Legalize suppressors thread!!! Please move to general discussion

Canadian Black Rifle Mag will be going down South this summer to play with suppressors and would be well interested in working anyone who actively wants to try an legalize them up here.
Click to expand...

I am happy to provide any technical information you might need. Soonish I will be in possession of the proper sound metering gear required to correctly measure suppressed gun shots. I also have sound suppressors in most of the common calibers for testing or demonstration if need be.

I also know several internationally respected experts in the field if we need additional information or independant corroboration of facts.


Suputin, its good to have you around buddy!
Click to expand...

Well I kinda have a vested interest in the subject. ;) If such an effort was successful, you guys would make me filthy rich in the process. :)

Tell you what, get silencers legalized and I will offer a killer group buy for CGN denizens only. :cheers:
 
One argument that we could use to show how dumb it is to ban silencers is that there are lots of extremely lethal weapons available that are considerably quieter than a suppressed centrefire rifle.

A recurve bow flinging a 1.25" razor sharp broadhead downrange comes to mind. A crossbow doesn't require a lot of practice to master and it would be as quiet as a bow.

Yet there are no calls to make bows louder in order to prevent poaching or stop owners becoming mass murderers.
 
Here in New Zealand sound suppressors are completely unregulated, you don't even need a firearms licence to buy one.

You ask what rationale we have for having them, my response would be there is no reason to regulate or ban them, as the don't constitute a risk to the general public and are useful for hunting. Frankly the lack of ear protection by most hunters can lead to hearing issues in latter life, at least that is a pet peeze of an audiologist friend of mine.

I've had many debates with American shooters who think they are some ninjfied assasination tool, an idea that I assume Hollywood is largely responsible for, an idea that is not backed up by reality. A noise signature isn't a factor in the types of crimes where people are murdered with firearms in New Zealand and I imagine the same would be said of Canada.
 
The best way to do this is to go for it for sound pollution and hearing protection. (im sure said MANY times already :p )


Heck I'd love a B&T or Canadian made can for my Mark23 handgun or my USC/UMP conversion :D
 
I'm all for the leagalization of supressors. I'd own several if I had the chance to buy them.

I can see the anti's arguing that if sport shooting is so inherently dangerous to hearing then perhaps it should be banned all together. If it only saves one child's ear drum then it's worth it. :(

Even with a full majority government, it's unlikely the Conservatives will back a private members bill that has a lot of political risk and very little reward for them.

I'd be happy if someone could prove me wrong.
 
sport shooting is no more dangerous then ice hockey, to play the game you need proper safety equipment pads, helmets, mouth guards gloves etc... we as shooters should be aloud the same priviledge. The antis will have to come up with some pretty good arguments against increasing safety for a shooting enthusist or hunter.
 
Suputin, i'd be very interested in learning whatever i can about suppressors and such so please post any info you have recorded. I'll pm you my email if that would be preferred. I think in order to get this started we need to gather as much info as we can possibly get together would be best. i also intend on drafting up a email to send out to any and all suppressor companies for any info they can give to me as well. What do you guys think?? It's a start anyways...
 
Heck I'd love a B&T or Canadian made can for my Mark23 handgun or my USC/UMP conversion
Click to expand...

45 ACP is a ##### to suppress. The low pressure combined with a huge bore conspires to make the things difficult to make quiet. I have done a couple of 45's which worked out well but they are much more difficult than other calibers.


I'm supporting this or sure, it would jusify the AAC blackout 51T on my AR
Click to expand...

You'd still be SOL cause silencers can't be exported from the US. IF they were legal in Canada your only choices would be Canadian made or from Europe or New Zealand.


Suputin, i'd be very interested in learning whatever i can about suppressors and such so please post any info you have recorded.
Click to expand...

It would be easier if you ask specific questions. I can't post everything I know about silencers. A really good source for information is Al Paulson's "Silencer History and Performance Vol 1" He goes into how they are tested and a lot of the inner workings and development history etc. It can be purchased through Amazon.ca

I think in order to get this started we need to gather as much info as we can possibly get together would be best. i also intend on drafting up a email to send out to any and all suppressor companies for any info they can give to me as well. What do you guys think?? It's a start anyways...
Click to expand...

What were you planning to ask them? Instead of bothering the US manufacturers, who are all super busy building cans right now, why don't you just post your questions here and I will answer them. If I don't know the answer, I will forward the question to the relevant expert.

Asking US manufacturers may not help because their laws are quite specific and are quite different from suppressor regulations around the world. As a result the US suppressor community is quite insular.
 
I have a question. Are suppressors caliber specific? Can I buy one for a .223 and use it on my 204 ruger with good results? How about a .17 HMR or a 22lr?

Thanks.
 
Just saw a posting about an Olds, Alberta range having noise issues. Surely suppressors in a controlled situation such as a range would make sense. Those folks in Olds wouldn't be looking for a new range and the neighbours would not have a noise complaint.
 
I have a question. Are suppressors caliber specific? Can I buy one for a .223 and use it on my 204 ruger with good results? How about a .17 HMR or a 22lr?
Click to expand...

To a certain extent they are caliber specific but there is some room to play.

A 204 would be fine in a 223 suppressor .... but a .308 obviously would not. Firing 223 through a 308 suppressor works reasonably well but 30 cal suppressor tend to be bigger, heavier and more expensive than 223 suppressors so you have to consider what you are giving up.

With respect to 17 HMR in a 22 rimfire suppressor. Most 22 suppressors are made from aluminum. The 17 HMR would work fine in a 22 rimfire suppressor but the baffles would likely undergo more erosion due to the higher intensity cartridge so the suppressor wouldn't last as long.

There are people shooting 300 Whisper through 9mm pistol suppressors with no problem but they are sticking to the lower intensity subsonic rounds because 9mm pistol cans are also made from aluminum.
 
^ also, i can imagine a suppressor made for a .22 but used on a .223 would get blown to bits from the extreme pressure.
im not against legal suppressors, but i, like others, dont see it as the first thing on our list of laws to abolish. getting rid of the long gun registry should be #1 on everyones list.
i do however see suppressors having a much stronger case than the 5 round mag rule.

lets face it, the 5 round mag limit is (in theory) to make sure the police/government have more fire power than some crazy who decides to walk into a bank or office building with a gun.... because if someone like this goes nuts, they will most surely think before hand, "id better bring a pile of extra mags, cause these are all pinned to 5 with a pop rivet".:rolleyes:

i could see the #1 stumbling block for legal suppressors being hollywood.
it seems like most liberals, and others who appose our hobby, dont care to get the real facts before jumping to conclusions or taking what they see on the news or in the movies as truth.

"ive seen James Bond!, i know what 'silencers' do to a gun!!!!!!!!!!!"
 
Suputin,

Based on your knowledge of the suppressor community, and of suppressors themselves, what do you feel would be the best starting point to open the debate on their legality in Canada, or the path most likely successful for us to obtain what I feel is an essential health and safety tool?

Thanks,

UncleMax
 
I used to live in South Africa where suppresors are legal. In spite of having the highest gun crime rates in the world to the best of my knowledge there was never a recorded case of a criminal using a suppresor.

The people that write the laws watch too many James Bond movies. There is no logical argument to ban suppresors. Many more people are killed by cars each year than guns so why don't we ban mufflers?

I used suppresors in South Africa and they make shooting much more pleasant.
 
^ also, i can imagine a suppressor made for a .22 but used on a .223 would get blown to bits from the extreme pressure.
Click to expand...

Yes, it prob wouldn't last more than a couple of rounds. Going the other way is bad too. Shooting a lot of 22 rimfire through a 223 suppressor causes the can to get plugged up with lead residue which buggers up the sound reduction.


Based on your knowledge of the suppressor community, and of suppressors themselves, what do you feel would be the best starting point to open the debate on their legality in Canada, or the path most likely successful for us to obtain what I feel is an essential health and safety tool?
Click to expand...

I think a 2-pronged approach might be best.

A. There is no good reason to ban them. Most developed nations (many of those being more socialist leaning than Canada) allow civilian ownership. The reasons currently given to ban them in Canada are based on Hollywood and not reality. They are a valuable safety tool for both shooters and others in the area where shooting may occur.

Are we really less advanced than countries like New Zealand, S Africa, Finland, France and Britain?

B. Suppressors are the only effective means to tone down the noise made by shooting a firearm. They protect the user (when conventional ear based protection cannot), they protect people and animals in the area (where ear muffs do not) and they reduce noise pollution the same as a car muffler. They are also more friendly to the environment in that they trap a lot of lead.

In the UK they won the right to own suppressors based on the health and safety aspect. As someone posted earlier, the cost of hearing related damage in Canada is staggering. Suppressors are an inexpensive solution with no downsides.

Suppressor use in other countries has shown no increase in crime, murder or poaching as a result. The reason is that law abiding citizens do not suddenly turn into criminals just because they have access to a silencer ..... even if the lefties think they do.

What is it about this guy that terrifies lefties?

silentmike.jpg
 
Suputin said:
45 ACP is a ##### to suppress. The low pressure combined with a huge bore conspires to make the things difficult to make quiet. I have done a couple of 45's which worked out well but they are much more difficult than other calibers.
*SNIP*
Click to expand...


Yeah Most of the can manufacturers can only do 20 or so Db dry, or barely get to the hearing safe range when wet. But, its still worth it, if it can get close to an unsuppressed .22 out of an 18" barrel then I would be happy! As it is, .45 out of an 8" barrel is quite unpleasant :p
 
my brief research into suppressor and hearing loss has netted good results. Today i've learned that even if a suppressor only bring down the sound by 10 decibls that a significant reduction! i am on my phone but will try and find and post the links to some great studies i've retrieved on line, although i have only found about three in total when i can. We can deffinitly make this happen.
 
Don't hasten to overlook the challenge of reality vs. politics...

Practical arguments are one thing, selling the idea to illogical people whose only desire is to secure votes from an overwhelmingly unaware and misinformed population is another.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom