Time to reconsider suppressor?

Daver_II said:
Hey Greentips,

I do understand your point, however, is that a good enough reason to not try anything?

The whole point is that regulating items based on fear has got to go.... suppressors are the best example of a piece of equipment that does contribute to reduced risk of hearing damage.

There is also a happy precedent of some other countries that allow suppressors specifically for that reason.
Click to expand...

The problems are the issue people want to leverage off: Health and Safety, and environment impact.

Make a big deal out of an issue on these matters, there is no guarantee your preferred solution is the solution you will end up with. All a sudden you open up the gate for ALL OTHER stakeholders with their own solutions. There is no guarantee the government, after listening to other stakeholders, will pick your preferred solutions. You may end up wiht solutions that you don't want, and there is no going back.

Great, noise is an issue, now we need to protect people living close to the shooting range and just driving down the road next to it. Let's mandate all rifle range to have 6ft wall with sound attenuation around the entire property.

Don't put a noose around your own head in exchange for money. People may just kick the chair and give you nothing.
 
greentips said:
The problems are the issue people want to leverage off: Health and Safety, and environment impact.

Make a big deal out of an issue on these matters, there is no guarantee your preferred solution is the solution you will end up with. All a sudden you open up the gate for ALL OTHER stakeholders with their own solutions. There is no guarantee the government, after listening to other stakeholders, will pick your preferred solutions. You may end up wiht solutions that you don't want, and there is no going back.

Great, noise is an issue, now we need to protect people living close to the shooting range and just driving down the road next to it. Let's mandate all rifle range to have 6ft wall with sound attenuation around the entire property.

Don't put a noose around your own head in exchange for money. People may just kick the chair and give you nothing.
Click to expand...

First response from the anti's I encounter is " well you should stop shooting." Followed by "see it harms your health"
 
greentips said:
The problems are the issue people want to leverage off: Health and Safety, and environment impact.

Don't put a noose around your own head in exchange for money. People may just kick the chair and give you nothing.
Click to expand...

You got a better solution? It is all fine to knock down a proposed solution, that I might add has worked in another jurisdiction, without making any attempt to propose an alternative.




parksb2 said:
First response from the anti's I encounter is " well you should stop shooting." Followed by "see it harms your health"
Click to expand...

Of course it is. Anti's by their very nature don't want you or anyone to own guns. Their answer to ALL gun related questions will always be that you and I should not own guns.
 
Suputin said:
You got a better solution? It is all fine to knock down a proposed solution, that I might add has worked in another jurisdiction, without making any attempt to propose an alternative.
Click to expand...

The solution is not to touch it and let sleeping dogs lie. This is not the time to push things like this with a Liberals Government in power.
 
It's not that anyone is going after one route in specific. It's that rather than just say we want our guns a bit quieter, it would be beneficial to have more knowledge and multiple reasons to have such an item.

If they were going to 'mandatory' anything like that. It would start at mandatory ear pro and masks IMO. I don't think it cuts down enough lead to make anything mandatory..and if it does cut it down that much...it's a damn good reason for ownership. People thinking theyll make it mandatory are pulling at straws. I highly doubt they'd flip a switch and make them mandatory from prohibited.
 
Last edited:
Yes as a kiwi living in Canada I can confirm that it is legal to use suppressors in New Zealand. Not only do they cut the db's for the surrounding population they protect the hearing of the user and have a substantial effect on lessening recoil. Why wouldn't you encourage the use of them. By the way Australia with its draconian gun laws also bans them!
 
The liberals will not give gun owners anything we want.
Our best course of action would be to gather information, prepare our argument, get all ducks in a row and get CSSA onboard then sit back and wait for the next government majority. If we get liberal or NDP in the next election we continue to sit and pray we don't lose anything else.
I don't think the conservatives are pro firearms or even our friends at all, they are simply the least anti and that's all we have to work with. If they were truely our friends they would have done much more than they did while they were in power. Honestly, what did they really do for us other than not take things away from us? I don't notice anything being easier as a gun owner since they were in power. Oh wait, that's right, I can carry one less piece of paper to the range with me. Wait, nope my paperwork says that my ATT is now part of my license but it says I'm supposed to carry this silly conditions sheet with me now. What else? Hmmmm... that's about it. They didn't do anything to the RCMP after High River other than let them stall until the next gov took power. JT will probably give the RCMP involved in that a medal now, proclaim them hero's who saved lives by risking their lives to get those firearms off the streets and out of the hands of criminals.
They got us the Swiss Arms and CZ back? Those should have never been allowed to be deemed prohib to begin with. Did anyone get their peepee slapped over that? Nope.

I don't know what the answer is but I don't think we're going to see anything we like given to us in the future. It will be death by a thousand cuts for us while rights and freedoms are taken one by one.

Tinfoil hat warning. Slip yours on before continuing ;)
I have no faith in our government or in the general populace. Government agenda is to disarm the civilian population and the sheeple have been brainwashed to believe the government only wants what's best for us. Very few believe that all the "terrorist attacks" throughout the world were actually engineered by the government to scare us so we look to them to protect us from the evil bad guys no matter what freedoms they take from us to make it happen.
 
rajczak_kashka said:
I think it's time we reconsider the issue of sound suppressors and view them as they do in some European countries not to mention the US as well.. With two of the once rural ranges where I shoot now facing possible closure or non renewal of lease on land due to "new" neighbors noise complaints immenent, it is time to reconsider the sound suppressor. Several European countries , Belgium being one I believe, do not allow hunting within a certain proximity to towns without some form of noise suppression. Maybe we should get together as a group and lobby that suppressors are appropriate for range use AND hunting! ��
Click to expand...

Consider: why were they prohibited in the first place? (And no, it's not because of any of the sarcastic smarta$s reasons CGNers love to use to show their internet smarts or display their political leanings).

There was necessarily a rationale, however weak, behind their inclusion as prohibited devices. To help conservation officers detect poaching? To help LEO determine the direction shots came from? If that's the case, there's no reason we couldn't use them openly on the ranges. The first thing to find out if we want to reverse the prohibition is the actual, "set in writing" reason they were prohibited in the first place and attack it as not being relevant anymore.
 
Good point Grawfr.
Silencers and full auto guns conjures up many things to the unlearned, mostly fear.
Most Canadians I've talked to in the last 30 yrs think of silencers/suppressors as an assassins weapon and they are convinced that "mufflers" are evil with guns, but more than necessary with automobiles.
I've played with FA guns at approved ranges and find them fun, but hard to control. To be honest, I could never afford to shoot them, but the thought of them in criminal hands abhors most Canadians that I've talked to. Truth is most criminals haven't been trained to properly use FA guns and end up spraying ammo everywhere.

The more of the unlearned we bring to ranges and try firearms is the answer to remove fear. I've seen this work and will continue to use that mode of conduct to increase our fold. It's fun to see somebody who hated guns turn into a gun collector tired of having his freedoms trampled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom