Ideal Home Defense Carbine?

[NWSharpshooter]

Honestly that application makes the most sense, I just don't see the advantage in the field or at the range.

Oh, I agree with you there. I have long held the opinion that the 300 BLK is great for home defense or punching paper and steel quietly and not much else. I hunted with mine this year because it was the only suppressed 30 caliber I had, but next year I will use my suppressed 30-30.

 

[Laufen]

Oh, I agree with you there. I have long held the opinion that the 300 BLK is great for home defense or punching paper and steel quietly and not much else. I hunted with mine this year because it was the only suppressed 30 caliber I had, but next year I will use my suppressed 30-30.

Did you have any luck?

 

[NWSharpshooter]

Oh I have, but I can't imagine any rifle caliber round is going to be easy on the ears sans suppressor. I also have reservations about using a can for home defense. It seems like a prosecutor would have a field day with painting you as a "sniper", "mercenary", gun nut type that was just looking for a chance to pull the trigger on his assault weapon with a deadly silencer, and I'm sure most jurors would eat that **** up like oatmeal.

I shot my 300 BLK in the field one day while hunting without the can to show the guy how much louder it was without it. In fact, that is the only time my BLK has been fired without a can. I was surprised how much quieter it was than other guns even though it only has a 8.5" barrel. If given a choice between shooting withou earpro a 300 BLK unsuppressed or a 22 pistol, I will choose the BLK ever time.

 

[NWSharpshooter]

Did you have any luck?

No.

 

[JDG.]

Oh I have, but I can't imagine any rifle caliber round is going to be easy on the ears sans suppressor. I also have reservations about using a can for home defense. It seems like a prosecutor would have a field day with painting you as a "sniper", "mercenary", gun nut type that was just looking for a chance to pull the trigger on his assault weapon with a deadly silencer, and I'm sure most jurors would eat that **** up like oatmeal.

Or just say
"your honor I have a family who I love dearly and wish to protect from all dangers. This is to included hearing damage that can occur from the sharp impulse created from firing a weapon indoors. The suppressor is a tool that allows me to reduce the harm to my family in the event we must use the weapon to defend our lives in our residence"

or something like that. Anyways I'd rather have to explain myself then be def or dead.

 

[Laufen]

Or just say
"your honor I have a family who I love dearly and wish to protect from all dangers. This is to included hearing damage that can occur from the sharp impulse created from firing a weapon indoors. The suppressor is a tool that allows me to reduce the harm to my family in the event we must use the weapon to defend our lives in our residence"

or something like that. Anyways I'd rather have to explain myself then be def or dead.

I agree, but you aren't going to definitely die if you use a gun that doesn't have a can. It's a positive tool for sure, but also an extra liability should you ever find yourself in court defending your decisions.

The average citizen equates "silencers" with Hollywood paid killers, and assumes they are illegal. That's just not an additional hurdle I want to clear if my freedom is in the hands of 12 buffoons.

 

[JDG.]

I agree, but you aren't going to definitely die if you use a gun that doesn't have a can. It's a positive tool for sure, but also an extra liability should you ever find yourself in court defending your decisions.

The average citizen equates "silencers" with Hollywood paid killers, and assumes they are illegal. That's just not an additional hurdle I want to clear if my freedom is in the hands of 12 buffoons.

I didnt mean dead if you use a can but for the argument most make is they would rather just let the attacker take what they want or whatever. Me personally I bought them to use them and I dont think (no lawyer here) it would have much impact if any if it was a clean shooting. Now if the circumstances of the use of said firearm/suppressor combo was "sketchy" then I could see it as a possible negative. But I sit here hopping to never have to be on the explaining end of this theory anyways

 

[Willy Leadwell]

I agree, but you aren't going to definitely die if you use a gun that doesn't have a can. It's a positive tool for sure, but also an extra liability should you ever find yourself in court defending your decisions.

The average citizen equates "silencers" with Hollywood paid killers, and assumes they are illegal. That's just not an additional hurdle I want to clear if my freedom is in the hands of 12 buffoons.

If you shoot someone in your home, you aren't going to end up in front of a jury. Unless of course it's the pest control guy or your wife's boyfriend or something...

 

[Laufen]

No.

The .223 does it to them pretty well inside 100. This was at about 50 yards, right in the noggin.

 

[JDG.]

The .223 does it to them pretty well inside 100. This was at about 50 yards, right in the noggin.

Is that you?