Damn it, I want a suppressor!!!

Thats one way to lobby for supressors. If people complain about range noise, tell them to write the government to legalize supressors.
 
Canadiankid said:
Thats one way to lobby for supressors. If people complain about range noise, tell them to write the government to legalize supressors.
Click to expand...

Seriously, do you think that's going to happen? If a member of the public is going to complain about noise levels from a range and they're motivated enough to write about it, then they're going to ask for a range closure, not the legalization of supressors.

Remember who we're dealing with. We're not talking about a firearms savy or knowledgable public. You mention silencers to the average joe and they think you're an asassin wanna-be or a potential baby killer. They're so conditioned to firearms being portrayed in such a negative light, they're not going to be reasoned with unless they've been educated on the subject and have an open mind about it.

Put fear in people's minds and you can sell them anything. Why do you think the gun control loby has been so successful in this country? It's because they're experts at selling fear to all the "sheeple" to encourage politicians to draft and pass feel good legislation. Then a few years down the road when the public realizes they're truly not safe, then the gun control loby puts a spin on it saying we didn't go far enough last time, let's get even tougher! And the cycle continues...again...again...and again...

Personally, I think we as shooters should launch a class action law suit against the government because they are preventing us from having the ability to use supressors to help prevent hearing loss.
 
2bad4u2 said:
Seriously, do you think that's going to happen? If a member of the public is going to complain about noise levels from a range and they're motivated enough to write about it, then they're going to ask for a range closure, not the legalization of supressors.

Remember who we're dealing with. We're not talking about a firearms savy or knowledgable public. You mention silencers to the average joe and they think you're an asassin wanna-be or a potential baby killer. They're so conditioned to firearms being portrayed in such a negative light, they're not going to be reasoned with unless they've been educated on the subject and have an open mind about it.

Put fear in people's minds and you can sell them anything. Why do you think the gun control loby has been so successful in this country? It's because they're experts at selling fear to all the "sheeple" to encourage politicians to draft and pass feel good legislation. Then a few years down the road when the public realizes they're truly not safe, then the gun control loby puts a spin on it saying we didn't go far enough last time, let's get even tougher! And the cycle continues...again...again...and again...

Personally, I think we as shooters should launch a class action law suit against the government because they are preventing us from having the ability to use supressors to help prevent hearing loss.
Click to expand...
Which is why we need to start going on with the educating part. We can't just sit idly by and hope nothing bad happens, we need to proactively get our name and ideas out there. Take friends shooting, take family shooting. So many people don't KNOW about shooting sports, so they listen to the TV and the CBC spew vile, and then parrot it because they don't KNOW better.

ETA - missed your edit :p

The idea of launching a class action suit is kind of weird, but so crazy it just might work, if we got 80% of the firearms community to get in on it...... A million people saying the exact same thing is a powerful voice.
 
yup the decision was made during the great depression to deter people from shoot on the farmer livestock....
Click to expand...

I have not been able to find any indication like this. From what I have found it appears as though they were looking to prohibit weapons and items that had no obvious use in polite society and silencers simply ended up being tacked onto the list for no real reason. Nobody understood the ramifications of hearing loss back then.
 
My recommendation would be to initiate some sort of Private Members Bill - combined with education, and as a sop to the government, add a tax like down here so the coffers are enriched.
 
Suputin said:
This paper is a good way to educate people, both shooters and non shooters. It contains all kinds of useful information related to sound suppressors including legal issues and some history. There is a discussion of hearing loss and a comparison of real sound levels.

http://members.shaw.ca/cronhelm/Images/LegalizeSuppressors.pdf
Click to expand...

I've made colour print copies, highlighted and given that article to PM MOORE. Hope he did more than line his waste paper basket with it.

50calshooter said:
I love that guys videos, I would love to shoot with him for a day, I bet I'd learn a lot...

Is there such a thing as sub sonic 5.56? Jus curious, I'd like to take my Noveske to the states to shoot suppressed...
Click to expand...

Hand loads !!! very cool
 
Other then noise what is there any advantage to sub sonic rounds? Im thinking it may benifit M&P in close quarter sitiuations vs a full load?? Why would a guy want a 300 black out vs a .308??

Cheers!!
 
colt45cz75 said:
Our firearms laws were written by a pack of gun hating a**holes whose only firearms knowledge came from movies and TV.That is why everything is f**ked up beyond all recognition.The RCMP also bears a level of complicity,as they could have helped us, but instead decided to enhance their monopoly of force.
Click to expand...

this deserves to be quoted again
 
Guy, will you please think of all the kids that are saved by the prohibition of suppressors??

Besides that, what most people know of suppressors is what they saw in movies.

But shooting a FA MP5 with a can sure is a blast :D

If someone starts a campaign for legalizing them, I'd support him for sure.
 
scott_r said:
Other then noise what is there any advantage to sub sonic rounds? Im thinking it may benifit M&P in close quarter sitiuations vs a full load?? Why would a guy want a 300 black out vs a .308??

Cheers!!
Click to expand...

For the very same reason you'd want a 7.62x39mm over .308 Winchester. The .300 Blk. is essentially an AR friendly ballistic equivalent of the Com Bloc round. The .300 Blk. is a very flexible chamberring in both supersonic and subsonic capacities.
 
scott_r said:
Other then noise what is there any advantage to sub sonic rounds? Im thinking it may benifit M&P in close quarter sitiuations vs a full load?? Why would a guy want a 300 black out vs a .308??

Cheers!!
Click to expand...

You can run heavier than standard bullets at lower velocities and still get an adequate energy dump. Remember that high school physics that you thought you'd never need again??? E= m (mass) x velocity ...
Because the .308 is a whole different rifle, while the 300BLK only needs a new barrel. It uses the same bolt and mags (essentially) as the 5.56.

P.S. - please use spell check...
 
Taken from 300aacblackout.com

Full power 115-125 grain ammunition matches the ballistics of the 7.62x39mm AK, and eclipses 5.56mm with much higher-mass projectiles for a more dramatic effect on the target. Or choose subsonic cartridges for optimal use with a sound suppressor - 220 grain Sierra OTM (open-tip match) bullets vastly outperforms a 9mm MP5-SD in penetration and long range accuracy.

At 300 meters, 300 BLK has 16.7% more energy than 7.62x39mm. Max effective range, using M4 military standards for hit probability, is 440 meters for a 9 inch barrel, and 460 meters for a 16 inch barrel. 300 BLK from a 9 inch barrel has the same energy at the muzzle as a 14.5 inch barrel M4, and about 5% more energy at 440 meters - even though the barrel is much shorter.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom