“The defendant is alleged to not only have been in possession of multiple illegal firearms, but to also have been illegally modifying the guns making them all the more dangerous. Simply put, there is no reason that a person with good intentions would require a silencer. Those devices are strictly made for violent and insidious purposes.” – District Attorney Marian Ryan in Shirley Man Held After Dozens of Guns, Silencers Seized from Home

59 COMMENTS

    • Exactly my point. I kind of like my hearing only being a little damaged thank you. And I’m sure hunters appreciate being able to get off another shot. And..how about discharging a gun in self defense in your home, the noise in a closed room is literally deafening. This dimwit has been watching too much TV and assuming that only assassins have suppressors. Probably never heard a suppressed weapon discharged in their life.

    • From the article –
      “At the time of his arrest, Mr. Dusti was the subject of a pending arrest warrant from Ayer District Court on charges of assault and battery on a person over the age of 60, two counts of making annoying phone calls and witness intimidation in connection with an unrelated offense.”

      This is the poster boy example that antigun people want to use violent, unhinged, and owns guns. Sounds like he was an ass to begin with.

      • “…two counts of making annoying phone calls…”

        Wait, that’s illegal? Who do I report it to? I’ve been getting a couple a day for the last month or so…

    • Someone snitched on him about the home made suppressors. If you live behind enemy lines, opsec is critical.

      Also, he’s also over 60. So he’s still a jerk, probably, but it’s not like some 20 year old punk bashing the elderly for grins.

      • He’s over 60 and accused/charged of beating up someone over 60, don’t comprehend that – you’d think geriatric fight club would be balanced. So it seems the elderly can be charged with elder abuse in the UK?

        He’s a jerk and going out on a limb here – the people he’s been arguing with or threatening likely complained about his suppressors and guns. Honestly, he doesn’t get a pass for the suppressors and guns because I like guns. If he’s acting aggressively and being a public nuisance then he’s right to be reviewed for a risk, just my 2 pence.

        • The birthplace of the Revolution, shot heard ’round the world and all that, is not part of the UK, but the ‘civil servants’ there obviously wish it still was.

        • @Baldwin yes, I realized that after time ran out to edit my comment. The website reminded me of a uk one and the whole scenario seemed like something prone to happen outside the US than in it. My bad.

        • Geriatric Fight Club…

          “Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to the Pinewood Grove Tapioca Class quarter finals! In the blue corner, we have George Smith! In the red corner, it’s Harold Long! The rules are simple, no low blows, no use of canes, fishing poles, or walkers, and both competitors must leave under their own power. Unless you fall and can’t get up…”

  1. Does that mean they think law enforcement and the military only acquire silencers for insidious purposes too?

  2. Wow, it looks like he has a bigger arsenal than I do. Not fair! 8~(

    Being that he’s in the People’s Republic of MA, he’s in for a long stretch in an MCI somewhere. Suppressors are strictly verboten for citizens of the Commonwealth. And those “high-capacity” magazines. Horrors!!

  3. Someone should take her to the range, stick a .357 in her hands and tell her she doesn’t need earplugs.

      • I tried that once too. A 6-1/2″ Blackhawk and there were a couple walls nearby for the sound to bounce off of. My ears rang for two hours. Still, I carry a 3″ .357 loaded with Double Taps. Hopefully if I ever have to use it, it won’t be in an elevator or parking garage. The shorter barrel should help though because there’s less gas coming out of the cylinder gap.

        • @gov not sure the smaller barrel helps all that much. My 2” snubby roars with hot 357 loads, i hope to never have to use that gun without hearing protection it also spews out a nice little fireball too. Since my gun range hearing mishap I am also a little more sensitive to loud noises so I could still have some small bias there.

        • Well, probably doesn’t help much. Those 158gr are already doing 1300+fps after 3″ so they’re not going to spend much more time traveling another 3″. A tighter cylinder gap would probably do a lot more. Either way, if I’m pulling the trigger, my ears ringing are going to be the least of my worries.

    • Friend of mine did that out a window in the 1960s, 6″ barrel, muzzle inside the house.
      Claims his ears actually bled. It was the beginning of his hearing troubles, but he can still talk on a speakerphone with hearing aids 50 years later.

      I do regrettable things on occasion.
      5″ .22 pistol, subsonic ammo, one shot at a woodchuck. Ouch, should have used a .22 rifle.
      Then last month, I used a table saw unprotected. Didn’t realize how bad it was until tinnitus set a few minutes later.

      • I had an hour long session at the range back in 2016 where the hearing protection just didn’t fit right. I could tell there was an issue but I just kept shooting despite the discomfort. When I took out the plugs all sounds were distorted and sounded like a scratched record/static. It took nearly a week before hearing returned to relatively normal levels; for two days I had to wear spongy ear plugs to filter out background noise. Doctor said I didn’t bust the eardrums but I think I came pretty close. Never go to a range now w/o over ear protection. It was my fault and I paid for it.

        • Plugs AND muffs for me. It also has the advantage that you can loosen the plugs just a bit when you’re not firing and hear people talk just fine, but if some jackass down the lane forgets to warn you and starts firing you’ve got a little bit of protection. Takes the edge off anyway.

        • Yeah, I definitely double up indoors. I use normal muffs too, not electronic indoors, it just works better. My range has 30 lanes and lots of folks bring their 8″ AR pistols with brakes on them so it’s pretty obnoxious. My outdoor range has a 1000 yard tube range and my neighbor brought out his Barret M82, and my ears were ringing doubled up. Not as bad as a LAV-25 firing next too you, but still pretty bad.

  4. It’s pretty stupid to suggest that silencers are only for insidious purposes. However, if someone who is into things like assault and witness intimidation has off-the-books silencers, I think it’s reasonable to speculate that he has insidious purposes.

    • Does he have kitchen knives? Fuel cans? Matches? Bleach? A car?
      .
      Looks at all the insidious objects!

      The problem with assigning intent to an inanimate object is that then the object can be called evil, and then we eventually lose. He had things that were deemed illegal, but those things are not necessarily used for insidious purposes and are not inherently bad, just illegal due to laws that are inherently wrong, kind of like alcohol a few years back.

  5. What’s good for the military and ‘our servants’ the government … is dangerous for us, their presumed keepers … lol … of course, all THAT has gotten turned on its head. Now ‘we the servants’ are only allowed what our masters say is allowable, don’t you know?

  6. They really don’t understand multi-use technology, do they?

    Myself, I think language, pr, and media aren’t only used for nefarious purposed. We oughta generally let prople keep talking, despite what District on Non-Distinction, there, said.

    Him, he just demonstrated he can’t use language responsibly. Probably shouldn’t be let out of the house unsupervised.

    The problem with gun – and everything else – controllers: they think everyone is as irresponsible as they are.

  7. Since silencers are controlled items, someone having a few of them(especially if they are found by police using a warrant for other crimes) just might make me think that he is trafficking them or they are for illegal purpose.
    I do not believe they are bad, but just like anything else, they can be used for other than legal reasons.

  8. “Simply put, there is no reason that a person with good intentions would require a silencer. Those devices are strictly made for violent and insidious purposes.”

    Tell that to European governments where silencers are easy to obtain because they protect against hearing loss (and the government has to pay for health care).

    • I must be doing it wrong. I thought I bought my suppressors for another reason. Damn it, I’m always getting these things confused.

      On the other hand, mayhaps the DA needs to look up the word “projecting”

  9. Someone who puts a muffler on his car is up to nefarious purposes. Even worse are electric cars, whose only purpose is to silently mow down pedestrians so people don’t have warning to get out of the way.

  10. The thinking, if it could be so described, behind the DA’s conclusion might well make an interesting study. How come she seems completely unaware of the hearing problems caused by the sound, spelled decibel levels, of unshielded gun fire? Silencers, aka mufflers, a device commonly found on automobiles, actually required by law, would to major extent, eliminate the referenced medical problems, otherwise known as Hearing Loss.

  11. Geez, the arrogance required to say, “My view doesn’t allow for a reason to [fill in the blank], which means no reason exists,” is laughable. You would actually have to believe that you possess the otherworldly objectivity and reason to see every possible viewpoint and invalidate them all based on your omnipotent intellect. Of course, that seems to be a recurring theme in anti-2A circles, regardless of the fact that most know nothing about firearms or their use. Color me suprised…

  12. And the IGNORANCE of the DA who instead of presenting each case based on the facts they instead use their own personal “feelings” and “assume” that their feelings & what they seen in a movie as their version Of truth, and that’s more important than any laws or constitutional rights!? Therefore the rest of The law abiding citizens must adhere to how they feel. Never mind the truth about a silencer, and how it’s purpose is to protect any and everyone within close proximity from having any possible ear damage by lowering the DB range. But instead The liberals choose to believe what they see on Jason Bourne films and expect that the rest of America is ignorant just because they choose to be when it comes to the real truth about guns and accessories. promoting false accusations as truth is what has divided America today but they will have main stream media back their play

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here