PDA

View Full Version : Ok we need to be allowed Silencers in Canada...



Drache
08-01-2014, 09:13 PM
http://www.silencerco.com/salvo/

http://static.squarespace.com/static/52cb1392e4b09c5a5a9139b6/53c9b085e4b017caa10686b6/53c9b09ae4b017caa10686d1/1405726885560/9.jpg?format=1000w

http://static.squarespace.com/static/52cb1392e4b09c5a5a9139b6/53c9b085e4b017caa10686b6/53c9b091e4b09faa58cb9989/1405726904462/11.jpg?format=1000w

How quiet is it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsPq9xtE69w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CC1E0znN5qk

Waynetheman
08-02-2014, 12:11 AM
I randomly came across this on youtube the other day. I really like the look of those funky square suppressors.

Gaidheal
08-02-2014, 07:26 AM
Not a range in the country would ever have to worry about noise compaints.

The benefits for hunting are self-evident.

So is the fact we have stupid laws.

Facepalm
08-02-2014, 07:56 AM
This is why it is so hard to come to a consensus on anything. while I neither agree or disagree on silencers, nor getting rid of the stupid gun laws for unrestricted. So I would only think why would you want everyone the ability to use silencers, or FA's, or an FA with unlimited magazines? Sounds like a recipe for disaster. Imagine that criminals start to use these, it would go very bad for us

RobSmith
08-02-2014, 07:59 AM
Criminals already have access to all of those things, so giving everybody else access really wouldn't change anything.


This is why it is so hard to come to a consensus on anything. while I neither agree or disagree on silencers, nor getting rid of the stupid gun laws for unrestricted. So I would only think why would you want everyone the ability to use silencers, or FA's, or an FA with unlimited magazines? Sounds like a recipe for disaster. Imagine that criminals start to use these, it would go very bad for us

Camo tung
08-02-2014, 09:20 AM
This is why it is so hard to come to a consensus on anything. while I neither agree or disagree on silencers, nor getting rid of the stupid gun laws for unrestricted. So I would only think why would you want everyone the ability to use silencers, or FA's, or an FA with unlimited magazines? Sounds like a recipe for disaster. Imagine that criminals start to use these, it would go very bad for us

OMG. You DO know that use of a firearm during the commission of a crime carries a severe penalty right? Robbery and/or murder is already illegal? Bad people will do bad things regardless of the consequences. Suppressors change none of that.

Drache
08-02-2014, 09:40 AM
This is why it is so hard to come to a consensus on anything. while I neither agree or disagree on silencers, nor getting rid of the stupid gun laws for unrestricted. So I would only think why would you want everyone the ability to use silencers, or FA's, or an FA with unlimited magazines? Sounds like a recipe for disaster. Imagine that criminals start to use these, it would go very bad for us

http://www.lexingtonprosecutor.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/guns.jpg

CanuckWR
08-02-2014, 02:38 PM
Why can't I live in a country that I get to hunt with a suppressed pistol? It seems totally logical to me...

x0ra
08-02-2014, 02:53 PM
This is why it is so hard to come to a consensus on anything. while I neither agree or disagree on silencers, nor getting rid of the stupid gun laws for unrestricted. So I would only think why would you want everyone the ability to use silencers, or FA's, or an FA with unlimited magazines? Sounds like a recipe for disaster. Imagine that criminals start to use these, it would go very bad for us

Anti were saying the EXACT SAME THING about CCW laws in the US. None of these "oh my god, streets will be stained with blood" bs ever happened.

FWIW, if I was a hitman, I would already use suppressors (if not manufacture my own, given all the money I'd make) and subsonic ammo (once again, home made), so really, your point does not stands.

GTA Dragon
08-03-2014, 01:39 PM
At the very least the drive byes won't be so damn annoying

lone-wolf
08-03-2014, 02:14 PM
So I would only think why would you want everyone the ability to use silencers, or FA's, or an FA with unlimited magazines? Sounds like a recipe for disaster. Imagine that criminals start to use these, it would go very bad for us

Freedom is dangerous.

RimfireFans
08-03-2014, 07:05 PM
Step one in us having them is to start calling them suppressors and not silencers. The general public hears the word silencer and they think of movies where a "silenced" .44 revolver makes no noise and it's scary to them.

Gaidheal
08-03-2014, 07:41 PM
Freedom is dangerous.

Can you envision Labchuk's head exploding when posed with the following question?

"Would you rather a normal firing range in your neighbourhood, or one that allows silencers/suppressors so you won't hear them?"

:D

bettercallsaul
08-03-2014, 08:19 PM
"We can't, cuz then they'd would FORCE us to use them." <---- worst excuse ever.

CanuckWR
08-03-2014, 10:17 PM
"We can't, cuz then they'd would FORCE us to use them." <---- worst excuse ever.

Would be terrible to be a civilized sport... :confused1:

OITC
08-03-2014, 11:20 PM
Yeah but i see where he is going with that. Everything could be forced to be silent or under a certain decibels or no go.

GTA Dragon
08-05-2014, 03:03 PM
"We can't, cuz then they'd would FORCE us to use them." <---- worst excuse ever.

Wouldn't be that bad champ... hunting with no ear protection... Shooting at will with no one bothering you... More people would join the sport, what the heck is a loud boom gonna do with your shooting experience. Does it serve a purpose?

RobSmith
08-05-2014, 03:27 PM
Unless it can be demonstrated that suppressors add significant cost or reduce accuracy, I'd be a lot more comfortable with them being mandatory than prohibited. Reduced noise and recoil are just some of the advantages, that means fewer noise complaints from the general public (and thus a reduction of the people hostile to shooting sports based on noise pollution rather than risk of injury), and a more pleasant experience for first time shooters.

bettercallsaul
08-05-2014, 03:31 PM
I'm just saying... you can't mandate the use of suppressors. Not everyone can afford them. It would be a huge barrier to sport shooting. Not to mention the various pistol sports that would be ruined here in Canada.

Just like in the USA, we should have the choice of whether we want to use a suppressor or not.

You can't go full tilt either way, prohibition is baseless, and mandatory use is another costly barrier to gun ownership. We need the choice.

Imagine you had to spend $700-$2000 for each gun you own simply to be able to use it legally. FORGET IT.

SIR VEYOR
08-05-2014, 03:39 PM
I'm just saying... you can't mandate the use of suppressors. Not everyone can afford them. It would be a huge barrier to sport shooting. Not to mention the various pistol sports that would be ruined here in Canada.

Just like in the USA, we should have the choice of whether we want to use a suppressor or not.

You can't go full tilt either way, prohibition is baseless, and mandatory use is another costly barrier to gun ownership. We need the choice.

Imagine you had to spend $700-$2000 for each gun you own simply to be able to use it legally. FORGET IT.

I dunno. Pillows are what $8 and bottles of pop are 2 for $4 right now. That's what's working at the low end of the market. So 5 rounds of ammo per silencer costwise in Canada.

Gaidheal
08-05-2014, 03:51 PM
Imagine you had to spend $700-$2000 for each gun you own simply to be able to use it legally. FORGET IT.

I could buy a '80s-era 40-foot sailboat for that kind of money.

:Bang head:

RangeBob
08-08-2014, 12:14 AM
August 6, 2014
Florida

Hunters of deer, turkey and other animals in Florida may soon be able to operate with lethal stealth under a state proposal to allow them to use silencers.

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission will consider a proposal at its Sept. 10 meeting in Kissimmee to permit silencers, also known as suppressors, for shooting deer, turkey, gray squirrels, rabbits, quail and crows.

They don't quite muffle shots down to the sinister pop heard in the movies. But supporters say they can protect hunters' hearing, reduce a rifle's recoil and allow hunters to operate near residential areas without bothering people.

"It basically will take a high-powered rifle and make it sound like a .22," said Tony Young, spokesman for the wildlife commission. "It still makes a sound, but it's at a lower decibel level. Maybe they're hunting close to some houses and maybe they want to be quiet for their neighbors. Maybe if they're quiet when they shoot, it will scare the game less. We're just trying to give people the opportunity to be able to buy one and use one if they choose. We don't see enough negatives to not allow them."

Opponents say silencers will make it easier for poachers to operate and threaten public safety by reducing the noise that alerts people to the presence of hunters.

"You don't want to have shooting in the area and not hear a thing," said Ladd Everitt, spokesman for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. "The report of a firearm is how you know if a hunter is nearby."

He dismissed the arguments in favor of silencers, saying the firearms industry was making a nationwide push to loosen silencer laws to generate more sales.

"They have saturated the market and they are looking for new things to sell existing owners," he said. "This is about an industry trying to sell people more toys without any regard for public safety."

The possession of silencers is controlled under the National Firearms Act, a 1934 law passed in the wake of Prohibition-era violence, restricting ownership of machine guns, sawed-off shotguns and other weapons. To acquire a silencer, a buyer must pass a federal background check and pay $200.

Despite being legal at the federal level, 10 states ban them and eight states, including Florida, don't allow them for hunting under most circumstances.

The American Suppressor Association, which represents manufacturers, has been working successfully to lift state restrictions, announcing on its web page recent victories in Louisiana, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky and Arizona.

"Hunters are very interested in them," said Knox Williams, president and executive director of the American Suppressor Association. "Especially young hunters and new hunters," who he said are more open to new technologies.

Although he said he has been in contact with the state wildlife commission, he said the Florida proposal did not originate with his organization.

Wildlife commission spokesman Young said the proposal came from Florida hunters and landowners, not the manufacturers association. He said current law already permits the use of silencers in hunting certain species, depending on the type of land involved, including wild hogs, raccoons, coyote, beaver, skunk, nutria and otter.

Newton Cook, a hunter and executive director of United Waterfowlers of Florida, said he opposes the use of silencers, except possibly near residential areas where they might make it easier to hunt without generating complaints.

Otherwise, he said, silencers might make it easier for hunters to kill more than the legal limit in deer or turkey traveling in groups or make it easier for poachers.

"I have a real problem with silencers except in situations where the noise of gunshots might make a difference in hunting access," he said.

Silencer supporters see no risk of increased poaching, since poachers could already use the devices if they're inclined to operate illegally.

"If they break one law, what's going to stop them from breaking another?" asked Marion Hammer, Tallahassee lobbyist for the National Rifle Association.

Although she said the devices would appeal to those seeking to protect hearing or avoid scattering wildlife with the first shot, she said the cost and procedural hassles will deter many people.

"You have to pay the transfer tax, go through background checks," she said. "This is not going to be something that everybody and anybody is going to want to do."

The proposal before the wildlife commission is a draft. It will receive preliminary consideration at the September meeting, and if given a green light, go for final approval at a later meeting. The public will have a chance to speak at each meeting.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2014-08-06/news/fl-hunting-silencers-20140806_1_young-hunters-silencers-florida-fish

Rory McCanuck
08-08-2014, 07:33 AM
Suprisingly neutral considering it started out with
Hunters of deer, turkey and other animals in Florida may soon be able to operate with lethal stealth




"You don't want to have shooting in the area and not hear a thing," said Ladd Everitt, spokesman for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. "The report of a firearm is how you know if a hunter is nearby."
Really? A gunshot usually signals the fact that I'm leaving the field very soon.
And why are you so worried about knowing if hunters are in the field? Oh yeah,"Coalition to Stop Gun Violence", hunters are just mass murderers in waiting :rolleyes:

Kane63
08-08-2014, 08:03 AM
Opponents say silencers will make it easier for poachers to operate

Poaching is already illegal. Also, a bow is pretty damn quiet.