• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Globe Silencer Poll

I got in ,read the article ,but there was no way to vote.
Must be for subscribers only.

I think they they know what's going to happen if it's open to the real public.

it listed last weeks poll with a total of 11 votes.

lame argument against.....but my shot spotter might not work, her der. ...
 
I couldn't even read the article without subscribing. They want $.99 a week but that's only for the first four weeks and I can't seem to find how much it's gonna cost me after that. I think I'd rather throw a buck a week into the toilet than give it to the globe.
 
W.E.C said:
I got in ,read the article ,but there was no way to vote.
Must be for subscribers only.

I think they they know what's going to happen if it's open to the real public.
Click to expand...

I couldn't get in to vote either and I refuse to pay them anything.

it listed last weeks poll with a total of 11 votes.

lame argument against.....but my shot spotter might not work, her der. ...
Click to expand...

Wow, they actually have that many paying subscribers ???
 
From the published counterpoint to Jim's support for suppressor legalization...

"Unfortunately, these bills are part of a national effort to deregulate silencers, or suppressors, and make them more accessible for use in criminal activity." - Frederick Ryan, Arlington Chief of Police
Click to expand...

Oh no, the jig is up, old Chief Freddy here caught us -- 42 other already legal states, supported by hundreds of state and national legislators representing hundreds of thousands of lawful gun owners, and we are all just scheming to give suppressors to criminals.

Chief Ryan's entire published opinion contains nothing but blatant misrepresentations and bold face lies.

I cannot vote in the poll or leave and online comment because I am not a subscriber -- I refuse to pay that much for ass wiping material.
If however your choice of toilet paper is of the Boston Globe variety as a subscriber please do leave a comment calling Chief Ryan out on his lies.

P.S.> Thanks very much Jim for your representation. [thumbsup]
 
Great argument by GOAL rep.

You know what might really help the cause, someone makes a movie like Heat, but using suppressed weapons. Show Americans how loud they really are.
 
I am frankly a bit surprised that they gave equal space for the "Yes" arguments and didn't ask Jim leading questions that could have the responses edited to suit their views.

Nice job EC.
 
Here's a half-assed copy and paste for those who can't see the article:

2


SEPTEMBER 08, 2017
YES
Jim Finnerty
Groton resident, board president of the Gun Owners’ Action League of Massachusetts
Handout_10weargue02_we-001-ke5G-U833650196117VdB-300x225@BostonGlobe.com.jpg
Jim Finnerty
I’m an instructor who teaches the safety classes required by the state for firearms license applicants. In spite of the fact that I always wear hearing protection, I have permanent hearing loss caused by exposure to the sound of gunfire during these classes. My ears are always ringing, and I have a hard time picking up normal conversation through any background noise. My doctor tells me it’s irreversible and will get worse as I get older. I am not alone. Every instructor or competitive shooter I know that has been at it as long as I have has the same problem.
I’m also a federally licensed firearms manufacturer, and this year obtained the many state and federal permits required to buy, sell, and build suppressors in Massachusetts.
ADVERTISEMENT
​
I recently acquired my first suppressor. My only prior “experience” with them came from movies and television. Therefore, I was expecting to be able snap a tiny device onto my firearm that would reduce a deafening roar to a barely audible click. As it turns out, I was quite disappointed — at first.
Right from the box, the unit was larger than I had imagined. It doubled the length of my handgun. My disappointment worsened at the audio range. My pistol was still loud! Instead of a Bond-like “pffft,” there was still a distinct BANG!
Get Today's Headlines in your inbox:
The day's top stories delivered every morning

Sign Up

Before long, though, I appreciated that the suppressor reduced the dangerous concussive noise so that my ears were not hurting, even after prolonged testing sessions. Another benefit I found was the lack of noise complaints from the range’s abutters.
As beneficial as these devices are, state law prevents their use by anyone except manufacturers and law enforcement officers. I can’t use suppressors in my classes because it’s illegal for my students to even handle them. I would not have the hearing loss I have today had I been able to use suppressors throughout my time as a firearms instructor.
I am hoping legislators remedy this problem by passing pending legislation to lift the ban. Where suppressors are legal, hunting is safer, neighbors are happier, shot-spotters still function, and shooters have fewer health problems. They’re a good idea for everyone.
NO
Frederick Ryan
Arlington Chief of Police
Handout_10weargue01_we-001-ke5G-U833650196117AmE-300x225@BostonGlobe.com.jpg
Arlington Police Chief Frederick Ryan
ADVERTISEMENT
​
For over 90 years the state silencer ban, originally supported by local law enforcement, has protected Massachusetts residents. However, this year two state legislative committees will both hear bills that would repeal the 92-year-old law.
The four bills are the gun lobby’s latest attempt to put profits over public safety. Unfortunately, these bills are part of a national effort to deregulate silencers, or suppressors, and make them more accessible for use in criminal activity.
Today, I stand with municipal police chiefs across the Commonwealth who oppose these attempts to repeal the ban. If repealed, our officers will be at greater risk when they respond to active shooter calls because the use of silencers will make it more difficult to identify where a shooter is. Additionally, technology called “ShotSpotter,” which helps identify where gun shots are coming from and is used by my department and many others, will likely be compromised when it comes to picking up the sound of shots fired with a silencer.
Simply put, these deadly accessories to lethal firearms will make it easier for criminals to get away with murder undetected.
But it gets worse.
Federal silencer regulation, which requires fingerprints of the purchaser, thorough background checks, and a national registry of silencer owners, is also under attack. While the current regulations have kept silencers from being used frequently in crimes, there is federal legislation pending that would deregulate silencers by treating them like other firearm accessories and requiring a much more limited background check to purchase. The likelihood of the federal legislation passing makes stopping the Massachusetts bills a high priority for concerned citizens and law enforcement alike.
In hearings last month, the gun manufacturer lobbyist argued that these bills would protect the hearing of hunters and shooters. The notion that a silencer would do a better job protecting hearing than the high-tech ear protection now available is ridiculous.
This bill has nothing to do with hearing protection and everything to do with the uniquely unregulated gun industry, that is exempt from lawsuits, profiting from their dangerous products and helping criminals get away undetected.


 
Last edited:
Chief Head In Sand wants nobody to have guns. I bet he still has the first box of sd ammo he bought and it has 6 empty spots until he is done with his shift.
I know only a few in law enforcement who are into the sport, the rest are lawyers who know jack about firearms and look like a deer in the headlights when you ask questions about anything gun related.
 
I'm guessing Chief Freddy is all about making sure he and his cronies have all the guns and accessories they would like. For me, but not for thee.
 
Great write up, Jim! I love how the chief conveniently leaves out that shot spotters can be tuned and adjusted.

Great info for history geeks.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Hiram-Percy-Maxim

Maxim studied at MIT and led the way for invention of the car muffler. I think it's also interesting how there was once a company called American Projectile Company in Lynn, MA. ...times have changed.
 
Last edited:
My phone won't let me into the site. I'll keep trying today. Yes I'm a tech caveman.
 
Got in, vpned from gun control central NYC.

voted.

my IP address must be on their anti free speech list.[laugh]

37 to zero.

but 3 buttholes pontificated on the comments about bad guns and suppressors,

the same dildos who cry about loud motorcycles.

hyprocrite much?
 
Last edited:
Not sure if you guys are members, but the comments are pretty much what you would expect out of this state.

ejallan09/11/17 02:13 AM
There are already far too many instances of members of the public getting killed or injured by firearms -- oh, by the person using the firearm. I'm sorry that Mr. Finnerty's job and hobby have led him to suffer hearing loss. But that is pretty much his own choice. I'm pretty sure that Mr. Finnerty wouldn't want anybody he knows, or even people he doesn't know, to be potential involuntary victims of a gunman enabled by a silencer to increase the number of victims and/or to evade capture.
Click to expand...

These people have no interest in doing their own research and you will (probably) never sway them.
If she bothered to look, she'd find as of 02-03-2017, there are 1,297,670 suppressors registered with ATF under the National Firearms Act," Justice Department spokesman Dillon McConnell said. The agency has only recommended prosecutions for 44 silencer-related crimes per year over the past decade. That means roughly .003 percent of silencers are used in crimes each year. Of those 44 crimes per year, only 6 involved defendants with prior felony convictions.

Youre trying to legalize something absolutely harmless and you still have an impossible battle in front of you. These people dont know because they dont want to.
 
CatSnoutSoup said:
From the published counterpoint to Jim's support for suppressor legalization...



Oh no, the jig is up, old Chief Freddy here caught us -- 42 other already legal states, supported by hundreds of state and national legislators representing hundreds of thousands of lawful gun owners, and we are all just scheming to give suppressors to criminals.

Chief Ryan's entire published opinion contains nothing but blatant misrepresentations and bold face lies.

I cannot vote in the poll or leave and online comment because I am not a subscriber -- I refuse to pay that much for ass wiping material.
If however your choice of toilet paper is of the Boston Globe variety as a subscriber please do leave a comment calling Chief Ryan out on his lies.

P.S.> Thanks very much Jim for your representation. [thumbsup]
Click to expand...

I TOLD YOU SO!

Without LEO buy-in, these things don't get traction. They never will without it. You think the average MA voter "knows the issue"? Most gun enthusiasts haven't made their case to the general public, and aren't bothering to try. So, folks just rely on 'the experts' on such matters - cops. If the cops say 'no', that's good-enough for a lot of folks to take a particular stance. NES preaches to the Choir, but hates the congregation.
 

Similar threads

  • Poll
Poll: MCarbo or Galloway Precision to upgrade a Ruger LCP?
Replies
2
Views
293
Qwikdraw45
Qwikdraw45
  • Poll
POLL - EDC Light Method
2 3
Replies
76
Views
2K
greencobra
greencobra
Poll: Gun ownership reaches record high with American electorate
Replies
19
Views
632
MaverickNH
MaverickNH
CCDL Testimony Highlights: Holly Sullivan, 3/13/24 Carry in Polling Places
Replies
4
Views
166
sbhaven
S
Go and vote on their stupid poll
Replies
15
Views
835
Rat187
Rat187
Back
Top Bottom