I understand your point that we should demand transparency from government agencies, especially the FBI. However, suppressors/silencers on guns are valuable to protect hearing and reduce noise pollution.
It isn't my point; I'm not a gun person and I certainly wasn't at age 11 (ballpark figure). One might also argue that silencers don't actually silence guns and the noise is still likely to be audible in most cases.
It's the second part of the statement “why would we not want anyone to know what we were doing?”, which is pretty close to an exact quote of a uniformed FBI agent with a badge if I recall correctly, that's important.
...here, the idea of using a silencer never occurs to him. It never came up. If there is a noisy gunfight, the noise would be helpful. Other persons would know to stay away. If you use a silencer they might walk right up to you. It was simply totally inappropriate for the agent to have any silencers around, and the agent was just saying so (I believe) candidly.
As I said, I agree that we should expect more transparency about the FBI and it is not sufficiently transparent. I'm increasingly swayed by those who say that FBI is so corrupt that it can't be fixed and must be replaced.
Also, it is true that silencers do not make guns silent. They are called that because that was the brand under which such devices were originally sold. Silencers/supressors are useful in the same way that mufflers are useful on cars.
I understand your point that we should demand transparency from government agencies, especially the FBI. However, suppressors/silencers on guns are valuable to protect hearing and reduce noise pollution.
It isn't my point; I'm not a gun person and I certainly wasn't at age 11 (ballpark figure). One might also argue that silencers don't actually silence guns and the noise is still likely to be audible in most cases.
It's the second part of the statement “why would we not want anyone to know what we were doing?”, which is pretty close to an exact quote of a uniformed FBI agent with a badge if I recall correctly, that's important.
...here, the idea of using a silencer never occurs to him. It never came up. If there is a noisy gunfight, the noise would be helpful. Other persons would know to stay away. If you use a silencer they might walk right up to you. It was simply totally inappropriate for the agent to have any silencers around, and the agent was just saying so (I believe) candidly.
As I said, I agree that we should expect more transparency about the FBI and it is not sufficiently transparent. I'm increasingly swayed by those who say that FBI is so corrupt that it can't be fixed and must be replaced.
Also, it is true that silencers do not make guns silent. They are called that because that was the brand under which such devices were originally sold. Silencers/supressors are useful in the same way that mufflers are useful on cars.