To Silence or Not to Silence

[Shawn Prada]

What are your thoughts about ditching all the laws about buying a silencer so as Hunters one doesn't blow out their ear drums??
The second question is do you want every Tom Dick and Harry to be able to have a silencer on their Pistols or Revolvers.???

 

[Michael Dean]

They are noise suppressors, they certainly don't make firearms silent by any means. They reduce noise to make it tolerable and I would very much enjoy going to a shooting range where everyone is using them.

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

A silencer or suppressor is a nice option to have. It reduces the report, but unlike in the movies or TV shows, it does not eliminate the noise altogether. I don't think suppressor proliferation will lead to a bunch of assassins roaming the free world. In fact, a suppressor makes concealment much more difficult.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

What are your thoughts about ditching all the laws about buying a silencer so as Hunters one doesn't blow out their ear drums??
The second question is do you want every Tom Dick and Harry to be able to have a silencer on their Pistols or Revolvers.???

I'd sure like to not have the continuous pinging in my left ear. An idiot with a pistol/revolver with no suppressor or with one is still an idiot with a gun.

 

[Scott Slough]

I think someone will eventually be able to win a lawsuit in the U.S. to have them delisted for rifles for hearing protection...not so sure anyone will be successful for handguns. The argument against them for rifles is pretty weak and the hearing protection argument is so strong.

 

[Amado]

I have several suppressors and use them all the time. I would love to see them delisted from the NFA.

Not only do they make shooting more fun and comfortable, I believe using one is extremely courteous to neighbors near your range, fellow shooters next to you and when hunting, I don't ruin the chances for other hunters that may be in my vicinity after I take a shot. I took one with me to Africa last year with no problems in or out.

 

[lcq]

Supressors or moderators as the Brits call them have advantages and disadvantages. They greatly reduce noise but only really bring it down to safe levels with subsonic loads. Muzzle flash and recoil are also reduced. The downside they require maintenance, i.e cleaning and make cleaning the gun more time consuming. I wish we were allowed to use them but ignorant politicians (that includes many chiefs of police) still get their information from Hollywood. sigh

 

[lcq]

I'd sure like to not have the continuous pinging in my left ear. An idiot with a pistol/revolver with no suppressor or with one is still an idiot with a gun.

amen to that. nothing is foolproof because fools are so ingenious

 

[stug]

I have a suppressor on my 708, it doesn't take any longer to clean the rifle. I just unscrew the suppressor and clean the rifle as I normally would. You can't really clean the inside of a suppressor. After many thousand rounds the effictiveness is diminished because of the carbon build-up, but they aren't that expensive, about NZ$300.

 

[1dirthawker]

a suppressor offers pretty serious recoil reduction. it tames noise about 30 db (decibels) for every 3 db, sound is reduced by half. overall,a good thing. just like ammo, use them or don't

 

[stug]

Actually suppressors don't reduce recoil mutch at all. They seem like they do, probably because of the muzzle blast reduction.
This video shows the difference pretty well.

 

[1dirthawker]

stug,

according to that video you appear to be right. however, my buddy that shoots a 338 lapua(100's of times a year> swears that his recoil reduction is more with a suppressor than a brake. he also says, bigger the cartridge the better it works. i have not shot a suppressor enough to notice tell one way or the other.

 

[stug]

The biggest recoil reduction with a suppressor is the increased mass. It is either a really big suppressor or a terrible brake. If you look at other videos by the guy I posted he has some 338 videos of brakes.

 

[Hearties]

Suppressors have become very popular here in South Africa. The noise and recoil reduction seems to outweigh the downsides of extra length and cost. I have a suppressor on all my rifles.

 

[PaulT]

A firearm with no muzzle blast is called a bow !!!

No point any of you flaming me for my stance, I won't hear any of you anyway

 

[Hank2211]

I wish suppressors (we really have to stop calling them silencers) had been legal and available when I was learning to shoot, and doing target shooting. Like a lot of people, my brain didn't really develop until I hit my forties or so (my wife would argue with that), by which time I had (and have) permanent ringing in my ears.

Apart from the myths created and perpetuated by Hollywood, it's difficult to see the downside of suppressors.

Suppressors don't eliminate noise. On a supersonic round (most rifles), they take the 'crack' out of the shot, which takes away the pain of shooting without ear protection, but doesn't eliminate it. The sound is still loud by any reasonable definition. On subsonic rounds fired from semi-autos, they reduce the noise but again, not so much that you could shoot squirrels in your backyard and not have a SWAT team at your doorstep. With revolvers I don't think they have much effect at all.

While there are no downsides I can see, there are upsides.

Firstly, for the Hollywood crowd, a handgun fitted with a suppressor is far harder to conceal than one without. If you carry it in the front, people may think you've just met Mae West.

Secondly, they are less disruptive to the animals (other than the one being shot, of course!) and anyone else who might be within hearing distance of the shot, such as farmers and ranchers. Makes for a nicer weekend.

Thirdly, they do reduce recoil - I've seen the video, but I also have the evidence of my senses. I used a .300 win mag and a .25-06 last summer on a cull hunt in South Africa. As much as I love my .300, I'm not prepared to put 40 rounds through it in the course of about 5 hours. Not only would it hurt like hell, but I'd likely develop a flinch of the worst kind.

Fourthly, as noted above, it's a health issue for the hunter and those around the hunter.

I said there were no downsides. There is one. They are a bit ugly. They would unbalance my beautiful rifles, and they would require that I thread the barrels. So I'd use them when I was target shooting (without my hunting guns) and when culling (when I use someone else's gun!).

 

[MS Hitman]

I now have several rifles which are threaded for the use of a suppressor and it makes shooting and hunting less of a strain on my hearing. Revolvers do not benefit from the use of a suppressor as the barrel cylinder gap remains and gas will escape this location. I am getting close to waiting 15 months for my next stamp to arrive. This is ridiculous in the extreme!

 

[Philip Glass]

Funny how gun control is so prevalent in some countries but you can buy a suppressor over the counter!
We are a stupid nation.