Both of my primary home-defense weapons (a G17 and a SBRed AR) have a suppressor attached, and there’s a very simple explanation. Shooting a gun inside a house is freakin' LOUD!!, and I’ve already lost hearing in one ear. I really don’t want to damage my hearing any worse. Although I prefer to use a suppressor at the range, I don’t always do it because some of my rifles and most of my pistols lack either a threaded barrel or a suppressor mount.srothstein wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 8:13 pm I think it depends on the NFA device how much jeopardy it can put you in. For example, a silencer used on a firearm should not make any difference to the justification or use of force. But, a sawed off shotgun might be a different position. The most important possibility I can see where it makes a difference would be a fully automatic weapon. We have already seen cases where a person was justified in using deadly force, but too many shots fired made it excessive force. I would think an automatic weapon would make this much more likely. While you might justify the first shot or even two, can you justify 15 when the last three or four were after the suspect was on the ground? I am not sure if a destructive weapon, say a .700 elephant gun, would make a difference over a smaller weapon.
But when I do keep a rifle in my vehicle, it is unsuppressed for exactly these kinds of reasons. What I might have to do inside of my house is a lot easier to defend than what I might have to do on the street. Now, if TEOTWAWKI arises, then I won’t worry about that stuff.