Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Home Defense with Supressor?

Discussion in 'Free Fire Zone' started by DARKSHADOW, Mar 4, 2010.


    DARKSHADOW My Work Hobby CLM

    Aug 10, 2005
    Would using a supressor on a home defense gun be a bad idea if drawn into court?
    I've heard about not using a supressor fo ccw, and I have no problem with that, seeing that it would be a real P.I.T.A. to conceal. Not to mention how people might think you are trying to sneak around looking for trouble, because only bad guys in movies use supressors. :upeyes:

    But for home defense, wouldn't it make sense to use a supressor? You are indoors, guns are very loud, and you're not going to have time to give everyone in the house ear protection while you are trying to stay alive.
    To me it would only make sense to have a supressor at the ready on a home defense gun?

    What, or is there any reason for this being a bad idea? I personaly would not want to go deff or cause a family member to go deff because I had to use deadly force. Specialy if I had the means to prevent it.

    What say you?
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2010


    Jan 15, 2010
    The only bad idea I can think of is if the intruder sneaks up on you he has a nice long barrel to grab a hold of.

  3. crazypilot

    crazypilot ERAU Alumni '05

    May 21, 2007
    Las Vegas, NV
    It would be hard to say. Many see the "assassin" side of a suppressor use but I think you're lawyer would paint a good picture for the jury regarding hearing safety. Minimizing noise helps protect yours and your family's hearing.
  4. You will find many people who have paranoid fantasy about having to explain this in court, but you will never find one person who can point to an actual case file where it was a problem.
  5. ancient_serpent


    Jun 6, 2008
    I'm just kinda guessing here, but I wouldn't think there are alot of cases to be found, where a suppressed firearm is used to fend off a home invasion...
  6. nnickatnight


    Jan 7, 2008
    DFW, Texas
    I'd have to agree with one of the posters, there are too many rumors about this or that and no facts to back it up. The arguing on trigger jobs is endless and never any hard facts to support it. My only issue might be how a negative court outcome would effect the NFA community as a whole. I personally would grab one of my shorty shotguns for an in house type incident, but I would certainly sweat the court proceedings!
  7. r2kba

    r2kba Relax

    Jun 13, 2000
    South Texas
    No, not simple because of the can. If it happens to be attached to your AR15 when you blast some asshat at 2am busting in your door, GOOD!

    Would I keep a can attached to my .45 on the night stand intentionally? NO!

    I really dont mind if it's loud. I doubt I'll hear it anyways.
  8. Liff


    Mar 17, 2006
    What about the bg shooting at you? Down range is much louder than behind the gun, so....

    I do not think a can on a hd gun is a good or bad thing. Probably a little better of an idea than one of those pistol bayonets.
  9. r2kba

    r2kba Relax

    Jun 13, 2000
    South Texas

    Yeah I think in general, folks are better off without it in split second defense situations. Auditory perception is greatly reduced during adrenalin dumps.

    But with that said, as I said, it's not going to hurt per-say.
  10. dday27


    May 15, 2007
    Its bought and paid for along with the 200.00 stamp, I would use mine if it happened to be attached during a home invasion
  11. Hoser

    Hoser Ninja

    May 22, 2002
    I wouldnt just in case my firearm gets impounded for a while during the investigation I would not want to be without my can.
  12. r2kba

    r2kba Relax

    Jun 13, 2000
    South Texas

    This is unlikely if it's a good shoot. Any evidence would be taken from the actor in this case such as their weapon. A legal defensive use of a firearm doesn't automatically mean the gun-owners gun is confiscated, and in most cases I would say this is not the norm.
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2010
  13. rockapede


    Sep 3, 2009
    From what I've seen it's most definitely the norm to seize the firearm. It's not uncommon at all for "cut and dried" home invasion shootings to turn out to be a drug deal gone south or some other scenario that turns it into a murder. If the initial investigation didn't retain the weapon, it's bad news.
  14. roberev


    Mar 31, 2009
    Police absolutely will take the weapon into possession as evidence, at least until a final decision on whether to prosecute is made.

    I don't see any impediment to using a suppressor from a legal standpoint. If the shooting is justified, what difference does it make if the gun went "BANG!" or "Phhhwap"?

    If you're in that scenario, why not remove the silencer prior to police arrival? Take the suppressor, leave the gun [for the police].
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2012
  15. Glockdude1

    Glockdude1 Federal Member CLM

    May 24, 2000
  16. rockapede


    Sep 3, 2009
    Holy cow, I just realized how much of a necropost that was. Sorry gents.
  17. roberev


    Mar 31, 2009
    Ditto. I wasn't looking at dates either.


    Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2
  18. Armchair Commando

    Armchair Commando Long Range Guru

    Jan 10, 2006
    Bunker in the Midwest
    unless your shooting a 10.5 inch sbr ar15 their so damn loud its crazy.

    Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2012
  19. JBaird22


    Nov 18, 2005
    If deadly force is authorized it doesn't matter if it's done with a firearm or a shovel. Getting wrapped around the axle over a silencer is not the issue.

    I say that to point this out: the media is going to paint you as the devil for shooting someone with a short barreled rifle and a silencer irregardless if the things are legally held or if you bought them off the corner.
  20. If the suppressor is purchased legally why would there be a problem? Have you ever heard a gun in a house? I have and they seem louder than outside. Ears ring for a week if it is a large caliber.