Would everyone have a sound suppressor..

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Would everyone have a sound suppressor.. (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 5/14/2005 11:53:08 AM EDT

Would you have a sound suppressor if you could buy them legally from "7-11" with no restrictions?

Posted: 5/14/2005 11:54:46 AM EDT

[#1]

Of course.

Posted: 5/14/2005 11:55:35 AM EDT

[#2]

Why wouldn't you.

Posted: 5/14/2005 11:58:52 AM EDT

[#3]

Not only would everyone have them, but they would be significantly better than what is available today.

Posted: 5/14/2005 11:59:23 AM EDT

[#4]

I mean when all they're talking about is that all that sound suppressors do is cause malfunctions by bringing all the dirt to the receiver. Haven't shot an AR with a suppressor before and would like to hear some opinions why to get one or why not to.

Posted: 5/14/2005 12:05:23 PM EDT

[#5]

I'd have at least 2 for every rifle.

Posted: 5/14/2005 12:08:02 PM EDT

[#6]

Multiples for every firearm. You'd also see gun ranges in BETTER locations due to reduced noise.

You'd also see a decreases in hearing loss for shooters.

Posted: 5/14/2005 12:15:05 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Multiples for every firearm. You'd also see gun ranges in BETTER locations due to reduced noise.

You'd also see a decreases in hearing loss for shooters.

That's right.
I happen to live in a country that has nothing against sound suppressors. We can get those for 100-400 bucks. I was just wondering about those real life problems when shooting with a suppressor.

Posted: 5/14/2005 12:15:28 PM EDT

[#8]

Hell yes, I would own several. Actually, I have buying one already budgeted for late this year.

Posted: 5/14/2005 1:08:36 PM EDT

[#9]

I already have one for every firearm I own except the shotguns, even with all the hassles to legally do so. Getting them in the manner you describe would be great, but they are still worth it now regardless of the difficulty to acquire them.

I've never had any suppressor-caused malfunctions yet.

Posted: 5/14/2005 1:26:26 PM EDT

[#10]

Those are the opinions I wanted to hear. I've heard so much of people talking that ARs with suppressors is a combination that's never gonna work. Someone has even told me that after a 30rnd mag they have had so much powder residue that there were malfunctions after every few rounds.
Just liked to hear some good experiences with suppressors before I get one.
I know shooting is much nicer with one. With a Sako/Valmet anyway.

Posted: 5/14/2005 1:29:38 PM EDT

[#11]

I hate shooting my ar with a can, the blow back gets you from around the charging handle, even with glasses I got that shit in my eye, even my ear, half my face and my hair was black

Posted: 5/14/2005 1:31:34 PM EDT

[#12]

yes I would have several,

Posted: 5/14/2005 1:36:23 PM EDT

[#13]

PRI gas buster is mandatory equipment for AR with a can. If I could get em that easy, I'd have half a dozen.

Posted: 5/14/2005 2:47:58 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Those are the opinions I wanted to hear. I've heard so much of people talking that ARs with suppressors is a combination that's never gonna work. Someone has even told me that after a 30rnd mag they have had so much powder residue that there were malfunctions after every few rounds.

Nah, the main issue is they got very hot after a few magazines and full-auto usage. if you are just going to be plinking in semi-auto, you will be fine.

Posted: 5/14/2005 2:54:37 PM EDT

[#15]

Hell yeah!

Posted: 5/14/2005 2:55:05 PM EDT

[#16]

Oh hell yeah

Posted: 5/14/2005 3:30:13 PM EDT

[#17]

YES! even though i might not use it alot as one of the joys of shooting, to me, is the sound of the report, along with the recoil, watching the brass eject, and the muzzle flash.

Posted: 5/14/2005 3:47:53 PM EDT

[#18]

Who's the jackass that voted "no"?

Posted: 5/14/2005 4:08:29 PM EDT

[#19]

I'd have cases of them.

--where we live we can own them, if we can get a CLEO signoff-- but we're not allowed to use them. We have to take them out of state to actually use them

Posted: 5/14/2005 4:16:42 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Why wouldn't you.

If I didn't live in MI, obtaining a Suppressor would be the first
priority.

Posted: 5/14/2005 4:27:50 PM EDT

[#21]

Well duh, of course.

Posted: 5/15/2005 7:46:07 AM EDT

[#22]

If I didn't live in MI, obtaining a Suppressor would be the first
priority.

Ha! Here in WA, I can own one, after paying my fees and taxes, but it's my understanding it is illegal to then USE it while shooting. Explain that brilliant bit of tyranny!

"Here son, I want you to have this condom. However I am going to beat the ever loving Jesus out of you if you ever use it while screwing!"

Posted: 5/15/2005 8:29:32 AM EDT

[#23]

Why a suppressor? So when I shoot an intruder, I don't wake the kids.

Posted: 5/15/2005 8:30:12 AM EDT

[#24]

The answer is going to be'Yes'.

(This is a stupid poll)

Posted: 5/15/2005 9:09:43 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
The answer is going to be'Yes'.

(This is a stupid poll)

Of course,
There are several countires today where you can buy them at almost any harware store.
The logic there is that only an ignorant, inconsiderate ass would shoot without one, due to the noise and hearing damage associated with shooting.

I WISH it could change, here, but I doubt it ever will, as most of OUR gun laws are based on "Hollywood Fantasy".

Posted: 5/15/2005 9:13:33 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Why a suppressor? So when I shoot an intruder, I don't wake the kids.

umm, no

Posted: 5/15/2005 9:16:07 AM EDT

[#27]

Too many people who live near the ranges don't like the noise of the guns...that's why few ranges are being closed in Italy. IMHO sound suppressors would be a solution to this problem

Posted: 5/15/2005 9:41:45 AM EDT

[#28]

Yes, and for exactly the same reasons we have mufflers on our cars: Noise abatement -- pure and simple. Also, high frequency hearing loss from 40+ years of firing unsuppressed weapons is something I could have definitely gone without.

Posted: 5/15/2005 9:46:34 AM EDT

[#29]

Only 33 states allow sound suppressors for firearms.

CRC

Posted: 5/15/2005 9:52:34 AM EDT

[#30]

If I could I would . Probably not on every weapon , but
definitely on few .

Posted: 5/15/2005 10:37:13 AM EDT

[#31]

Hell yes.
No brainer.

Posted: 5/15/2005 10:39:00 AM EDT

[#32]

I voted no.

I ain't buying nothin' for my gun from 7-11!

Posted: 5/15/2005 10:39:11 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
Only 33 states allow sound suppressors for firearms.

CRC

Is the glass half-full or half-empty?

Only 16 states (+DC) do not allow silencers for civilian ownership.

http://www.advancedarmament.com/owners.asp

Posted: 5/15/2005 10:56:29 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
Multiples for every firearm. You'd also see gun ranges in BETTER locations due to reduced noise.

You'd also see a decreases in hearing loss for shooters.

+1,000

Posted: 5/15/2005 11:24:15 AM EDT

[#35]

Would be nice if it was as easy as buying bullets, but I doubt it ever will be. Sound Suppressors aren’t exactly covered under the 2nd Amendment and for those outside the clandestine community, it's only real purpose is fun. Would be hard to argue in front of the Supreme Court the necessity of easily attainable Sound Suppressors (Justice Thomas, access to Sound suppressors should be made easier to prevent the prairie dog community from being alerted when I’m whacking their buddies, or to prevent my kids from waking up when I’m shooting intruders).

At least they are legal though, unless you live behind enemy lines. It’s something I might look into once I get my next M4 project done

Posted: 5/15/2005 11:29:11 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Sound Suppressors aren’t exactly covered under the 2nd Amendment and for those outside the clandestine community, it's only real purpose is fun.

Sound suppressors help prevent hearing loss, and make shooting ranges less of a noise nuisance. That's why they are over-the-counter items in many European countries.

Posted: 5/15/2005 11:30:03 AM EDT

[#37]

Hell yeah, I'd grab a bunch just for good measure.

Posted: 5/15/2005 11:55:26 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Sound Suppressors aren’t exactly covered under the 2nd Amendment and for those outside the clandestine community, it's only real purpose is fun.

Sound suppressors help prevent hearing loss, and make shooting ranges less of a noise nuisance. That's why they are over-the-counter items in many European countries.

Wear proper ear protection, and none of my regular outdoor ranges are a nuisance to anyone as they are far from residential areas. Rightly so. Sound isnt a nuisance, flying bullets are. Properly designed and insolated indoor ranges can operate with minimal impact on nearby homes and businesses And do you really want to start modeling american gun laws after the europeans? I'm sure you dont.

Supressors are a luxury item at best, with a dubious classification under the 2ndA. Thankfully they are legal, and hopefully that will never change

Posted: 5/15/2005 12:00:37 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
Wear proper ear protection, and none of my regular outdoor ranges are a nuisance to anyone as they are far from residential areas. Rightly so. Sound isnt a nuisance, flying bullets are. Properly designed and insolated indoor ranges can operate with minimal impact on nearby homes and businesses And do you really want to start modeling american gun laws after the europeans? I'm sure you dont

Earmuffs are bulky and earplugs are annoying and uncomfortable. I'd rather use a suppressor.

US law on suppressors is retarded, I don't know why you're defending it. In this respect, yes, we ought to go the way of the Europeans, because they obviously don't buy into the Hollywood image of suppressors the way the US government seems to.

Posted: 5/15/2005 12:17:22 PM EDT

[#40]

Earmuffs are bulky and earplugs are annoying and uncomfortable. I'd rather use a suppressor.

No firearms safety instructor or manufacture would ever endorse a sound surppressor as a replacment to proper hearing protection

Posted: 5/15/2005 12:20:03 PM EDT

[#41]

Beyond the benefit of reducing the audible muzzle blast the additional benefits include: reduction to muzzle flash, as well as felt recoil, and reduced dust signature so as a shooter I don't have to put up with debris blasting up into my face when shooting from the prone.

I'll take those benefits any day of the week if I could go out tomorrow and buy the damn things unrestricted, would have been one of the first things I'd have gotten if I lived in a free state and not here in California. Several cans from integrally suppressed 10/22 or Ruger MKII, to the AR15s, to my 300WinMag, and my 308Win.

Everything I have heard on why sound suppressors were banned has more to do with poaching and the illegal taking of game during the depression years than it has to do with nefarious criminal acts against other humans.

God forbid we poach game animals or kill people with suppressed firearms, as if a person commited to doing one of those illegal acts would care one way or another if they were to break another law and simply manufacture one to use in their criminal act.

If they had the mind to do it what do they care? Break a law on manufacture, break a law on the use, and break a law on the act of poaching or murder. There are plenty of stupid badasses out there who likely don't care one way or another what laws they break. Let the biggest offense they commit be the poaching or the murder, abolish the stupid laws concerning sound suppressors and let the rest of us enjoy the merits of owning and using sound suppressors.

Even better, tell the states they cannot make laws going beyond the scope of federal law and make the 2nd Amendment be covered across the lay of the land using the 14th Amendment to assure we can all enjoy our rights equally.

Posted: 5/15/2005 12:41:43 PM EDT

[#42]

yes

Posted: 5/15/2005 4:24:05 PM EDT

[#43]

I'm buying one anyways, even though it's a pain in the ass.

Posted: 5/15/2005 4:42:50 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
(snip)
Everything I have heard on why sound suppressors were banned has more to do with poaching and the illegal taking of game during the depression years than it has to do with nefarious criminal acts against other humans.

God forbid we poach game animals or kill people with suppressed firearms, as if a person commited to doing one of those illegal acts would care one way or another if they were to break another law and simply manufacture one to use in their criminal act.

If they had the mind to do it what do they care? Break a law on manufacture, break a law on the use, and break a law on the act of poaching or murder. There are plenty of stupid badasses out there who likely don't care one way or another what laws they break. Let the biggest offense they commit be the poaching or the murder, abolish the stupid laws concerning sound suppressors and let the rest of us enjoy the merits of owning and using sound suppressors.

Even better, tell the states they cannot make laws going beyond the scope of federal law and make the 2nd Amendment be covered across the lay of the land using the 14th Amendment to assure we can all enjoy our rights equally.

+10^(10^100)

If more people had your widsom, the world in which we live would be very different, and dramatically better.

Posted: 5/16/2005 4:38:50 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Why a suppressor? So when I shoot an intruder, I don't wake the kids.

umm, no

Ummmm it's a joke.

UmmmmmmmmmmmK ?

Posted: 5/16/2005 5:11:56 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Only 33 states allow sound suppressors for firearms.

CRC

Is the glass half-full or half-empty?

Only 16 states (+DC) do not allow silencers for civilian ownership.

http://www.advancedarmament.com/owners.asp

$20 says you wouldn't say that if you lived here.

And, Variablebinary, sound definitely seems to be a major complaint of city folk living near gun ranges. If sound wasn't a nuisance, everyone would have straightpipes on their cars. It's called noise pollution............hmmmm, that sounds like a defense

WIZZO

Posted: 5/16/2005 5:12:37 PM EDT

[#47]

By this time next year I will have one for at least every caliber i have (22, 223, 308, 9, 45)....Ideally i would have one for every weapon, wether i used it all the time or not....but dang...the transfer taxes alone would be more then 3K.