SilencerCo Troubles?

A place for sharing news stories related to armed citizens, law enforcement & 2A/CCW topics.

Please note that when linking to an article you must cite the source URL and provide no more than a brief preview of the article to ensure fair-use standards are met.

NO DOCUMENT DUMPING.

Posts in violation of these rules are subject to immediate deletion without warning.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

Post Reply
rimfireOH
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 9:49 am
Location: NE Ohio

SilencerCo Troubles?

Post by rimfireOH »

We don't have an NFA or suppressor section here at OFCC (although it seems as if there are a handful or two of users/collectors/applicants?), so these next few links might have a limited audience.
Coupled with all that are market difficulties caused by the post-Vegas Hillary suppressor tweet, the soft firearm market created by the Trump win, and the failure to push the HPA across the finish line.

Not that their podcast is the litmus test for health, but it might indicate something's going on since two weeks ago they were planning out the next 26 podcasts and today they're shutting it down.

Is SilencerCo having troubles? Are enough people waiting for HPA to pass that they're delaying their suppressor purchase and NFA wait? Or are Democrats just good at/for firearms sales? Perhaps there are too many suppressor companies in the US, or not enough demand or SilencerCo has a bad business model or perhaps something else entirely.
User avatar
evan price
Forum Janitor
Forum Janitor
Posts: 9044
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: Westfield, Ohio

Re: SilencerCo Troubles?

Post by evan price »

I bought my first suppressor right after the 41p trust rule change. Hadn't thought about it because i didn't need a trust...it took more than 14 months to get my stamp.

While i really really enjoy my can, and want a 9mm & 30-cal can now, I'm not going through this again.
Suppressors should be sold as impulse items with spare mags and eye protection for the reasonable price that an assembly of aluminum bits should cost...without an extra government fee attached.

It's not just the $200 tax that rankles- but it does- it's the fact that it still takes months or years to get the permission slip to take possession of my own purchased item.
"20% accurate as usual, Morty."

Striking down evil with the mighty sword of teamwork and the hammer of not bickering!
Carpe Noctem- we get more done after 2 am than most people do all day.
User avatar
Mr. Glock
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 8965
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:20 pm
Location: NE Ohio

Re: SilencerCo Troubles?

Post by Mr. Glock »

Suppressors have a high “cool” factor but limited use for civilians with huge hassles to aquire. When Obama was in office, folks were buying anything gun-related and, if more restricted and thus first to be illegal, folks were really buying it.

Old Trump took the wind out of the market, the whole gun market is the conventional wisdom. But it was really concentrated in makers who leaned way forward on building stock for a Hillary win. NICS checks were still strong last year, but a number of gun makers were almost giving away guns to clear built up stock. You can’t do that with suppressors
soley due purchase hurdles and time frame.
OFCC Patron, GOA, SAF, YouTube 2A Patreon, NRA Benefactor Life & Hot Stove League Member
rimfireOH
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 9:49 am
Location: NE Ohio

Re: SilencerCo Troubles?

Post by rimfireOH »

evan price wrote:Suppressors should be sold as impulse items with spare mags and eye protection for the reasonable price that an assembly of aluminum bits should cost...without an extra government fee attached.
Agreed. I find it annoying amusing that in some countries, suppressors are considered safety equipment and are quite easy to obtain. We should be able to get one from anywhere that sells a flash suppressor, and just as easily.
Mr. Glock wrote:Suppressors have a high “cool” factor but limited use for civilians with huge hassles to aquire.
You're right.

I use mine hunting so I can hear the game and my environment and also at the range on my long guns. I almost always get a "thank you" from my neighbors when I suppress my 556.

From a CHL perspective, the only suppressed pistol that I'm aware of is SilencerCo's Maxim 9. There may be others, but that's the one I know about.
User avatar
djthomas
Posts: 5961
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am

Re: SilencerCo Troubles?

Post by djthomas »

rimfireOH wrote:I use mine hunting so I can hear the game and my environment and also at the range on my long guns. I almost always get a "thank you" from my neighbors when I suppress my 556.
I bought my first suppressor because of the cool factor. I've bought all the other ones since then for precisely the reasons you indicate. Once you shoot suppressed, particularly rifle, you will never shoot an unsuppressed gun again. I don't like the fact that even after doubling up on plugs and muffs a good day at the range will leave me with ringing ears. That's real damage. Shooting suppressed and still wearing muffs eliminates all of that.

In other countries suppressors are considered safety equipment much like eye protection. In some cases they're legally required if one wants to shoot outdoors in certain areas under good neighbor policies. The challenge, of course, is obtaining the firearm in the first place.

As far as CCW with a suppressed gun goes, it's a no no in Ohio.
rimfireOH
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 9:49 am
Location: NE Ohio

Re: SilencerCo Troubles?

Post by rimfireOH »

So, 2923.11 (K) (5) defines a suppressor as a "Dangerous ordnance"

And 2923.12 (A) (2) and (3) says this:

2923.12 Carrying concealed weapons.
(A) No person shall knowingly carry or have, concealed on the person's person or concealed ready at hand, any of the following:
(1) A deadly weapon other than a handgun;
(2) A handgun other than a dangerous ordnance;
(3) A dangerous ordnance.

So it sounds like if a suppressor (dangerous ordnance) is concealed on a person's person (in their pocket, for example, or backpack), they would be violating this law.
And if a Maxim 9 (integrated suppressor/pistol) is concealed-carried, it violates this law. But if this dangerous ordnance is opened carried, it's OK.
User avatar
Bianchi?
Posts: 1541
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Akron, Ohio

Re: SilencerCo Troubles?

Post by Bianchi? »

So what does "ready at hand" mean? If my can is in my bag that's sitting on the passenger seat, is that "ready at hand"? For that matter if a suppressor is in my vehicle, is it considered concealed, even if it's in plain sight (like a loaded pistol)?
I've had consistently good results with ether.
User avatar
High Power
Posts: 2557
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 6:03 pm

Re: SilencerCo Troubles?

Post by High Power »

evan price wrote:I bought my first suppressor right after the 41p trust rule change. Hadn't thought about it because i didn't need a trust...it took more than 14 months to get my stamp.
Image
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Post Reply