5.56 Suppressed Questions

[LittleLebowski]

ETA: I will add, Josh is 100% on with businesses closing down. Unfortunately.

Yup, Surefire's financial woes are well known.

[rob_s]

Buy what you want. Enjoy it. You've earned your money and you get to decide how to make spend it.

I'd hate to think I'd ever need to justify all the items I've ever purchased.

Being told you NEED to be able to justify suppressors (or anything else for that matter) is total bullshit.

You don't need to justify it to us or anyone else.

Since this is likely a reaction to my post...

I have no issue with people buying cans because they simply want to. As you point out, it's your money, you burn it how you want to. In fact, I'm a HUGE proponent of guns=fun.

But...

What I take issue with is the "I need this to do that" mentality that's so pervasive in the gun hobbyist (and, sadly, gun professional) world. People are looking to add meaning, value, purpose, etc. where there simply is none.

Buy what you want, have fun with it, but don't confuse that with some sort of tactical ninja (or any other, for that matter) need. And be honest, both with yourself and those from whom you request advice, as to your actual motivations for your purchases.

[LittleLebowski]

I had no idea that rob_s takes exception with the "tactical ninjas" in gun forums since he's never mentioned it before, ever

[joshs]

Since this is likely a reaction to my post...

I have no issue with people buying cans because they simply want to. As you point out, it's your money, you burn it how you want to. In fact, I'm a HUGE proponent of guns=fun.

But...

What I take issue with is the "I need this to do that" mentality that's so pervasive in the gun hobbyist (and, sadly, gun professional) world. People are looking to add meaning, value, purpose, etc. where there simply is none.

Buy what you want, have fun with it, but don't confuse that with some sort of tactical ninja (or any other, for that matter) need. And be honest, both with yourself and those from whom you request advice, as to your actual motivations for your purchases.

Why not use a rifle suppressor? If it weren't for the NFA, suppressor ownership would likely be extremely common, especially for hunting and shooting on outdoor ranges is populated areas. Most rifles cause hearing damage when used with only one form of hearing protection (plugs, muffs, suppressor). Many people suffer hearing damage at or even slightly under the 140 "safe" OSHA level. There are some situations where it is difficult to wear hearing protection, so it's nice to have it on the gun.

[Matt O]

Couple of things that just occurred to me re-reading this...

1) no mention in the OP of what you want the cans for. That might help people make suggestions. If it's just because you think they might be harder to get in the future then just buy whatever looks cool or makes you feel good.

Now that I'm to the point of deciding whether to get the 5.56 suppressor, however, I'm beginning to wonder if this is a purchase that makes sense and has a specific use or am I just doing this because I'm caught up in getting NFA purchases in, potentially unnecessary ones, before the 41P deadline?

I realize that part of that question is a personal one for me to decide, but in general, given that 5.56 isn't hearing safe when suppressed, is the juice worth the squeeze? Is this just a fun/novelty item? Do people usually shoot their SBR's suppressed vs unsuppressed?

See quoted section of the OP above. I don't have a specific use for it and am trying to ascertain whether the suppression of 5.56 ammo is generally seen to be worth it.

Some great points made that I hadn't thought of regarding suppressor durability - particularly in regards to multi-caliber use suppressors, as well as the hassle of switching cans between guns, especially when hot.

Being told you NEED to be able to justify suppressors (or anything else for that matter) is total bullshit.

You don't need to justify it to us or anyone else.

To me this isn't a justification process in the sense of defending a decision. It's simply an analysis of whether this decision is worthwhile given the fact that A) resources are finite and B) the presence of opportunity costs. And if something is a ton of "fun," that alone can serve as sufficient justification provided there are resources available. Hell, this entire hobby isn't one that provides much in terms of quantifiable value for most people, but by God is it fun.

You're NOVA. I can get you down to F'Burg with LL and Hansohn Bros if you want to play with some and decide, for yourself, if the juice is worth the squeeze.

I think it is.

Well if you gentleman decide to do a range/suppressor day, I would most certainly be happy to join. Once I get my ass over to Hansohn to pick up the Surge, at least I'd have my one lone suppressor to add to the mix.

[rob_s]

Why not use a rifle suppressor? If it weren't for the NFA, suppressor ownership would likely be extremely common, especially for hunting and shooting on outdoor ranges is populated areas. Most rifles cause hearing damage when used with only one form of hearing protection (plugs, muffs, suppressor). Many people suffer hearing damage at or even slightly under the 140 "safe" OSHA level. There are some situations where it is difficult to wear hearing protection, so it's nice to have it on the gun.

I hear that whole "if it weren't for the NFA..." thing a lot. But there IS an NFA. Might as well wish for Bernie Sanders to get elected and start handing out free money. It's a silly argument.

A decent rifle suppressor is going to run $700-$1500 with tax and other fees. They add weight, screw with the balance, dirty up the gun faster, push gas into the shooter's face, and/or add a layer of complication and fiddle-fuck to try and eliminate the mechanical and gas issues, and even then you're not guaranteed to have solved them. All of these things are, in fact, selling points to a lot of people looking for ways to burn cash and time. I used to be one of them too. I'm not anymore.

Again, if people think they "need" a can, by all means buy one. If people simply want a can, by all means buy one. But don't confuse the latter for the former, and don't simply assume you're going to get all the benefits (reduced noise) with none of the downsides (still not hearing safe, expensive, heavy, legal restrictions, fouling, disrupting function, etc.). If you've got it all sorted out in your head, buy 30 of them if that's what makes you happy.

I own three cans myself. The 5.56 was essentially a giant waste of money. The 9mm is amusing as it's on a 9mm AR, and the .22 is something that may prove useful now that I have a larger yard, in a more rural setting, with pests that may need dispatched. I could do without all three and never notice they were gone. In fact, at one point the .22 can had rolled into a crevice in the safe and I thought I *had* lost the stupid thing.

[LittleLebowski]

I hear that whole "if it weren't for the NFA..." thing a lot. But there IS an NFA. Might as well wish for Bernie Sanders to get elected and start handing out free money. It's a silly argument.

A decent rifle suppressor is going to run $700-$1500 with tax and other fees. They add weight, screw with the balance, dirty up the gun faster, push gas into the shooter's face, and/or add a layer of complication and fiddle-fuck to try and eliminate the mechanical and gas issues, and even then you're not guaranteed to have solved them. All of these things are, in fact, selling points to a lot of people looking for ways to burn cash and time. I used to be one of them too. I'm not anymore.

Again, if people think they "need" a can, by all means buy one. If people simply want a can, by all means buy one. But don't confuse the latter for the former, and don't simply assume you're going to get all the benefits (reduced noise) with none of the downsides (still not hearing safe, expensive, heavy, legal restrictions, fouling, disrupting function, etc.). If you've got it all sorted out in your head, buy 30 of them if that's what makes you happy.

I own three cans myself. The 5.56 was essentially a giant waste of money. The 9mm is amusing as it's on a 9mm AR, and the .22 is something that may prove useful now that I have a larger yard, in a more rural setting, with pests that may need dispatched. I could do without all three and never notice they were gone. In fact, at one point the .22 can had rolled into a crevice in the safe and I thought I *had* lost the stupid thing.

To be fair, following this line of reasoning, you could probably also lose many of your guns and never "need" them. The odds are extremely high that you'll never actually need a gun period. It's a slippery slope.

[Josh Runkle]

Why not use a rifle suppressor? If it weren't for the NFA, suppressor ownership would likely be extremely common, especially for hunting and shooting on outdoor ranges is populated areas. Most rifles cause hearing damage when used with only one form of hearing protection (plugs, muffs, suppressor). Many people suffer hearing damage at or even slightly under the 140 "safe" OSHA level. There are some situations where it is difficult to wear hearing protection, so it's nice to have it on the gun.

Personally, I buy rifle suppressors for flash suppression, concussion reduction in closed spaces and reduction in felt recoil. I don't buy them for sound reduction. Signature reduction is different than sound reduction (one is volume, one is ability to identify by sound from a distance), and I can understand why someone would like that for "tacticool" reasons, but that's not really one of my main reasons.

"Silencing", for me, has nothing to do with buying a rifle suppressor.

[Robinson]

I recently bought a rifle suppressor because I already have hearing problems and I think I will be less likely to make the problems worse with the suppressor when shooting at the range. And in the unlikely event I ever need to fire the rifle without hearing protection, even though with the suppressor it's still not 'hearing safe' it will hopefully be a little less damaging. Words like 'tactical' or 'stealthy' didn't factor into my purchasing decision in the least.

[joshs]

I hear that whole "if it weren't for the NFA..." thing a lot. But there IS an NFA. Might as well wish for Bernie Sanders to get elected and start handing out free money. It's a silly argument.

A decent rifle suppressor is going to run $700-$1500 with tax and other fees. They add weight, screw with the balance, dirty up the gun faster, push gas into the shooter's face, and/or add a layer of complication and fiddle-fuck to try and eliminate the mechanical and gas issues, and even then you're not guaranteed to have solved them. All of these things are, in fact, selling points to a lot of people looking for ways to burn cash and time. I used to be one of them too. I'm not anymore.

My point was that most people don't realize the "need" a suppressor until too late because the damage to their hearing is already done. One of the biggest hurdle to suppressor hunting legislation has been game wardens claiming they have hunted their whole lives with no earpro without hearing damage. Many people simply don't recognize the damage because it is a gradual change unless the hearing loss is accompanied by tinnitus.

I can't stand to wear ear protection while hunting, I've tried to put it on right before a shot, but even then it's muffs only with a so-so seal because I put them on while trying to hold a rifle while not making too much noise. I also dislike hunting with dogs for this reason because it destroys their hearing. Every rifle shot we are exposed to without earpro does permanent irreversible damage to our ears. I consider being able to hear later in life a "need."

I mentioned the NFA to address the need/want argument. The fact that getting suppressors is a hassle doesn't affect whether they are needed or not.