More Suppressor Talk

[Newview01]

But unfortunately not in Canada.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/busines...436/story.html

ATLANTA - They are the stuff of legend, wielded by hit men and by James Bond. For decades, buying a silencer for a firearm has been as difficult as buying a machine-gun, requiring a background check that can take close to a year.
Now, emboldened by the election of Donald Trump as president, the industry has renewed a push in Congress to ease those restrictions, arguing that it'll help preserve the hearing of gun users.
"We look at this as a Second Amendment issue. We look at it as a health issue," said Erich Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America. "The decibel level of a fired gun, even the lowly .22-calibre, can cause hearing damage."
Since the 1930s silencers have been regulated under the National Firearms Act, facing the same paperwork, $200 tax and background checks required to buy a machine-gun.
A background check to buy most firearms must be completed within three days, or the sale automatically goes through. But the process for a silencer and weapons regulated under the NFA can take eight months or more. Each silencer carries a serial number that can be tracked. Eight states outlaw the sale or possession of silencers.
Despite the barriers, silencers have gained in popularity. In 2008, when West Valley City, Utah, based SilencerCo was formed, about 18,000 silencers were being sold each year by the entire industry. These days the company, which has 70 per cent of the market, sells that many each month.
One of its founders, CEO Josh Waldron, said he suffers hearing loss and still deals with a ringing in his ears from when he went hunting for mule deer as a teen with his father's .243 rifle.
Waldron and other advocates say one of the biggest benefits is for hunters who need to be able to hear what's around them and detect the movements of prey — something made more difficult if they're wearing ear protection.
"You need your senses when you're hunting," Waldron said while attending this year's gun industry SHOT Show convention in Las Vegas. "What this is doing is taking the hearing protection that one would wear off your head and putting it on your gun."
Silencers, more technically called suppressors and nicknamed "cans," were invented in the early 1900s by MIT-educated Hiram Percy Maxim, who also invented a muffler for gasoline engines. They were brought under NFA regulations after Depression-era game wardens were concerned hunters would use them to poach.
Advocates say it's misleading to call them silencers because they don't mute the noise a gunshot makes so much as muffle it. They cringe at the images fed by Hollywood that show them as a tool of assassins and others looking to kill people without detection.
"It's only in the movies where you put on a suppressor — or as they call them in the movies, a silencer — and all you hear is 'pfff'. That's not real life," Pratt said.
U.S. Rep. Jeff Duncan, a Republican from South Carolina, is a sponsor of the "Hearing Protection Act," the latest attempt to pass such legislation. It's previously been met with resistance, especially under President Barack Obama and among Democratic lawmakers who view it as a gun-promotion issue.
It doesn't hurt now that Trump's son Donald met with SilencerCo and was videoed trying out their products.
"I'm cautiously optimistic," Duncan said. "Don Junior, who is an avid hunter himself, has come out in favour of this particular legislation. And so he gets it. That gives us a little bit of juice within the White House and the executive branch. And hopefully we can tap that energy and have it transfer over to the legislative branch."
Suppressors generally lower the sound level by 20 to 35 decibels, leaving most guns still louder than your average ambulance siren.
Critics say efforts to ease the restrictions will allow more criminals to use them and will make it difficult to detect when and where a shooting is taking place. There aren't many cases to point to in which a silencer was used during a crime. Gun-control advocates say that shows that tightly regulating them is working, while the gun industry says it's more an indication that criminals aren't apt to use them even if restrictions are eased.
Lindsay Nichols, senior attorney with the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, scoffs at the idea that making it easier to buy a suppressor is motivated by protecting someone's hearing.
"They're not about protecting people's ears. In fact a good pair of ear plugs and ear muffs work just as well as a silencer — and they don't pose a risk that a criminal is going to use them in a violent crime," she said, adding: "This is clearly something that I think that a lot of people can see through. They can see this is really about profits for the gun industry."
Ed Turner, a former police officer and the owner of Ed's Public Safety, a gun shop in Stockbridge, Georgia, said he's scaled back the number of silencers he carries because of the hassle of buying one.
"To say that it's going to enhance a criminal element, I think that's kind of ludicrous," Turner said. "Criminals don't abide by laws anyway... They're getting them off the street. They're stolen."

As a matter of fact, I would say without a doubt the ringing in my ears is from firearms. Suppressors do more good for hearing protection than bad on the streets.

[Kevlak]

I find it funny in Canada we can get a ticket if our car/truck/motorcycle exhausts are too loud, but it's illegal to put a supressor on your rifle to make it quieter.

[Slicktricker]

Rifles to loud use more hearing protection don't see the need in suppressors

[fps plus]

Originally Posted by Slicktricker

Rifles to loud use more hearing protection don't see the need in suppressors

I have been fortunate to be able to use firearms with suppressors. I would suggest if you had the opportunity to use one your opinion would be quite different .

[mgvande]

It would be nice to have a can on when the whole family is shooting. At the very least it is safer as you can communicate with everyone in a normal voice. Yes I know there is the battery powered ear muffs but I'm not buying 6 of them.

[calgarychef]

Originally Posted by Slicktricker

Rifles to loud use more hearing protection don't see the need in suppressors

The need is because shooting ranges are being shut down due to noise issues.

[qwert]

Originally Posted by Slicktricker

snip
don't see the need in suppressors

A Citizen of a free country, should not need to demonstrate or prove need.
A Citizen of a free country, should be able to make their own decisions, for which they should accept responsibility.

We do not need to prove need for cars capable of 150mph, but we are responsible for their use.

We also do not need 5000 sqft homes, or many other things that we feel entitled to buy if we can.

In MANY peaceful countries, use of firearm suppressors are compulsory, and it is considered irresponsible and offensive not to.
The Citizens of those countries would submit that suppressors are needed.

In MANY peaceful countries, use of engine suppressors are compulsory, and it is considered irresponsible and offensive not to.
The Citizens of those countries would submit that suppressors are needed.

[catnthehat]

Hopefully the Boyz from NZ or UK will chime inn here, the four that I know of have all used suppressors there and like them for the most part, some disadvantages but lots of advantages especially when hunting - not tghat it matters to us, IMO you will lenient legislation on see open carry before supressors and that won't happen today, tomorrow don't look any better
Cat

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

Hopefully the Boyz from NZ or UK will chime inn here, the four that I know of have all used suppressors there and like them for the most part, some disadvantages but lots of advantages especially when hunting
Cat

Watch that show from up in Alaska and one carries a 30/06 with suppressor on it, I often wonder why.

I need therefore I am ....

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

Watch that show from up in Alaska and one carries a 30/06 with suppressor on it, I often wonder why.

I need therefore I am ....

In areas with lots of acreages and farms, or multiple kills on skittish critters like goats or hogs, yeah.
Alaska? I don't see the reasoning......
Cat

[fish_e_o]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

Alaska? I don't see the reasoning......
Cat

Apparently gun shots are like dinner bells for grizzly bears.

Making it a little quieter might make hunting in grizzly bear territory a little safer

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by Slicktricker

Rifles to loud use more hearing protection don't see the need in suppressors

Rifle too loud? Use a suppressor, I don't see the need for more hearing protection.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by fish_e_o

Apparently gun shots are like dinner bells for grizzly bears.

Making it a little quieter might make hunting in grizzly bear territory a little safer

In country where there are lots of bears maybe, but then the splashing of a salmon at the end of a fishing line is like a dinner bell to them as well.
Cat

[fish_e_o]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

In country where there are lots of bears maybe, but then the splashing of a salmon at the end of a fishing line is like a dinner bell to them as well.
Cat

Would that be considered baiting?depends on the intent I guess!
Cat

[southernman]

I have several suppressors, on rifles in New Zealand, 7x57, 2506, 17 hornet, 17 fireball, .22 rimfire.& .22mag,
They reduce sound, and recoil, often make rifle more accurate, and reduce the sound, by up to 25%, this varies greatly, depending on the quality of suppressor, and intensity of the round/cartridge.
I think they will come eventually, mostly due to OHAS, regs mandating an engineering, solution for safety, likely to military first, (if they don't already have them,) then specialized groups, like pest control, police.
Even in this thread, there is considerable miss information.
I use one, around livestock or on small blocks, if I am expecting or wanting to shoot multiple game, a suppressed rifle shot, is much harder to determine sound direction., short action cal, suppress better than, std or magnum's.

disadvantages, extra cost, weight and length, but its very common in NZ to chop rifle barrel back 4" or more and maintain std 20-22' length, there is sum loss of velocity, very common to see a guy hunting with a 708-308 chopped to 14-16" with a 4" forward over barrel suppressor,

[Random_randall]

Uk boy chiming in!

Its LEGAL and considered POLITE to shoot with a suppressor in the UK. Have to get it added to your license which would require a justified reason, rabbit control etc.

I don't see why it shouldn't be legal here but I don't makethe rules.

[skywrench]

Originally Posted by qwert

A Citizen of a free country, should not need to demonstrate or prove need.
A Citizen of a free country, should be able to make their own decisions, for which they should accept responsibility.

We do not need to prove need for cars capable of 150mph, but we are responsible for their use.

We also do not need 5000 sqft homes, or many other things that we feel entitled to buy if we can.

In MANY peaceful countries, use of firearm suppressors are compulsory, and it is considered irresponsible and offensive not to.
The Citizens of those countries would submit that suppressors are needed.

In MANY peaceful countries, use of engine suppressors are compulsory, and it is considered irresponsible and offensive not to.
The Citizens of those countries would submit that suppressors are needed.

What he said. Edmonton Gun Club (Sherwood Park location), Edmonton Fish & Game and Spruce Grove are all ranges that were shut down with noise complaints being a contributing factor. The range I shoot at now is beginning to receive noise complaints and it is in quite a rural location. Suppressors make for a safer shooting experience and are more neighbourly.

[Coyotebutcher]

I honestly don't see what the big deal with suppressers is? We should be allowed to have them. They make firearms less concealable. There is still considerable noise (more than a 22lr). Yet it lowers the noise level to the point neighbors won't be walking out on your land to complain about you target shooting (true story). The general public is so uneducated on firearms and shooting that the government can simply ban whatever they want and the majority will be happy with the decision. When I was young my mom had everything packed and was planning to move to Texas. To this day I sure wish she had