Ammo For Sale

« « So, did the app work? | Home | So, what caliber for riot? » »

How far we’ve come

The rule, I was told by someone at NRA who would know told me once was, was that we don’t talk about NFA. Seems if the average congressweasel knew that you could buy suppressors or MGs, they’d freak right out. So, they let it lie. Well, the recent surge in the popularity of suppressors continues to turn the NRA around: NRA Supports the Use of Suppressors for Hunting in Florida

Excellent! Basic safety equipment shouldn’t be regulated.

8 Responses to “How far we’ve come”

  1. Matthew Carberry Says:

    It’s almost as if the NRA, a large organization, *is* responsive to members once there is a big enough groundswell, not just bitching from folks on the bleeding edge.

    Almost as if individual efforts will drag the NRA along with them, as opposed to waiting for them to act.

  2. Shootin' Buddy Says:

    It is a recent conversion. I was told exactly that at the CLE seminar at the Pittsburgh (2011) Annual Meeting.

  3. Lyle Says:

    Back as recently as the 1990s you’d never see an “Evil Black Rifle” on the cover of The American Rifleman. Things have changed.

    If the people will lead, the NRA will follow.

    That’s a good thing and a bad thing. I’d hoped that the NRA would take point, but alas. At least they’re not fighting against us for the moment, or so it seems.

    So it is with large institutions. The original purpose (the founding principles), once an orginization has been well established, takes second place to the job of maintenance and growth of the organization.

    Probably the best you can ask is for them to jump on a bandwagon soon enough that they can take credit for it some time down the road once it’s been accpeted as a success, but not so soon that they’re forced to take the blame in case it fails. I beliece that this will be a feature of ANY orginization run by a board of directors. It becomes political survival first, principles second (or third, or in the case of the Republican Party, it’s to hell with principles; this is all about “winning”). It can get so bad that “winning” is losing– “Hey look; we got all of ‘our’ chosen candidates elected this season. Sure; they turned out to be total douchebags, but hey, we ‘won’! Get on board with the ‘winning’ team! Give us money”.

  4. Matthew Carberry Says:


    Well said.

    There’s a line from a live album (Undercover is the band) I have to believe is a quote, but I’ve never been able to source.

    “When an institution becomes self-perpetuating, the people become secondary.”

  5. Mr Evilwrench Says:

    But… but… the NRA is just the mouthpiece for the gun manufacturers, so the NFA item manufacturers would be getting their piece of the pie! ?

  6. mikee Says:

    What fun is a Ruger 10/22 with a 25 round magazine (Butler Creek, of course, not OEM! Never forget, never forgive!) without a suppressor?

    One day, one day, one day, soon.

  7. Linoge Says:

    Suppressors are definitely our foot in the door when it comes to attacking the NFA, both from the “this protects our hearing” aspect, and from the “this keeps the noise for the neighbors down” angle.

    Of course, halfwitted imbeciles who move in next door to a range and then whine about the noise will just find another way to attack it…

  8. Darragh McCurragh Says:

    The question is: what does the “right to bear arms” mean? It is a very broad definition in the constitution that actually allows anything that can be used as a weapon, as long as it can be “carried” (or so I should interpret “bear”). This includes silencers as well as even a nuclear suitcase device. So where do you draw a line? Actually in Napoleon’s time there was an airgun that was as powerful as the then rifles yet there was no fire to be seen nor any sound. This would probably allowed today – so why not mufflers?