
Difference Between A Supressor And Silencer
#1
Posted 19 February 2006 - 12:13 AM
#2
Posted 19 February 2006 - 01:08 AM

cut and paste below
Silencer and Suppressor General Info
General suppressor/silencer information provided by AWC Systems Technologies:
A sound suppressor is designed to be most effective with a given firearm and cartridge. The main purpose of a sound suppressor is to reduce the muzzle blast, which is the most significant portion of the noise. Muzzle blast is caused by high pressure gases suddenly escaping from the end of the barrel into the atmosphere as the bullet exits. Reducing the pressure results in less sound generated. Pressure is reduced by increasing the volume for gas expansion, reducing the gas temperature (cooling), delaying gas exit through trapping and turbulence, and by a combination of these technologies. How well a given suppressor works on a given weapon depends on how efficiently these goals are accomplished.
#3
Posted 19 February 2006 - 02:53 AM
Suppressor/silencers can still be made for civilian consumption, but make sure that your state will allow them if you want to purchase one.
Some states allow MGs, but don't allow suppressors/silencers.
As far as I know, any NFA weapon (or device) can still be manufactured and sold to civilians EXCEPT machineguns.
Ironically, supressors and short-barrel shotguns seem to NFA weapons that states like the least (even more than MGs.

The following is a list of NFA weapons allowed in each state (copied from Western Firearms website.) Check with your state to be sure the chart is up to date.

#4
Posted 19 February 2006 - 08:30 AM
BTW a suppressor is the same thing as a silencer.
#5
Posted 19 February 2006 - 08:37 AM

David Albert
dalbert@sturmgewehr.com
#6
Posted 19 February 2006 - 08:47 AM

There is no difference - but there is technically no such thing as a "silencer". All devices of this nature supress the sound, no one can eliminate it. Many are efficient enough that all you think you hear is the bolt slamming and the cases hitting the pavement, but they have supressed the bang to a point where it is lower than the other noises, and it is not really gone.
Read Doug Richardson's book on supressors (Doug is the one I was paraphrasing when I said no such thing as a silencer...!). I highly recommend it for anyone remotely interested in quieting a Thompson. He has done the homework, why reinvent the wheel.
#7
Posted 19 February 2006 - 10:02 AM
Hey SGT ...
Here's a web site with a good forum about Silencer/Suppressors, someone on AR15.Com posted a threaded when he built hi silencer on a Form1, which I would not recommend doing ….. posting the building on a web site, he screwed up the suppressor, wrote the ATF and the change he wanted to make would have cost him another $200.00
http://www.silencertests.com/
#8
Posted 19 February 2006 - 10:38 AM
Obviously, suppressors for things like .223 can't silence the "crack" of the bullet, but by suppressing the sound of the shot, it is difficult to tell from which direction it came by ear, although the US now has electronic gear, being used in Iraq, that can pinpoint where a shot came from, even if suppressed. It's being used with the sniper teams.
Also, what "makes" a suppressor is a bit problematic for ATFE. When I bought a MAC-10 in .45, there wasa gizmo you could get, <_< referred to as a "pop suppressor", which when screwed on the barrel, allowed you to then screw on a two-liter plastic soda bottle. This suppressed the sound pretty well for about 50 shots until it started to disintegrate. So should every 2-liter soda container be registered with BATFE as a suppressor?
#9
Posted 19 February 2006 - 10:53 AM
A silencer is what Hollywood uses on TV and in movies.
#10
Posted 19 February 2006 - 01:29 PM

I have heard that factory suppressed MP-5s from HK have holes drilled in the barrel. The holes bleed of gas, thus lowering the velocity of the bullet. The shooter can use standard ammo instead of sub-sonic, and still eliminate the sonic crack of the bullet.
I know an agent with the Kansas Beuare(sp) of Investigation. He went to school to learn to fire the MP-5. In Kansas LE can have full auto, mere citzens are verboten. I aked him if they used suppressed MP's as I was curious as to how loud they are in real life. The agent told me that the way the Ks. law is written not even LE can have a suppressed weapon. The LE's were trying to get the law rewritten for thier use.
KJ
#11
Posted 19 February 2006 - 01:29 PM
Also, got a friend in GA, gun-friendly. CLEO would sign off on his MAC-10, but not on his suppressor. Said he "just didn't believe people should have them." (Screw the law, I guess) He got some gun-friendly judge to sign-off on the suppressor. But the A-holes are all over.
#12
Posted 19 February 2006 - 02:31 PM
I'm confused. Isn't murder already a crime? If the perp doesn't care about the law governing life, what makes anybody in their right mind think that the perp will obey a law about doing it with VOLUME, or doing it with a muffler?
And what if he just wraps a pillow around his gun, or sticks the muzzle right into his victim? (Which makes the poor saps body the silencer...)
So, why exactly are firearm suppressors illegal again?

Edited by Whiskey Brother, 19 February 2006 - 02:31 PM.
#13
Posted 19 February 2006 - 02:36 PM
I do not know the specifics for Delaware (or most states for that matter.)
I do understand that many states do allow NFA weapons, but people get caught up in the local level red-tape.
Fortunantly here (in Tennessee) we seem to have a "must sign" law on the CLEO letter. This is a state law that makes it manditory for the CLEO to sign the letter unless there is a valid reason to decline (ie past criminal record, etc.)
I have never been able to find where this law is written in the TN law books, but I do know that I never met with any opposition as far as getting a CLEO sign off for my NFA stuff. I live in Memphis, so I deal with big city government (well about as big as it gets in TN) and I have never had any problem getting the letter or fingerprints.
I wish it were that easy for you guys in Delaware (and other states.)
It is my understanding that a California citizen can obtain a transfer on a MG, but good luck getting past the local government.

Norm
#14
Posted 19 February 2006 - 03:20 PM
Or CA having a law saying if you wear a "bulletproof" vest in the commison of a felony you get an extra 5 years. Let's see, How does that go.....I'm getting ready to rob a bank...stolen pistol? check! Stolen shotgun? check! Stolen car? check! Bulletproof vest? Uh-oh! I can't take that. I'll get an extra five years if I get caught!
#15
Posted 19 February 2006 - 03:58 PM
There is no shortage of stupid laws (or stupid people!)
#16
Posted 19 February 2006 - 05:46 PM

#17
Posted 19 February 2006 - 06:05 PM

Mike Hammer
#18
Posted 19 February 2006 - 09:37 PM
QUOTE (NotDeaf @ Feb 19 2006, 09:02 AM) |
Hey SGT ... Here's a web site with a good forum about Silencer/Suppressors, someone on AR15.Com posted a threaded when he built hi silencer on a Form1, which I would not recommend doing ….. posting the building on a web site, he screwed up the suppressor, wrote the ATF and the change he wanted to make would have cost him another $200.00 http://www.silencertests.com/ |
Be wary of Silencertests, as its owned by a dealer who is a cheerleader for his pet company and is clearly biased in his opinions. His testing methods have been called into question. Run far, far away....
#19
Posted 19 February 2006 - 10:53 PM
#20
Posted 21 February 2006 - 09:14 AM
QUOTE (Mike Hammer @ Feb 19 2006, 06:05 PM) |
Whiskey Breath, oops, I mean Brother, I belive suppressors were originally regulated (or banned in some states) because of the poaching of game that was taking place and not because of anything more sinister, like what has been depicted in film and television for decades. In the early part of the 20th century you could order a maxum type suppressor for your gun from the sears catalog! While I enjoy using suppressors on my macs, I would never even consider trying one for my Thompson, I like to hear my Thompson "ROAR"! ![]() Mike Hammer |
So, what you are saying is that if you poach any game with a silencer, the punishment should be 10 years in jail? (Which is what California law currently pushes for on this Mala Prohibita inanimate object.)
Is poaching still a major concern in the United States?
With all of Governments "apparent" concern for my safety, such as seat belt and helmet laws, OSHA, and all the rest, you would think they would be equally concerned about my hearing and pass laws requiring the use of a suppressor on firearms.
After all, I'm sure we are all aware of how the passing of more laws having to do with personal security and individual liberties is beneficial to us...
Right?
Even though it is not itself a firearm, a suppressor should fall under that clause covered within the Bill of Rights under article 2, specifically the part where it says "Shall not be infringed".
As for Maxim type silencers appearing in the Sears Catologue back in the day, you have to remember that this was a period of US history where the word "Freedom" meant something.
Nowadays if you want a silencer out of the Sears Catalogue, you have to look under the words "Lawnmower engine muffler", or "Pillows", in order to find what you are looking for...
I'm in full agreement with you regarding their use on Thompsons, I prefer the "roar" myself. But for target shooting or rat dispatching in your backyard with .22 shorts, one would definetly not want to freak the neighbors out with non-suppressed shots. If I'm not hurting anybody else, then I see no reason why this absurd tax law should remain on the books since it does not raise any significant tax revenue for the Government, and actually infringes on personal liberties like some sort of modern day Jim Crow Law.
As for the "Whiskey Breath" comment, I only drink a few shots of Wild Turkey on my Birthday each year, and that aint for 6 months yet...
Ever heard of a little incident in American History called the "Whiskey Rebellion"?
Well, it's spirit is still alive...
