• If you are having trouble changng your password please click here for help.

Suppressed as nightstand defense weapon?

Suppressors used in home defense are less about playing Jason Borne and taking them out one by one and more of a factor practicality. Suppressors mean less muzzle flash to impede night vision. In addition, has anyone ever fired in can enclosed area without ear pro? You can hear anything. That means, you cant hear if there are more bad guys, and more importantly if your wife/kids are moving around. Having muzzle flash blind burned into your eyes, followed by not hearing anything means the odds of you shooting one of your family members goes way up.
 
uploads.tapatalk_cdn.com_20160904_bd33e5593742a45be0470a136181224a.jpg


This is what I use in case my rape whistle stops working.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
I doubt that. Doesn't have to be an issue. I think you could even remove the suppressor while waiting for the cops to show up and you are not "tampering with evidence" because its not materially changing the facts of the case (you shot an intruder with your legal firearm).
Wow. There's some poor legal advice.
 
I think that, if at all possible, a home defense weapon should have a light AND a suppressor, and you should be very competent in using that particular setup. I don't care if the jury thinks I'm a tactical ninja - I just want to survive and not let a criminal take mine or my family's life (or my hearing, or my ability to know what's happening after that first unsuppressed shot at 3 AM).

Try shooting indoors in the middle of the night, once with a suppressed firearm and once without, and then get back to me on which is the better option. Most suppressed calibers (except .22) are still uncomfortably (but not dangerously) loud in an enclosed space, and the mitigation of muzzle flash is very helpful when your eyes are adjusted to total darkness.

Self-defense is self-defense, and you have to be able to justify it on its own merits. I personally think the "you have to use your grandpa's hunting gun" argument is way overblown, and I've yet to see substantial legal examples to make me think otherwise. (My $0.02)
 
Back
Top Bottom