Would pick related be quite enough with sub-sonic rounds to unload in a housing estate without waking the neighbour's

Lol OP confirmed no English

I'm a regular on this board I'm just a little drunk sorry the word single action would probably make more sense their.

>housing estate
>neighbour
>favourite

Ok, so Aussie? Kiwi?.....

Wait, Northern Ireland is relatively OK regarding guns isn't it?

Only if it’s a nagant 1895. A revolver will still make a ton of noise with a suppressor because of the space between the cylinder,bullet, and barrel

you do realize that a suppressor would be all but useless on 99% of revolvers, because of the noise coming from the cylinder-barrel gap?

>To mitigate this problem could I just use a revolver
Not really. Nearly every revolver (I can only think of one exception, and it's ancient) has something called a cylinder gap (that exception still has the cylinder gap, but it also has a gas ring to prevent gasses escaping from it). There's a small gap (usually around 4 thousandths of an inch) between the cylinder and the barrel, and hot gasses escape from that small gap. Even if you were to hypothetically make a threaded barrel revolver and put a suppressor on it, there would still be enough noise to come from this gap that suppressing it to make it hearing safe would be virtually impossible.
>or similar none repeating gun?
A non-repeating gun? Just an FYI, even revolvers are repeating firearms. A repeating firearm means that the firearm will, through whatever action (be it autoloading, revolver, bolt action, pump action, lever action, etc, etc) will load a round into the chamber to be fired, extract and eject the empty casing, and then load a new round into the chamber.
As far as handguns go, auto-loaders and revolvers make up 99.something% of the market. There are a few non-repeating handguns (like a derringer), but they are uncommon and objectively inferior to revolvers/auto loading pistols for serious use. Theoretically, though, you could thread the barrel on a single-barrel derringer, put a suppressor on it, shoot subsonic ammo, and have a perfectly silent handgun. Well, there's also the fact that the first shot on suppressors are usually quite loud because it burns all of the available oxygen in the air that is inside the suppressor itself, but so long as you've already fired a round or gotten past that issue in some other way you'd then have your theoretical silent handgun. I don't know of anyone that's actually done this because all of that effort, expense, and custom work to have a 1 shot silent handgun just isn't worth it.

Depends how many and they'd have to be directly to the head or heart.

It sounds like you want a nearly perfectly silent repeating firearm. Your best bet would probably be a manually cycled action of some type (probably lever action for speed, but you could use a bolt gun if you're willing to forego speed), put a suppressor on it, and then shoot exclusively subsonic ammo. The sound of racking a lever/bolt is going to be a lot less loud than any autoloading firearm cycling at fast speeds. Between that and the first round pop from a suppressor, the gun itself shouldn't make too much noise.

With perfect shot placement (like into the brain via the eye socket) probably. It doesn't have enough power to be a reliable man stopper though. Great for hunting squirrel and other small game though.

Oh, I put a not quite accurate definition of a repeating firearm. Whoops. You get the general idea of a repeating firearm, but a revolver (which is a repeating firearm) doesn't meet the inaccurate definition I provided. Whatever.

Ding ding ding we have a winner

Thanks never owned a revolver

Maybe just a single well placed shot then from any suppressed subsonic.

>4 thousandths
You mean one two hundred and fiftieth?

Or 0.0254 mm if you use the correct measurement system.

When in doubt aim center mass and fire till empty.

Just use a car bomb

Wouldn't that be louder then a suppressed subsonic though? And what if I want to use it for home defence?

When I think subsonic i usually think of the CCI quiet ammo that only travels at like 700 FPS. Standard velocity 22lr is also typically subsonic, I realize. You're right. However, I still wouldn't rely on 22lr (regardless of velocity) for self-defense purposes unless I had no other options.

Dude is literally asking how to murder somebody, I think it's safe to say he doesn't know shit and is larping.

If this guy is trying to murder somebody, ballistic on a pistol in general won't be great. If you want to silently kill somebody with no evidence, you don't use something that's as loud as a jet plane at its quietest, and leaves a bevy of gasses and metal to follow back to its source. You use something with no breadcrumbs.

I’ve definitely heard what could be legitimate gunfire in my apartment complex and did nothing about it because I figured someone else would deal with it, and I also don’t care if it doesn’t affect me.

Who said anything about self-defense?

Not going to murder someone its hypothetical

Such as?

In testing various home-built .22lr takedown rifles and an old semi-auto .22lr pistol at home over several years, I've probably fired over 1,000 rounds of various brands/velocities of subsonic ammunition. I have neighbors living downstairs, and have often left the windows open for the smoke if I'm shooting more than once or twice. The stuff stinks. Lots of people walking by in my area. I'm shooting into a heavy lead trap, so impacts are the quietest thing about this.

No one has ever commented among my neighbors. No passer-by has ever looked up at the window (the times I've bothered to check). Of course I make very good suppressor baffles, but still, if the noise were more significant than, say, hammering in a nail to hang a picture, someone would have said something, I'd have had a police visit most likely.

Recently purchased a 9mm carbine and built a suppressor for that. Relatively crude thing as my lathe isn't powerful enough to make proper K baffles for a 1.375" ID tube - the .22lr cans have all used 0.875" 7075 aluminum rod for the baffles and that's about my upper limit for smooth machining diameter. I've shot the pressed washer style baffled suppressor on the 9mm 10 times spread over 3 sessions on a couple of days, and while it's substantially louder than .22lr suppressed, it's well below the pain threshold for my ears. Quite comfortable really. My kid tells me that if he didn't know me and what I was doing, he'd probably call the police. That's from hearing it two rooms away. I can only imagine that a suppressed 9mm pistol would be substantially louder than that, considering the greater quantity of un-burnt powder exploding from the shorter barrel into the smaller suppressor body. That guess arises from the obviously quieter results I get when comparing an 8" long can on an 11" long rifle barrel to a 5" can on a 4" pistol barrel.

So tl;dr version - no. People will notice.

Different question would be whether neighbors care. Maybe, maybe not.

It isn't like the movies, kid. Killing somebody in their own home has numerous factors to account for that make it a bad call. You are not going for effect or sending a message, so it's a numbers game. What is the chance you get caught, a real percentage that factors everything.

Do they have surveillance? Do they have protection? How much evidence will be left behind? What ballistic factors come into play, bullet traces, signature, noise, is the suppressor registered, is the gun in your name, etc.? Will neighbors see you go in? What is police response time?

All of these things make it not worth the effort.

Also you're going to leave DNA behind, which is now in a stranger's home without explanation.

>G19
>probably .22
Fuck off idiot noguns.

user makes some excellent points. In the past 30 or so years we have become a barely monitored society to an almost entirely surveiled society, with very few corners left unrecorded, even on quiet residential sidewalks. I've been making it a habit more and more while out on walks and errands to observe all the angles from which I'm being recorded. Then at least double that count for all the dashcams I can't spot, which is most of them. And the backup/parking cams, though most of those only record a very short distance behind the vehicle due to the downward angle. And then there are the citizens, the Instagram set, who faithfully archive random moments, often when one least expects to be in the background of a selfie video. It all adds up to living in the most hyper-documented era in human history, and it's only getting worse.

I hope some genius soon comes up with a reasonably discrete 'invisible shield' tech which will render useless any captured image of the wearer. Been thinking about how such a device might work... The market would be huge. I'd buy several for my family. Being erased from video documentation may look suspicious to authorities, but they have to find you to question or charge you, and they're more and more heavily relying on that same recorded footage in order to find people. So yeah, seems like probably the best direction to go if we want to avoid, for example, having our guns grabbed by corrupt governments.

Thanks for the input

No. Silencers are loud as fuck. If you actually had one you'd know that, Nigel.

That's not what we are talking about. I'm talking about guns

Why do you need to shoot a person without your neighbors knowing about it?

My neighbour's are cunts

Not OP, rather I'm the wordy bastard commenting above. But for me shooting quietly has several justifications. 1 is that I really don't like loud noises, so my airguns and my firearms are all suppressed. 2 is that if I want to shoot in the woods, it's a bloody long trip to get to somewhere I can do so without someone getting their panties in a bunch about it and reporting me, and I just don't have time to go that far out of town very often. So if I can shoot suppressed after an hour hike to just behind a mountain, nobody around, nobody in the distance hearing and reporting it, I get to do my shooting and nobody gets harmed. Win-win. And 3, if I ever do have to shoot a home invader or defend myself in the street, a suppressed pistol is going to at least significantly increase my chances that no third party will hear what's happened and associate it with me. I get to go on living my life, bad guy gets to bleed on the sidewalk, again, win-win. Not really interested in spending years and hundreds of thousands of dollars on lawyers just to get judged innocent of a crime as I was defending myself or my family. In case of a home invasion, they'd go down and I'd find a time to discretely relocate the body to somewhere else.

Retard

Wow. Such an eloquent critique. I stand humbled before your intelligence.

You want to turn a legal kill into an illegal kill. You're going to get yourself thrown into prison, retard.

Early prototypes of the MK23 could lock the slide forward, so it could be fired without automatically cycling. Downside to this is that operators would have to cycle the gun manually.