• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Journalists and guns

Ranb

Penultimate Amazing
Ranb
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
11,313
Location
WA USA
I read this article months ago; about the NRA and firearms.
http://www.salon.com/2012/12/30/silencers_the_nras_latest_big_lie/ It was written for Salon by Alexander Zaitchik

I wrote a lengthy letter to the author detailing the errors he made in it. To my surprise he replied. It seems that I was one of those that responded in a rational manner and he wanted to discuss the NRA and gun politics with me. I gave him my number and got a call from him yesterday. He wanted to know more about what I felt about the national pro-gun organizations. I think I disappointed him a bit when I revealed that I was mostly a “grass roots politics” type of person and did not do much at the national level.

We talked for about the NRA, other 2nd Amendment groups and NFA law for about 10-15 minutes; he said he was writing an article for Rolling Stone and might quote me. I balked at this a bit as the last time I was quoted in a newspaper I ended up thinking; "Did I actually say that?" He said he would let me know what he was quoting me on before he sent the story in. I told him he could quote me about my feelings towards the NRA and I gave him an earful about them avoiding certain niche gun control legislation.

After we were done talking I e-mailed him to ask if he was going to write another article for Salon to correct the deficiencies from the first; I've yet to receive a reply on that.

Ranb
 
The exercise starts with a militarized baseline, as both shooters unloaded designed-for-damage rounds from high-capacity magazines loaded into assault rifles. Improving their killing efficiency would require one of two things: the ability to shoot more bullets faster, or more time. A fully automatic machine gun would provide the first.
Click to expand...

Wow. That's as far as I got.
 
Some of the claims I commented on included;

By muffling the noise generated with every shot by sonic booms
Click to expand...
A silencer does not muffle bullet flight noise since the bullet makes this noise after it exits the muzzle.
The NRA has enjoyed state-level success chipping away at restrictions on the use of silencers around the country
Click to expand...
The NRA might be enjoying it, but I doubt they had much to do with it. I couldn't get the time of day from them when working on overturning the ban on silencer use in WA.
To purchase or transfer a silencer, you must acquire a special license
Click to expand...
The tax stamp application is proof the tax was paid and the firearm registered. It is not a license (FFL).
The reason the public associates silencers with death squads, assassination raids, and mafia hits is because these were the uses WerBell had in mind when he engineered them.
Click to expand...
Really? I think I had heard of this guy prior to reading the article. I didn't know this man was so well known that he was the face of evil when it came to silencers.

Ranb
 
Hiram Maxim (not that Hiram Maxim) invented the first modern sound moderator as an accessory for 'salon' shooters, i.e. those indulging in indoor target shooting to reduce the nuisance and potential for hearing loss.
This was around the same time as similar devices were introduced for vehicle engines.
 
Ranb said:
We talked for about the NRA, other 2nd Amendment groups and NFA law for about 10-15 minutes; he said he was writing an article for Rolling Stone and might quote me. I balked at this a bit as the last time I was quoted in a newspaper I ended up thinking; "Did I actually say that?" He said he would let me know what he was quoting me on before he sent the story in. I told him he could quote me about my feelings towards the NRA and I gave him an earful about them avoiding certain niche gun control legislation.
Click to expand...

I would think that if you dispute what you were quoted as saying then you could ask him or his editor to show a recording or hand-written notes of your conversation. Perhaps you could also make your own recording of the conversation next time you speak to a journalist, as it is highly likely that if they want to interview you they will want to quote you.

But there are a couple more important points and that is that it happens quite often that what someone thinks they said and what someone thinks they hear can differ quite a lot from what they actually said, and that what is actually said in the context of a conversation seems quite different when it appears removed from that context.
 
The bizarre thing is in many countries which have very strict gun control silencers are not only unregulated but encouraged, when required in some areas so as not to disturb neighbors when hunting/shooting and to protect hearing. The USA treats them as if they're machine guns, Illinois bans them entirely.

Many a range accident has happened because a shooter didn't hear warnings/safety instructions because of the hearing protection they were wearing.

Hollywood years ago made it seem that silencers were only used by snipers and hit men, thus the near-ban way back in the 1930s.
 
Ran -

I just don't speak with journalists wrt firearms or anything else connected. I've seen first hand up close how the run-of-the-mill "reporters" approach the issue and I'm not impressed.

I've participated in a press conference as ordered, been asked if the weapon used was an "assault weapon" and when I answered in the negative faces dropped like you'd think the 49er's just lost the SB.

Many years ago in this area there was a gun dealer who was the go-to guy for any question related to firearms.

Was he closest to SF stations? No.
Did he have the biggest store? No.
Was he good on camera? No.

Vic was their go-to guy because he looked like a much tougher version of Dennis Farina the actor, talked like a movie hard guy and never had anything on other than a black t shirt and black jeans. Some of us guys begged him to at least hang up a sportsjacket in his office for when they'd show up, but his answer was predictable - **** 'em! He did us no favors in his appearances.

At the time this was going on, almost within walking distance of most SF stations there was the San Francisco Gun Exchange. Fantastic store, owned and operated by Nate Posner, and later his son, Bob. Both great guys, fantastic collection on the walls, Nate was a personal friend of Bo Randall and was the west coast dealer for Randal Made Knives. I knew him quite well through my father, who Nate sent 'smithing business to, and over the years I'd probably bought something like 50 firearms through them.

Why didn't the stations go to the guy down the street? Because Nate was very well spoken, looked like your grandfather, ran a true "clean, well lighted" place for firearms sales, and when Bon came into the business he looked like a dentist.

Neither fit the stereotype, and being Jewish had understandable reasons for believing that a well armed civilian population was a good thing, which Nate was glad to explain in a most articulate way.

When it comes to educating individuals interested in the question of firearms and related issues, it's more than a simple question of giving honest informative answers and expecting that the information will be put to use.

Back when I held a SOT, I was contacted by a friend on behalf of a newspaper writer that he knew well. At the time there'd been some sensational exposes of civilians owing NFA stuff, which to some uneducated individuals was big mojo, and this guy wanted to speak with someone in the know. My friend put us together.

I spent the better part of two days with this guy, explained the NFA (this was before '86) went through the whole process, explained it through every step, and took the guy to our private range.

The article that eventually appeared wasn't a hatchet job per se, and I'll give the guy credit for giving me a copy prior to publication, but the article was thin on the facts relating to legal purchase, long on the shock that a civilian could possibly own the same guns used by the military and SWAT teams. I had tried even back then to explain to the writer that folk's perceptions of these firearms weren't realistic, and I can count him amongst those I've introduced to a SMG that couldn't believe how fast a 30 round magazine would go dry, and he also had a good time burning my ammo (if I had known how the article would shake out, I'd have charged him for the ammo and taught him how to properly clean a piece) but none of that made it into his article either.

I wish you all the luck in the world, but don't hold your breath.

Might want to check these pages out - Center for Investigative Journalism guides on gun issue reporting and other gun related articles:

http://cironline.org/sites/default/files/legacy/files/GunReportingMethodology.pdf
 
While we're on the subject, is there any recorded case of an assassin being caught with a suppressed weapon?
 
I Am The Scum said:
While we're on the subject, is there any recorded case of an assassin being caught with a suppressed weapon?
Click to expand...

Assassins per se no, criminal bad actors yes.

First that comes to mind are the white power mental defectives that murdered Alan Berg in Denver:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Berg

The recent rampage by the ex-LAPD officer Christopher Dorner

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Dorner

Involved a surppressed precision rifle he purchased legally as a Nevada resident, which leads me to a third example:

http://www.examiner.com/article/incarcerated-dayton-cop-to-see-parole-board

It's not indicated in the linked article, but the M11 used in the crime was suppressed.

Three crimes, two cops and some WP nutjobs.

The above case is the single documented case of a registered MG used in a crime since the NFA 1934.
 
BStrong,

Good advice.

angrysoba said:
I would think that if you dispute what you were quoted as saying then you could ask him or his editor to show a recording or hand-written notes of your conversation. Perhaps you could also make your own recording of the conversation next time you speak to a journalist, as it is highly likely that if they want to interview you they will want to quote you.
Click to expand...
I'm thinking I need to get a recording device; have to find out the wire tapping laws in WA first.

Ranb
 
Last edited:
I have a friend (lives in Texas) whose hobby is collecting and modifying firearms. Some people collect baskets, some play golf, others collect sports memorabilia. This is just his hobby.

He hasn't shot anyone. No one has stolen any of his 200+ guns. He keeps them out of reach of his 6-year-old daughter. He pays taxes. His wife is a doctor.

Among his collection, he has several suppressors. The BATF stamps were all obtained legally. I've gone shooting with him, and when a suppressor is on and subsonic rounds are fired, all you hear is the bolt cycling. His .22 fired with suppressor in place shooting 60 gr. subsonic ammunition is quieter than a BB gun.

I have no problem with this. There is a difference between legal gun owners/hobbyists and people who get their hands illegally on firearms with the intent to use them for nefarious purposes. The latter is where we need to focus our interdiction efforts. Better laws? No, better enforcement.

~Dr. Imago
 
BStrong said:
To avoid blood splatter, yes.

To suppress the muzzle blast, not so much.
Click to expand...

I've read that the best "silencer" is to actually press the muzzle into the target's body before firing, and letting the flesh absorb it all.
 
Polaris said:
I've read that the best "silencer" is to actually press the muzzle into the target's body before firing, and letting the flesh absorb it all.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure, and this isn't something that I have any first hand experience with, but one of our officers was disarmed and shot through the right thigh with his G21 (.45 ACP) with muzzle contact at the instance of firing, and witnesses could clearly tell the the shot had been fired.

Our guy survived because his assailant relaxed at the moment when he fired, maybe he thought the fight was over, but the officer regained control of his duty weapon and stopped the fight. He was very lucky as there was a vacationing paramedic as a witness that helped him tie off his thigh using his duty belt as a tourniquet - it saved his life.

The entry wound was clearly powder tattooed, so there was no doubt that the muzzle was in contact with his thigh at the moment of firing.
 
Actually a good silencer is fairly easy to make on a hobby lathe, no oil filter or water balloon needed. While the water balloon did make the guns seem a bit less noisy, flv files compressed and played back on computer speakers is a terrible way to evaluate the effectiveness of a silencer.

Ranb
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom