I haven't been able to get excited about buying a suppressor. It isn't that I don't understand the benefits. I have a problem with the artificial expense involved with acquiring one. Paying a tax for the privilege of owning one - no thanks. As for the purchase price - it's a chunk of machined metal with average precision. There's no reason for one to cost more than $250. When I see $500 - 1000 units...I'm just not seeing the value.
Is anyone else meh about suppressors?
- Thread starter Kobayashi
- Start date
I definitely agree about the $200 stamp bit. It seems silly. I think it's a great idea for a HD gun but otherwise it isn't worth the cost for me. I would have 3-5 of them if the total cost for one was in the $400-600 range including the BS tax.
I felt the same way for a very long time, but after trying some at the range, I became more interested. Personally, my reason was for HD and for when I shoot at people's property where they don't want to piss off the neighbors with excess gunfire.
I'm having the same conflict though about SBR'ing a rifle; I'm just not able to justify the $200 cost for a SBR
I'm having the same conflict though about SBR'ing a rifle; I'm just not able to justify the $200 cost for a SBR
The biggest benefit for me is teaching new shooters. For one, you won't develop as many bad habits if you can reduce concussion and noise. It makes the experience a lot more fun for the new shooter. Secondly, it's helping to erode the old perception that suppressors are used by bad guy tv villains for assassination. Judging by the comments by BO, we still have a ways to go. They are out marketing against us, we can't fold.
If cans were more easily obtained, I'd be enjoying silence right now instead of the constant cicada chorus.
If cans were more easily obtained, I'd be enjoying silence right now instead of the constant cicada chorus.
The higher end ones are made of more exspensive materials such as inconel and stellite.
I don't like shooting with out a suppressor now.
I don't like shooting with out a suppressor now.
I don't know why, but two things always fascinated me as a kid- suppressors and automatic out the front knives. Just always liked them.
And I find the centerfire rifles much easier to shoot accurately with the can attached. The .308 bolt gun is a huge difference. The AR is different too- but more in a gassy-hazy-can't-breathe kind of way.
And I find the centerfire rifles much easier to shoot accurately with the can attached. The .308 bolt gun is a huge difference. The AR is different too- but more in a gassy-hazy-can't-breathe kind of way.
I was once in the same position not to long ago. But once I shot suppressed it just isn't the same now. Range time would be a lot more enjoyable if everybody was shooting suppressed.
I agree the stamp few is a damn joke. I can only hope that the hearing safe act passes and I get some money back.
I agree the stamp few is a damn joke. I can only hope that the hearing safe act passes and I get some money back.
I think there is a great case to be made for hunting with a suppressor; it really benefits everyone.
I want a bolt gun this year for the sole purpose of hanging a can on it.
I love em. I have one for home defense also and only have 4 up to now. I want at least 1-2 more.
Same way bout SBR's i have several and would have more if i could afford it. Convenient and manageable. The 1 time $200 is worth it to have exactly what i want. I understand that most believe we shouldnt even need to pay the $200 to have a few inhes less or a few DB's less, but as thats the current price and law i will comply as me whining about it wont change anything.
Same way bout SBR's i have several and would have more if i could afford it. Convenient and manageable. The 1 time $200 is worth it to have exactly what i want. I understand that most believe we shouldnt even need to pay the $200 to have a few inhes less or a few DB's less, but as thats the current price and law i will comply as me whining about it wont change anything.
I would never shoot unsuppressed again if I could afford it. Honestly, I'm pissed that it took me 30 years to discover how awesome they really are.
I remember arguing your same argument with @PewPewPewCo a couple of years ago. He brought his up for me to try out and a year later I owned 5 of them.
I remember arguing your same argument with @PewPewPewCo a couple of years ago. He brought his up for me to try out and a year later I owned 5 of them.
After you start shooting suppressed, you get really pissed when folks show up at range with their noisy ass guns. I hate having to put my ears on when someone else shows up to shoot.
I know, more dreaded regulation - but given the current state of affairs I would almost prefer it if the government made suppressors mandatory for certain situations. It would likely have a positive effect on pricing. From a government perspective there would be a public health benefit.
Government try's to limit civilian ownership. You protest by not owning. Government wins
I'm not really protesting, but it certainly has the same effect. They have successfully priced me out of the market.
DoglegArms
Silencer Dealer of 2015, 2016, 2017
I'll give you a few reasons:
Materials aren't free.
Machining equipment isnt free.
Skilled labor is not free.
Running a business is not free.
Do you think silencer manf shouldn't profit? Dealers shouldn't profit either?
I seriously don't get the anti silencer/NFA sentiment that goes around here. There's a ton of shit I don't like but I don't start threads about it.
And before someone comments that my opinion is biased and doesn't count, my profit margin to members on this forum is 1/2 to 3/4 less than normal.
I like 1911s as much as the next guy. I own two myself. And for the record - I never said that Glock was THE best, only that they make a solid weapon.