There is nothing more frustrating than a politician who wants to pass legislation despite having zero understanding of the subject in question. It’s even worse when they take to a public forum such as Twitter to express their views and instead of persuading, reveal their stupidity.
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand did that when talking about silencers aka suppressors.
When someone gets shot by a gun with a silencer, it's quiet. Witnesses might not hear. Police will be less likely to track down the shooter.
— Kirsten Gillibrand (@SenGillibrand) March 14, 2017
Senator Gillibrand has been watching too many movies. Silencers do not reduce the sound of a gun being fired to a whisper quiet “pew pew” often associated with assassins and special agents in movies.
I won’t take the time to get into the science of firearms and the decibel levels they reach, but I can assure you that no silencer makes a gun “quiet.” To believe that is akin to believing “fake news.”
Putting aside Senator Gillibrand’s absurd claims about guns being “quiet,” the notion a shooter can get away with murdering a person because nobody heard it, is not ignorant. It is downright idiotic.
Can you imagine the conversation happening at a police station if she were right?
Captain: So how is the murder investigation going?
Detective: Good. We have ballistics, fingerprints, gunpowder residue and other evidence linking the victim to a suspect we are tracking down.
Captain: That’s good. Did anybody hear the shooting?
Captain: Were there any witnesses who heard the shooting?
Detective: No, sir. Not that I am aware of. But we have all this other evidence….
Captain: Detective, if nobody heard the shot, it didn’t happen.
Detective: But the body…
Captain: Detective, nobody heard the shot. Close the case out.
Smarten up, Senator.
It’s this reason, the NRA is a necessity. If dopes like Gillibrand got her way, the byzantine requirements to get a gun would drive most people to not even bother.