Suppressor Brands

[Raven Armament]

Grand juries will indict a twinkie if given the chance.

There is no such thing as a class III weapon.

[SHIVAN]

So again, an acquittal, and a legal bill for a major shootout where the good guy survived.

Your legal bill is your legal bill. Period.

There has been no illustration that you'll be in a bad way for using a suppressor. We have two cases of machineguns, in which both are acquitted.

Seems clear cut to me:

1) Hope you don't have to, but if you do, use the tools to win.

2) You can always make more money, but being dead would suck.

[Raven Armament]

Well said. I agree.

[Coleslaw]

Grand juries will indict a twinkie if given the chance.

Exactly.

There is no such thing as a class III weapon.

WTF?

How did we stray so far from this:
And arrive at this:
Just thought it was funny. There should've been a thread opened in GD just for C3 weapons involved in SD shootings...
~Bobby

An excellent question Bobby. It all started when one poster alluded that he was going to drive around in his car with his suppressed SBR 'just in case' trouble shows up.

I plan on building a Colt 727 clone (except with a 11.5'' barrel) with a Nodak Upper + A2 Aperture, FailZero BC, LMT Enhanced Bolt, Gunfighter CH, Colt Commando CAR stock, A1 grip, and a Nodak XM16E1 lower, for a car gun. As a car gun, it'll STILL be run suppressed.
My current (KAC) car gun is. Until they say it's illegal, I'm going to do it.

I know what I think, but will bite my tongue. In any case, my contention, seemingly supported by AC and Scottyran, not to mention Mr. Fadden, is it is best to exhibit some discretion relative to Title II weapons use, to include suppressors.

Some others seem to think that it is the wild, wild west and a shoot 'em up is all good and well with anything you so desire, and seem fit and tied to play it out with your typical bad guy using C3 weapons, even after the two previous cases outlined BOTH stated not to use C3 weapons for personal defense.

A very few have done so at the price of a small fortune, not to mention the agony they put their families through with a two year or more legal battle.

I will give myself a caveat so no one’s panties get in a wad, and state that I too would use whatever was available should the situation arise, but I think most of us here have plenty of non C3 weapons around to take care of whatever needs taking care of. Hell, Grant said he wouldn’t use a shotgun but a carbine or pistol, so there ya go! I know you guys have carbines and pistols!

I am not saying no one should defend themselves, but you have to use some sense. I previously posted in this thread a couple of times as stated by AC, " most long time NFA owners have discovered that discretion is the better part of valor".

I am getting some mileage out of that one, but I couldn't have said it better.

I'm worn out on this one, you guys can have it. Just remember, pray you can get a second mortgage on the house, you will need it if you use a C3 weapon, justified or not.

[threeheadeddog]

You say that both previous cases stated not to use c3 weapons for defensive use. That may be correct but it is ABSOLUTELY taken out of context. The author in both articles was the SAME man. The only thing that is proven when you look at both articles together is that Ayoob's opinion is that it is a bad idea. While Mr. Fadder may believe it is a bad idea Mr. beckwith was obviously not only comfortable with it but saw enough of an advantage and use to DO IT AGAIN IF GIVEN THE CHANCE. I only say that because HE DID IT TWICE.

I have absolutely no problem with someone voicing their opinion of the subject. DO NOT attemp to skew truth to make that point.

I get off my soapbox now.

[Raven Armament]

WTF?

Class 3 is a status of SOT taxpayer, not a weapon. They are NFA weapons or Title II weapons. Calling an NFA/Title II firearm a Class 3 weapon is like calling a magazine a clip.

[The Dumb Gun Collector]

Unless somebody else disagrees I think this thread is a goner.

[Iraqgunz]

Well, well, well Coleslaw. We have discussed this case here in the past an I am well aware of it. Personally it means jack shit to me. But, that's how I roll.

In the state I live in it matters not what weapon you use to defend yourself. As a matter of fact our legislature has seen fit to put the burden of proof back on to the prosecution. The way it is supposed to be. It matters not if I am in Ft. Livingroom or on the way back from the desert range where I shoot.

In Arizona if you are charged and acquitted the state must reimburse you for all legal costs and I believe for lost wages and earnings.

I can also assure you that I don't go driving around waving my SBR out the window either.

If you have a problem using an NFA weapon for defense or whatever that's your hang up, not mine. My tin foil isn't wrapped as tightly as yours.

Then you haven’t tried one of these!!

[IMG][/IMG]

Contrary to other opinions, I still maintain that a good shotgun is best for home defense.



Well, well, well. I guess that about sums it up. What say you Iraqgunz? On the subject, the couple of cases where LE have used personally owned C3, it caused problems for them also.

Perhaps in you could get away with it in your own home, but not out on the road. You have to always remember, the gov't has unlimited resources in time and personnel and plenty of overzealous law school grads. Whether right or wrong, your defense comes out of your own pocket.