Earlier today, Smith & Wesson revealed its new suppressor-ready Performance Center 9mm models. As I pointed out, they cost a pretty penny: nearly a grand in the hand. Given the hassle and expense of buying a silencer (as its inventor called it), Smith’s decision to put a threaded barrel on their highest price 9mm handguns makes perfect sense. But what if the recently mooted Hearing Protection Act – which would make buying a suppressor as easy as purchasing a red dot or a muzzle brake – became law? (I’d love to hear President Obama’s reason for vetoing it!) Would you buy a suppressor? How many? For what? How much would you be willing to spend? Would you buy a threaded barrel for an existing gun or buy a new suppressor-ready model? Do you already have one or more suppressors? Basically, are you suppressor ready?
A lone wolf barrel is stupid cheap and works perfectly on my Glock 22…. I would buy a suppressor read Sig P320 just because so far I don’t think they have much of an aftermarket supply of barrels….
But a grand? I dunno, there had better be something more than a threaded barrel and night sites on it for that kind of cash….
It’s also optics ready, judging by the name. Compare that to FNX 45 Tactical, which retails for $1200 in my area.
2 of my guns are suppressor ready. I’ll make another 2 ready as well if this passes.
when it becomes an illinois option, the boy’s charger takedown will be so equipped. the threaded barrel is one reason we acquired it.
Best part about the federal suppressor federal is that it includes state preemption.
The Illinois Senate version is seeing some movement this month. On the plus side, if the federal version passes, it will make the Illinois version irrelevant as it includes a federal preemption amendment.
Can you link a source for that preemption information? I’m really looking for it but haven’t seen it yet.
Check out section 4. I may be reading it wrong, but it looks like a state preemption to me.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/3799/text
I believe that you are correct. Though, it doesn’t preempt any ban on threaded barrels…
I see integrally suppressed barrel kits making a killing.
Hold on a sec, after re-reading section 4 a few more times (I’m kinda slow with legal-ese) it seems that it is not a preemption on suppressor banning laws, but instead a preemption of suppressor taxation laws.
They’d still be banned in places that they are banned, just tax free in other states?
Sec. 4 stipulates that laws against ” making, transferring, using, *possessing*, or transporting” a silencer “shall have no force or effect.”
SEC. 4. PREEMPTION OF CERTAIN STATE LAWS IN RELATION TO FIREARM SILENCERS.
Section 927 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: “Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, a law of a State or a political subdivision of a State that, as a condition of lawfully making, transferring, using, possessing, or transporting a firearm silencer in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, imposes a tax on any such conduct, or a marking, recordkeeping or registration requirement with respect to the firearm silencer, shall have no force or effect.”.
I don’t know if it works this way, but just shortening all the phrasing reads like this:
“State and locals laws that require taxing, marking, or registration of silencers as a pre-requisite of their ownership or possession have no force or effect.”
To me that doesn’t sound as much like a magic wand that legalizes silencers everywhere as much as it says you don’t have to get a tax stamp for them… Maybe I’m overthinking this.
@Chrispy
You’re correct as far as the taxation goes – but read a bit further, it also preempts regulations for marking or registering. So, the State has no real enforceable way to prevent you from building or buying one. It would be good to see the bill amended to just flat out preempt any laws on possession or use.
Washington State was funny that way for years – it was legal to own or possess a silencer, but illegal to actually fire rounds through it. Even for cops (although that was ignored with impunity). That law was changed a few years ago, and silencer sales boomed, so to speak.
My first would be for my home defense pistol. Then my AR. Then for my .22.
We shoot a lot. Target, hunting, training, blowing crap up. I have a .22, a 7.62, and a .45 silencers. So much fun! Worth the hassle.
Currently I own 4 with a 5th in process. With that one, EVERY freaking thing I own will be suppressor ready. A bit much? Maybe. Too much time and money? Definitely. But it just makes practicing so much more enjoyable. Which means I’m more apt to do it on the regular. Suppressors made me a better marksman. YMMV.
Are you suppressor ready? Yes, yes I am.
Nope
Unless they are located in the middle of nowhere, outdoor ranges draw noise complaints from neighbors. If this passes, I expect suppressors will become required equipment.
They should’ve been around back when Cutts Compensators were the thing to have on a trap gun. Actually made the gun louder. Didn’t want to stand in the lane next to one if you could avoid it. Probably why all us old farts are half-deaf now.
The clock is ticking on my wait. One month down for my Omega. I have 4 rifles waiting for this .30 caliber beauty.
Already have one good for the 5.7 and .22’s.
Silence is golden!
I’m going to spring for three cans right out the gate.
1x 5.56
1x 7.62
1x 9mm
I have guns ready to rock with all three of them.
pwrserge,
You would only have to buy two suppressors because you could use the 7.62 mm rifle suppressor on your 5.56 mm rifle … unless you want to shoot both at the same time of course.
I recently learned that a suppressor for a larger caliber works just as well for smaller calibers. (A 7.62 mm suppressor would allow ever-so-slightly more noise to come out than a 5.56 mm suppressor … but it would be negligible and undetectable to a human ear.)
The only thing that you cannot do is use a handgun suppressor on a rifle. Rifles generate a LOT more pressure at the muzzle than handguns. If you were to use a handgun suppressor on a rifle, it would fail catastrophically. But you could use a rifle suppressor on a handgun — although I have to think that an especially large/heavy rifle suppressor would be a bad idea for semi-auto pistols with moving slides/barrels.
I’m looking at a very small 5.56 can (I’m thinking the AAC Mini4) to go on my SBR. The 7.62 can will be much bigger and is intended to go on my 20″ .308 DMR. There weight and size are not as much of a concern.
I can just hear the Lefty’s now, “Oh no! Now guns are going to go pfffft, pfffft, instead of BANG!”
That is all they know about suppressors, the Hollywood point of view. The truth of the matter is that it knocks off a few decibels from the report. They definitely do not “silence” the weapon.
Well, the only thing I have that comes close to pfft is a 22 rifle with a suppressor and subsonic ammo.
The 9 mm, 5.56, and 7.62 still make a significant kaboom, just not enough to damage my hearing.
My understanding is that suppressed firearms still generate enough noise to damage your hearing … a suppressed firearm simply damages it less.
Of course if you are in a self-defense situation, a small amount of hearing damage is much better than a lot of hearing damage. I think the main benefit of suppressors is less noise to annoy your neighbors.
What do you mean “recently mooted” Hearing protection act? Did I miss something?
Are you and I the only ones who noticed that? I don’t know what it means.
Agreed – I’ve scoured the Interwebz and to the best of my Google-Fu I cannot seem to find why this bill would be mooted. Bloggers, let us know if we’re missing something.
+1 to this comment. Did Fearless Leader open his noisebox about it or something?
Google moot 🙂 I had to do it too!
Would love to get a suppressor for my M&P15-22.
I have two currently and have slowly been having barrels threaded as money permits. Still wouldn’t drop a grand for a gun that should cost $600.
I’d probably pick up a lone wolf barrel and the cheapest reasonable silencer money buys.
Otherwise no I have no silencer or even means to mount one.
None of my pistols are suppressor ready as I have no desire to own one.
A silencer on a home defense or concealed carry pistol? C’mon, man! If, god forbid, I should ever have to pull my weapon on another human being, the last thing I’ll be concerned about is noise suppression. The only practical use for suppressors is perhaps when hunting, or perhaps to reduce noise at an outdoor range, unless of course, you are some kind of assassin. I love my guns as much as anyone, but cannot fathom the need for a suppressor, which adds weight to the gun and impairs accuracy. But to answer the question- no I would not spend that much for a suppressor ready pistol.
1. Suppressors do not affect accuracy.
2. Suppressors for home defense are a great idea. In the middle of the night, the last thing I want to deal with is being effective deaf after my first shot.
Actually, suppressors make most weapons more accurate, and as far as using them on a SD weapon, the benefit of hearing baddy 2 trying to sneak up behind you after you blast baddy 1 just might keep you alive.
It is also helpful if you can hear the movements of family members as well as hear verbal requests from professional emergency responders after shooting violent home invader #1.
Have you ever shot a gun indoors? It sucks. It hurts and then you can’t hear shit. Plus I suspect the cat would never forgive you.
I see no real advantage for hunting, carry it for miles to suppress one shot, but then I am not a hunter. OTOH, for plinking, I have a hard time supplying enough ammo when I carry my .300 blk suppressed SBR to family get-togethers, everybody wants to shoot it constantly. Are you saying they are all assassins? That sounds kinda fuddy.
The major advantage for hunters is situational awareness. No need to walk around the woods with plugs in your ears.
I don’t hunt. But I have electronic earmuffs. They actually amplify the sound so why wouldn’t you just go with that?
Muffs often have cheek weld issues and they make it difficult to tell where a sound is coming from. They are better than plugs, but when you’re stalking through the woods, hearing even a twig snap can make a huge difference.
Harvest a few pigs before they figure out the first one’s been shot.
Suppressors don’t just dampen decible output. The reduce the report heard at or near the weapon. With only the slight sound of the round’s travel, and the differentially crack and strike downrange, it is more difficult for the target, and whatever’s around the target, to place the direction and position of the shooter.
I have a 5.56 can and a .30 can for the Blackout. Hassle? Yeah they were. Fun? You bet. One often overlooked benefit is that in addition to reducing noise, they also reduce recoil which can be a problem for new shooters. You can start somebody off shooting with a suppressor to make it more enjoyable.
YHM – All the way.
Recommend: .30 Cal Steel w/QD additional QD to mount .30 Cal cans on 5.56
And: .22 Wraith and .45 Sidewinder
I’d be in the market for that same assortment, for the same reasons.
Can’t beat the price very few beat the suppression, there are a lot of comparisons on the internet.
People complain about the weight, I say wanh. I only complain about the ATF wait, I believe it’s “thottling” and they can pound salt if they are, if they’re not, they just really suck at manpower planning for the tax $.
One of the more [most?] prolific 9mm’s out there is the Beretta 92, why is it that, if you find a threaded (or extended and threaded) barrel for it [ready for purchase] not just “available for order” (for $75 – $125 more than barrels for many other weapons) it will likely be at arm’s reach in a unicorn’s a_ _?
If the NRA nonsense is repealed, absolutely. But for probably a few years after it is, they would be sold out everywhere.
So I’ll get one in 5 years.
You mean NFA?
Friggin’ autocorrect.
My phone is on the wrong side of this issue. :I
Shit. If they became as readily available and reasonably priced as they should have always been I’d have one for every firearm I own and a box full of extras
Lordy, a box full of spare suppressors. Just the idea is astonishing!
^^^^^^^THIS!
Hopefully passage of this act will inspire more manufacturers, bringing greater quantity to the market, which will drive more competition, which will bring prices down to a reasonable level. I’m not demanding a $50 suppressor with a lifetime guarantee, but c’mon…over a grand for a threaded metal pipe with a few baffles?
Yes. My 9mm P99 and Micro 7 are both using the same can until my 7.62 version comes in. These days, a threaded barrel is a great incentive to purchase a particular gun.
I have the M&P22 compact which is threaded. However, S&W does not sell the thread adapter. Doesn’t make much sense to me…
Once I get my last few firearm acquisitions taken care of then i will start on my suppressor buys. One for every caliber.
In the process of getting a .308 suppressor (and a .308 to use it with). With this in place, I’d be looking for threaded barrels for 2 Kimbers and a .45 can for them to share, and probably a bunch more, just for fun.
I’m guessing we’d start by getting a threaded barrel for one of our existing guns just to see how we like it.
Then, either rebarreling and resighting others, or buying one already good-to-go, depending on the particulars.
I’ll wait to see if we get any traction on the Hearing Protection Act. Being in Kommieformistan, I will probably have to wait until I retrograde from the occupied territory, I mean move.
Nop my state bans all the fun stuff from law abiding citizens.
I have several and have more waiting. There are great guns I won’t buy because they aren’t suppressor ready.
It makes good sense to put one any gun in your home used for self defense. I wouldn’t want one on a “carry” gun. The extra length might tickle my nuts!
Don’t need one at the range, everybody uses ear protection. Used to bother me that I couldn’t hear anything that was said, until I got a set of volume controllable electronic muffs. Now that I think about it, It might be better to get another set, or two, to hang besides the bed, instead of investing big bucks for a couple of suppressors.
I don’t own any right now, but tinnitus suuuuucks, so it’s in my long term plans to get some suppressors.
What was that? I can barely hear you, can you repeat that!
All I can hear is eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
If suppressors are taken off the NFA as proposed under the bill? I’ll wait awhile until the price drops a bit after the initial rush I’ll get one for a 300 blackout AR based pistol.
No, and never will be. Thanks CA 🙁
Yep. Have some, more are in process, will buy more when those arrive.
I could have bought a nice used car with the amount of stamps I have, so yes, I’m suppressor ready
I don’t see why a suppressor should cost more than about $50 … there just isn’t much material or machining involved. If suppressors were around $50 each, we could purchase them at point-of-sale, and take immediate possession without tax stamps, I would purchase two or three calibers. I would probably purchase one for .30 caliber rifles and another for .45 caliber handguns. I would also probably purchase one for .44 Magnum for hunting.
“I don’t see why a suppressor should cost more than about $50 … there just isn’t much material or machining involved.”
$50 for a disposable rimfire model, yes.
The ones that can take the beating of centerfire ammunition are made of durable (and expensive) materials like Inconel or Titanium and take specialized techniques to fabricate using some very costly tooling.
Price out EDM machining and see for yourself…
If it’s as inexpensive as you seem to think it is, start your own can company and make a fortune.
Rarely shoot unsuppressed any more. Quiet shooting is so much more courteous and civilized. My concealed carry gun is the only one without a threaded barrel.
Not a revolver guy are you?
Would spend thousands and have a dedicated suppressor for each of my weapons
What? Me?
Subsonic rifle ammo sucks like pistol ammo.
Suppress a .45 and be done with it.
I’d want a .30 cal one and a 5.56 one. Probably get a dedicated .22 cal later. Gah I wish this HPA would pass!
I have a lathe, and I know how to use it.
I’ve got one rifle that’s ‘ready’. But it’s a Century made CETME from the dark days of the Clinton AWB. :p
Still I’d put one on her. If it would cycle right. I spent a fair amount of time, effort, and even money to get her running like a Soviet made watch. Fuggly, but works solidly.
Century openly states that they don’t certify their barrel theads are concentric with the bore. Per a local gunsmith, i used a cheap check method. I used a close-fit ( – .004 ) long-shank drill-bit to test a mounted can-to-bore concentricity, an honestly was a little scared by the result, and don’t know if I’d run subsonic/non-known-stabilizing rounds through that can on that weapon.
what the fork? that should be +.004. You basically thread the can on there and insert the long drill bit [bore dia. + .004] through the can into the bore, and make sure nothing touches or really comes close. Bore should hold drill bit centered in can bore without getting too close to the sides.
“Given the hassle and expense of buying a silencer”
Hassle? Signing a form 4 that’s filled out by an SOT and enclosing a copy of your trust?
Filling out a Form 4473 takes longer!
No I’m not ready. I live in Illinois.I don’t hunt but having one for home defense sounds like a brilliant idea. ‘Course screwing one on a regular shotgun kinda’ precludes hiding in the shadows. A pistol would make more sense…
I refuse to play the government’s reindeer games. $200 and a six month wait? There are other ways to go quiet….wink nod.
Not only supressor ready but have owned Suppressors for some years now. I wouldn’t spend a grand on any SW, ready or not, as there are a number of other equally good platforms in .22, 9mm, .40 and .45 for hundreds less which are also Supressor Ready.
Many very effective Suppressors are not expensive at all and may be aquired for less than $500.00 add the Federal TaxStamp at $200 and it’s still cheap. A .22 supressor will work quite well on any .17 or .22 Rimfire platform that is set up to accept one. This works for most calibers. One has no need to have a detacated supressor for every platform they own. If you got the bucks to support such a desire fine but most of us only have one or three for specific platforms.
There are more places in the US that allow one to buy and own a Supressors than most think.
Yes, their worth having. On the range, hunting, or for defense.
Everything I have is threaded but my carry gun and AK SBR. I have enough cans to cover 9mm, .45, .22LR, 5.56, and 7.62.
“I’d love to hear President Obama’s reason for vetoing it!”
“Because guns.”
Have a 22 rimfire can and 45 caliber can which I adapt for use with 300 blackout and 9mm.
Have 556 and 762 that are ready and waiting for cans, which I would immediately get if the $200 and waiting period went away.
I currently only purchase pieces which already have threaded barrels or can be easily upgraded to such.