todays outrageous fact: gun silencer sales

Post Reply New Topic

This almost implies that anyone who owns a suppressor has criminal intent.
How many of them are used for criminal purposes?


Selfish and touchy??
Oh, you mean by bringing some facts to this thread to dismnatle some nutty claim from takepart.com that YOU posted.
Well, that's standard for these gunz-r-bad type threads that arise once in a while. So, if you going to keep posting threads like this prepare to have them easily shot down......no pun intended.

Guns get used places other than at the range, and it would be nice if defending your home or hunting didn't cost you your hearing, not to mention that of those around you.



And? How many criminals are in the quietly killing people business, and of those who are, why would you think they couldn't just make their own silencers? I learned how in middle school, made my first few for paintball and other airguns, then graduated to real guns, where the principle is exactly the same but you need tougher materials. As has been and will be continually pointed out, silencers are bulky, which is why they're not often used by criminals, as concealment and convenience are far more important to them than a quieter weapon, which, incidentally, is the same reason that rifles aren't often used in crime, even the scary black ones. They weren't even made illegal for the reasons you probably think, they were only included on the 1934 NFA because of concerns about poaching, which is by far the most plausible crime likely to be committed with one.



So you don't remotely know what you're talking about, but we should defer to your opinion why?



We are concerned about public safety, which is why we actually do something about it, in contrast to whining on the internet about things which we know nothing.

Interesting, I guess you learn something new every day.

So you honestly believe that if a person intends to use a fire arm for a "bad purpose" that they are going to let something like this little law get in their way? These laws dont make anything easier or harder.

Also dont silencers reduce speed/stopping power/range/accuracy/ect... of a bullet?

I read an article on this recently. A recent gun buying surge has ended so people are moving on to accessorize what they own. Silencers are still not a standard item. +37% of a small market is still a small market. If there is some high profile abuse then the usual arguments will begin. I would suspect that silencers are more vulnerable than semi-automatic rifles are to public opinion.

If someone wants to kill someone quietly,they can always use a knife.Those are still legal.

That goes for many on both extremes of the issue.

You can make an ersatz suppressor yourself. WIth a little bit of metalworking skill and the tools and materials to do it with you can make a real one that will last. It's illegal, of course, but so is murdering people.


I've shot suppressed weapons but I'm not all that knowledgeable of suppressors and I don't have time to research it now. However, I believe only integral suppressors (where the suppressor is actually a part of the barrel as opposed to attached at the muzzle) reduce the velocity of the projectile. To eliminate the supersonic CRACK, subsonic ammo has to be used and, depending on the round, that can reduce the power of the projectile significantly. Even using super-sonic ammo with a suppressor, you still alter the acoustic signature so that it is considerably quieter and does not necessarily sound like a firearm being discharged. You still get that sharp crack, though, since the projectile is super-sonic.
Examples:
A 9mm firing a 115 grain bullet from a handgun has a muzzle velocity of about 1150-1250 fps. In order to make it sub-sonic you'd have to buy or load ammo that will render a muzzle velocity somewhere under 1000 fts OR use a heavier 147 grain load that are usually all subsonic due to the increased weight. For the lighter 9mm 115 gr. loading it's the higher velocity that gives the 9mm it's sting. Drop that to subsonic levels and you reduce what makes the 9mm shine.

The .45 ACP firing a 230 grain bullet from a handgun at a muzzle velocity of 850-900 fps is already sub-sonic and a slower loading does not have to be used. What gives the .45 its sting is its bigger and heavier bullet and a 230 grain bullet at the above velocity is standard for the .45 ACP though lighter (185-200 grain) and faster loadings are available. If I were going to get a suppressor it would be for one of my .45's.

It depends on the design both of the suppressor and the gun it's attached to - but in general the answer is "no".

However, most people who shoot with suppressors also use sub-sonic ammo, which does substantially decrease the velocity of the round (by design).

They do make a gun more likely to jam. Unless it's a revolver or a bolt-action rifle, some of the energy from firing the bullet is used to feed the next round into the chamber. Because suppressors soak up some of the pressure in the barrel and let it out slowly, they're still blowing out sooty gas when the breech at the back of the barrel opens to expel the spent casing. That fouls the 'action' that does the reloading.

Example, please?

Come on now. I have no doubts about your knowledge and responsibility when it comes to firearms, but there are plenty of gun owners out there who know nothing about their weapon other than what they have seen on TV. You should come hang out in my neighborhood on New Year's. That by itself is an excellent argument in favor of mandatory training/education pre-reqs for purchase.

Granted, there are less who are uneducated on the firearm owner side, but idiots come in all flavors.

Again, it depends on the design of the gun as well as the design of the suppressor. I've mostly seen FTEs with home-made suppressors or guns that are notoriously picky about ammo.

Well, considering that they actually own the weapon in question and have it in front of them, they now de facto know more about it than what they've seen on TV, as opposed to the anti-gun people talking about porcelain Glocks and "shoulder things that go up". You can't really make a 'both sides do it' argument here, the ignorance is overwhelmingly a one way street.

I tend to be a little less critical of someone's ignorance who has never even touched a gun and has ridiculous impressions than someone who owns one and thinks the best way to carry a gun is in the front of his waistband or has never learned the vital lesson that you should only point it at things you are fully prepared to have a bullet go into. Maybe that's just me, I suppose.

silencers actually work very well when used with ammo designed for them. light load .22s out of a pistol are pretty quite the action of the gun is louder than the bullet