Quote of the Day: Silence Isn’t Golden? Edition

dayton

“I’m not aware that there is any part of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that gives us the right to bear a silencer. Suppression of gun noise heightens the risk to law enforcement officers and also innocent bystanders.” – Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton, in Gun-weary Senate makes surprise turn to legalize silencers [via twincities.com] [h/t Brian]

comments

  1. avatar actionphysicalman says:

    I live here and have trouble avoiding hearing him. He rivals Joe Biden in intellect. I get the impression someone usually tells him what to do. I hope in this case it isn’t Bloomberg. There are some other things mixed in in the bill that might get it signed if someone else has his ear this week.

    1. avatar Devina Invidia says:

      There’s nothing in the Constitution that say’s we cant have a cannon either and why? It’s because our forefathers wanted us armed to oppose oppressive government. They’d already seen advances in firearms and how the next generation of firearms made the latter obsolete. This is why there is no mention of any type or kind of firearm in particular. Restrictions are man made limits to insure oppressive government prevails over the will of We the People.

    2. avatar Rad Man says:

      Does this schmuck not understand that the function of the Constitution is to limit government power and enumerate rights? It “gives” no rights at all.

    3. avatar B says:

      The bill of rights clearly states that it is not all inclusive. Any rights not listed are assumed to exist unless specifically stated otherwise.

    4. avatar Joe R. says:

      MN governor was correct up until he completed “I am not aware. . .”

      The purpose of guns are to have a vote in what comes next when blue stater’s are finished ending America.

      The founding fathers had no idea that their experiment was going to work, especially at the time of the writing of the Bill of Rights, they wanted you to be able to not just defend yourself, but to exercise demands on your fellow peoples to return some semblance to Society [loosely paraphrased TERMS, J.M. Thomas R., 2012]

      Again, keep your guns for the end of America, keep your suppressors, demand full auto weapons, body armor, drones. Your a-hole neighbors needing jobs (a/k/a the “government”) is so equipped and ready to use them against you.

  2. avatar the ruester says:

    I’m sure if they could have silenced their muskets they would have. As it was general Washington spent the whole revolution with his fingers in his ears. And there was already a silenced projectile in that time, this thing called a “crossbow,” also covered by the 2nd.

    1. avatar Dutch says:

      There was also the Girandoni air rifle used by the Austrian army and the Lewis and Clark expedition. It was a .46 cal repeater with a 20 round magazine and had been around for 9 years before the Bill of Rights was written.

  3. avatar SD3 says:

    Fascists: Is there anything they *can’t* do?

    1. avatar T-DOG says:

      Not without useful idiots.

    2. avatar Sammy says:

      Yea. They can’t mind their own business.

  4. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    “I’m not aware that there is any part of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that gives us the right to bear a silencer.
    Us. He is a part of the government.
    So….the government does not have the right to silencers?
    I know where I wish he would install a silencer.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      He could not put a silencer in the same space his head already occupies. TAI.

  5. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    Please try to educate you fellow citizens. This might explain how this dummy got elected. Perhaps he also thinks typewriters are not allowed by the Constitution only bird feather ink pens.

  6. avatar Gordon says:

    Yeah! Cause ~130 db suppressed 9x19mm is SO quiet…

    1. avatar Josh says:

      Exactly. The gov is demonstrating how ignorant one can be when all their knowledge of guns/silencers comes from the Die Hard or Lethal Weapon movies.

    2. avatar James says:

      Understand that when your whole knowledge of suppressors comes from what you saw on TV or the movies, this is what you think. The shoulder thing that goes up wasn’t an aberration, it’s a tell of the shared ignorance on anything firearm, most in that political party.

    3. avatar Cliff H says:

      And ever so much easier to conceal.

    4. avatar James in MO says:

      I always thought that a lawmaker should bring a snare drum and SPL meter to the assembly or committee to demonstrate the SPL of a suppressed firearm to dispel the hollywood myth, since their transient and frequency response are similar. It’s not like you can secretly play drums, so how could you be able to secretly shoot someone?

  7. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    Suppression of gun noise heightens the risk to law enforcement officers and also innocent bystanders.” –
    Any stats on that?

    1. avatar brentondadams says:

      Yeah, its .0 of 0%

    2. avatar Paelorian says:

      Statistically speaking, liar liar pants on fire. I believe that’s the technical term. There are countless incidents of firearm noise causing hearing damage among police and other civilians (not to mention military), both in defensive use and in training. I doubt this bloviating twerp could name a single incident where a criminal escaped justice by using a silencer. It is a statistically insignificant occurrence. Data shows that the use of silencers in violent crime is extremely rare. His comments are pure speculation grounded in fiction and fantasy. And you know what? I hope more criminals use silencers! Then they can get a few extra decades on their sentences. Either they’d violate NFA (most likely) or there will be an NFA paper trail for police to follow and they’ll get extra time for using a silencer. Plus as an innocent bystander my hearing won’t be damaged when I’m walking in the park and one gang member shoots another.

      Also, as long as “silencers” are legally considered legal “firearms” in the United States of America I have a legal right through the Second Amendment to own one. I also have a fundamental natural right to own such things as a responsible human being.

  8. avatar Bill Kohnke says:

    It appears the governor is using stereotyped Hollywood portrayals to justify his reasoning. If so, I certainly hope he proposes a ban on pillows before it’s too late.

    1. avatar Accur81 says:

      Ever talk to a chiropractor about how twisting someone’s head 90 degrees causes “instant death”? That’s up there with bad guys being blown across the room with a Blackpowder revolver like in Django.

      1. avatar working4change says:

        the real work is loud n boring vs Hollywood world.

        Supressors make everything whisper… Nope! not even a 22lr is silent.

        being shot by guns and bows do not toss you off your feet or horse.

        one slice kills with knives n swords lol only rarely and the most skilled. even they cant pull it on ever hit.

        one shot kills! only to head most of the time. one shot lethal sure but plenty of fighting after being hit, even to center mass snd yes even many head shot. unless you sever the spine most can continue to fight for quite some time. or till you do enough trauma to the target.

        10rds is never enough and Supressors do not make your gun silent

  9. avatar lurker_of_lurkiness says:

    wierd I don’t see anything in the constitution that gives the .gov the right to regulate intrastate commerce of silencers. Pesky tenth ammendment/

  10. avatar RetLEO says:

    Another brainless bloomturd lap dog. According to a study from California, well known as a hero of the anti-2A crowd, suppressors were used in the commission of a crime nationwide 15 times between 1995-2005. Ironically, suppressors are better accepted in such bastions of firearms ownership as the UK.

  11. avatar mike oregon says:

    Soooo, Blood in the streets? Sigh.

    1. avatar blahpony says:

      Quiet blood in the streets.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        While blood bleeds quietly, the screaming that is known to accompany gunshot wounds is not.

        Current training is deficient in this area.

  12. avatar Grumpy says:

    Perhaps this clown thinks all the rights we exercise based on the 1st A but not specifically listed are moot also?

    1. avatar Raven says:

      “Perhaps this clown thinks all the rights are moot also?”

      Likely, this is a more suitable edit of his views.

  13. avatar Matt Richardson says:

    Firearms are only dangerous when used in an unsafe manner either intentionally or through negligence. A reduction in report does nothing to the usefulness or lethality of a firearm.

    This goes back to the same argument we make ad nauseum; a bad guy is a bad guy whether he has a gun or not. A silenced gun changes absolutely nothing.

  14. avatar Javier says:

    Please go to :

    http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/04/poll_is_it_wrong_for_someone_simply_accused_of_dom.html#incart_river

    and vote on the pole.

    Please to those of legal minds please post your comments! Thanks!

  15. avatar John L. says:

    Aren’t suppressors considered to be firearms in and of themselves? In that case aren’t they covered by arms?

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      They are not considered firearms unless some state statue makes them so. The NFA simply regulates them. In the end, it is simply stupid laws. They are banned where they are banned for no other reason than ideology, emotions or politics not due to any facts. Dayton here is simply using verbal gymnastics to keep his democratic credibility. If anyone simply looked at the facts, the whole discussion would not even be needed.

      The funny part, in areas with gun ranges with neighbors complaining about noise could be solved if they simply made it easier to use silencers.

      1. avatar Ben says:

        Under the NFA, they are firearms.

  16. avatar Raven says:

    It’s really too bad there isn’t something suppressing the noise of wind through his ears. Perhaps that device most creatures use to think with. Hmm, what’s thing that called again? Oh yes, a brain.

    I have serious misgivings that he has ever been around a suppressed weapon. Further, I’d take bets he got his “education” on the topic from action movies. Someone should suggest that all forms of hearing protection should be outlawed because they lessen the sound of weapon fire, & I’ve no doubt he’d run with that one too.

    Here’s your gratis clue of the day Guv’nor:

    Suppressed weapon fire; nowhere near as quiet as advertised by Hollywood. Also, a quote for you… “Even a fool is thought wise if he keeps silent, and discerning if he holds his tongue.”

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Outlaw everything including earbuds, listening to music or your phone might preclude you hearing gunfire! Outlaw windows in cars and houses, too!

      1. avatar Raven says:

        Yeppers. And don’t forget sound deadening sheetrock, in-wall insulation, helmet that cover the ears, dynamat, navcom, sorbothane, XPS & EPS foam…

        Err, wait. I could keep this list going aaaall day, but I just remembered I have things to do. :p

  17. avatar RandallOfLegend says:

    Mark Dayton, read the Ninth Amendment.

  18. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    I think this guy needs some piratical experience in what a silencer is. How it works and to stop watching TV and movies.
    My 1st remembrance of a silencer was in some movie where the assassin puts one on a revolver. Yah that will work!!!

    If they make it so that you don’t need a tax stamp to get a silencer then they might begin to show up at a crime scenes doubtful. If gun thefts increase by a ton in Minnesota, Which wont happen. One might show up some day.
    Add 6-12 inches to an already full size gun and Im sure it will NOT become the weapon of a criminals choice. Who in their right mind will add one to a berretta bobcat as a dumb example??
    Me Id like it if more folks did show up with silencers at these indoor ranges.
    As I get older its ear plugs and muffs. Are still not good enough for some of these newer size large hand blasters Im next to. 2 feet from my ears. Id love to get a sound suppressor for my target guns. I have a trust and have to look into seeing if that’s good enough to get a can some day.

    1. avatar Evan says:

      That suppressed revolver was from the Sting, wasn’t it? Great movie!

  19. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    Its still an NFA item, so yeah, legal owners should be pretty low on the police radar.

  20. avatar Accur81 says:

    We should remove mufflers from cars and trucks which have been used in many more murders than firearm suppressors. If it saves just one life, it’s worth the whole nation having hearing loss from the Honda Civic rolling through the neighborhood.

    /sarc

    1. avatar Model 31 says:

      A Honda Civic without a working muffler constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

      1. avatar Raven says:

        Naw, that’s not that bad. Try an unmuffled (non-turbo charged) rotary for some ear bleeding entertainment. 😀

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          It’s really weird how a turbocharger on a Mazda rotary makes one hell of a good muffler…

          Allot like the additional energy recovery turbine stages makes a turbofan a whole lot quieter than a raw turbojet.

    2. avatar Jay-El says:

      No kidding. While we’re at it, let’s ban Priuses, which are well-known by first responders for causing car-vs-ped injuries to people who don’t hear them coming.

      Come to think of it, a Tesla would be a great choice for suppressor-silenced drive-bys. Silent approach, hushed escape, bolstering acceleration and oh-so-luxurious.

      1. avatar Accur81 says:

        Especially the Tesla P85D – with a front 221 HP motor and a rear 470 HP motor for a glorious combined output of 691 HP. That’s my kiNR of Eco-friendly car.

  21. avatar Sian says:

    Idiot Governor: The Constitution does not give us rights. It restricts what the government can do. As a career politician who took an oath to defend and uphold said constitution, you really should know this.

    So considering that this is a free country, and considering that our laws for some reason consider silencers to be weapons (which by definition are protected by the 2A), show me where in this document that the government is granted the right to restrict such a thing.

    As for ‘justification’, show me the last time a legally owned suppressor was used in a violent crime.

    1. avatar Kelly in GA says:

      I’ve never heard it

      1. avatar Accur81 says:

        [facepalm]

      2. avatar Sian says:

        UNACCEPTABLE! 99 YEARS DUNGEON!

  22. avatar Mk10108 says:

    Silence of a pen on a ballot would be the best suppression of his words.

  23. avatar Removed_californian says:

    Let’s ban car mufflers. You know, for muh chilluns.

  24. avatar S.CROCK says:

    Yea because the biggest danger to LEO’s is a suppressed AR pistol with a Sig brace shooting M855 ammo.

  25. avatar Sixpack70 says:

    This genius is assuming the constitution gives us rights. Sorry buddy, it does not give us rights, it tells the government what it can and can’t do. So yeah, silencers as a firearm part are protected as there is that little phrase “shall not be infringed”. To make it easy for simpletons like him I have this example. If the constitution told the government it can’t make a law forcing everyone to cut the crust off of PBJ sandwiches, then it can’t pass a law that says everyone must cut the crust off a PBJ sandwich. Just because you are left with most of the PBJ sandwich does not make it OK when the law is clear the government is not allowed to do that. The 2A is just as simple. The government is told they can’t pass laws that infringe on the right, but they have been doing so anyway.

  26. avatar Grindstone says:

    heightens risk to law enforcement

    Hasn’t been paying much attention to the news lately, LEOs aren’t exactly everyone’s favorite right now. So that emotional plea might not work as well as he hopes it does.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      I lost my coffee on that one. I know you were serious and I agree but it caught me off guard. 😀

  27. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    First, the constitution doesn’t *give* us *any* rights; rather, the constitution merely enumerates and *protect* rights that already exist, naturally and inherently.

    Second, you’re going to need to cite some reference to support your claim that silencers pose a risk, to LEO or to anyone else.

  28. avatar Another Robert says:

    Anybody else think “for the cops” is currently making a run at “for the children” as the statists’ preferred gun-grabbing rationale cliche’?

  29. avatar Ralph says:

    Exactly the kind of drunken talk we’ve come to expect from Gov. Mark Target.

    1. avatar actionphysicalman says:

      His speech is slurred and has a strange cadence. I thought he was impaired somehow but have always imagined it was a stroke or something. I am not trying to make light of it here.

  30. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    Wow dumber than the last governor of Illinois Quinn? Amazing but coming from Minn. who selected Al “stewart smally” Franken and lowlife Jesse Ventura I guess I understand…

  31. avatar Excedrine says:

    I’m unaware of any part of the Second Amendment that doesn’t affirm a right to keep and bear silencers. 😉

  32. avatar Lib lurker says:

    He should try looking at OSHA

  33. avatar Tiru Maru says:

    Well seeing as the government and the ATF mandates that , Yes Virginia,a silencer IS A FIREARM, the Constitution says we have every right to one…

  34. avatar gsnyder says:

    There’s zero increased risk, nothing changes except in the hands of criminal intent. And they already have all kinds of stuff they are not supposed to have.

    Typical anti 2A attack which implies anyone with a firearm is a criminal in wait.

  35. avatar Wood says:

    What an unfortunate pose. I see Gutter saying, “Just try to relax”.

  36. avatar Hannibal says:

    Well since it’s not constitutional case before the court, it really doesn’t matter.

    BUT if he’s been reading the 2nd Amendment I wonder if he’s learned what ‘shall not be infringed’ means.

  37. avatar Carson says:

    Holy $^!#! There are still idiots out there that believe that nonsense? This idiot’s existence is putting me at a higher risk of using colorful language…

  38. avatar KAP says:

    listening too this dink spout off in support for the Democratic Line is sickening! His Daddy gave him big bucks so he is special don’t you know! he wears his pants sideways! and because of that being rich and not having too work for it gives him power in his mind too make any law he wants or suppress any law he doesn’t like! time for the Unions to shut down the Democratic party in Minnesota!

  39. avatar Dustin Doyle says:

    To follow the suppressor and other pro gun bills in Minnesota go to MN Gun Owners Civil rights Alliance http://www.gocra.org https://www.facebook.com/gocra

    I don’t have time to dig up the links, but the police association received about $20,000 from Bloomberg for police training, and they have the governors ear.

  40. avatar Silver says:

    There’s also nothing in the Constitution protecting free speech over the internet or phones. Guess that means we don’t have it.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email