Firearm silencer footage

sadhatter said:
Now one of the standard pieces of equipment for a mob hit ( not by any means the only, but one of the more popular sets of equipment. ) is what is called a " hit kit". This consists of a 22 pistol with a silencer. From all evidence i have heard from first hand experience, this is perfect for taking out a person in an apartment or other semi crowded area, due to a lack of any large blast noise.

So, is this simply untrue? Is a silenced .22 pistol loud enough to still attract attention through the walls of an apartment, or other semi public place? I have a moderate experience with guns, but none with silencers. And am open to having this shown to be false. But it raises the question of why it is in consistent use.
Click to expand...

A pistol with a good silencer will still be loud when shot indoors. It is likely that everyone in the room will hear it unless there is loud music or machinery noise present. Even though a silencer can be made to perform better by adding water or other coolants, they are still noisy in a small room. They do sound different though.

I do not think a person would hear the same suppressed gun shot through a wall made of drywall unless they were expecting it. If they did hear it, then they might not recognize it as a gunshot.

If I thought that legally registered silencers were a menace to society, then I would not promote their use. I know that silencers are used to commit some violent crime and have heard that a small pistol with a silencer on it is the preferred weapon of some "hit men". But I also know that the violent miss-use of registered silencers by their legal owners is very rare compared to other firearms. At least I have seen very little evidence they miss-use.

I would not call a pistol of any kind a perfect weapon. Unless it uses captivated ammo, it will make more than a little noise. They leave the bullet in or near the victim in most cases. Gun powder residue can be left on the shooter. Only the lower powered pistols will be the least noisy. These small pistols will require excellent shot placement, or all you will do is make the target very angry. Shooting me with a Kel-Tec P-32 or a NAA mini revolver in 22lr might take the fight out of me, or it might provoke me into attacking the shooter. :)

Ranb
 
Ranb said:
A pistol with a good silencer will still be loud when shot indoors. It is likely that everyone in the room will hear it unless there is loud music or machinery noise present. Even though a silencer can be made to perform better by adding water or other coolants, they are still noisy in a small room. They do sound different though.

I do not think a person would hear the same suppressed gun shot through a wall made of drywall unless they were expecting it. If they did hear it, then they might not recognize it as a gunshot.

If I thought that legally registered silencers were a menace to society, then I would not promote their use. I know that silencers are used to commit some violent crime and have heard that a small pistol with a silencer on it is the preferred weapon of some "hit men". But I also know that the violent miss-use of registered silencers by their legal owners is very rare compared to other firearms. At least I have seen very little evidence they miss-use.

I would not call a pistol of any kind a perfect weapon. Unless it uses captivated ammo, it will make more than a little noise. They leave the bullet in or near the victim in most cases. Gun powder residue can be left on the shooter. Only the lower powered pistols will be the least noisy. These small pistols will require excellent shot placement, or all you will do is make the target very angry. Shooting me with a Kel-Tec P-32 or a NAA mini revolver in 22lr might take the fight out of me, or it might provoke me into attacking the shooter. :)

Ranb
Click to expand...

Seems reasonable, logic being i am guessing, evil people will use it for evil just like they use guns.

Btw, weaponry nut here myself as well as a writer/actor. If you want to spice up your footage, get in contact with me, send me some info and i can turn it into something rather entertaining ( from a writing perspective, and from a voice over perspective. ). I have experience in radio so voice overs are one of my specialties. And i am rather bored for the next few weeks, so feel free to drop me a message and i'll see what types of monologues or whatnot i can get going for you.
 
Ladewig said:
Did any of those states have laws against it before legalizing it? If so then the legislators or the lobbyists in that state might have helpful information
Click to expand...

Good idea. I will have to write a few letters. Not sure if any other state legislator is going to reply though. I get fewer than 10% of my e-mails and letters relied to in WA. I will have to look into it more, but based on what I remember from reading other forums and looking at state laws, a few changes have been made recently.

In Missouri, the law was recently changed to allow holders of the Curio and Relics license to own silencers. That state also allowed other licensed dealers to own and sell them before. The C&R license is intended for collectors to buy and sell old guns (there is a federal list) across state lines, but not to sell at retail for a profit like the usual gun dealer.

I believe it was Kansas that recently changed the law to allow civilians to own silencers and other title 2 weapons. Before they changed the law, the police had to buy some of their weapons from out of state dealers. I heard that some gun dealers hired a lobbyist to get the law changed. They paid him/her $25,000.

I looked into the lobbyist method when I talked to one of the Washington Arms Collectors (WAC) officers. He said he was a lobbyist but refused to devote any time to the matter as he claimed he was awaiting a change in the political climate. Anyone who thinks the political climate in WA is going to change is dreaming. One of the most stanch gun control fanatics is Senator Kline. When I asked for his support for bill 1604 to legalize use of registered silencers, he tried to convince me that silencer possession was illegal in WA and that if bill 1604 passed they would be legally sold "no questions asked" at gun shows. Both of these claims are obvious lies as he knows silencers are legal in the USA. He won by a wide margin in the last election.

The key is to get enough people, or at least a few influential ones to talk to the Committee chairmen to get the bill a vote on the House and Senate floors. So far I have been unsuccessful.

Ranb
 
sadhatter said:
Btw, weaponry nut here myself as well as a writer/actor. If you want to spice up your footage, get in contact with me, send me some info and i can turn it into something rather entertaining ( from a writing perspective, and from a voice over perspective. ). I have experience in radio so voice overs are one of my specialties. And i am rather bored for the next few weeks, so feel free to drop me a message and i'll see what types of monologues or whatnot i can get going for you.
Click to expand...

Thanks. How about I send you a dvd with the footage I am considering using as well as my script? PM me for my address if you like.

Ranb
 
Newtons Bit said:
Flash suppressors are there so that the muzzle flash isn't visible for the shooter, not the people down range. You may think "whoop de do", but at night time the muzzle flash can temporarily destroy your low-light vision.
Click to expand...

Actually yes, the flash suppressor is there for people down range as well. From a tactical stand point, you want to hide your flash so you do not give away your position. But it is there for the shooter too.
 
I uploaded a ROUGH cut of part one of the video. This part explains briefly explains silencer ownership legalities and construction. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCmAWssUVQo

If there is anything I can do better (other than speaking clearer) please let me know. Thanks.

Ranb
 
sadhatter said:
So, is this simply untrue? Is a silenced .22 pistol loud enough to still attract attention through the walls of an apartment, or other semi public place? I have a moderate experience with guns, but none with silencers. And am open to having this shown to be false. But it raises the question of why it is in consistent use.
Click to expand...

A .22, without suppression, has relatively very little blast noise to begin with, so I could see a suppressed .22 being used for that kind of purpose, and for surprising a single target at point blank it would still be quite lethal despite the low power. As SEAL Harry Constance remarked in his Vietnam memoir "Good to Go" paraphrasing: 'The difference I noticed when I had to switch from .45 to .22, was, the .45 stops people, but with the .22, you shoot them and they don't react to it, they keep running at you, they keep shooting at you, you have to shoot them 7 or 8 times to stop them.'

For military/police/home defense use a .22 would be dangerous to rely on, it's basically a pellet gun with more velocity. But a situation like an apartment mob murder where you can hit the target repeatedly at point blank a suppressed .22 would probably be a 'good' tool. How often do these kinds of organized hits happen though? Seems like a thing from movies. The only hitmen I ever hear about are undercover cops :D.
 
Ferguson said:
But a situation like an apartment mob murder where you can hit the target repeatedly at point blank a suppressed .22 would probably be a 'good' tool.
Click to expand...

BUt not always. Although I cannot find the case on the internet, I remember a late 70s /early 80s case in Lincolnwood, Illinois where a hit man fired four .22 rounds at a target's head at point blank range. All hit, but the man's skull was thicker than usual and he survived the assault.
 
A .22, without suppression, has relatively very little blast noise to begin with
Click to expand...

Not true at all, imo. My .22 pistols are quite loud and I use hearing protection with them. Inside a room, this would be even worse.

The only .22 I have that is relatively quiet is my Marlin 39A Lever action rifle, and that's because of the action and the long barrel.

My Beretta .32 is unbelievably loud, most likely because like many small auto pistols, it uses the "blowback" form of action.
 
While a 22lr may have little muzzle blast compared to a 45 auto, they can still be very loud. I always wear hearing protection when shooting them unless a silencer is attached. The only exception is when shooting the 22 CB (primer only) ammo through a rifle. The CB ammo makes a rifle sound like an air rifle.

Ranb
 
Muzzle Flash Story

One evening a few years ago, I was sitting in a tripod looking down a long narrow food plot through some pines. It had been planted with wheat and oats to provide forage for deer. I had my bolt action .270 with a 4-9x40 scope. I heard the barely perceptible sounds of something moving cautiously through the pines. It wasn't loud enough to be a squirrell. I thought I was imagining it at first. There would be a twig snap. Then another a minute later about 10 feet from the previous one. Had I been down in the trees I probably wouldn't have heard it, but I was above them. Something was moving slowly, timing its' arrival at the plot with the approaching darkness. As daylight fades you can see better through a scope than with your eye. It gathers more light so it seems brighter. The buck stepped out at about 80-yards. I only saw his silhouette. I couldn't tell if he was quartering towards me or quartering away. I put the cross hairs slightly behind his shoulder, hoping he was quartering towards me. I squeezed the trigger and an orange fireball filled my scope picture. I recovered my vision and he was gone. There was blood where he had been standiing. I looked for him for an hour in the darkness, but I had no idea which way he had run. I found him the next morning. Coyotes had been there. All I could get was his head. I wish I had seen and heard where he went after I shot. He would have been a great addition to my freezer.
 
SezMe said:
Interesting. The rifles I've fired didn't have any flash that I'm aware of, although I've never used one at night time. Can you make any statement of how "large" a gun must be to cause a flash that has the potential to harm low-light vision. Or is it primarily a function of barrel length?
Click to expand...

All combustion projectile weapons have some form of muzzle flash. Like everything else, it's a matter of degrees. An accurate round requires that the bullet be accelerating along the entire length of the barrel. To insure this the pressure behind the projectile must be continuously increasing which requires that some powder be burning right up until the round leaves the barrel. Since the powder won't burn exactly the same way each time you have to put in a little extra to insure you have enough. Lengthening the barrel will reduce the flash, but mainly because there is less powder still burning after the round exits the barrel. Reducing your powder load can do this also.

The standard vented flash suppressors on the AR-15 work by breaking up the cloud of still burning powder causing it to burn more quickly and in a less distinct pattern. This means you don't have a grapefruit sized ball of fire at the end of the barrel after each shot rather just a short lived spray of light which is hard to pinpoint unless you are looking right at it.
 
RenaissanceBiker said:
Muzzle Flash Story

One evening a few years ago, I was sitting in a tripod looking down a long narrow food plot through some pines. It had been planted with wheat and oats to provide forage for deer. I had my bolt action .270 with a 4-9x40 scope. I heard the barely perceptible sounds of something moving cautiously through the pines. It wasn't loud enough to be a squirrell. I thought I was imagining it at first. There would be a twig snap. Then another a minute later about 10 feet from the previous one. Had I been down in the trees I probably wouldn't have heard it, but I was above them. Something was moving slowly, timing its' arrival at the plot with the approaching darkness. As daylight fades you can see better through a scope than with your eye. It gathers more light so it seems brighter. The buck stepped out at about 80-yards. I only saw his silhouette. I couldn't tell if he was quartering towards me or quartering away. I put the cross hairs slightly behind his shoulder, hoping he was quartering towards me. I squeezed the trigger and an orange fireball filled my scope picture. I recovered my vision and he was gone. There was blood where he had been standiing. I looked for him for an hour in the darkness, but I had no idea which way he had run. I found him the next morning. Coyotes had been there. All I could get was his head. I wish I had seen and heard where he went after I shot. He would have been a great addition to my freezer.
Click to expand...

Here, it's against the law to hunt after dusk and your story is the reason why.
 
I suggest using a corporate strategy... rebranding! You're no longer the much hated Comcast, now you're Xfinity! You're not building silencers, you're building HappyFunQuietTimes!

;)
 
Ladewig said:
BUt not always. Although I cannot find the case on the internet, I remember a late 70s /early 80s case in Lincolnwood, Illinois where a hit man fired four .22 rounds at a target's head at point blank range. All hit, but the man's skull was thicker than usual and he survived the assault.
Click to expand...

And then you have cases like the Virginia Tech shooting, in which the .22 seemed to work just fine.
 
Originally Posted by RenaissanceBiker
Muzzle Flash Story

One evening a few years ago, I was sitting in a tripod looking down a long narrow food plot through some pines. It had been planted with wheat and oats to provide forage for deer. I had my bolt action .270 with a 4-9x40 scope. I heard the barely perceptible sounds of something moving cautiously through the pines. It wasn't loud enough to be a squirrell. I thought I was imagining it at first. There would be a twig snap. Then another a minute later about 10 feet from the previous one. Had I been down in the trees I probably wouldn't have heard it, but I was above them. Something was moving slowly, timing its' arrival at the plot with the approaching darkness. As daylight fades you can see better through a scope than with your eye. It gathers more light so it seems brighter. The buck stepped out at about 80-yards. I only saw his silhouette. I couldn't tell if he was quartering towards me or quartering away. I put the cross hairs slightly behind his shoulder, hoping he was quartering towards me. I squeezed the trigger and an orange fireball filled my scope picture. I recovered my vision and he was gone. There was blood where he had been standiing. I looked for him for an hour in the darkness, but I had no idea which way he had run. I found him the next morning. Coyotes had been there. All I could get was his head. I wish I had seen and heard where he went after I shot. He would have been a great addition to my freezer.
Here, it's against the law to hunt after dusk and your story is the reason why.
Click to expand...


And yet another example of how deluded people are about themselves and believing that they are qualified, responsible gun owners who know what they are doing!

In great detail you explain to us how you were TOTALLY unable to identify your target, aimed where you "hoped" was on target and had ZERO qualms about discharging a deadly weapon! Congratulations - You are yet another poster child for why people shouldn't have guns!

You were "hunting" You EXPECTED to see a a pray animal, the one you were looking for - a deer. WHAT IF that was another hunter, or a kid out early morning playing cowboys and indians or a photographer birding? What if you MISSED? What was behind this deer where your bullet would have gone? How do you know that while you were sitting there waiting another hunter didn't line up opposite you and that is why that dear was sneaking through the woods coming your way? Just like people look up at the sky and the clouds and see bunnies, you saw what you wanted to! This time you were right, but based on your description of the events it was 50/50 and as a "responsible" gun owner the ONLY thing you see wrong with this scenario is "I didn't get to put the meat in the freezer". Nothing wrong with pulling the trigger when you're not clear
what you are shooting at or what's around.

By the way this whole thread reminds me of "I SHOULD be able to have nuclear weapons it just sucks that Coppertone Doesn't make SPF 30000. In other words, yet another TOTALLY lame excuse for why another gun nut acting like a spoiled child who wants their toys and damn the responsibilities.
 
Magyar said:
By the way this whole thread reminds me of "I SHOULD be able to have nuclear weapons it just sucks that Coppertone Doesn't make SPF 30000. In other words, yet another TOTALLY lame excuse for why another gun nut acting like a spoiled child who wants their toys and damn the responsibilities.
Click to expand...

This whole thread? Really? You got that from someone wanting the right to use a mufffler on their gun at home like most other states allow?

Ranb
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom