Fully understanding that hearing protection is important when firing a weapon, how many of you out there have a silencer on your bedside gun, or finds it necessary to supress them? I should add that I don't and don't plan to.
Last edited:
Who has a silencer on their bed-side gun
- Thread starter wishin
- Start date
- Status
Atroxus
Member
I would if I could afford the tax stamp, cost of a suppressor, and cost to get it mounted on my SD/HD weapon. But currently I do not. I don't like the tought of making myself or my family deaf if I had to fire inside the house. It would not stop me from doing so however, if I could(legally of course) I would not hesitate to get one.
Mine is a .357. But, I wouldn't even think of going through the trouble or expense unless I was pretty sure in would turn into a gunfight of great proportion; then I'd grab one of my semi-auto rifles. What are the odds of that happening?
SharpsDressedMan
member
Currently by the bed. The gun, with grips, I got about 4 years ago for $420 delivered off gunbroker, barrel $100 off ebay, the AAC Scorpion (discontinued) can for $460 last year, plus the $200 tax. $1180 out the door......................
[/IMG]
Last edited:
Lol. That's a boomer.
Not knowing the stats, I suspect many people would rather have a handgun handy. I would think that not too many people have silencers on their handguns. It would be interesting to learn what the breakdown is for bedside guns - handgun, shotgun or rifle. Since We don't have any children around, my .357 is out all the time and when we do have children visit, it goes out of reach.
Not knowing the stats, I suspect many people would rather have a handgun handy. I would think that not too many people have silencers on their handguns. It would be interesting to learn what the breakdown is for bedside guns - handgun, shotgun or rifle. Since We don't have any children around, my .357 is out all the time and when we do have children visit, it goes out of reach.
WoofersInc
Member
This is something that has been discussed before. I have suppressors, with a few more coming once the paperwork clears.
I would not use one on a defense gun. I am in the camp that beleives it would cause significant legal issues in the aftermath.
There are those that are of the mentality of "if it's a good shoot. It's a good shoot."
That is all fine and dandy when it comes down to the simple aspect of a self defense shooting. There are a lot of cases to back up self defense shooting. There are laws that specifically address this.
At this time there aren't any cases of a legally owned suppressed firearm being used in a self defense shooting. So now it would be a precedent setting case. Something that could make a huge difference in a D.A.'s career. I don't know about anybody else but I really don't want to be the test case for something like this. I sure don't have the unlimited financial resources to do so.
Some things to remember. How many firearm owners are aware that suppressors are legal? I run into them all the time telling me that you can't own those things.
Now, how many normal every day citizens know suppressors are legal? And guess which of these groups will be on the jury if you are tried.
According to Massad Ayoob every single case of a NFA item being used has gone to a Grand Jury at a minimum. How many of those would have progressed if a standard firearm had been used?
The simple fact is that the aftermath of a self sdefense shooting will be bad enough. Using something that could give leverage to a agenda driven D.A., and make you look like a hitman to a uneducated jury would just add to it.
So for now I will stick to the simple 12 guage and let someone else be the first to test the waters.
I would not use one on a defense gun. I am in the camp that beleives it would cause significant legal issues in the aftermath.
There are those that are of the mentality of "if it's a good shoot. It's a good shoot."
That is all fine and dandy when it comes down to the simple aspect of a self defense shooting. There are a lot of cases to back up self defense shooting. There are laws that specifically address this.
At this time there aren't any cases of a legally owned suppressed firearm being used in a self defense shooting. So now it would be a precedent setting case. Something that could make a huge difference in a D.A.'s career. I don't know about anybody else but I really don't want to be the test case for something like this. I sure don't have the unlimited financial resources to do so.
Some things to remember. How many firearm owners are aware that suppressors are legal? I run into them all the time telling me that you can't own those things.
Now, how many normal every day citizens know suppressors are legal? And guess which of these groups will be on the jury if you are tried.
According to Massad Ayoob every single case of a NFA item being used has gone to a Grand Jury at a minimum. How many of those would have progressed if a standard firearm had been used?
The simple fact is that the aftermath of a self sdefense shooting will be bad enough. Using something that could give leverage to a agenda driven D.A., and make you look like a hitman to a uneducated jury would just add to it.
So for now I will stick to the simple 12 guage and let someone else be the first to test the waters.
If the silencer was built with wipes, mesh or other material that contacted the bullet then those tests might show that something brushed against the bullet. But most modern silencers are built with metal baffles that do not contact the bullet at all which would leave no evidence on the bullet.
If a gun was equipped with an integral silencer using a ported barrel, the ports might leave marks on the bullet, but this is still barrel marks and nothing to do with the silencer.
Ranb
If a gun was equipped with an integral silencer using a ported barrel, the ports might leave marks on the bullet, but this is still barrel marks and nothing to do with the silencer.
Ranb
Zombie
member
Since this is the rifle forum I guess you are asking about rifles? I find that silenced rifles are too long to work properly for home defense. A pistol on the other hand is about the right size. I don't have one though.
SharpsDressedMan
member
In the end, what type of weapon you used is less important than whether you needed to defend yourself. I don't burden myself with a lot of "what if's". In Ohio, we recently got some improved legislation regarding defending one's self in the home. If it's an aggavated burglary, and the situation turns to one of the homeowner or resident mortally wounding an intruder, the law pretty clearly protects the resident. Knife, ball bat, SMG, shotgun, suppressed pistol. Not a big deal. Did you NEED to mortally engage the attacker? That's about it. Re silencer forensics: A really GOOD ballistics tech MIGHT have some knowledge about evidence relating to gunshots from silenced weapons, but about 99% of the techs around the country won't. A "dry" can will trap a lot of powder residue, disguising/altering the distance that the shot took place. A "wet" can will add addition crap to the scene or victim, in the form of semi-liquid coolant and suppressor crud being blown out with the projectile. The debris from the wet can would probably give techs something to examine and match to the silencer being used. A smart criminal would probably use a "disposable" suppressor made of PVC, and toss or burn it after use.
freakshow10mm
member
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2008
- Messages
- 1,951
Home defense gun is a full auto M16 with suppressor.
waterhouse
Member
Both my handgun and AR are suppressed. If I happen to have the shotgun it isn't.
Zombie
member
Some might feel that this is excessive, but if you are going to be firing full auto inside your house a suppressor makes a lot of sense. What is your back up gun? Do you use a suppressed AR pistol since it shares magazines or do you rely on something smaller?
Zundfolge
Member
So you shoot a thief there to steal a few hundred dollars worth of stuff and end up having to forfeit a $15,000 rifle when the police show up.
If I has a full auto M16, it by far would be the most valuable item in the house and in need of protection as opposed to using it for protection.
A suppressed home defense gun makes a lot of sense to me. Its a shame that in order to defend your home and your life that you have to sacrifice your hearing.
freakshow10mm
member
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2008
- Messages
- 1,951
No, it's a $600 gun. My company is a class 2 SOT. I make machine guns for a living.
30mag
Member
I would if I could, but I'm 19, and poor.
- Status
