Suppressors are awesome.

PETITION NO.: 421-01700
BY: MR. TROST (SASKATOON-UNIVERSITY)
DATE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2017
PRINT NAME OF SIGNATORY: HONOURABLE JODY WILSON-RAYBOULD
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
SIGNATURE
Minister or Parliamentary Secretary
SUBJECT
Firearms
ORIGINAL TEXT
REPLY
7BThe Government believes in implementing effective measures with respect to firearms that prioritize public safety, while
remaining mindful of the need for such measures to be manageable for firearms owners and businesses. Naturally, the
safety of firearms users is always a paramount consideration.
8BAny device intended to muffle the sound of a firearm has been unlawful in Canada since the early 1900s. Sound
reduction or elimination diminishes the public’s ability to react to gun violence and makes it harder for law enforcement
to become aware of a possible criminal incident.
9BThe Minister of Justice encourages firearms owners to make use of other forms of hearing protection that are commonly
available and that do not adversely impact public safety
 
EJG said:
In Germany for example Suppressor manufacturer Roedale released many tests, research results, teamed up with universities and kind of used any media they could to bring the story to attention. For example saving the hearing of your hunting dog was one theme as the hearing protection is not an option.
edi
Click to expand...
That's a good point. - dan
 
Onagoth said:
another downside to consider....at least here. Suppressors are expensive.

The best ones cost around $1,200 plus the tax stamp.
Click to expand...
They don't have to be though. In countries with more liberal access to suppressors they can be quite inexpensive. Legalizing them would also open up the ability to manufacture your own in the same vein as those done stateside on a Form 1 (although hopefully not requiring stupidity like tax stamps and the like).
 
sound mods are anything from $40 to $400 dollars in the UK,pending if you want air rifle or centrefire.
no tax stamp whatsoever.


i spoke with a gundealer earlier this year when i flew back and the police are now actually thinking of complete
de regulation of sound mods.you wont need a firearms license to purchase one
 
Onagoth said:
another downside to consider....at least here. Suppressors are expensive.

The best ones cost around $1,200 plus the tax stamp.
Click to expand...
That is only the US market. High costs are a result of the tax stamp cost. People want a high quality product if they are going to pay a $200 tax on it. Where no such regulations or tax costs are involved, sound suppressors are marketed and sold quite cheaply. Places like Finland and New Zealand have very inexpensive sound suppressors available on the market.


KRider said:
PETITION NO.: 421-01700
BY: MR. TROST (SASKATOON-UNIVERSITY)
DATE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2017
PRINT NAME OF SIGNATORY: HONOURABLE JODY WILSON-RAYBOULD
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
SIGNATURE
Minister or Parliamentary Secretary
SUBJECT
Firearms
ORIGINAL TEXT
REPLY
7BThe Government believes in implementing effective measures with respect to firearms that prioritize public safety, while
remaining mindful of the need for such measures to be manageable for firearms owners and businesses. Naturally, the
safety of firearms users is always a paramount consideration.
8BAny device intended to muffle the sound of a firearm has been unlawful in Canada since the early 1900s. Sound
reduction or elimination diminishes the public’s ability to react to gun violence and makes it harder for law enforcement
to become aware of a possible criminal incident.
9BThe Minister of Justice encourages firearms owners to make use of other forms of hearing protection that are commonly
available and that do not adversely impact public safety
Click to expand...
What, you thought a petition would cause the govt to see the light and change a long standing law? ROTFLMAO. The two points made by the govt are 100% BS.

In order for police to know a crime has to be committed, that crime must be as loud as possible? And it is the law that stops an unlicensed criminal from illegally getting a gun and ammunition, illegally transporting that gun and then illegally shooting a person in an illegal attempt to kill them? This is a LUDICROUS argument put forth by a COMPLETE MORON that could only be accepted by BRAIN DEAD LEFTISTS.

There is a scientific study done by an audiologist (available on the internet) that shows ear muffs are not effective at preventing damaging levels of sound reaching the ears. The govt is forcing shooters to injure themselves and is violating their own OH&S laws in the process. There is NO excuse to maintain the ban on sound suppressors. The ban on sound suppressors adversely impacts public safety. The law adversely impacts public safety.
 
I Dont Care About You said:
That is only the US market. High costs are a result of the tax stamp cost. People want a high quality product if they are going to pay a $200 tax on it. Where no such regulations or tax costs are involved, sound suppressors are marketed and sold quite cheaply. Places like Finland and New Zealand have very inexpensive sound suppressors available on the market.



What, you thought a petition would cause the govt to see the light and change a long standing law? ROTFLMAO. The two points made by the govt are 100% BS.

In order for police to know a crime has to be committed, that crime must be as loud as possible? And it is the law that stops an unlicensed criminal from illegally getting a gun and ammunition, illegally transporting that gun and then illegally shooting a person in an illegal attempt to kill them? This is a LUDICROUS argument put forth by a COMPLETE MORON that could only be accepted by BRAIN DEAD LEFTISTS.

There is a scientific study done by an audiologist (available on the internet) that shows ear muffs are not effective at preventing damaging levels of sound reaching the ears. The govt is forcing shooters to injure themselves and is violating their own OH&S laws in the process. There is NO excuse to maintain the ban on sound suppressors. The ban on sound suppressors adversely impacts public safety. The law adversely impacts public safety.
Click to expand...
No, just posting the answer received when people attempted
 
I would think high end suppressors in unregulated markets are still around $1000

Titanium isn’t cheap and R&D costs have to be recovered.

Maybe a clunky steel suppressor is cheap, but I think a Socom RC3 is going to be pricy no matter where you are

Then again, most decent quality firearm accessories are expensive
 
^ Absolutely true. Tinnitus is torture and there is no cure. Taxpayer's money is wasted on gender #### and yet they won't let us spend our own money to protect our hearing. Bastards!
 
Onagoth said:
I would think high end suppressors in unregulated markets are still around $1000

Titanium isn’t cheap and R&D costs have to be recovered.

Maybe a clunky steel suppressor is cheap, but I think a Socom RC3 is going to be pricy no matter where you are

Then again, most decent quality firearm accessories are expensive
Click to expand...
That is the beauty of a free(ish) market. There would be fancy, high end cans for $$$ and decent, low cost cans that still perform very well. You don't need fancy materials or high costs to have decent performing suppressors. The cheaper ones will just be a bit heavier than the expensive ones, which isn't much of a tragedy at all.


Mark
 
Purchased a issue of "RIFLESHOOTER" magazine JAN/FEB 2025 , it contains an advertisment for SILENCERCENTRAL (US company) offering buy one get one free. While it is for a .22 the cost is valued at 465.00 US Divided in half plus 400.00 for two tax stamps doesn't seem that bad
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom