To Silence or Not to Silence

D

Doc Holliday 1950

New member
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 put in the wait time for mine, no regrets.

I wouldn't mind seeing everyone at the range with a can on their guns, lots of benefits.

In the UK, it's considered rude NOT to run a can on their guns.
 
Silencers are probably one of the best accessories you can get for you gun. I'm really hoping the HPA passes so more people can get one. I bought two and I'm waiting on the paperwork to go through. Can't wait!
If/when the HPA passes, I'm sure you'll need to go through a background check when buying one just like with purchasing a gun. That should keep most Toms Dicks and Harrys from getting one if they have a history. If a criminal REALLY wanted to get one, they'll get one through other avenues like they do already. I think most criminals are more about concealment vs sound. It would be harder to conceal a pistol with a silencer than one without. But I could be wrong. Not a criminal expert.
 
DH1950 said:
The second question is do you want every Tom Dick and Harry to be able to have a silencer on their Pistols or Revolvers.???
Click to expand...

Yes, though I doubt many revolver owners would use them.

DH1950 said:
What are your thoughts about ditching all the laws about buying a silencer so as Hunters one doesn't blow out their ear drums??
Click to expand...

There should be no prohibitions on these.

As a practical matter, on a bolt action rifle that isn't going to blow a bunch of junk back at the shooter, they make sense so long as they don't destroy accuracy. Same goes for my rimfires; a suppressor might blow all kinds of crud back into the action, but a rimfire is so dirty anyway that the difference might not matter.

Suppressors on full power ARs seem to have some disadvantages.
 
"...one doesn't blow out their ear drums..." The idea of needing a suppressor when hunting is a fad brought on by stupid laws changing. It has nothing do to with hearing protection. That's just an excuse. Mind you, so was the idea that criminals would use 'em.
And they do not work on revolvers.
"...suppressor might blow..." Nope. Think in terms of your vehicle's muffler. It's the same thing.
 
Silencers are probably one of the best accessories you can get for you gun.
Click to expand...

This.

On my .308 it tames the recoil and makes shooting way less tiring on the ears. Why anyone would want to shoot without one when hunting is mystery to me as is why authorities don't allow it.

As for every T, D and H.... if we don't mind them buying guns why should we mind them getting cans too?

The thing I wish is that the shooting and non-shooting worlds would understand that a silenced shot and a Hollywood silenced shot are NOT the same thing....

It would make so many people realise how redundant current restrictions are....
 
I don't own any, but have shot suppressed firearms. If not for the paperwork, I'd probably have one or more. If new legislation significantly eases or eliminates the current process, I may be in the market myself. If Tom, Dick and Harry are otherwise legal to own firearms, I could care less if they have suppressors.
 
The idea of needing a suppressor when hunting is a fad brought on by stupid laws changing. It has nothing do to with hearing protection.
Click to expand...

Not sure what was the intended meaning of this, but it sounds like you think suppressor are not needed for hunting. Is this correct?

If so why would you think or say that? Is it because you destroyed your hearing years ago and can't hear anymore? Or is it from ignorance, thinking that one shot won't hurt anything?

Personally I am all for using suppressors for hunting. The only real draw back to using a can is they add typically a minimum of 6" to the barrel length.

Love to know the reasoning.
 
The second question is do you want every Tom Dick and Harry to be able to have a silencer on their Pistols or Revolvers.???
Click to expand...
I want every law abiding citizen to be able to own the firearms and accessories of their choice, such as suppressors, short barreled shotguns and rifles. and select fire firearms.
I would get a can for the CZ 527M and the BREN 805 for hunting, if the prices aren't outrageous. We'll see.
 
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.???

To directly answer your question: I am all for ditching all the laws about buying a silencer for whatever reason (hunting or otherwise).

Yes, I want EVERY Tom, Dick, and Harry to be able to have a silencer on whatever they are shooting. It really annoys me when I arrive at my local gun club and find that I am the only one there. I start shooting (suppressed) and I don't need any hearing protection. I am not sweating under those muffs. I am aware of what is going on around me. I can hear nature: turkeys calling and all that. Then someone else shows up and ruins the whole experience for me by making me put on hearing protection because they are about to make all kinds of noise.


Let me ask a question. I see all kinds of arguments made by gun owners to de-regulate suppressors. But my question asks a question TO the question;

What good purpose does the noise made by a firearm serve ?
It is beyond any question harmful. It is well beyond the safe noise level for humans.
Beyond the harmful range (some distance away from the gun) it disturbs other people. Shooting ranges deal all the time with noise complaints. My own local club ASKS the members to refrain from shooting before 1000 to be "good neighbors" to the people living near the range. FWIW: I go much earlier than that and shoot with a suppressor and nobody even knows I am there.

We regulate how much noise a car can make by requiring mufflers on the car.
People often complain about motorcycles with loud pipes on them. Many cities regulate air traffic certain times of day because of the noise around airports. I used to live in a city with an air force base and the air force was not allowed to do full powered take-offs because of the noise. OSHA or whomever regulates noise in industrial settings and requires the use of hearing protection.
Yet when it comes to guns many people demand that they produce unsafe levels of noise...........I just can't figure out why ?????

Again, what good purpose does it serve ????
And if you can't think of any good purpose it serves (I certainly can't) and we have the technology to greatly diminish that noise: why wouldn't we do it ????

Here is another thing that I heard brought up by someone else that I thought was interesting. What if the first gun ever invented was designed with what we today call a suppressor ? What if every gun ever made from that point on, copied that design ? Nobody would think anything about it. But because that didn't happen, many people consider making a lot of noise to be a good thing (I guess) ?????
 
Last edited:
What are your thoughts about ditching all the laws about buying a silencer so as Hunters one doesn't blow out their ear drums??
Click to expand...

I think a lot of hunters are idiots for not wearing hearing protection. Even so, silencers should be allowed so as to help protect their ears.

The second question is do you want every Tom Dick and Harry to be able to have a silencer on their Pistols or Revolvers.???
Click to expand...

You mean like every Tom Dick and Harry can have a gun???? This sort of query reminds me of folks who worry about people owning body armor. Silencers and body armor are not weapons.

And they do not work on revolvers.
Click to expand...

Sure suppressors work on revolvers. The laws of physics don't change just because a firearm is a revolver. You may need some slightly different technology from your standard issue revolver, but suppressed revolvers have been made in the past.

Mosin Nagant made a revolver specifically designed that would take a normal suppressor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n97Yrb-OuVY

Also..
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/06/15/why-cant-revolvers-be-suppressed-or-can-they/
 
I think you either like them or you don't or, like me, don't really have an opinion either way. Only problem I'd have with them is in my opinion they're terminal ugly! I like classic looking firearm's. Shoot the bludge in the end of shotgun barrels drives me nut's, I'll never have a shot gun with screw in choke's either! Odly, when I was young, I got a brand new Mossberg 500 from the local hardware store, Western Auto. Had a c-lect choke on it. back then it seemed cool. But I set the thing on modified and don't recall I ever changed it after that. But it was still cool!
 
I don't own a "silencer", and as things stand now i never will.
PA allows them for hunting.

Instead of silencer, they should be called sound dampening devices.
Any way you look at it a super sonic bullet makes noise.

I think the stigmatism is in the name.

I'm ok with Tom and Harry having them. Dick, welllll..... Lol
 
T. O'Heir said:
"...one doesn't blow out their ear drums..." The idea of needing a suppressor when hunting is a fad brought on by stupid laws changing. It has nothing do to with hearing protection. That's just an excuse.
Click to expand...
Using a silencer while hunting -- especially if you're using a higher-powered rifle -- will drastically reduce the hearing damage caused from firing your rifle without hearing protection. Sure, I'll bet some people use that as an excuse to use a silencer when hunting, but I'm sure many hunters are actually concerned about hearing loss. Dismissing all hunters who use silencers is ridiculous.

T. O'Heir said:
"...suppressor might blow..." Nope.
Click to expand...
Actually, yep. Zukiphile's full quote was, "a suppressor might blow all kinds of crud back into the action". And that's exactly correct; almost every silencer ever made will cause extra gas blowback, and if the gun is an autoloader that means extra gas blows back into the action.
 
Last edited:
The idea of needing a suppressor when hunting is a fad brought on by stupid laws changing
Click to expand...

It is easy to protect your own hearing, when just shooting at the range I use both a suppresor and hearing protection because why not?

but it is very hard to put hearing protection on your dog

loads of other benefits to reduces recoil (which improves your accuracy), reduces muzzleflashes (especially good for hunting over a feeder at night)
 
At the range yesterday, while shooting my flintlock, I got to talking with a man who was shooting a silenced .308. There was very little noise. One thing led to another and we ended up shooting each other's rifles. The silencer made the .308 virtually impossible to hear with hearing protection on. I'd guess it to be on the order of a .22LR..."maybe". The recoil was rather piddling as well. My .308 Sav. M99 gives a good kick and blast; his .308 was a kitten. A Godsend in the woods, I'm convinced.
 
I'm all for suppressor use, you would be amazed how much easier it is to teach someone how to shoot if they are not busy waiting/afraid of the loud boom. I love teaching people with my Marlin bolt gun and a can, nice and quiet and easy to instruct.

Over the pond it is considered rude not to run your gun with a suppressor on it.

I agree with what has already been said about the many reasons to run one, from hunting to target practice to self-defense in your home all verry good reasons to use one. What good is the extra noise? As far as criminals getting them that can already happen.

I personally perfer to shoot with a can on, yes it adds a little weight and length but I think the pros out weight the negative in this case.
 
A PSA?

I do agree that Hollywood is not our friend in the battle.

Perhaps a PSA, if not that a grassroots effort to educate the general public (ya I know) about suppressors esp. their noise signature.

I would say the public in general does not know that Hollywood silent does not exist. I'm sure those same folks fantasize about gangs shooting up the streets and not making a sound.
 
I can imagine that down the road we will not recognize a sporting rifle. Likely even the black rifle will be a think of the past and taser's like we saw on program's like Star Trek will be the thing! I think I'm glad I won't be around to see it! :-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top