This one:
Unless you are shooting subsonic it really doesn't help as much as the guys act like it does.
They do help. My previous posts enumerate the benefits.
And this one:
Why pay $1,000 for a silencer if it is only really going to help on your hearing.
Silencers help more than your hearing. Again, my previous posts state the advantages beyond hearing protection.
And this one...
"reduce felt recoil" on a 223?...really....now that is funny. Guess ya'lls 223s must kick really bad.....LOL
223s do recoil. The recoil is extremely light. But they recoil enough to change your sight picture. Silencers improve shot to shot performance.
Now, I'd like to address this:
Since this thread was about hog hunting, I didn't address my comments toward competition shooting. That is entirely a different subject. And you didn't mention kids. So, bringing them up now is changing the context of the message.
Your previous quote about spending $1000 for a silencer and comparing it to electronic ear protection was a red herring. I used the point about competition and not having kids to nullify your red-herring by pointing out that silencers are not just overpriced hearing protection. My point is only as a rebuttal to show that part of the cost can be spread across other hobbies and that each person's income and cost justification may be different. This addresses the cost side (silencers are multi-taskers) and my previous posts address the value side of the equation.
Additionally, I use my competition rifle to hunt. I prefer not to need to re-zero between outings. If you have a company and dedicated gear, then great. But individuals like me tend to require more versatility.
Our shots probably average under 50 yards. Our guns are plenty accurate for what they are asked to do. They are good out to 200 easy. And if I can't get the hunter closer, that is my fault.
My experience is similar. 50 yards to a sounder of hogs at night is the magic number. I submit that accuracy still matters. Here's why:
Hogs run after the first shot is fired. 50 yards turns to 75, then 100. The importance of accuracy increases every second until they disappear into the trees or are left to make dirt angels. If I can change 1MOA into .75MOA or .5, I want to do it. Everyone's budget is different, so it may not be worth the expense to them.
My point before we digressed was that silencers improve accuracy. Remember, this was a rebuttal to the straw-man argument that they only help your hearing.
Now for this one:
Our thermal optics are top notch. I have NEVER had a flash problem with any of them. And I have been killed several hogs out of a sounder running. We have a few tricks up our sleeves that enable our hunters to stay on target and steady.
Great. If you're using a $5K+ thermal, then you don't have to worry about muzzle flash (except for your non-dominant eye). I 'm still saving my pennies for a Thor and I don't have a business hunting hogs, selling gear, etc. This point seems to be a tangent from the core argument that silencers aren't that useful.
In closing, I don't have a dog in this race. I only jumped into this pissing contest because I want silencers made legal for all hunting in Alabama. I don't care who anyone uses for a paid hog hunt, or who advertises what where. Silencers are useful and there's plenty of good data to back that up. If you want to debate the point to the contrary, then I'm game.
ElkHunter, I mean you no disrespect. I love shooting and love shooting with silencers. I'm passionate about the subject and I want to do what I can to promote their usage.
I'm argumentative, but I will yield to logic and reason.
