Trends in suppressor (silencer) ownership?

Status
Not open for further replies.
MatthewVanitas

MatthewVanitas

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2002
Messages
3,476
Location
Baltimore
I've been around THR since 2004 or so, and other forums before that. Best as I recall, suppressor ownership was rarely discussed in the past, and when it was it was usually "they're not actually illegal but a huge hassle..."

But it seems nowadays that every gun forum I look at, including THR, has people buying suppressors. I was pondering the reasons why, and I'd imagine it's a combination of $200 diminishing with inflation, greater interest in "modern" firearms, and definitely just people's awareness of the attainability of suppressors. Before the internet, if you didn't know someone personally who owned one, you and all the guys at the shop probably thought they were illegal, or required reams of paperwork. Nowadays you can just hop online and find all kinds of info, look at catalogs, read reviews, etc.

Is my perception accurate? Has the suppressor market expanded greatly in the last 10 years?

Has the ATF publicized any figures as to how many suppressors are added to the registry each year? I'd imagine that might be pretty illuminating.


EDIT: Just wanted to mention that THR members played a big role in my getting a suppressed Ruger MkII in 2006. And I currently have a GemTech 9mm can waiting at my SOT...
 
I think its just people discussing, and a growing awareness of their legality, and especially their usefullness.

When you have people like Zak Smith placing videos of quite long-range shooting, without the need for ears, it kinda gets interest running. I think this is a great trend we're seeing.

I ordered my first one last week, actually. Major-Malfunction, the company I ordered through, said he is absolutely SWAMPED, been getting hundreds of calls a week.
 
I was not aware of people using them or the laws surrounding them until I started hitting the gun boards. Now I really want one, but unfortunately in Michigan they have legislated us to go deaf (illegal). If they did become legal, I would definitely get one. As you said, $200 is getting cheaper every day, especially with Bernake and Paulson turning the presses on to max speed.

According to the inflation calculator I found via google:

What cost $200 in 1934 would cost $3067.30 in 2007.
Also, if you were to buy exactly the same products in 2007 and 1934,
they would cost you $200 and $12.97 respectively.
Click to expand...
 
For years I thought they were just illegal, now I know different. There has been talk of raising the tax to $500.
 
I'm assuming that they are illegal in one of the most gun unfriendly states, Illinois?
 
I've been watching this for about 15 years. Yes, suppressors are a lot more popular.

It's partly the spread of information, partly the dramatic improvements in suppressor technology in the last two decades. We're not talking muffler pipe and washers any more.
 
Suppressor design has come a long way in the past few decades. With numerous companies trying to keep up with demand, quality has improved. OPS Inc., AAC, SWR, KAC, AWC, and Surefire all make good products. Even smaller companies like Liberty Suppressors and Innovative Arms make good, usable cans. With the choices available, just about anyone can afford a can. My .22 can from Innovative Arms is top notch, and it only cost me $260 plus stamp. My M41k (old model) was $550 and makes my AR hearing safe.

The affordability of cans combined with increased media attention (internet and print) has greatly increased ownership and therefore knowledge. It's great IMO.
 
Agreed, information regarding the ease of obtaining one legally has led me to order a suppressor for my .22's.

I am out of pocket about $410 but it seems worth it for the fun factor.
 
One of our moderators who was at this year's SHOT Shot said something to the effect of "everyone and their dog is making a suppressor now".

I agree that awareness is rising.

Also keep in mind states like Kansas (and I think Missouri) just recently got their right (excuse me, permission) to purchase and own NFA weapons. I'm sure there were plenty of guys there who always wanted one, and bought one the first week they legally could.

But yeah, having people like Zak Smith getting rifle reviews published in big magazines, with a can on every rifle he shoots; that definitely helps. :) Flip through any "tactical-oriented" gun rag today and you'll see plenty of adverts showing suppressors, or guns sporting them.
 
I can not help but think that there is still no shortage of people who want to convince fellow gun owners that silencers are illegal in the USA and promote the idea that anyone who uses them is a wanna be assassin. When I confront some of these losers with the truth, they normally resort to some sort of profane denial or threat.

Gun owners are their own worst enemies at times.

Ranb
 
First of all, I think that there are a lot more gun stores getting class 3 licenses and selling them, so there is a rise in ownership/interest.

I think the other main reason is because of the war. Whenever there is a war there is an huge increase in new weapons and gear. Remember that before 9/11 almost all of the tactical gear you could buy was black. Now it's all tan. So manufacturers start creating products to be used in the war, and then civilians want to buy the same stuff. Recently suppressors are a lot more common in the war, so the manufacturers have come out with a lot more models and improved the technology, so just like tan gear, the civilians have started being interested in the suppressors.
 
There is also a lot of business these days in SBRs and sawn off shotguns.

I think it is at least partly because the 1986 freeze on full autos has run the prices of SMGs into the stratosphere and left silencers and short semiauto shoulder weapons as the only affordable ways to have the way kewl ninja operator experience and image. As expvideo says, it is just an extension of the Coyote Tan Everything fad.


...Zak Smith placing videos of quite long-range shooting, without the need for ears
Click to expand...

I don't know what kind of supressor Zak uses versus what the guys I have shot with use, but the only supressed rifles I have seen shot were NOT quiet enough to do away with ear protection. Perhaps the ones here are inferior brands.
 
I mailed in my form 4 on friday. I tired major malfunction, took me 2 weeks to get a hold of them, said they were out of stock and it would be forever and 2 days to get one in. He suggested I find one in stock, and I did. I got one fora few reasons, but mostly because i finally could afford one and the likely hood of a price increase and tax stamp increase or ban from the new administration.
 
I don't know what kind of supressor Zak uses versus what the guys I have shot with use, but the only supressed rifles I have seen shot were NOT quiet enough to do away with ear protection. Perhaps the ones here are inferior brands.
Click to expand...

I don't claim great experience, but my integrally-suppressed .22LR Ruger MkII I can shoot outdoors without discomfort (and I have sensitive ears), but indoors I'd still like to have at least plugs.

When I went to buy my can at John's Guns up in the TX Hill Country, he also demo'ed some QD AR-15 cans for me, and most of them were "quiererer, but still dang loud". Then again, he also demo'ed a suppressed .44 Mag bolt-action, and it was 100% ear-safe. The sound of the bullet striking a berm 50m away was far louder than the report.

It really depends what cartridge and what can. He did also show an AR-15 can that was simply huge (with giant expansion chamber?) that were indeed ear-safe, though not the kind of thing you'd take for kicking down doors.
 
The difference between shooting my AR-15 in the open or under weather protection is night and day. Under a roof of any kind it is uncomfortable and definitely needs ear plugs. Out in the open it is much less noisy and possibly hearing safe without protection.

Ranb
 
call me tin foiled but i dont fancy having my name stamped on nfa paperwork..

i would venture and guess the actual sales haven't changed.. just people talking more about it. perhaps many are fearing the proverbial total ban of class3?
 
I'll agree that the information I've learned here, and elsewhere, has led me to desire a suppressor. I don't see much practicality for spending the money for my "real" calibers, but I want one for my .22's, so it can multitask. I'm even considering dropping the coin for a 5.56 can, since a .22LR can won't work on my AR, but a 5.56 can will work on my .22's.
 
When I hear people complain that a silencer is still loud, it seems to always be the case that they are using a semi-auto host. THE NOISE IS COMING FROM YOUR ACTION. I have two silencers (22lr & .223) my host weapon is a single shot Contender Pistol.

In addition to sound suppression, silencers are superior muzzle brakes & superior flash suppressors.
 
Making silencers for my gun collection is a logical extension of my hobby just like loading ammo. I can not imagine dropping hundreds of dollars for a gun muffler when I can just make my own that are nearly or just as effective and a fraction of the cost.

Ranb
 
Yes, but if you are in the USA and lack the appropriate license, they are not nearly as legal. The $10,000 fine and five years out of the productive economy will add a lot to the total cost.
 
Ranb,
You can't make a suppressor without paying the tax - big NoNo. Many years scrubbing prison floors.
 
I never had understand why the US is so big against suppressors. Sure it was a good way of stopping poachers in the great depression from making it easier for them to grab some dinner off a landowner's land, but nowadays it rather silly to keep it on the books. Really many of these laws that came about due to the great depression need to be disposed off as they were little more than ways to keep people in control.

Most other countries make it so much easier to get one and you think with noise concerns it be highly recommended for shooters at ranges, hunters, security personal and police and the general public.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Reuters Op-Ed Anti Gun
Replies
23
Views
1K
Cosmoline
C
G
  • Locked
Nevada leads in gun deaths, ownership (??!!??)
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
Robert Hairless
R
M
  • Locked
(article)Do you think guns will be outlawed soon?: The future of guns in America
2 3
Replies
54
Views
3K
wvshooter
W
O
  • Locked
Is That Thing Legal: Understanding NFA 34
Replies
15
Views
1K
ptmmatssc
P
H
  • Locked
Extreme Overkill: anti-gun editorial in my local paper...
2 3
Replies
67
Views
3K
trinydex
T
Back
Top