22 replies to this topic

[Bud]

and I think Illinois residents should have legal access to them and I thik they need to be removed from the ATF's Class III listing

In support of that:

Silencers Are Legal

[Jeff Johnson]

Suppressor is more accurate but I agree with you. I've had opportunites to play with a few. the quietest one I ever shot was on either a 9mm uzi or a Mac10, and both had the "group therapy" option. interesting that sportsmen in some parts of europe/scandinavia are encouraged to use supressors!

[Machine]

I 100% agree. Our sport is noisy and they would certainly help. People watch too much TV and make it an emotional issue. Even if you are in a rural area, your neighbors would rather not hear your 50 BMG at full volume!

[Birdmang]

If you own land in a state that allows suppressors, can you get one, pay the tax and keep it there?

[Jeffrey]

Machine, on 21 February 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:

I 100% agree. Our sport is noisy and they would certainly help. People watch too much TV and make it an emotional issue. Even if you are in a rural area, your neighbors would rather not hear your 50 BMG at full volume!

I want a neighbor like that.  I would NOT complain.

They just have to rub the Illinois part in.

Edited by Jeffrey, 21 February 2012 - 11:53 AM.

[vezpa]

Birdmang, on 21 February 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:

If you own land in a state that allows suppressors, can you get one, pay the tax and keep it there?

NO.....

Must be the state you permanently live in or reside in (Drivers license or State ID).  You can either have the Sheriff sign off on it (which is not going to happen in most places) or show proof that you have established a TRUST.  $200 and you get the stamp.  I was going to get one in Florida but decided i don't need to draw any attention to or have more government officials from our poorly run ATF researching me.

If we can't even get carry here, this will never happen in Illinois.  I can see a Bill trying to pass with these a$$holes in Chicago. Good God....

They should be legal in all 50 states to cut down on noise, complaints etc.......

But a lot of things in this world should be different.  I truly do apologize for Chicago to the rest of you downstate, I feel your pain.

Edited by vezpa, 21 February 2012 - 01:07 PM.

[Xwing]

The argument officials use against silencers is “the bad guys use them in the movies”, and the thought that they really suppress the sound enough that it’s as the volume of a whisper.  

[Patriots & Tyrants]

Would be cool to put a surpressor on a good woodchuck rifle.....The whispering death is coming you lil wood chuck'n bastards!

Really though, it would be nice to shoot AR's and AK's at an indoor range without double hearing protection.

[Bud]

Patriots & Tyrants, on 21 February 2012 - 02:48 PM, said:

Would be cool to put a surpressor on a good woodchuck rifle.....The whispering death is coming you lil wood chuck'n bastards!

Really though, it would be nice to shoot AR's and AK's at an indoor range without double hearing protection.

Using a silencer (or suppressor more correctly as Jeff pointed out) makes a lot of sense to anyone who is as deaf as I am.

[Lou]

BudMan5, on 21 February 2012 - 04:03 PM, said:

Patriots & Tyrants, on 21 February 2012 - 02:48 PM, said:

Would be cool to put a surpressor on a good woodchuck rifle.....The whispering death is coming you lil wood chuck'n bastards!

Really though, it would be nice to shoot AR's and AK's at an indoor range without double hearing protection.

Using a silencer (or suppressor more correctly as Jeff pointed out) makes a lot of sense to anyone who is as deaf as I am.

I'm sorry --- what did you say?

[FST_Kent]

I've always wondered how air rifles get away with noise dampeners.

For example: http://www.gamowhisper.com/

[Ron]

I've never even seen one let alone heard one - just how much do they reduce the sound?  I know it's a general question but let's say on something like a 9mm?

Edited by Ron, 22 February 2012 - 11:18 AM.

[samy12386]

Ron, on 22 February 2012 - 11:17 AM, said:

I've never even seen one let alone heard one - just how much do they reduce the sound?  I know it's a general question but let's say on something like a 9mm?

It depends on the caliber mostly. From my experience .45 is a great round to suppress since it moves slower than sound already. It's not at all like the movies but can really distort your sense of where the shot came from because the secondary echo is almost non existent.

[Jeff Johnson]

Ron, on 22 February 2012 - 11:17 AM, said:

I've never even seen one let alone heard one - just how much do they reduce the sound?  I know it's a general question but let's say on something like a 9mm?

it depends. some cans are pretty effective at reducing noise. I've never shot a .22 rimfire with a can but I've shot 9mm and a .45 with the old large "wiper" type can that was like a somewhat loud pellet gun

[riversludge]

On a 10/22 with a can you can hear the bolt sliding.
Never shot one on anything bigger.
But on that .22 it was cool as hell..

[Tvandermyde]

Guys give me some time, there is a plan. But right now I'm working on right to carry, but there is a long term plan that is less than 5 years

[Erik_m_o]

I've lived in Louisiana where it is open carry. Not a lot of people had suppressors but some people did have them. Most of the people I talked to who had them said they got them to shoot varmint and not bother their neighbors. But they all had to pay the $200 and then buy the suppressor.

[blackhalo]

Ron, on 22 February 2012 - 11:17 AM, said:

I've never even seen one let alone heard one - just how much do they reduce the sound?  I know it's a general question but let's say on something like a 9mm?

I got to shoot a fully auto suppressed MP-5...  but because there was a guy shooting a mini-gun 20 feet away, everyone had ears on.  I couldn't barely hear the MP-5, so I imagine it's substantially quieter.

[bornhunter04]

I did a long range shoot last weekend in MO where some guys had suppressors on they're .308's.....I'm Jealous! First time, I've ever been around them!

[Stavros31]

Tvandermyde, on 22 February 2012 - 07:42 PM, said:

Guys give me some time, there is a plan. But right now I'm working on right to carry, but there is a long term plan that is less than 5 years

Great to hear Todd!!!

[SiliconSorcerer]

Xwing, on 21 February 2012 - 01:24 PM, said:

The argument officials use against silencers is “the bad guys use them in the movies”, and the thought that they really suppress the sound enough that it’s as the volume of a whisper.  

I believe the original law was enacted was to prevent pouching.

I've never heard one "sound " like on the movies other then on a 22 rifle you hear something, just not the sharp bang.

[Don Gwinn]

In some ways, suppressors are the opposite of machine guns.  Where machine guns are loud, extremely expensive, and usually good only for converting money into noise really fast, a good suppressor is a safety and teaching tool.  I want suppressed .22's badly, if only so I can use them to teach without hearing protection.

[Kipp Jones]

I have an idea, if in any state something is illegal or a right is denied, no TV show or movie can contain the illegal or right denied content....