jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

As you probably heard by now, the shooter in Virginia Beach used a silencer on his .45 handgun. This is causing concern among authorities for two reasons: people have been told to run away from the sound of gunfire, and first responders have been told to run toward the sound. If you can't hear the gun firing, you can't run away. Police can't hear the firing, so they don't know where to go. By using a silencer, a shooter can kill many more people because they don't even know that shots are being fired.

edwdickinson Loc: Ardmore PA

"Silencer" is a misnomer, it is actually a suppressor. A weapon with a suppressor can be heard, but at a greatly reduced decibel level. In a crowd where there is noise, the sound will be close to impossible to hear except to those he may be very close to the shooter. In a silent room, the shoot will still be heard.

Frank T Loc: New York, NY

Thanks for the lesson on semantics but the problem remains. There is no legitimate reason to own and use a suppressor.

genocolo Loc: Vail and Gasparilla Island

👍👍👍👍

MauiMoto Loc: Hawaii

Maybe there's some kind of bureaucratic noise ordinance he didn't want to violate.

jgudpns Loc: Pensacola, FL

Yeah - Probably would be a funny comment if 12 people didn't die.

Tommy II Loc: Northern Illinois

Legalizing civilian “suppressors” is ridiculous. The only practical reason a suppressor would be used would be in a offensive situation, where the element of surprise would be needed in an attack. People, using weapons in “self defense” situations would never need suppressors. Hunters claim it helps them because when a shot is fired other animals will be alarmed. True, but in a terror situation where people are being shot at, the same holds true, and they, never herring shots won’t seek safety. Civilian suppressors should be outlawed ( as they once were). This is where groups like the NRA came in to change the minds of legislators, in order to legalize these “toys” for their fellow shooters. Making them illegal would be a good read off in saving lives. Hunters might lose a few more hunted animals, but saving human lives is far more important. Time to grow some brains, people.

MauiMoto Loc: Hawaii

It was not meant to be funny.

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

There was int he last two years an effort by "gun rights" activists, including the NRA, to fully legalize silencers under the guise of "hearing protection" for sport shooters. This was introduced as the "Hearing Protection Act of 2017" introduced by Republican members of congress. Ironically, this bubble popped when, on the day that hearings on this bill were scheduled, Congressman Steve Scalise was shot while participating in an annual congressional baseball game.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I got that.

Vietnam Vet

I know a young woman who would like to go to the gun range and shoot. However she has a medical issue and cannot tolerate loud noises like fireworks or a siren. A silencer would allow her to have fun at the gun range with her friends and family. So there is a legitimate reason for some people to own a suppressor.

And lest we forget, the silencer was not the problem, the one using it was.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

And those big "ear muffs" don't help?

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

And I would like to play at Carnegie Hall, but I am handicapped by a lack of talent. Some things are just not meant to be.

And lest we forget - the silencer multiplied the problem of the person with the gun.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

This is partially true. "Silencer" is a colloquial term for what's more accurately called a "suppressor".

One of the primary purposes of a suppressor is to protect the hearing of the person using the firearm and any other people nearby, such as at a firing range.

Suppressors only reduce the noise of a gun to a limited extent. In most cases, it's nothing close to what's depicted by Hollywood.

A suppressor on a small caliber gun like a .22 will have quite a bit of effect. But on larger caliber they are far less effective. One example with a .22 showed a reduction from 157db to 116db.

For example, one I just looked up reduces 5.56/.226 rifle noise levels by 32 to 34db, down to around 130db which is the "pain threshold" for most people. A jet airplane is commonly around 140db and noise at or above that level is considered potentially harmful. A jackhammer or car horn at 1 meter is about 120db. A chainsaw, around 110db. A helicopter, about 105db.

A .45 pistol, two of which the shooter in Virginia Beach used and at least one of which was reported to be suppressed, is a fairly large and loud caliber. I couldn't find a specific example for comparison, but see several suppressors for .45 claiming to reduce loudness to around 130db. That sounds reasonable, since a 9mm pistol is similar, but slightly smaller caliber... typically 162db unsuppressed.... 126db suppressed.

Another legitimate purpose of a suppressor might be a rancher trying to clear out a gopher problem, hoping reduced noise from their gun won't send all the critters hiding after the first shot.

There is nothing "new" about suppressors, either. They were first developed in 1909. Federal regulations have required special licensing for ownership of a suppressor in the U.S. since 1934. It's unknown if the Virginia Beach shooter had such a license, although at least three of his guns appeared to be legal purchases.