|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Professor: Don’t Deregulate Suppressors; Loudness Is a ‘Gun Safety Feature’
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Political science professor Robert Spitzer voiced opposition to the suppressor deregulation by claiming that the sound of gunfire is a “gun safety feature.” Writing in the Washington Post, Spitzer, the chair of the Political Science Department at State University of New York at Cortland, opened his column by quoting George W. Bush’s former press secretary, Ari Fleischer, who was in the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport on January 6 when Esteban Santiago allegedly opened fire. Fleischer recalled hearing the shots, saying, “We all realized it was gunfire, and it was coming from the level below us at the escalator.”
|
| Comment by:
jac
(1/24/2017)
|
Another anti-gun liberal with an agenda. Common sense is lost on people like this so their opinions don't count for much.
Silencers reduce the sound pressure level from around 145 decibels to 110 decibels. It is still plenty loud to act as a warning to anyone in the vicinity. |
| Comment by:
Sosalty
(1/24/2017)
|
| Too much TV professor, gunfire is going to be heard, with suppressors or not. Yet it would be beneficial to have the 'edge' taken from loud firearm use. Not only beneficial, but it's counter productive to be taxed $200 to pursue this hearing health positive product. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
