressors, making it easier for hunters and sportsmen to protect their hearing in the 42 states where private suppressor ownership is currently legal, and the 40 states where hunting with a suppressor is legal. This legislation will remove suppressors from the onerous requirements of the NFA, and instead require purchasers to pass an instant NICS check, the same background check that is used during the sale of long guns. In doing so, law-abiding citizens will remain free to purchase suppressors, while prohibited persons will continue to be barred from purchasing or possessing these accessories.

Source: http://americansuppressorassociation...-from-the-nfa/

[Kellhound]

Not holding my breath, but...



Source: http://americansuppressorassociation...-from-the-nfa/

That would be nice, reduce the complaints about noise if nothing else.

[Svifnymr]

Not holding my breath, but...



Source: http://americansuppressorassociation...-from-the-nfa/

I'm going to file for a Dead Air Ghost anyway, if it passes while I'm waiting then so be it, but the wait is long enough without having to wait for the law first.

[TITAN308]

Meh I'd only be eligible for one $200 refund

[Svifnymr]

Meh I'd only be eligible for one $200 refund

I'm waiting on a Dead Air Sandman now, so that'd be one of their refunds, but the Ghost would be easy enough to cancel. Really the main dollar hit would be the fact almost everything I have would get a new silencer.

- - - Updated - - -

I suppose this explains why there was suddenly an article about suppressors on The Federalist.

If someday they make suppressors that actually work like the movies, regulating them might make sense, but making people jump through hoops for things that reduce a handful of guns from "will literally make you deaf" to "will temporarily damage your hearing" seems a bit silly. It might also reduce the number of disruptive gun shots I hear during hunting season.

That was actually my solution, rather than this method of removing silencers from NFA, just redefine a "silencer" to mean a device that completely eliminates the sound of a gunshot. Thus current "sound suppressors" would no longer be "silencers" according to the NFA. The HPA sort of just brushes aside individual states with a "oh yeah, and it still counts for state stuff", since a lot of states just have a "it's illegal unless NFA registered" language.

And of course I'm sure ATF will crack down on "oil traps" and similar just out of spite.

[TITAN308]

And the anti-suppressor propoganda has begun:

http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...110-story.html

Instead of looking at countries with gun control they want on the topic, lets just pull randomness out of our ass.

Some of the countries with the most stringent gun control measures even recognize suppressors as a safety and nuisance device and they require nothing special to buy them.


I'm trying to find the article that a reporter did that reported on a suppressed .22LR being a "high powered rifle" and what a suppressor can do.

/facepalm



Edit:

But gun-control activists say silencers are getting quieter, particularly in combination with subsonic ammunition, which is less lethal but still damaging. They point to videos on YouTube in which silencers make high powered rifles have “no more sound than a pellet gun,” according to one demonstrator showing off a silenced semiautomatic *.22LR.

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.5e866cda23e4

LoL at sub-sonic "less lethal".

[Annoying]

For real. There's an absolute load of resources on the average dB of almost any gun -- including suppressed vs non-suppressed.

I could literally google a gun I want to suppress -- say a 1911 -- and get an easy comparison of how loud it is before and after.

Like so -- Googling "1911 suppressed decibels chart"

RIGHT ON THE FIRST PAGE OF IMAGES:


So that's ~162dB to ~130dB. That's still right at the pain threshold, and much louder than a rock concert.

SMH at people doing scare tactics to lobby against a safety device.

Edit: Complete side note, but I have a friend who is willing to trade his Ruger 1911... that hasn't ever been fired, for my VP9 that has a few thousand through it. I'm thinking I might spring for it. Thoughts?

[Tasttey]

Edit: Complete side note, but I have a friend who is willing to trade his Ruger 1911... that hasn't ever been fired, for my VP9 that has a few thousand through it. I'm thinking I might spring for it. Thoughts?

As someone who owns the SR1911, I'd say go for it. For a $600ish 1911 they are very nice. Although if he hasn't fired it yet, I'd spend some time putting a nice polish on the feed ramp. Until they're broken in a bit they can be a bit finicky with feeding some ammo. Putting a nice mirror finish on the ramp eliminated the occasional failure (not going fully into battery) I had with cheap (Winchester White Box) ammo. Now with over 1k rounds through her she'll eat anything all day.

[TITAN308]

If you like 1911's because you like 1911's then go for it.

If you want a modern gun then no.

[hakujinbakasama]

As someone who owns the SR1911, I'd say go for it. For a $600ish 1911 they are very nice. Although if he hasn't fired it yet, I'd spend some time putting a nice polish on the feed ramp. Until they're broken in a bit they can be a bit finicky with feeding some ammo. Putting a nice mirror finish on the ramp eliminated the occasional failure (not going fully into battery) I had with cheap (Winchester White Box) ammo. Now with over 1k rounds through her she'll eat anything all day.

I to this day loath this concept beyond any belief.

"Break in period" wtf?

I can understand guns like the Walther P22 which only would function correctly with hot CCI ammo which they were upfront about because of the design. But if you're telling me that a pistol needs a break in period I've got some serious questions about it's quality. You're telling me that the $600+ Ruger is expected to not function correctly out of the box but the $150 Hi Point which will eat everything is a bad gun? (This is hyperbole)

[Stormdash]

If you've wanted a 1911, I'd say that's a no brainer. VP9 is a nice pistol but you've clearly gotten your mileage out of it and there's always another polymer striker 9 out there.

[Kellhound]

I to this day loath this concept beyond any belief.

"Break in period" wtf?

I can understand guns like the Walther P22 which only would function correctly with hot CCI ammo which they were upfront about because of the design. But if you're telling me that a pistol needs a break in period I've got some serious questions about it's quality. You're telling me that the $600+ Ruger is expected to not function correctly out of the box but the $150 Hi Point which will eat everything is a bad gun? (This is hyperbole)

1911s are notorious for being finicky about the ammo they feed, though many semi-autos have some ammo they just dont like.

[Roxinius]

Finally picked up my 226 legion in 9 a few weeks ago sig was so as hell sending out the free case for buying it

- - - Updated - - -

Finally picked up my 226 legion in 9 a few weeks ago sig was so as hell sending out the free case for buying it

[Svifnymr]

1911s are notorious for being finicky about the ammo they feed, though many semi-autos have some ammo they just dont like.

To be fair, when you have a design from 1911, and you introduce hollowpoints that will not feed in the only gun really MADE in 45acp at the time, it's more the ammo's fault than the guns, IMO.

Though, nowadays there are a lot of 45s made by a variety of manufacturers and hollowpoints are also made a lot better than the early days, so you shouldn't need to worry about ammo sensitivity. If you find one brand your gun won't feed, that's an ammo/ tolerance issue, but if your gun won't feed a variety than there's a gun issue. You shouldn't have to polish a feedramp (and that's not "break in") on a new gun.

- - - Updated - - -

Finally picked up my 226 legion in 9 a few weeks ago sig was so as hell sending out the free case for buying it

- - - Updated - - -

Finally picked up my 226 legion in 9 a few weeks ago sig was so as hell sending out the free case for buying it

Colt wasn't too bad with sending my case years ago (within the 2 months they stated up front), but Remington screwed me out of a rebate. Trying to talk to folks on the phone got me no where and so I just won't buy their crap again.

[Svifnymr]

The Hearing Protection Act actually made the topics on Bing News, links to various stories, and most of them were actually fairly balanced. Sure there was some LA Times story that said it means criminals get silencers for free with a happy meal (paraphrasing), but nothing major.

Most common misconception I see is confusing the transfer tax with registration, which isn't a big deal, but they represent the process as a "up to 9 month" background check. It's not that, at all, it's your form sitting in a pile until they get to you 9 months later and see if the silencer is in the system correctly. Yeah, there's a background check during that, they run your fingerprint card, so they have to check that the fingerprints came back good. The thing is, fingerprints can be run in no time, it has nothing to do with the 9 month backlog.

The NFA system is just long outdated and understaffed.