CBS Removes Trans Mandates From Its Reporting; NY Times Accuses War Crimes With...
Anti-ICE Protesters Try to Shame an Agent — It Backfires Spectacularly
For the Trans Activist Class, It’s All About Them
Ilhan Omar Claims ICE Isn’t Arresting Criminals. Here's Proof That She's Lying.
'The Constitution of a Deity' RFK Jr. on President Trump's Diet
Father-in-Law of Renee Good Refuses to Blame ICE, Urges Americans to Turn to...
Iranian State Media Airs a Direct Assassination Threat Against President Trump
US Halts Immigrant Visas From 75 Countries Over Welfare Abuse Concerns
Tricia McLaughlin Defends ICE's Visible Presence
California Man Pleads Guilty to Laundering Over $1.5M and Evading Taxes on $4M
Venezuelan Man Shot After Assaulting ICE Agent With Shovel
House Committee IT Staffer Charged With Stealing 240 Government Phones Worth $150K
Justice Department Challenges Minnesota’s Affirmative Action Hiring Requirements
Founder of LGBTQ+ Nonprofit Casa Ruby Sentenced in Federal Fraud Case
DC Rapper 'Taliban Glizzy' Sentenced to Over 18 Years for Multi-State Jewelry Heists
Tipsheet
Premium

House Democrat Demonstrates Cluelessness on What Suppressors Do

AP Photo/Lisa Marie Pane

Suppressors for firearms, often called "silencers," don't really silence anything. They just reduce the sound of a gunshot a bit in an effort to protect people's hearing. That's what they were designed for and why people want them.

Now, a bill that reduces the $200 fee to get one is under fire, and for the dumbest of reasons, from one Democrat.

He seems not to realize that people actually want them for lawful purposes:

U.S. Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.) tore into House Republicans over a provision in their new legislation that cuts taxes for those wanting to buy a firearm silencer.

House Republicans unveiled President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” earlier this week that includes tax breaks and massive spending cuts to Medicaid. During a House hearing on the bill this week, Horsford slammed House Republicans for also including a provision to cut the tax on gun silencers to “zero.”

“So like many of you, I can’t say that I’m shocked. I’m disgusted that Republicans would include in their ‘Screw Americans Bill,’ this provision. And I really want to ask: Who asked for this? Was it the assassin lobby? So let me get this straight ... Republicans are cutting health care on 13.7 million Americans, but making silencers cheaper? Make it make sense … cutting the tax to zero. What planet are you even on to propose such a provision?," he said during a House hearing.

“And clearly this was endorsed by the entire Republican caucus. This is something that all of the members are backing. I know most of them are not even here to defend this provision. We’ve got one member who’s spoken on it, and he referred to a 1934 law. So let me get that right: That’s 91 years of existing law that you want to upend in a Republican bill on behalf of the assassin lobby,” he added.

If Horsford wants to know who asked for this, it's me and millions of people just like me. I'd like to have a suppressor on my home defense gun in case I need, God forbid, to shoot at someone breaking into my house in the middle of the night. There's no time for everyone to put on hearing protection, after all, and I'd really like to protect my family even more.

And then there's the fact that referencing any BS "assassin lobby" is asinine.

See, would-be assassins are able to illegally make a suppressor without any concern for the law. We know because we've seen it. Luigi Mangione allegedly built and used a suppressor to kill UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. He didn't need to navigate any hoops or get licenses or anything.

And one of the things many on the right are upset about with this is that this proposal doesn't go far enough. All of the regulations other than the $200 fee remain so that no one is just walking into a store and buying one without any background check or anything.

I happen to think they should be able to, but this budget bill doesn't do that.

Further, the 91 years of the National Firearms Act can and should be upended because, as the Supreme Court's Bruen decision noted, the only valid gun control laws come from the time of the nation's ratification of the Bill of Rights or from the time of incorporation via the 14th Amendment. The NFA doesn't meet that criteria.

But then again, if Democrats weren't being stupid, we wouldn't know what was going on in the world.

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement