Silencer?

[Styx]

A suppressed handgun for home defense is getting pretty common in the states where they are allowed.

View attachment 1157755

The figures are that it's under a million (cited by gun grabbers) to 2.6 million (cited by the NRA) registered suppressors.

When you account for the fact that many people who own suppressors owned more than one (many own 3 or 4) and arguably the most commonly sold suppressor is for a 22lr which is not commonly used for in house self-defense purposes, I'd have to come to the conclusion that the usage of suppressors for home self-defense is far from being common. That only a small fraction of gun owners own or use suppressors for home defense in the United States.

Current post pandemic stats are that 45%-47% of homes in the United States has at least one firearm in them, there are over 400 million firearms and counting in the U.S, over 22 million post pandemic CCW permits issued not to mention those who carry in Constitutional Carry states without a permit, and even millions more than that 22 million figure who don't carry but just have a gun for home defense. It's mathematically impossible for suppressed handguns to be common for home self-defense.

 

[Madcap_Magician]

I think suppressors on a handgun would be impractical in my case. The length and awkwardness added to a handgun and the fact that it won't fit in most bedside safes with an attached suppressor would lean me toward 'no,' but for a home defense long gun, I can definitely see the attraction, especially a two-stamp gun where the overall length is the same or shorter than a 16" carbine.

 

[FAS1]

The figures are that it's under a million (cited by gun grabbers) to 2.6 million (cited by the NRA) registered suppressors.

When you account for the fact that many people who own suppressors owned more than one (many own 3 or 4) and arguably the most commonly sold suppressor is for a 22lr which is not commonly used for in house self-defense purposes, I'd have to come to the conclusion that the usage of suppressors for home self-defense is far from being common. That only a small fraction of gun owners own or use suppressors for home defense in the United States.

Current post pandemic stats are that 45%-47% of homes in the United States has at least one firearm in them, there are over 400 million firearms and counting in the U.S, over 22 million post pandemic CCW permits issued not to mention those who carry in Constitutional Carry states without a permit, and even millions more than that 22 million figure who don't carry but just have a gun for home defense. It's mathematically impossible for suppressed handguns to be common for home self-defense.

Of course, when you compare to the total number of guns in the USA.

That's like comparing the number of DUI's to the amount of people that drink alcohol every day.

 

[Styx]

Of course, when you compare to the total number of guns in the USA.

That's like comparing the number of DUI's to the amount of people that drink alcohol every day.

I didn't only compare or bring up the number of firearms people own though. I mentioned the number of homes with at least one firearm which is almost half of the homes in the entire country, the number of people with CCW, etc vs the number of suppressors that are on the market.

About 67 million homes with at least one firearm in them which is appropriately 45% of the over 141 million homes said to be in the U.S.. Only 2.6 million suppressors in total in circulation. That alone is enough to show that suppressors aren't commonly used in homes for self-defense, but when we add the context that people own more than one suppressor and many of these suppressors are for 22lr and/or are put on long rifles that may not be relegated for self-defense instead the home purposes, that 2.6 million number shrinks even lower.

Not that any of that matters. Other countries, even antigun countries don't even regulate suppressors. If they were ever taken off the NFA list, I would reckon they would be much more popular for home self-defense usage. I'd probably buy a few.

 

[dogtown tom]

I'd simply would put ear plugs on.

"Simply" takes time. Fumbling in the dark to stick plugs in my ears? Oh heck no.
A silencer is already mounted.

I don't feel the need for a suppressor or believe it's an necessity.

I do. I don't want to destroy my hearing by touching off a 5.56 inside my home.
That is my need. Do what you want to your hearing.

I also am of the opinion that the whole "going temporarily blind" because of muzzle blast is wayyyyyy overblown.

I'm not sure what you mean.
Bright light in your eyes at night is certainly a detriment and doesn't improve your vision. If it did we would all drive with our high beams on all the time. We can't because.......it blinds oncoming traffic. Thats not overblown.

The military considers minimizing muzzle flash as a pretty important reason for using silencers.

It's not going to be pitch black, you wouldn't be firing at a potential threat in pitch black darkness, most would turn on the lights, have a bright flash light, or there would be plenty of ambient lighting. I've fired handguns (with and without ports), rifles, and shotguns in low light conditions, and I wasn't blinded.

I wouldn't count on all those factors. Whether your house is not pitch black may be true for your home, but not for everyone. I live in the city, nearest street light is 80yards away. With my blinds closed the only light inside is from the cable tv box and alarm clock. Pitch black also works in MY favor.

I have nothing against those who choose to use suppressors; however, IMHO, some are over exaggerating in their attempts to justify their importance.

So give some examples that are over exaggerations.
Protecting and minimizing my hearing isn't an exaggeration.
Minimizing muzzle flash isn't an exaggeration.

 

[MachIVshooter]

I'd simply would put ear plugs on.

How quickly can you get ear pro on/in when you're awakened to an intruder in your home? I'm betting that would take longer than retrieving a firearm and separate magazine from a bedside safe, inserting magazine and chambering a round, which has already consumed more time than you may have, especially when you're trying to do fine motor things at a level of consciousness that is anything but conducive. You don't just wake from a dead sleep 100% alert and coordinated, so you're already at a disadvantage.

And then there's the fact that no matter how good your ear pro is, it will not stop the conduction through tissue and bone that can absolutely damage your hearing. Suppressors mitigate a tremendous amount of that harmful concussion, especially with high pressure rifle rounds from short barrels.

If you don't want to use a can for HD, that's your prerogative, but it's no exaggeration to state the sound and flash reduction advantages. They are very real, especially with commonly used for HD short barreled ARs.

I've never touched off an AR SBR without ear pro in a bedroom sized space, but I have a 9mm and a .45 Colt. It's deafening even at those levels, and it's an affront on more of your senses than just hearing. I'd say try it and find out for yourself, but I'm not in the habit of recommending people do things that will harm them.

 

[Styx]

"Simply" takes time. Fumbling in the dark to stick plugs in my ears? Oh heck no.
A silencer is already mounted.

If you can't put a pair of earmuffs over your head, then you aren't together enough to grab a gun and start firing shots at anyone. I don't get the logic behind being to out of it and "fumbling" to put earmuffs on because you're waking out of sleep, but at the same time you have enough motor skills and sense to use proper firearm safety, grab a loaded weapon while keeping your finger off of the trigger, NOT "fumbling around in the dark" while grabbing your loaded weapon, aim properly, and fire off shots at the threat instead of in the direction of family members. More over exaggerating.

I do. I don't want to destroy my hearing by touching off a 5.56 inside my home.
That is my need. Do what you want to your hearing.

I still do not think it's necessary, a 5.56 is going to be loud even with a suppressor, and I will have hearing protection on so my hearing will still be more protected than yours, but did what you want to your hearing.

I'm not sure what you mean.
Bright light in your eyes at night is certainly a detriment and doesn't improve your vision. If it did we would all drive with our high beams on all the time. We can't because.......it blinds oncoming traffic. Thats not overblown.

I explained what I meant. I have experience using in low light condition and with ported barrels, and I wasn't "blinded." Many others who actually have done the same also claim the same, and there have also been YouTube videos to that effect. The fact also is the suppressors are very really used with military, L E., and civilian shootings. They aren't something that's standard issue. There have been thousands of police and civilian shootings in low light conditions. There is also the Active Self Defense YouTube channel where there are also plenty of night time and low light shootings were the shooters on both ends do not appear to be blinded in anyway.

The military considers minimizing muzzle flash as a pretty important reason for using silencers.

Yet L.E. and most militaries around the world do issue them or use them except for small specialty units. There are solider fighting write now at night in the dark with AKs, ARs, and side arms without a suppressor mounted. I don't recall many military members being issued Beretta 92s, Glock 19s, or Sig M17s or M18s with suppressors. Law enforcement all around the country have had shootings at light in low light without suppressors or going blind.

I wouldn't count on all those factors. Whether your house is not pitch black may be true for your home, but not for everyone. I live in the city, nearest street light is 80yards away. With my blinds closed the only light inside is from the cable tv box and alarm clock. Pitch black also works in MY favor.

If it's pitch black in your home to the point that you can't see your hands in front of your face then you shouldn't be shooting at anyone. Let me get this straight. In your scenario, you're waking up out of your sleep in pitch black darkness too disoriented to grab earmuffs because you'll fumble with them, but you can grab, not fumble with, and operate a firearm still in pitch black darkness, and then while in a disoriented blinded state you're going to use your firearm?

So give some examples that are over exaggerations.
Protecting and minimizing my hearing isn't an exaggeration.
Minimizing muzzle flash isn't an exaggeration.

I gave an example in the paragraph that you snipped the quoted sentence out of. You took a snippet out of my direct reply to a specific claim someone else made in which I went into detail to rebuttal too only to add flip it around and add your own context.

 

[Styx]

How quickly can you get ear pro on/in when you're awakened to an intruder in your home? I'm betting that would take longer than retrieving a firearm and separate magazine from a bedside safe, inserting magazine and chambering a round, which has already consumed more time than you may have, especially when you're trying to do fine motor things at a level of consciousness that is anything but conducive. You don't just wake from a dead sleep 100% alert and coordinated, so you're already at a disadvantage.

And then there's the fact that no matter how good your ear pro is, it will not stop the conduction through tissue and bone that can absolutely damage your hearing. Suppressors mitigate a tremendous amount of that harmful concussion, especially with high pressure rifle rounds from short barrels.

If you don't want to use a can for HD, that's your prerogative, but it's no exaggeration to state the sound and flash reduction advantages. They are very real, especially with commonly used for HD short barreled ARs.

I've never touched off an AR SBR without ear pro in a bedroom sized space, but I have a 9mm and a .45 Colt. It's deafening even at those levels, and it's an affront on more of your senses than just hearing. I'd say try it and find out for yourself, but I'm not in the habit of recommending people do things that will harm them.

Again, it takes seconds to put hearing protection on, and again with the exaggeration that it takes to long and it's to difficult to slip hearing protection on, but at the same time it's not to hard or difficult to operate a firearm? Then you claim it takes more time to grab a gun and mag from a bedside safe than it takes to slip earmuffs over your head? Really?

You're not "100% alert and coordinated" after being awaken out of sleep to put earmuffs on, but you're okay to find and grab a gun out of a safe or dresser draw and properly operate the firearm in self defense? You're okay to fire a gun in a disoriented state? That's a recipe for disaster, and an accident waiting to happen.

I understand that you all find suppressors useful, but are you listening to the scenarios and the things you're coming up with to shoot down other alternatives to using a suppressor? You aren't making logical sense.

Then you both conveniently looked over the other fact that I brought up that if you're in a gun fight with someone else who doesn't have a suppressor on their firearm, your hearing is still going to be affected vs using earmuffs or the like. The whole argument that someone won't be able to put earmuffs on kinda sorta reminds me of the blanketed assertions that people who are anti thumb safety make about people being able to swip the safety off while under duress, but they can still aim, manipulate the trigger, drop a mag, insert another mag, drop the slide, etc while under duress??? It's just that the thumb safety will be to difficult to handle?

For me personally, I don't find that I need a suppressor for all the reasons given. I am not against those who decide to go that route. To each their own.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Again, it takes seconds to put hearing protection on, and again with the exaggeration that it takes to long and it's to difficult to slip hearing protection on, but at the same time it's not to hard or difficult to operate a firearm? Then you claim it takes more time to grab a gun and mag from a bedside safe than it takes to slip earmuffs over your head? Really?

You're not "100% alert and coordinated" after being awaken out of sleep to put earmuffs on, but you're okay to find and grab a gun out of a safe or dresser draw and properly operate the firearm in self defense? You're okay to fire a gun in a disoriented state? That's a recipe for disaster, and an accident waiting to happen.

I understand that you all find suppressors useful, but are you listening to the scenarios and the things you're coming up with to shoot down other alternatives to using a suppressor? You aren't making logical sense.

Then you both conveniently looked over the other fact that I brought up that if you're in a gun fight with someone else who doesn't have a suppressor on their firearm, your hearing is still going to be affected vs using earmuffs or the like.

For me personally, I don't find that I need a suppressor for all the reasons given. I am not against those who decide to go that route. To each their own.

You are completely missing the point, which is that adding steps to your defensive plan in the event that you're awakened by a home invader only serves to reduce your already handicapped efficacy.

I certainly don't keep my HD firearms locked away and unloaded at night, only set that as an example that fumbling to put muffs on or stuff plugs in your ears, after you've found and oriented them, would likely take longer than readying a weapon that isn't as ready and accessible as it should be. Those things don't give you the kind of tactile orientation feedback a firearm does. Might be a fun test for you to put your ear pro on the nightstand or wherever and have your wife wake you up, see how quickly you can get it done. I expect the muffs or plugs will hit the ground before they're in your hands. Those things are a lot more likely to be knocked off a surface or fumbled and dropped than a pistol laying on it's side.

As for the noise and flash of an armed intruders weapon, well, we control what we can. If they're already shooting at you in your home, things have got to the worst possible point. Maybe because you took too long finding and fumbling with that ear pro......

And with that, I am disengaging here. I've said what needs to be said for onlookers, clearly your mind is made up, further discourse is pointless.

 

[Styx]

You are completely missing the point, which is that adding steps to your defensive plan in the event that you're awakened by a home invader only serves to reduce your already handicapped efficacy.

I certainly don't keep my HD firearms locked away and unloaded at night, only set that as an example that fumbling to put muffs on or stuff plugs in your ears, after you've found and oriented them, would likely take longer than readying a weapon that isn't as ready and accessible as it should be. Those things don't give you the kind of tactile orientation feedback a firearm does.

As for the noise and flash of an armed intruders weapon, well, we control what we can. If they're already shooting at you in your home, things have got to the worst possible point. Maybe because you took too long finding and fumbling with that ear pro......

And with that, I am disengaging here. I've said what needs to be said for onlookers, clearly your mind is made up, further discourse is pointless.

I don't believe it's hard or takes longer than a quick second to slide hearing protection over your ears, and IMHO, some of you are making it sound like it's rocket science as a way to justify your puchuse and usage of a suppressor or alternative options others may choose to utilize. Now it's: "things have gotten worse and they're already shooting at you because you spent minutes fumbling around trying to picking ear protection and put it over your ears. You had no problem picking up a gun, but the ear protection was much more difficult to get a grip on?

We can agree to disagree at this point because some of the assertions make no sense to me, and aren't going to no matter how much it's repeated.

 

[JohnKSa]

The prosecutor tried using the fact that a Ruger AC 556was used to fight off his attackers as somehow making the self defense argument invalid because a machine gun was used. The jury saw through that red herring and acquitted Gary of the charges because it was a justified shooting and what was used wasn't relevant to the fact he was legally defending his life and that of his girlfriend. This isn't theory or internet "talk", but case law.

It's been suggested by Fadden himself that the only reason he was charged in the first place was because the prosecutor believed that the use of an NFA weapon would tip the jury in favor of conviction in spite of the fact that he had been pursued and forced into an obvious self-defense situation by folks who were armed and were pretty obviously not upstanding citizens. The original charge was first degree murder. Fadden's legal fees ran around $50K back in the mid 1980s and he ended up losing his job over the whole mess.

Fadden notes that the prosecutor made a concerted effort to bias the jury regarding the type of weapon used--to the point that the judge finally had to put a stop to it.

It is certainly true that ultimately Fadden was acquitted, but it's also true that his choice of weapon almost certainly caused him a significant amount of legal trouble that could have been avoided had he chosen some other equally effective weapon that was a bit more mainstream.

I'm not really arguing against using NFA items for self-defense, but I do think it's important that people understand that it can potentially complicate the situation from a legal standpoint. Probably not to the point that someone who should go free would be convicted, but Fadden's case makes it obvious that it could definitely be a significant complicating factor.

 

[mavracer]

Again, it takes seconds to put hearing protection on, and again with the exaggeration that it takes to long and it's to difficult to slip hearing protection on

It's not an exaggeration to say it's an extra step or that it could be fumbled. That's called a fact. The exaggeration would be to continuously deny that it isn't.

I still do not think it's necessary, a 5.56 is going to be loud even with a suppressor, and I will have hearing protection on so my hearing will still be more protected than yours, but did what you want to your hearing.

Here in lies the rub "you think" and I know what my 12.5" sounds like unsuppressed with just muffs indoors and what that concussion does vs the sound and concussion when suppressed and that's with a 9mm K suppressor that's not nearly as quiet as a dedicated 5.56 can would be.

 

[Sistema1927]

I think that this has gotten to the "you do you, and I'll do me" stage.

 

[Spats McGee]

I think this one has run its course.