• TranscendentalEmpireEnglish
    1·
    6 hours ago

    Right now, the market for them is distorted by the tax stamp. Only a few people bother with the paperwork and fee (even though it’s been highly streamlined in recent years). That means companies producing them have to make up their costs with high prices rather than volume. It’s almost a stealth tax on top of the stated tax.

    Oh I agree, I’m not saying that the system we have is great. I just don’t think the majority of people are buying suppressors because of the added hearing protection.

    Personally I just don’t see the point of suppressors. Maybe if I had a bunch of land or something and got to shoot by myself all the time. But me having a suppressor isn’t going to help much if the guy in the lane next to me is shooting with a muzzle brake.

    The cost of subsonic ammo alone is enough that I wouldn’t run a suppressor even if they were cheaper.

    • frezik@midwest.socialEnglish
      1·
      6 hours ago

      If I had a suppressor on my AR-15, I’d still be using hearing protection. I really should be doubling up on ear plugs and muffs together, but I tend to have a lot of earwax buildup, and properly inserted ear plugs tend to compact that problem.

      Subsonic 5.56NATO is a joke.

      • TranscendentalEmpireEnglish
        1·
        5 hours ago

        Yeah, I double up on ear pro. It’s not comfortable, but I already have some hearing damage from my job.

        If I ever ran a suppressor I’d rebuild my upper receiver for .300 black out, but I can’t see myself shelling out the money for the rebuild, tax stamp, suppressor…and paying a buck a round.