I fail to see how a suppressor only being useful as an accessory for shooting doesn’t make it a common sense accessory (for shooting). They’re common sense in the same way that wearing a mask when you’re sick is common sense. A mask helps prevent you from getting other people sick, it doesn’t protect you from getting sick. Wearing a mask isn’t “not common sense” because it only works while you’re sick and not all the time.
It’s like scraping snow and ice off your car. Cleaning your windshield will let you see when you drive, but cleaning off your roof will prevent a sheet of ice from slamming into the car behind you on the highway when the wind catches an edge, or will save you from having it slide down onto your windshield the next time you slow down and blind you. Calling a snow scraper a common sense accessory isn’t a stretch because a lot of the world never sees freezing temps or snow. Tools are made to be used in context, and within that context it can be common sense to use them for that purpose.
There are roughly 82 guns for every 1 suppressor in America. Four years ago that was closer to 150/1. Suppressors are not in common usage among firearms owners in the US, they are not included in any standard firearms safety training, they are not required or mandated at most shooting ranges.
The average American would not think about a suppressor before going and shooting which means it’s not “universal” or “held more or less without reflection or argument”.
You’re conflating “common sense” and “cultural norms”. It may be a cultural norm with a certain group in the American shooting community but it is not common sense.
The reason those numbers are so low is because of the hoops jumped through via NFA and the tax. If you had to fill out extra forms, go to the DMV a second time, and pay an additional fee for seatbelts, most people wouldn’t have them in their car despite them being common sense safety equipment.
The reason those numbers are so low is because of the hoops jumped through via NFA and the tax.
I’m sure there’s some truth to this but they are still not in common usage among firearm owners and the average American would not think about a suppressor before going and shooting which means it’s not “universal” or “held more or less without reflection or argument”.
If you had to fill out extra forms, go to the DMV a second time, and pay an additional fee for seatbelts, most people wouldn’t have them in their car despite them being common sense safety equipment.
Maybe. Some people were very resistant in the US when seatbelts first became mandated in all vehicles in the US in 1968, however it wasn’t;t until the 80s when most of the laws mandating their use began. Today, since they are both required in all new vehicles in the US (some exceptions apply) and their use is required by law they would now be “universal” or “held more or less without reflection or argument” in the US.
With the change at the end of the year to the NFA tax suppressors might follow the same trend but I doubt it. Just like with seatbelts, the majority of people will probably ignore them unless they are required to use them.
I fail to see how a suppressor only being useful as an accessory for shooting doesn’t make it a common sense accessory (for shooting). They’re common sense in the same way that wearing a mask when you’re sick is common sense. A mask helps prevent you from getting other people sick, it doesn’t protect you from getting sick. Wearing a mask isn’t “not common sense” because it only works while you’re sick and not all the time.
It’s like scraping snow and ice off your car. Cleaning your windshield will let you see when you drive, but cleaning off your roof will prevent a sheet of ice from slamming into the car behind you on the highway when the wind catches an edge, or will save you from having it slide down onto your windshield the next time you slow down and blind you. Calling a snow scraper a common sense accessory isn’t a stretch because a lot of the world never sees freezing temps or snow. Tools are made to be used in context, and within that context it can be common sense to use them for that purpose.
There are roughly 82 guns for every 1 suppressor in America. Four years ago that was closer to 150/1. Suppressors are not in common usage among firearms owners in the US, they are not included in any standard firearms safety training, they are not required or mandated at most shooting ranges.
The average American would not think about a suppressor before going and shooting which means it’s not “universal” or “held more or less without reflection or argument”.
You’re conflating “common sense” and “cultural norms”. It may be a cultural norm with a certain group in the American shooting community but it is not common sense.
The reason those numbers are so low is because of the hoops jumped through via NFA and the tax. If you had to fill out extra forms, go to the DMV a second time, and pay an additional fee for seatbelts, most people wouldn’t have them in their car despite them being common sense safety equipment.
I’m sure there’s some truth to this but they are still not in common usage among firearm owners and the average American would not think about a suppressor before going and shooting which means it’s not “universal” or “held more or less without reflection or argument”.
Maybe. Some people were very resistant in the US when seatbelts first became mandated in all vehicles in the US in 1968, however it wasn’t;t until the 80s when most of the laws mandating their use began. Today, since they are both required in all new vehicles in the US (some exceptions apply) and their use is required by law they would now be “universal” or “held more or less without reflection or argument” in the US.
With the change at the end of the year to the NFA tax suppressors might follow the same trend but I doubt it. Just like with seatbelts, the majority of people will probably ignore them unless they are required to use them.