Why Suppressors?

[Wabatuckian]

I'll preface this by saying I have nothing at all against suppressors, and that I of course don't believe they lead to more crime yadda yadda.

What I do wonder is why there's so much interest in them. They make the host firearms longer and bulkier, and don't negate the need for hearing protection, especially if you're firing supersonic loads.

I suppose I could see using a subsonic .358 (or similar) load for deer hunting, but last I knew, suppressors were not legal for hunting.

What's the fascination with suppressors? What am I overlooking?

 

[Tactically Fat]

The real question is: "Why NOT suppressors?"

 

[Wabatuckian]

The real question is: "Why NOT suppressors?"

For me, anyway, I'd rather just spend the money on another gun.

 

[edwea]

Once you start shooting suppressed, the answer will be clear. And hey, if it makes the gun too long and bulky you can always prop it up with your purse!

 

[Tactically Fat]

For me, anyway, I'd rather just spend the money on another gun.

If it makes you feel better, you've got to fill out a 4473 for a suppressor, too. Probably two of them. That's like "extra" gun-ness.

 

[Wabatuckian]

If it makes you feel better, you've got to fill out a 4473 for a suppressor, too. Probably two of them. That's like "extra" gun-ness.

I've only filled out a 4473 twice in the past 10 years or so. Not a fan.

The only reason I did was because I needed an LCP of some sort and wasn't back to INGO yet, and my daughter was ready for a rimfire rifle and I couldn't find a purple one outside the gun store.

 

[Aszerigan]

last I knew, suppressors were not legal for hunting.

Silencers are legal for hunting in Indiana. It became legal in 2013.

Personally, I use suppressors for a number of reasons. First, they mitigate recoil, so my 45-70 isn't such a beast to shoot. Also, we live on decent acreage but have neighbors 1/4 mile away. They shoot occasionally, but I shoot a lot more, and I think it's polite to cut down on the noise pollution in the otherwise peaceful woods. I also don't need everyone within a mile of me knowing I'm shooting NFA guns.

Shooting outdoors, even 308 etc, suppressors make rifles hearing safe. They force whatever blast is left forward and away from the shooter. Makes it more pleasant. I'm not against hearing protection of course, but I'd prefer to not wear it if I don't need to.

Also, not gonna lie, the coolness factor of shooting suppressed never gets old. It's just plain fun. Sounds cliche, but it's a real reason.

YMMV but that's why I use suppressors. Other people may have different opinions.

 

[BJHay]

Once you start shooting suppressed, the answer will be clear.

I think this is true. I bought a Wolfman 9mm suppressor and it's more fun to shoot than I expected. Depending on the load, the sound of the bullet hitting steel is louder than the sound of the shot. I had no intention of using it on anything other than my pistol but it has a side rating of .300 BLK, so I had to buy a .300 BLK and then slapped on a cheap scope and an IR viewer. I can now hit steel at 100 yds with almost no visible light and no sound. To me that's fun.

I bought it on a whim thinking it may end up as a safe queen but I shoot it a lot and now I'm thinking of buying one for my .22s.

 

[KLB]

If you are firing subsonics, you do not need ear pro. Depending upon the weapon and round being used, some supers are hearing safe as well.

When I have non-shooters over to shoot, they always love the suppressed weapons the most.

I believe suppressors have been legal for hunting in IN for a while now. Looks like since 2013.

Turner Valentine, LLP | Law Blog | Hunting with Sound Suppressors

Turner Valentine, LLP Law Blog - Hunters may now use sound suppressors to hunt game in Indiana.

warsawlaw.com

By attaching suppressors to firearms, hunters can help protect themselves against hearing loss caused by the sound of a gun. They also can reduce noise pollution and disturbances for those that live and work near hunting areas. Additionally, hunting with sound suppressors can lessen recoil to make for more precise shooting and fewer wounded animals.

 

[Wabatuckian]

Silencers are legal for hunting in Indiana. It became legal in 2013.

This is good to know. It also bothers me that it's been this long since I read through the gun laws. I didn't realize, and I used to go through them yearly. Thank you.

 

[Aszerigan]

This is good to know. It also bothers me that it's been this long since I read through the gun laws. I didn't realize, and I used to go through them yearly. Thank you.

If you started reading the gun laws in Indiana today, you'd be done about the time they were all changed anyway. Kind of like painting the Tappan Zee Bridge in New York. The finish at one end and start at the other again.

 

[AndreusMaximus]

Have you ever shot suppressed? I'm going to guess not, as I don't think anyone who has ever had the experience would ask "why suppressors?"

It was only very recently that I got to shoot with a suppressor (we'll, actually a few different suppressors) thanks to a friend of mine who let me try his out. The difference is something you can't understand/believe until you've tried it; it just makes shooting so much more fun and pleasant. And even supersonic rounds like 223 benefit surprisingly much in rounds reduction.

Aside from the fun factor and how much more pleasant it makes things for yourself as the shooter at the range, the main practical reasons I see for it are:

1) Less nuisance for neighbors
2) Extremely useful for hunting, when you generally don't want to be wearing earpro, so any sound mitigation is a huge plus
3) At matches it makes thing 100x nicer for those you're shooting with. Last February I got to participate in a long range shooting match for the first time. Of course everyone is wearing earpro, but the difference in suppressed/unsuppressed is still night and day. When your trying to focus on that 700 yard target, the guy next to you shooting suppressed 308 sounds like a mild thump through your earpro, as opposed to a loud, distracting bang if unsuppressed.

If you haven't yet, you really should find someone who can let you try one out. Even if you're like me right now, and don't have room in your budget/time for getting one yourself right now, the experience is just so fun.

Now I just need to find someone who can let me try full auto...

 

[Aszerigan]

If you haven't yet, you really should find someone who can let you try one out. Even if you're like me right now, and don't have room in your budget/time for getting one yourself right now, the experience is just so fun.

Now I just need to find someone who can let me try full auto...

I have both and welcome visitors with appointments.

 

[Jhammers]

My neighbors would probably like it if I had a suppressor

 

[Aszerigan]

And hey, if it makes the gun too long and bulky you can always prop it up with your purse!

Ok, seriously belly laughed at that one. Well done, man.

 

[jagee]

I bought my first one to use while hunting. SilencerCo Hybrid for a 308. It can be used with various other calibers as well, so it was going to be my "do it all" can and I wouldn't get any more.

Long story short...I have more.

 

[Rookie]

Aszerigan pointed out the biggest plus. The first year my hunting partner and I hunted coyotes, I was hunting suppressed and he wasn't. I flat out told him that the next year he had to have a suppressor or I wasn't hunting with him. I could shoot all night long and not have an issue. One shot from him and my ears were ringing.

 

[indyblue]

I've shot suppressed before and yes, it's interesting and fun. But unless/until they are removed from NFA I have no interest in going through all the legal "hoops" and expense of registering one. They shouldn't even be this controlled and since the last several SCOTUS decisions I don't get why (legally) they still are since they are in "common use" with a couple million of them owned.

And how are they even considered dangerous destructive devices? They have no moving parts, don't explode and cannot harm anyone. In Europe, if you hunt without one you are considered rude and inconsiderate.

 

[Aszerigan]

They shouldn't even be this controlled and since the last several SCOTUS decisions I don't get why (legally) they still are since they are in "common use" with a couple million of them owned.

And how are they even considered dangerous destructive devices? They have no moving parts, don't explode and cannot harm anyone.

While I whole-heartedly agree with you, this isn't the point of this thread. The OP asked what the fascination is, not whether or not we agree with the governmental standing on them.

I don't understand why everything has to devolve into political bitching on INGO these days. It was a straight-forward question from the OP, not a chance to pound the political sand. There's a section for that.

 

[indyblue]

While I whole-heartedly agree with you, this isn't the point of this thread. The OP asked what the fascination is, not whether or not we agree with the governmental standing on them.

I don't understand why everything has to devolve into political bitching on INGO these days. It was a straight-forward question from the OP, not a chance to pound the political sand. There's a section for that.

Sorry it came out that way, not what I meant to do to the thread. The first reply was:

The real question is: "Why NOT suppressors?"

So, that was my reply to that question. It was a poor response and I am very unskilled at putting my thoughts into words most of the time