If suppressors were suddenly removed from the NFA list, would they still be as popular?
I get the feeling that much of the appeal of suppressors is that the government says you shouldn't have them. Yes, they do reduce Db levels, but they also reduce the performance of the firearm (or so I have been told). They are kind of clunky (especially on pistols) and are highly over priced. I can buy a pretty nice rifle/pistol for the cost of a suppressor.
So what exactly is the appeal (aside from the fact that the government says that they are evil)?
On a side note, what if the Democrats introduced a bill that ALL firearms had to be equipped with suppressors that reduced the Db level to some ridiculas degree? (It is for the children!).
I almost wish that I was a newbie trying to get the to magical 25 post thingie so I could make use of the classifieds! I think this might do it. :-)
I get the feeling that much of the appeal of suppressors is that the government says you shouldn't have them. Yes, they do reduce Db levels, but they also reduce the performance of the firearm (or so I have been told). They are kind of clunky (especially on pistols) and are highly over priced. I can buy a pretty nice rifle/pistol for the cost of a suppressor.
So what exactly is the appeal (aside from the fact that the government says that they are evil)?
On a side note, what if the Democrats introduced a bill that ALL firearms had to be equipped with suppressors that reduced the Db level to some ridiculas degree? (It is for the children!).
I almost wish that I was a newbie trying to get the to magical 25 post thingie so I could make use of the classifieds! I think this might do it. :-)