"Why do you NEED a silencer?"

Dumb Question:

Do suppressors have any effect on muzzle velocity?

Honestly, suppressors should be readily available, for public safety.

It would help cut back on noise pollution, and be safer for the user's ears.

IT is very enjoyable to shoot with a can.. It reduces recoil and blast.

That's awesome, man. Thank you for posting that video.

As to the argument.. I think it's insane that people would want to regulate silencers at all. I mean, all those neighborhood dwellers that cry and complain about "BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG" from the local range wouldn't have that problem if silencers were affordable and easy to acquire..

It's almost like having your cake and eating it too, only the reason we can't do that now is because other people won't let us..

I want to be able to shoot in more spots, and other people don't want to hear it..

Having my cake is shooting, eating the cake is people not being subjected to loud noises..

Silencer.. The universal cakesaving fork that allows one to eat, and maintain said cake.

The better question would be: Why would you NOT want a silencer? I would love to have one for all my rifles and handguns. Don't guess they would work well for shotguns....

Mufflers are mandated by law for most vehicles. Mufflers are forbidden by law for firearms (not actualy since you can pay $200 and get special permission for a can, but essentialy.)

The technology is simple, the safety benefits are real.

They will write you a ticket if you take the muffler off your vehicle yet they require it stays off of firearms.

Legislation has kept firearms in the 19th century on many fronts.

Huh?

Most non-gunners think in movie and television terms.The Mob or the serial killer,or the assassination team using silencers.
This has created the fear and bias against the devices.

noise

High frequency hearing loss is no joke; I lost the best job I ever had because of it.

"Because I can."

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Great information and a very useful demonstration! Thanks.

best,

Dave

Because firing a short AR15 indoors at a violent intruder would be decidedly unpleasant, and I want to hear the judge afterwards.

Because firing a .50BMG made "hearing safe" (suppressed) is a lot more pleasant than firing one with a "auditory damage enhancer" (muzzle brake).

Because hearing the hammer strike, muzzle "pppft", and target "thunk" is hugely amusing having never heard those sounds behind the "BANG!!!" of an unsuppressed .22LR bolt-action.

Because hearing "ka-chunk, thump" just makes me smile when firing a Hollywood-quiet AR15.

Because keeping the noise down is courteous to the neighbors.

Because having an unsuppressed .308 go off 3 feet to the left, and 1 foot behind, your unprotected left ear, with subsequent absence of high frequencies, is a very disturbing experience.

FWIW: Silencer manufacturer Advanced Armament Corp. hosts a silencer-only shoot every fall near Atlanta. I highly recommend going. ...no, wait, take that back, there's too many people there already, no, it's in the Alaskan backcountry in January, um...

+1 for silenced deer rifles!

ctdonath said:

...there's too many people there already, no, it's in the Alaskan backcountry in January, um...

Click to expand...

No, no, no, don't send everyone up to my portion of the country, I already left Utah because it was becoming infested with escapee Kalifornians...

(As opposed to the good people of California who we don't see move away)

The use of them make FAR too much sense (and we all know antis/gov have NO sense!)

Here in New Zealand there are no restrictions at all on sound moderators (or silencers or whatever else you want to call them).

A lot of people who have .22s also have a moderator on them or at least for them. They're reasonably cheap and easily purchased ... in fact more easily purchased than ammunition for a .22!! Moderators are not as common on centrefire firearms, but they are becoming more popular from what I can tell.

Here we need to have a licence to own the firearm and we need to present that licence to purchase ammo (in an attempt to make sure that only licenced people can shoot), but a moderator can be bought without a firearms licence.

Here a moderator isn't considered to be a firearm (why would it?) and its not considered to be any more or less dangerous than a bipod or a sling. Its just something that gets attached to a firearm .... what's the big deal?

It seems like at least part of our firearms laws are not too far from common sense.

I swear that I saw a video much like this one a few years ago.