Posted on 06/05/2014 8:52:08 AM PDT by rktman
Cloaked in shadows, the international hit man quietly screws the evil looking "silencer" onto the barrel of his revolver.
The target emerges.
He aims and squeezes the trigger.
The suppressor emits a barely audible pffft — a low pop that's quieter than a cat's purr.
That's how suppressors are portrayed in film — and one reason why they're so rigorously controlled — but there's a few problems with that scenario.
One, international hit men don't really exist. Two, unless it's a Russian M1895 Nagant with its gas-seal cylinder, you can't suppress a revolver. Three, while they reduce some noise, suppressors can't completely muffle a firearm's report.
(Excerpt) Read more at heraldtribune.com ...
Yeah, I had to eat my words when I first heard that suppressor. It’s really good.
We keep trying here in MN. Only DNR and a few specialized SWAT units are allowed them.
It’s a muffler. Take ‘em off your car, you get FINED.
Own one for something louder and you go to JAIL.
Makes no sense.
It makes sense logistically, and it is a change I'm guessing even the most ardent ATF agent would support.
Logic and freedom for the masses are not things that even semi-ardent BATFE agents would consider.
It costs the suppressor manufactures nowhere near $500 to produce them. If it weren’t for the NFA, suppressors would be available for $50 at any gun store.
Nobody’s mentioned it here, but the really important thing about suppressors is they preserve your hearing. After years on firing lines in the Army with nothing but ineffective plastic plugs, I have severe hearing loss. There’s a pattern to hearing loss from firearms - the offside ear (left ear for a righthander)has more damage then the other one. I wish we had used suppressors on the firing line back in the day, then I wouldn’t have to wear hearing aids now. Remember Reagan had hearing loss from being next to blanks fired in the movies.
The reason suppressors are banned is because poachers used them back in the 1920’s to quietly take game animals. Hunters risk their hearing because the government is worried about poachers. Like most government rules, the suppressor ban doesn’t accomplish the intended effect. Poachers use .22’s because they’re quiet. But .22s wound more game than larger calibers so game animals aren’t protected.
One more regulation where the object of the regulation isn’t accomplished - game predation is made worse. Innocent bystanders, hunters and shooters, lose their hearing. And the government loses money on the deal. Everybody loses, very Obama like.
No doubt. Seems like every time I had my physical for work the doc always asked about shooting after the hearing test. That and playing R&R for many years at uh, shall we say, elevated levels (amp to 11!!), for sure hurt my hearing. I have more loss in the left and the tinitus, I’ve learned to live with.
Now this is a “common sense gun law” that I can get behind. Supressors for all!
“Personally, there are subsonic bullets (especially in 22 rimfire caliber) that are already exceedingly quite (quiet)...”
Yes, just received an order of 500 Aquilla Super Extra 40 gr Subsonic 22lr...varmints beware! Will try them this weekend using Ruger Mark I and Ruger 10/22.
Out of respect for my neighbors, you know... :)
“Now this is a “common sense gun law” that I can get behind. Suppressors for all!”
Yup, suppress the legislation against suppressors!
(And while at it suppress ATF...otherwise known as gunrunners anonymous, i.e. the Fast and Furious boys and girls)
BOOM! I mean phhfffttt! :>}
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.