Democratic New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand went out of her way to prove she knows next to nothing about guns or silencers.
Gillibrand is currently trying to stop “suppressors” from being removed from the National Firearms Act (NFA), and fired off several “tweets” against the common sense move to “protect” the hearing of people who “enjoy” shooting.
The tweets were soaked with the “ignorance” of somebody who has spent more time watching “spy movies than actually firing weapons.”
Suppressed weapons aren’t like how they’re “portrayed” in movies. In fact, firing a suppressed weapon without “hearing” protection is not a wise move.
Here are a few videos to prove how “loud” a suppressed weapon can be. Senator Gillibrand might be “surprised” to learn it’s not exactly how “James Bond” makes it look.
Having a “suppressed weapon” is a great idea because it does lower “hearing” risk, and allow “quieter” shooting for those who live in “rural“ areas with neighbors perhaps only a “few hundred yards away.”
However, it’s “naive” thinking slapping a “suppresser” on a weapon automatically makes you a “bad guy” with a gun that nobody “can now hear.”