Silencerco adopts a unique tactic in the "we won't sell to ban states" dispute

[Ruffdaddy]

It was just an attempt at sarcasm without smilies...
However, technically, they do just suppress sound, not silence, correct?

For the most part yes, but theyre still called silencers, and that's a correct term. It irritates me to no end when people make a big fuss about stupid details like that so my bad on not catching the sarcasm lol. Similar to the clip vs magazine argument, except in that one there was a truly technical difference at one point. Now they're used just about interchangeably unless you're a terminology snob.

[racrguy]

Interstate commerce was designed to keep states from placing tariffs on each other. As the Constitution is written, it wouldn't fall under the clause. Then again, the constitution has been very bastardized through judicial review, also unconstitutional, and case law. Wickard v Filburn was complete bs because it pretty much said "Yes, but because you're not engaging in interstate commerce, you're preventing someone from selling that good to you so you're still engaging in it."

Absolute horse hockey. Racr gets upset that I actually go by the words of the document, not the SC rulings that are overwritten and replaced and contradictory.

Nope.