Posted June 21, 2017 12:54 pm by Comments

By Chris Eger

Those against easing regulations on suppressors content they can make active shooting events more deadly. (Photo: Chris Eger/
Though a recent high-profile shooting at a Congressional baseball practice did not involve a suppressor, gun control advocates pose the question “what if it had” in an effort to derail pending reform on the items.
In the aftermath of the shooting that left GOP House Whip Steve Scalise among others critically wounded at a practice for a charity baseball game, national proponents for increased gun regulations are claiming the incident could have been worse if the assailant used a suppressor.
“We’re grateful to the law enforcement officers and first responders who bravely protected those present at the shooting and saved lives,” said Robyn Thomas, executive director of the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, in a statement. “It’s terrifying to imagine how much more difficult it would be for police to respond to a mass shooting when a gunman has a silencer.”
Prior to last week’s baseball field attack, Americans for Responsible Solutions, spearheaded by former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly, asserted that more suppressors in circulation would translate to a public safety risk, painting a portrait of increased police deaths


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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