SC Attorney General defends gun silencers and bullets in 2nd Amendment showdown

[Elderberry]

The Post and Courier By Schuyler Kropf 6/15/2019

S.C. Attorney General Alan Wilson says there’s a slippery-slope reason he joined a U.S. Supreme Court gun silencer case out of Kansas.

The three-term Republican sided with six other red states in arguing that protecting Americans’ access to silencers is fundamentally in the same vein as protecting their access to bullets.

Wilson’s primary goal was to head off any attempt to water down the Second Amendment, even if the case is rooted 1,000 miles away.

“The bottom line is, if the Second Amendment does not apply to suppressors because they are accessories, a future court could say the same for ammunition because it is an accessory,” Wilson told Palmetto Politics.

“If ammo has no Second Amendment protection, then the door is open for government to regulate or prohibit the ability of law-abiding citizens from buying ammo for their lawfully owned guns,” he added.

More: https://www.postandcourier.com/politics/sc-attorney-general-defends-gun-silencers-and-bullets-in-nd/article_121b7b00-8b95-11e9-9050-9be9737b4514.html

[txradioguy]

He makes a very good point.

[Elderberry]

He makes a very good point.

A difference though is that a suppressor is not defined as an accessory by the BATFE. In the NFA a suppressor(silencer) is defined as a firearm.

[txradioguy]

A difference though is that a suppressor is not defined as an accessory by the BATFE. In the NFA a suppressor(silencer) is defined as a firearm.

Good point.