Could buy a suppressor/silencer but haven't? Why not?

[MatthewVanitas]

Not to go calling folks out, but I'm honestly interested to hear: if you're an adult with some spare money to spend on guns, are legally able to own a suppressor/silencer, but don't currently own one, why not?

Myself, I didn't buy one until almost two years after I moved to Texas. I had enough gun budget, no legal impediments to it, I just had never really thought of getting one before. I thought they were cool, but one of those things "other people do" that never happens to me.

Then at some point, I don't even recall why, I suddenly realised that a decent .22 suppressor plus the $200 tax was cheaper than a lot of pistols, and I'd rather blow $600ish on something really interesting and new instead of just another nice 9mm or .45 that more-or-less does what my other pistols do.

I looked into the details, found an SOT not far away that could rebarrel my Ruger MkII with an integral suppressor for $450, and so $650 later I'm out shooting a .22 pistol that sounds kinda like a nailgun. The same fellow (John's Guns) also demo'ed an integrally suppressed .44 boltgun that was 100% ear-safe, fully "movie quiet." That was tempting...

Mainly starting this poll to see what the impediment is to buying suppressors, to folks who don't have a major financial or legal impediment to shooting quieter guns. If current suppressor owners have stories of how they suddenly realised "hey, I could get one of those!", that'd be great too. Suggestions on good starter cans for noobs would also be gun.

 

[nekwah]

never saw the use of such an expensive piece of equipment. I would rather save for another gun than buy something i have no practical use for. What can you youse them for besides taking out the gaurds silently. I mean they dont seem to be a great contribution to hunting or anything.

 

[freakshow10mm]

Hearing protection for one thing. Reduces recoil and muzzle blast. In many states you can hunt with them. Reducing noise pollution.

Good suppressors make good neighbors.

 

[freakshow10mm]

I owned a few when I lived in Wisconsin. I since moved to Michigan and had to sell them. When I got my 07 FFL 02 SOT status, I can now legally own them in Michigan, as well as manufacture them. In MI, only SOTs can own suppressors.

 

[MatthewVanitas]

never saw the use of such an expensive piece of equipment. I would rather save for another gun than buy something i have no practical use for. What can you youse them for besides taking out the gaurds silently. I mean they dont seem to be a great contribution to hunting or anything.

Isn't that the same as someone asking you "what can you use a gun for, besides murdering people?"


I haven't had the need to take out any guards, but I still get more use out of my suppressed .22LR than any gun I own.

 

[jws527]

I'd love to have one for my .22 - and if they were $150 or even $200 outright, I would.

I just can't bring myself to spend in excess on something that should be widely available and affordable (and would be if not for the NFA) as a matter of principle.

 

[DoubleTapDrew]

What can you youse them for besides taking out the gaurds silently. I mean they dont seem to be a great contribution to hunting or anything.

That's the biggest problem. Hollywood has brainwashed the majority of people into thinking they are the tools of assassins and have no other practical use. Not only that but most people think you need some sort of "class 3 license" to own them.
The biggest benefit is quieting down any gun, where shooting a .22 is like shooting a pellet gun. Sure, it's fun to make lots of noise sometimes but it's not always necessary and, believe it or not, annoys people who don't shoot to the point that they can get ranges shut down or have the cops pulling up your driveway all the time bothering you and cutting into your range time.
They also reduce recoil and muzzle blast a large degree, which makes it a great teaching tool for new shooters. You can hold a conversation without yanking off your muffs and yelling "WHAT?" when you notice your shooting partner still has his/hers on.
I suppose they aren't a great contribution to hunting though. I love it when another hunter shoots at an animal a mile away and the deer I'm watching bolts off like he just got hit with a cattle prod. And that's what the second amendment is all about right, hunting?
A small part of it is also just excercising your rights, even though the government that rules...er...represents you, has done everything they can get away with to take them away.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

I could have one anytime, but I don't, as I have no need for one. They do have some hypothetical value in self-defense, as they buy you some time to collect yourself, get your story together and summon police yourself, rather than have them arrive in minutes on the basis of panicked calls from neighbors. But that assumes using a suppressed caliber in a suppressed gun for self-defense, which I would not do. Deadly force = magnum force. Pretty tough to suppress a .44 Magnum.

 

[Kind of Blued]

I can think of 10-12 suppressors I'd like, but I have lots of things that I really need that I don't have.

So my answer is "they cost money".

 

[MatthewVanitas]

Deadly force = magnum force. Pretty tough to suppress a .44 Magnum.

So... you're using a full-house .44 Mag for home defense? Hope your house is built of masonry, or your neighbors live far away...

But that assumes using a suppressed caliber in a suppressed gun for self-defense, which I would not do.

If only, if only there were a popular combat round that were also, somehow, subsonic. It's too bad that those 230gr .45 slugs are so weak. You need a real man's gun for HD...

 

[Duke of Doubt]

I hadn't thought of .45ACP. Yeah, that would do.

I don't worry about any handgun round overpenetrating my building, barring an unlucky missed shot. Even a .25ACP round can sail out a window and hit a passerby.

 

[PTK]

"Silencers have no use in hunting"


REALLY NOW?! Hear this 30-06...

Video

 

[Kind of Blued]

1 point for PTK. That setup rules.

I wouldn't have believed it was a 30-06 when I shot it had I not chambered the round myself.

 

[PTK]

I wouldn't have believed it was a 30-06 when I shot it had I not chambered the round myself.

A 30-06 with the round SCREAMING out a 150gr SPBT at ~2900FPS...

I'm seriously going to miss that silencer.

 

[HK G3]

Cost is my biggest issue.

That said, I'm seriously mulling over outfitting my HK 91 with an AAC762-SD.

The $1,000 price tag once all is said and done is the biggest deterrent. For that much cash, I could get a lot more trigger time at the range.

 

[PTK]

Go talk to the folks at www.major-malfunction.com

He sells them for CHEAP, name brand, just have to find an inexpensive dealer transfer fee in your area.

 

[Ranb]

nekwah, I bet you never saw the use for a car muffler either. Silencers are one of the most practical means of reducing the noise pollution and hearing loss associated with firearms use. They do not have to be expensive either, they are easy to make on a hobby lathe with a little experience.

Unfortunately we Americans elected the creeps in Congress who decided to tax and over-control silencers. We get the laws we deserve because we elect the representatives. Sad and painful, but true.

Should we class you in with those other anti-gun gun owners who denigrate others by suggesting that a certain firearm in a collection is only good for "taking people out"?

Ranb

 

[Deanimator]

Just hearing BATFE people talk on the radio makes my eyes bleed. Having to have direct contact with them would simply be intolerable. It's the same reason why I don't own a machinegun or SBR.

 

[chris in va]

I like supressors, but in my case they're fairly pointless as the only place I can fire a gun is at a range. So I still have to wear muffs.

 

[Shytheed Dumas]

It comes down to utility; $200 tax + purchase price is a bunch of money for something I can't get any practical use out of, even if there is a certain 'cool' factor.

 

[expvideo]

I voted other because I am in the process of buying one right now.. Just waiting on a form 4.

As for the usefulness of a suppressed gun, let me point out my reasons:

-I like to shoot, but I hate paying range fees. It's hard to find a good place in the woods to shoot out here that isn't watershed (illegal to shoot in most wooded areas that are easily accessable). I can find a lot more fun places to shoot closer to town, if I am not making as much noise.
-I would like to be able to shoot without hearing protection sometimes.
-I think that it would help to train new shooters, since it would help to eliminate the fear of the noise, and reduce flinching.
-Guns are loud when fired inside, so home defense is less damaging to hearing with a suppressor (less damaging, not "silent"... a suppressed gun is still fairly loud)
-What if my girlfriend and I get married and decided to have kids? What if she had to defend herself or I had to defend her, while she is pregnant? I would prefer to not damage my unborn child's developing hearing with loud gunshots.


So those are a few non-assassin reasons. There is also the short list of less politically correct reasons:

-They are so cool!
-I get to feel like James Bond.
-They are so damn cool!
-Shooting suppressed weapons is loads of fun.
-They are really, really cool!

 

[c5_nc]

Cost is keeping me (and probably most people) from getting one. I don't see the point at all on handguns, you are either using in self defense where it would not matter, or at the range.

I'd like to have one for rifles, but its too much to invest and there is a not a real need. If I had to knock out a rat or something at the house I could just use a subsonic 22lr round. I had thought about buying one for a 308 and threading every 308 and buying a brake for each also, and rotate the supressor when needed. I'm not sure how practical this is, how tight they are installed, etc?

 

[ZXD9]

I guess I haven't found the 'need' for it yet. It would be neat but not really necessary. If I had enough property to shoot on and didn't want to annoy neighbors then I would give it more serious thought.

 

[Hawk]

Other: Utterly pointless as I have no place to shoot it.

The normal array of indoor and outdoor ranges wouldn't work as I'm surrounded by folks without suppressors and would have to wear ear protection anyway.

Any location where ear protection isn't required I can't shoot.

A silencer is on the agenda if I ever buy enough land in Montana or Idaho where I can shoot on my own property, or move to a place where there's more public land than Texas. And I guess I'd have to get a divorce or wait for my wife to die: she's a city girl.

Too bad, NFA paperwork is pretty easy around here.

 

[CoRoMo]

I'd love to have one or many, but the cost is keeping me from it right now. Eventually, hopefully.

Silencers are one of the most practical means of reducing... hearing loss...

I'd disagree. I'd say the most practical means would be hearing protection. Earplugs or muffs are infinitely more practical. I'd almost agree to your first point, that I omitted here, of reducing noise pollution. The only other means I can think of is an indoor range, but I won't say an indoor range is more practical than a silencer or suppressor.