Flash Supressors, reason for ban....

I'm vaguely familliar with one system that the US government developed or uses to find a concealed shooter. IIRC, it works off the noise of a projectile (it's supersonic, after all) and triangulates from several microphone arrays.


There's no logic behind the AW provisions of the 94 Omnibus Crime Bill.
 
I seem to remember there was an article in popular mechanics magazine which explained how the system worked. You might be able to search it. It was used during the Bosnia conflict to find out where the concealed shooters who were killing innocents. It worked really well and could tell you where the bullet would land even before it would impact.

I seem to remember seeing a news report about a year ago about a city in california which adopted a similar microphone system that would cross trianglulate the location of gun shots.

As for the suppressor ban, i only see it as the slow but steady erosion of our rights to bear arms. Firsts it was "well you dont really NEED a machinegun" and now its "well you don't really NEED a flash suppressor" finally it will be "you dont really NEED guns"
 
Whenever some pre-intellectual brings up the 'need' argument.

I calmly point out that they don't need socks. That leaves them sputtering.

Soon, I am going to move to mentioning that I don't need clothes, but that I imagine that they would prefer that I wear them.










PS- It is an insult to place the false concept of "need" in front of the noble word 'argument', but I had to, and I beg that you do not judge me for it......
 
The British Army in N.Ireland have a device in their land rovers that detects from which direction a shot has been fired at them and displays it on a sort of compass screen - some of the Army guys here might be able to explain it better.
I guess it works on the directional sound of the report?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top