ccw9mm

I think a properly-sized HK MP5 9mm would do just fine. Mildly suppressed, of course. (Examples: one, two, three.) Though, I'm simply going by 25yrs of LEO comments and reports about the viability of these little units in such close-quarters situations.

__________________
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
Reports: CZ P01 pt1, pt2.
Thoughts: Justifiable self defense.
Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
Tip: Use the <search> feature.

Shizzlemah

Yeah something tells me a machine gun may not fly so well.

I'd be ticked if a $2000 gun was impounded. A $20,000 gun ? Oh that would be the end of me!

atctimmy

Would it be effective? Yes. Would a suppressor be something an anti-gun prosecutor could use to crucify you in front of a jury? Yes. Is it worth the risk? I don't think so, especially when a good 12 gauge would stop any in home threat with aplomb.

__________________
"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of
chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! - I know not what course others
may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
- Patrick Henry

ccw9mm

Of course, it's like a gun being black. It hardly alters the lethality of the gun, hence is wholly irrelevant. It's primary practical effect would be, in the hands of everyone other than criminals, to not wake the neighbors while defending one's home, and to avoid permanent hearing damage if needing to be fired indoors.

But, I agree that anti-gunner prosecution would get irrational on the point, attempting to paint someone's character as evil simply because it's one of "those" things. Dumb x2, but likely real as a heart attack.

__________________
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
Reports: CZ P01 pt1, pt2.
Thoughts: Justifiable self defense.
Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
Tip: Use the <search> feature.

atctimmy

Yup. I just read here on DC somewhere that a prosecutor stated that a 10mm was overly powerful and unneccesarily deadly. They found the good guy guilty.

Ayoobs advice is to use normal gear so as not to give the prosecution any "ammo" against you.

__________________
"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of
chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! - I know not what course others
may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
- Patrick Henry

ccw9mm

I'm assuming you're referring to the Harold Fish case, from Arizona, in which a man was attacked first by dogs and then the dogs' owner on a trail while out for a walk. He claimed self-defense and shot the attacker using a 10mm pistol, which the prosecution made the most of. Though, I'd argue that he was convicted on other grounds than merely 10mm calibration, though it certainly didn't help that fairly-quickly-dead seemed worse than simply-effectively-dead. Dumb, but there it is.

__________________
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
Reports: CZ P01 pt1, pt2.
Thoughts: Justifiable self defense.
Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
Tip: Use the <search> feature.

Bark'n

Many years ago I recall an incident Mas Ayoob wrote about regarding a gunshop owner who defended himself with a legally owned machine gun. I believe it was in Florida, and he lived next door to his shop. It was a late night B&E into the shop and the confrontation took place outside between his residence and the business.

In that case, since it was a legally owned class III weapon, no action was taken once it was ruled justifiable. He did not lose his weapon.

I can not tell you whether the good guy killed the guy, wounded the guy or even hit him, for that matter. I simply can't remember all the details, but I do remember reading the case as it was being written regarding the use of a legally owned class III weapon for lawful self defense by a civilian. I also remember that the intruder did fire rounds at the shop owner.

__________________
-Bark'n
Semper Fi

"The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, will prey on those of us who without one, would surely perish."

Rob99VMI04

IT was a HK employee who did it. He used a Ruger AAC 556 at the Chantilly HK import plant back in 1985. He had run from this guy for about 50 miles back in the 80's when there was no common cell phones. I would highly recommend against use of a gun with a can on it for SD for the following reasons:

Most people in a SD adrenaline encounter experience a chemical reaction which makes it that you probably won't even hear a real gun going off, therefor ea suppressor is not necessary.

Second I know you and I know that a AR-15 with a can on it is no more effective than an AR-15 without a Can on it. But will the jury see it that way. Remember the old saying its better to be judged by 12 of your peers than carried by six. That saying is kind of wrong since the 12 is not YOUR PEERS. I.e Your PEERS are smart enough to get out of jury duty. I.E. 12 peers are the people who are to dumb to get out of jury duty and probably extremely anti gun. YOUR EVIL ZOMBIE/SQUIRREL DEANIMATOR will be held up in front of 12 IDIOTS with the EVIL Aluminum tube on the end "THINK OF THE CHILDREN" and shown to your 12 idiot PEERS that you are a wanna be Physcho killer. Now if I was on the jury I would be thinking NO he was just trying to protect his hearing for the long term. I would also motion to physically exam the evidence to see how you mounted it and what type of can you had, and how it was constructed simple cause I think it would be cool. No difference between using a can and not for a rational person. However, your not going to have me on the jury.

__________________
"You may find me one day dead in a ditch somewhere. But by God, you'll find me in a pile of brass." - Trooper M. Padgett

"When seconds count.....Cops Respond in Minutes"

HotGuns

On the other hand...

you could argue to the lawyer that you didnt want to damage the perps hearing...

so you shot him with a suppressed weapon.

That could prove that you really did care about his well being.

__________________
AR. CHL Instr.

To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men, their individualism, loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism, and religious dogmas.'
Dr. G. Brock Chisolm

stanislaskasava

I've never used a suppressor. Would not a .45 acp weapon be a more appropriate choice because it is commonly loaded to a subsonic velocity? I think loud noises will damage your hearing, whether you perceive them or don't, due to adrenalin.

As far as 'a jury of your peers' and 'how would a suppressed weapon look in a courtroom', would one be better off choosing to have the judge decide the trial?