Suppressor legality in Canada

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pure Energy said:
What if the firearm was manufactured with a built in suppressor? Like say a new gun, built in Canada, with it made into the barrel. If it left the factory like that, then it would no longer be a device used to reduce sound, as that is the sound it makes from the factory no?
Click to expand...

Nice try but that won't fly in Canada.


I have thought of this before, and by the letter of the law a factory made and non-disassemble-able integrally suppressed rifle (like the factory sealed can on the MP5SD) SHOULD be legal but there would be no way the RCMP would let that go. They would FIND a reason to prohibit it, somehow or some way.
Click to expand...

The MP5SD is not no-disassembleable. The can may be removed from the barrel simply by unscrewing it. The barrel underneath is ported which is why the thing is deemed "integral" but there is nothing stopping the gun being fired with the can removed .... other than it would be REALLY loud.

Interestingly the MP5SD is actually legal in Canada. The people who wrote the laws didn;t have a clue what they were lumping into different classifications and the MP5SD is listed in the 12-5 prohib class. There is a general rule in law that the specific over-rules the general. The general rule is that silencers are prohib. But the MP5SD is specifically named as being a 12-5 prohib. Of course this is all academic as there are no 12-5 MP5SD's in civilian hands and the 12-X rules do not allow the creation of new guns in any class.
 
mmattockx said:
Since it has not been mentioned, there is another group that can own suppressors - businesses that are licensed to possess prohibited devices. They do not have to be elaborate, profitable, or a full time occupation and are relatively easy to get licensed. There are CGN members that have such businesses, mostly just to have access to all of the forbidden toys, with little to no intention of ever making money from the enterprise.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure such a comment is really fair. I don't know of anyone designing and making suppressors who doesn't have the goal of making money from it. I certainly didn't go to all the trouble to prosecute two patents without any intention of ultimately profiting from that work. I have invested a great deal of time and money into my business and one day it will pay off and pay off big ..... I hope!

The one thing I can say with absolute authority is that good silencer designers do not simply appear out of nowhere. It takes time and a lot of interest in the subject to be good at this. What goes on inside a can is an extremely complex process that few understand well. I don't think there are more than a couple dozen really good designers working today worldwide.

I just became aware of a new process that could revolutionize how we make suppressors. It boggles the mind with the potential to create new shapes that would be otherwise unmachineable.
 
"prohibited device" means ...
(c) a device or contrivance designed or intended to muffle or stop the sound or report of a firearm.
Click to expand...

as pointed out to me by someone who used to work in the RCMP firearms section, when used during shooting, earplugs (or any other form of hearing protection) also technically fall into this category of prohibited device.
 
mmattockx said:
I know people whose experiences say otherwise.


Mark
Click to expand...

Well technically so does mine, (as I only know one guy that applied for it, and he did get it) but my friend got his Prohib devices license when the last (temporary) CFO was in, whom was much more firearm friendly.

Now theoretically if you have a valid reason or at least can convince the CFO WHY you should get it, then you shouldn't have any trouble with getting it. But as far as I know the CFO still has the final say in it.
 
cavegoon said:
as pointed out to me by someone who used to work in the RCMP firearms section, when used during shooting, earplugs (or any other form of hearing protection) also technically fall into this category of prohibited device.
Click to expand...

That is the single most ridiculous thing I have ever heard and the fact it supposedly came from an RCMP firearms "expert" is both shocking and disappointing.

Ear plugs only block existing environmental noise from reaching the ears of the person wearing them. That in no way satisfys the wording of the law prohibiting silencers.
 
Suputin said:
That is the single most ridiculous thing I have ever heard and the fact it supposedly came from an RCMP firearms "expert" is both shocking and disappointing.

Ear plugs only block existing environmental noise (this would include firearm reports) from reaching the ears of the person wearing them. That in no way satisfys the wording of the law prohibiting silencers.
Click to expand...

Read it again...

"prohibited device" means ...
(c) a device or contrivance designed or intended to muffle or stop the sound or report of a firearm.

Earplugs and earmuffs do that, as in firearm reports get lower in dB to the user of ear protection. A developer of suppressors should know how dB ratings work.

That is exactly why I want a suppressor, so myself and others can protect our hearing without, or with less, ear protection. That's why every firearm owner in Canada wants a suppressor, to lower the dB rating of our firearms. Hunting, competition and plinking would be come much more enjoyable for shooters, spectators and communities with ranges.

Right?
 
Last edited:
Kratos said:
Read it again...

"prohibited device" means ...
(c) a device or contrivance designed or intended to muffle or stop the sound or report of a firearm.

Earplugs and earmuffs do that, as in firearm reports get lower in dB to the user of ear protection. A developer of suppressors should know how dB ratings work.

That is exactly why I want a suppressor, so myself and others can protect our hearing without, or with less, ear protection. That's why every firearm owner in Canada wants a suppressor, to lower the dB rating of our firearms. Hunting, competion and plinking would be come much more enjoyable for shooters, spectators and communities with ranges.

Right?
Click to expand...


I totally agree. I started this thread with that in mind and I was being called a retard and told to use the search function.

I live in a area where ranges are minimal because so much farm land that most owners either own or have friends who own land and just shoot at home. Plus not far there is a ton of crown land. The majority of complaints is noise. People hate the noise of 3 or 4 guys shooting away on a Saturday afternoon. I seriously don't see the down side to suppressors. Government needs to stop thinking about the crazies. Crazies all have suppressors so making a law against it doesn't really effect them. For the pal holder who enjoys recreational shooting a suppressor has so many benefits. As mentioned you don't need ear protection nor do people around. And you won't piss everyone off within 1 km radius.
 
Kratos said:
Read it again...

"prohibited device" means ...
(c) a device or contrivance designed or intended to muffle or stop the sound or report of a firearm.

Earplugs and earmuffs do that, as in firearm reports get lower in dB to the user of ear protection. A developer of suppressors should know how dB ratings work.
Click to expand...

Ear plugs DO NOT reduce the report of a firearm. Earplugs block existing noise from reaching the ears of the person wearing them. They do not in any way alter of reduce the sound pressure wave that travels through the air. Anyone who thinks otherwise has a serious issue understanding the English language. And to think I pettitioned to have this thread reopened. :(

The law specifically states a prohibited device must reduce or muffle the report of the firearm. That something may stand between you and the noise of the gunshot it totally irrelevant. If not then every house, car, forest and even the air itself would be classed as Prohibted devices because any if those things between you and the gunshot will reduce the amount of sound reaching your ears.

I'm not sure I can be any more clear about this.

That is exactly why I want a suppressor, so myself and others can protect our hearing without, or with less, ear protection. That's why every firearm owner in Canada wants a suppressor, to lower the dB rating of our firearms. Hunting, competition and plinking would be come much more enjoyable for shooters, spectators and communities with ranges.

Right?
Click to expand...

Correct.
 
Chago said:
I totally agree. I started this thread with that in mind and I was being called a retard and told to use the search function.

I live in a area where ranges are minimal because so much farm land that most owners either own or have friends who own land and just shoot at home. Plus not far there is a ton of crown land. The majority of complaints is noise. People hate the noise of 3 or 4 guys shooting away on a Saturday afternoon. I seriously don't see the down side to suppressors. Government needs to stop thinking about the crazies. Crazies all have suppressors so making a law against it doesn't really effect them. For the pal holder who enjoys recreational shooting a suppressor has so many benefits. As mentioned you don't need ear protection nor do people around. And you won't piss everyone off within 1 km radius.
Click to expand...

He mistake you are making is to beleive there is an actual reason silencers are prohibited. From all the research I have done there appears to be absolutely no reason stated for the inclusion of silencers on the prohib devices list.
 
Suputin said:
He mistake you are making is to beleive there is an actual reason silencers are prohibited. From all the research I have done there appears to be absolutely no reason stated for the inclusion of silencers on the prohib devices list.
Click to expand...

I believe their use in movies may have influenced the architects of our current laws...we see suppressors creating harmony by helping us be less obtrusive with our neighbours...they see suppressors as turning every owner into a sniper.
 
Permit Acquisition
Canadians are no longer able to acquire permits for silencers. However, permits that are "grandfathered," meaning they were acquired before the law changed in 1995, are still considered valid. If you are not sure if your permit is valid, check with your local gun shop or lawyer. Be warned that if the permit turns out to be invalid, you may be expected to surrender your silencer.

Laws surrounding airsoft guns are not clear, and some magistrates and law-enforcement officers still consider them dangerous firearms. If you are caught with a silencer for an airsoft gun, it could carry the same penalty as it would for a dangerous firearm.



Read more: Canada's Silencer Laws | eHow http://www.ehow.com/list_6802569_canada_s-silencer-laws.html#ixzz2VweXXBKQ
 
So I guess we are just to young... Wonder why fun stuff was allowed before and now ... it just become too dangerous for the population ...
I think we are just getting overprotected by the gov. and not just about gun ... the worst thing about that is what dosn<t kill you make you stronguer but getting over protected only make people weaker and more scared of everything...
 
Suputin said:
The law specifically states a prohibited device must reduce or muffle the report of the firearm. That something may stand between you and the noise of the gunshot it totally irrelevant. If not then every house, car, forest and even the air itself would be classed as Prohibted devices because any if those things between you and the gunshot will reduce the amount of sound reaching your ears.
Click to expand...

You are right, everything should be prohibited by the definition in the law. The only place you could legally shoot firearms is in space. Now do you understand my argument against this law? It doesnt even make sense. I'm on your side, I'm sorry if my writing indicated otherwise.
 
Dube295 said:
Permit Acquisition
Canadians are no longer able to acquire permits for silencers. However, permits that are "grandfathered," meaning they were acquired before the law changed in 1995, are still considered valid. If you are not sure if your permit is valid, check with your local gun shop or lawyer. Be warned that if the permit turns out to be invalid, you may be expected to surrender your silencer.

Laws surrounding airsoft guns are not clear, and some magistrates and law-enforcement officers still consider them dangerous firearms. If you are caught with a silencer for an airsoft gun, it could carry the same penalty as it would for a dangerous firearm.



Read more: Canada's Silencer Laws | eHow http://www.ehow.com/list_6802569_canada_s-silencer-laws.html#ixzz2VweXXBKQ
Click to expand...

If the bit about airsoft is true, then I'm in pretty big trouble. But it's not. Airsoft guns are not firearms according to the law, and the mock suppressors are designed to look like suppressors, but don't actually function to any noticeable degree.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom