Suppressors are awesome.

we have a gov't in place that doesn't recognize the shooting sports, how can they be expected to respect the health and safety of shooters
sadly this can be applied to much of the populace too, guns are bad, the fear is strong
My feeling is that it has little to do with fear at all, more to do with politics. I think with Conservatives being the only ones championing gun rights, an authoritarian government like Trudeau's won't move an inch in the direction of restoring...or heaven forbid, improving the options for law-abiding gun owners.

Wasn't that long ago (C-21) that Liberals, one after one (mostly lead by sock boy and Menodcino) stood up the HoC and repeatedly asserted that only assault rifles were on their list, guns "designed to k*ll the greatest number of people in the shortest amount of time". Meanwhile, Conservatives were breathlessly asking why then, there are single-shot shotguns on the list? These lies made me want to pull my hair out, but asking around to non-shooting friends/co-workers=seemed that really...nobody was paying attention to the most easily-proven lies the Liberals have ever puked-out.

I think its completely absurd that we can't have/use sound moderators in Canada. I also imagine Pierre (unfortunately) can look a little into the future and have no appetite for defending the decision to make them accessible. He'd have to be on-board with the idea, I have to wonder if it's even on his radar?
 
I think its completely absurd that we can't have/use sound moderators in Canada. I also imagine Pierre (unfortunately) can look a little into the future and have no appetite for defending the decision to make them accessible. He'd have to be on-board with the idea, I have to wonder if it's even on his radar?
With a supermajority, the CPC won't have to defend anything. If they make such changes quickly, the leftists will have 4+ years to forget about their faux outrage and we will have 4+ years of history to show that, NO, the gun law changes didn't result in mass shootings in the streets etc and that in fact the crime rate dropped, which is the exact opposite of what the lieberals said would happen.

I talked to CCFR at a gunshow and they understand the above and have plans to work w the CPC to completely rewrite the Firearms Act and just maybe remove the ban on silencers.
 
Once you realize how many eurpoean countries that have way stricter gun rules allow or mandate them for shooting and hunting, you have to realize how retarded Canada’s legal outlook on suppressors really is.
That's fer sure. Here in Kanuckistan, the mutants in charge would rather give free hard drugs to fookin' dead beat losers than let folks save their
hearing. Absolute sheeeit that be.
 
I was in Houston Texas for work, figured I’d pop in to the closest range and see what they offered for rent. Got to shoot a shushed AR and a Ruger mark 5 .22. Anyone that has a half a brain would realize shooting suppressed is much safer. I will also add the range had an atm like machine for processing the ATF funny business tax stamp deal for suppressors. Pretty funny.
 
My feeling is that it has little to do with fear at all, more to do with politics. I think with Conservatives being the only ones championing gun rights, an authoritarian government like Trudeau's won't move an inch in the direction of restoring...or heaven forbid, improving the options for law-abiding gun owners.

Wasn't that long ago (C-21) that Liberals, one after one (mostly lead by sock boy and Menodcino) stood up the HoC and repeatedly asserted that only assault rifles were on their list, guns "designed to k*ll the greatest number of people in the shortest amount of time". Meanwhile, Conservatives were breathlessly asking why then, there are single-shot shotguns on the list? These lies made me want to pull my hair out, but asking around to non-shooting friends/co-workers=seemed that really...nobody was paying attention to the most easily-proven lies the Liberals have ever puked-out.

I think its completely absurd that we can't have/use sound moderators in Canada. I also imagine Pierre (unfortunately) can look a little into the future and have no appetite for defending the decision to make them accessible. He'd have to be on-board with the idea, I have to wonder if it's even on his radar?
This is it in a nutshell. Infuriating isn’t it.
Don’t like guns?!? DONT BUY ONE.

The lesson here (and I know I’m preaching to the choir) is that “they” will never stop trying to ban and confiscate civilian owned firearms.
Their plans do not include you owning a single shot .22 .

The disarmament agenda won’t stop by conceding. The ratchet only ever tightens.
 
Around 25 years ago a high percentage of our hunters in Ireland were against suppressors and possibly helped politicians keep them illegal. Those that saw the light kept on pushing and now no hunter would dare going against use of suppressors. Exactly the same happend in Germany maybe 10 years later. The old school hunters and antis were so strong that I didn't believe it could ever be turned around... but it was. The trick is to keep pushing, pushing facts and comparing health and safety rules how to deal with reducing noise at source etc. Inviting politicians to hear for themselves at shooting ranges. Have a positive outlook.
edi
 
Around 25 years ago a high percentage of our hunters in Ireland were against suppressors and possibly helped politicians keep them illegal. Those that saw the light kept on pushing and now no hunter would dare going against use of suppressors. Exactly the same happend in Germany maybe 10 years later. The old school hunters and antis were so strong that I didn't believe it could ever be turned around... but it was. The trick is to keep pushing, pushing facts and comparing health and safety rules how to deal with reducing noise at source etc. Inviting politicians to hear for themselves at shooting ranges. Have a positive outlook.
edi
Not a bad idea, but how are you going to let politicians compare at the range if we can't bring them to the range? Suppressors i mean, though politicians are a slippery bunch as well. - dan
 
Not a bad idea, but how are you going to let politicians compare at the range if we can't bring them to the range? Suppressors i mean, though politicians are a slippery bunch as well. - dan
There are some who legally own suppressors (through businesses licensed to buy/sell/own/manufacture prohibited firearms and devices) and could provide demos and hands on experience with them, but you need to find one of those people willing to publicly expose themselves and jump into a thankless political fight instead of living their lives elsewhere.


Mark
 
Around 25 years ago a high percentage of our hunters in Ireland were against suppressors and possibly helped politicians keep them illegal. Those that saw the light kept on pushing and now no hunter would dare going against use of suppressors. Exactly the same happend in Germany maybe 10 years later. The old school hunters and antis were so strong that I didn't believe it could ever be turned around... but it was. The trick is to keep pushing, pushing facts and comparing health and safety rules how to deal with reducing noise at source etc. Inviting politicians to hear for themselves at shooting ranges. Have a positive outlook.
edi
Agreed. The best way is to let people see, hear and try them.

I firmly believe the only solution is what the Americans did to the British
You may not be wrong but the British shooters were successful and no blood was required. UK OH&S law is virtually the same as CDN OH&S law. Both say that an employer MUST do all possible to reduce workplace noise AT THE SOURCE. It is not sufficient to simply hand out hearing protection.

There are lots of workplaces that involve firearms use. ALL of those workplaces are violating federal OH&S law because the Fed govt forces them too. Employees and their JWHSC's need to sue the Fed govt.

After UK workers won their court case it made no sense to prohibit sportsmen, competitors and hunters from using PPE that workplaces were mandated to provide for their employees.

We simply need a group of employees and employers to initiate a lawsuit against the Fed govt.
 
Not a bad idea, but how are you going to let politicians compare at the range if we can't bring them to the range? Suppressors i mean, though politicians are a slippery bunch as well. - dan
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
 
another downside to consider....at least here. Suppressors are expensive.

The best ones cost around $1,200 plus the tax stamp.
 
Back
Top Bottom