WaPo:Tim Kaine's claim the Las Vegas shooter was only stopped because he lacked a silencer

[friendly_iconoclast]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/10/04/tim-kaines-claim-the-las-vegas-shooter-was-only-stopped-because-he-lacked-a-silencer/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_factchecker-355am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.05236bbcb021

“He was only stopped finally because he did not have a silencer on his weapon. And the sound drew people to the place where he was ultimately stopped. Can you imagine what this would have been if he had silencers on these weapons?”
— Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), interview with The Washington Post, Oct. 2, 2017

...The Facts

First of all, there are relatively few reports of suppressors being used in crimes. In 2015, 125 suppressors were recovered from crime scenes where a trace was requested by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) — when nearly 265,000 pistols, revolvers, rifles and shotguns were recovered. The Violence Policy Center, which opposes the proposed law, argues that this shows the success of current restrictions. “The limited information available suggests that the current regulation of silencers under the NFA is working to keep criminal use of the devices rare,” the group says.

...Hearing damage begins to occur at about 85 decibels, which is the sound of a hairdryer. Various reports have indicated that the Las Vegas shooter had AR-15-type rifles. A 30-decibel reduction means an AR-15 rifle would have a noise equivalent of 132 decibels. That is considered equivalent to a gunshot or a jackhammer. A .22-caliber pistol would be 116 decibels, which is louder than a 100-watt car stereo. In all likelihood, the noise level is actually higher...

...But in any case, the evidence does not support Kaine’s claim that the shooter was “only stopped” because he did not have suppressors on his weapons. That’s exaggerated and could leave a misleading impression on people only familiar with silencers in the movies. The crowd under attack might have had trouble establishing the location of the shooter if he had silencers, but he fired from a hotel filled with guests who almost certainly would have heard 132 decibels from the floors above and below the attack.

They gave Kaine two Pinocchios- when will people learn that giving out inaccurate information about guns
only provides a means for the NRA, et al for dismissing any accurate information one does provide?

[bearsfootball516]

1. Interesting piece

I read somewhere (Maybe LA times?) that the reason the police were able to locate him so fast was because the smoke from his gun set off the fire alarm in his room, which allowed them to track them directly to him.

[Kleveland]

2. Happy to see some facts there.... regardless of the what Kaine said.

There is no such thing as a silencer.

As indicated in the article, it is a suppressor.

You want a silent weapon?

Use a knife.

[PJMcK]

27. Better yet

Use your hands. Last time I checked, there aren't any restrictions or regulations on one's digits.

[lapfog_1]

3. muzzle flash

haven't heard that he had flash suppressors (and those aren't that effective anyway).

It was night time... he was shooting through broken windows on the 32nd floor... the muzzle flashes (and the sound) gave him away.

I have no idea why he stopped after 9 to 11 minutes.

The bump stocks allow for rapid fire, but the gun barrels are not made to function for a long period of bump stock (near auto) fire rates (again, there are various water cooling options but I haven't heard he was using them). Once the barrel overheats the rifle could be useless.

Probably that's why he had so many weapons and bump stocks.

[TheMastersNemesis]

13. Based On The Time Line Looks Like Security Guard Distracted Him Pretty Quickly.

It is looking like the wounded security guard drew him off his plan. And it also looks like he did himself in soon after the police arrived in the hallway. He became occupied with being under siege.

Fortunately something seemed to cause him to sort. It took an hour to breach that room.

[Watchfoxheadexplodes]

26. ABC coverage showed flash

Stephonopolus spelling?

They pointed it out not good video but it can be seen.

[Girard442]

4. Amazing isn't it. The NRA et al. are quick to point out that silencers don't actually work...

...and in the next breath tell us how they neeeeeeeed them.

[friendly_iconoclast]

9. They're suppresors, not 'silencers' and they only reduce sound

In Europe, whose gun laws are often lauded here, they are generally easier to obtain:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppressor#Europe

Legal regulation of suppressors varies widely around the world. In some nations, such as Finland and France, some or all types of suppressor are essentially unregulated and are sold through retail stores or by mail-order. In other countries their possession or use is more restricted.

Europe
In Norway, suppressors are not regulated and can be purchased by anyone for any firearm. No licence or permits are necessary.

In Denmark, the Danish Weapons And Explosives Law makes the unlicensed possession of a suppressor illegal. As of 7 May 2014 it is legal to own and use suppressors for hunting.

In Finland, a firearm suppressor is classified as a firearm part by law. Purchasing a suppressor requires a firearm ownership permit, which is to be shown to the vendor at the moment of purchase.

Suppressors for rimfire pistols are sold without government oversight in France.

In the Russian Federation, usage of firearm suppressors, legally defined as "devices for noiseless shooting", by civilians is prohibited, and the dealers are prohibited from selling them, but there is no penalty for purchasing or possession of such devices.

In Sweden, suppressors for specified calibers are legal for hunting purposes and a license is required.

In the United Kingdom, firearm certificate (FAC) will need to show permission for the purchase of a "sound moderator" and also the firearm for which it is intended. All firearms certificates have the firearm and caliber approved by the police and annotated to the document before a suppressor may be purchased. Applicants must show a "good reason" for needing the accessory.

In Germany, a suppressor is treated the same in the eyes of the law as the weapon it is designed for. Accordingly, suppressors for air guns, which can be purchased by anyone over 18 years of age, can as well be purchased by anyone over said age. Since, amongst other things "good cause" must be shown to be issued a license to own a firearm in Germany, the same "good cause" requirement exists for suppressors for these firearms. This requirement is handled very varyingly across the States of Germany. The State of Bavaria accepts the possession of a valid hunter's license as "good cause" to own an unlimited number of suppressors, while North Rhine-Westphalia does not accept hunting as a "good cause" at all. Baden-Württemberg accepts "active exercise of hunting" as "good cause", but only allows the purchase of one suppressor.

[Girard442]

12. Another tidbit from your Wiki article:

Aside from reductions in volume, suppressors tend to alter the sound to something that is not identifiable as a gunshot. This reduces or eliminates attention drawn to the shooter.

Explain to me why I should want anybody to have this, because right now I sure as hell don't.

[friendly_iconoclast]

14. "Explain to me why I should want anybody to have this" Because they don't work for rapid fire

[Girard442]

15. What??

Bottom line: if silencers/suppressors/Care Bears for muzzles don't work, then there's no reason you should want them.

If they do work, in any capacity, then there's every reason you shouldn't have them.

[friendly_iconoclast]

16. They quit working after five or six rapid fire shots, so even if Paddock *had* used them...

...during his demonic spree they would have quickly failed due to overheating.

[Girard442]

17. I've seen this game played before.

You respond with some barely relevant verbiage, keep the thread going ad nauseum, and declare victory when your correspondent remembers he has a life and stops.

[friendly_iconoclast]

20. You were and are, of course welcome at anytime to elaborate on what you feel I'm avoiding

If you chose to fold, however- it's entirely your decision.

[Girard442]

21. I think you've entirely avoided the issues with Winnie-the-Pooh.

[friendly_iconoclast]

22. If you dislike supressors, fine. Say so. But do so for honest reasons.

[Girard442]

23. Bet you can't not respond to this post.

[friendly_iconoclast]

24. Engaging with aficionados of outdoor sports can be interesting

Take for example the person shown here:



The observant viewer will note that they're using both spinning *and* casting reels.

What do you prefer?

If, on the other hand should you choose to accept a discussion of the items under discussion
in the OP, well...

You might start by explaining why they're a bad idea when they are readily available
and whose use is encouraged by countries whose gun laws and gun violence rates are much lauded
here.

England and France are the most prominent examples.

If you wanna keep with the "guns are sinful and gun owners are sinners" schtick,
that's fine by me.

[sweetloukillbot]

10. The newest argument I've seen is that they should be required

Just like mufflers are required on cars, because guns are noise pollution.

[Sailor65x1]

5. Actually, you're missing an important point

You're talking sound pressure, which behaves as an inverse square to distance. At the 400 yards to his targets, the sound pressure would only be about 70dB, and from his window to street level, not much more. And that's with no attenuation from structures.

If he were using a suppressor, even a 30dB drop would have made his shots almost undetectable at range, and only moderately detectable at street level below. Inside the building, the team tracking him definitely would have had a much harder time.

Remember, too, that structural attenuation also has the effect of impairing directional detection of sound.

I think that Kaine is making a decent point here.

[friendly_iconoclast]

7. Why would something as loud as a jackhammer not be heard in the hotel?

Again from the WaPo piece:

Officials credited hotel security and the police for quickly locating the source of the noise, based on officer observations about the trajectory of the shots and information from the guest calls inside the hotel. That led officials to conclude the shots were coming from a room between the 29th and 32nd floors. Paddock then gave himself away when he fired at a security guard checking rooms on the 32nd floor, apparently because Paddock had set up remote video cameras to monitor the hallway.

[ClarendonDem]

6. This is consistent with the WaPo opinion piece from Leah Libresco

As for silencers — they deserve that name only in movies, where they reduce gunfire to a soft puick puick. In real life, silencers limit hearing damage for shooters but don’t make gunfire dangerously quiet. An AR-15 with a silencer is about as loud as a jackhammer.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-think-gun-control-was-the-answer-my-research-told-me-otherwise/2017/10/03/d33edca6-a851-11e7-92d1-58c702d2d975_story.html?utm_term=.b987e683d64d

There's a lot of interesting information in the full article and worth a read.

[genxlib]

8. There is a better way to protect their hearing

Not firing a fucking AR-15

[AncientGeezer]

11. It's not just AR's...they are relatively quiet compared to larger calibers

[weissmam]

18. beimg an expert in the manner with regards to silencers

if you are worried about your hearing you have two options

Don't shoot

Wear ear protection

done

[SCantiGOP]

19. Fuck the gun nuts

They have a forum here; they should post there.
The NRA and their supporters have blood on their hands. They are nothing more than the lobbying arm of the weapon and ammo industry. They will defend the right to bear arms with your life.

[friendly_iconoclast]

25. Fuck self-appointed zampolits that think *they* run forums actually operated by others

They're too prone to:

That out of the way, do you care to elaborate on the subject of the OP?