silencers/supressors

[sinawalli]

There are 5 ways noise is produced when firing a weapon.
- Explosion of powder exiting the barrel when trigger is pulled.
-Bullet breaking sound barrier.
-Noise the action makes.
-Action cycling another round (if semi auto).
- bullet hitting target.
A supressor will supress the first one to a certain degree, but nothing like you see in a James Bond movie. Subsonic ammo will get rid of #2, and there is notheing you can do about the other three. I have a book on the history of supressors, and according to it, a supressor will reduce the bang by about 30-40 dbs. Pretty interesting read.

[MCline]

honestly it comes done to a persons opinion on the matter I can't see a real use for em, ooo noise the place has been a gun range forever if someone moves in and complains about it they are an idiot as for noise on yourself they made ear plug along time ago read up on em if you have too. and for crime yes the criminals will break the law that is what they do but now make silencers really easy to get a hold of and tell me that wouldn't make things at least a little worse.

[LongBomber]

Originally Posted by MCline

honestly it comes done to a persons opinion on the matter I can't see a real use for em, ooo noise the place has been a gun range forever if someone moves in and complains about it they are an idiot as for noise on yourself they made ear plug along time ago read up on em if you have too. and for crime yes the criminals will break the law that is what they do but now make silencers really easy to get a hold of and tell me that wouldn't make things at least a little worse.

The problem becomes that those idiots have more clout than we have, and ranges are being shut down or threatened. To bad that we are outnumbered when it comes to these issues. I agree - idiots - to bad we need to keep them happy for our sport to exist.

[Cappy]

I have shot many suppressors and they are of great benefit for range use. The audible noise that carries to surrounding areas is greatly reduced. The sonic crack of a bullet doesn't carry as far and doesn't seem to be as disturbing to surrounding areas. It's is also more difficult to determine where a shot is coming from.

Could they be used for poaching? Absolutely, for the above reasons individuals could employ them for use in poaching. They are probably the same people that poach anyways.

Would I put one on a hunting rifle? Most like likely not. They are heavy. Adding a pound to a pound and a half on the end of a sporter weight rifle throws the balance all out of whack. Off hand shots become much more difficult and the rifle can become pretty ungainly. Maybe on the end of a dedicated long range rig.

I could see value in them for areas as mentioned above that are near populated areas and at the range to prevent more range closures.

[Gunny]

Originally Posted by calgarychef

Hopefully this won't get pulled, I'd like to hear a discussion and get to know peoples feelings here.

Ok so I've been living in the UK for six months now and been to the gunrange and hunting with some cool guys. The thing is lots of people use silencers on their guns and I'm thinking they are a good thing. I'm also wondering why they are illegal in Canada. It seems it's been to avoid people using them for poaching. After using them I don't think they are a poachers tool at all and a rifle isn't actually quieted enough to avoid others hearing the shot. It does make it a lot easier on the shooters ears and the people close by. Ever had that eardrum splitting feeling at the range? Doesn't happen with supressors. As well they really tame down recoil and you don't lose sight of your target during the shot another big help for hunting. Think about the reduction in noise for the neighbours of a shooting range. I'd be willing to bet that we'd have more ranges available if they weren't so hard on the neighbours.

So after thinking about it I'm really wondering why there isn't a big push to legalize silencers in Canada?

I think they are ok on a range but I am one of the guys that was shot at by a sound shooter and they shot really close to me and I was lucky enough to hear where the shot came from and was able to ID the guy but if he had one of them on his rifle I mite not have known where the shot came from but I know if he hit me and I could have shot back your F***ing rite I would have

[dollman]

i am from the uk,at the moment i have only two of my rifles with moderators thats what we call them, they do work very well but they upset the balance of the rifle [muzzle heavy] and when you shoulder the rifle ,the rifle tries to go backwoods they have they uses , but when hunting how many shots are you using on the range may be the only one that the mod works on is a b/a 22 lr with sub sonic ammo which i use for rabbits,but i think you should have the choice anyway and make up your own mind ,not someone making it up for you,atb steve

[kayaker]

Its odd that in countries with draconian gun laws like UK and RSA supressors are quite common.

Other than a specialist rifle like a lightweight mountain rig or dangerous game rifle I would equipped my general purpose sporter/general hunting rifle with one for sure. The positives outweigh the added length and aesthetics are trumped by function IMO.

They are a good idea.

[Hjortejeger]

My mountain rifle have a 50 cm barrel and a 13 cm suppressor, the suppressor is 306 gram. This rifle have a good balance and easy to carry around. It is not a problem to get a nice balanced hunting rifle.

[insurgus]

Why the heck would you want suppressors legalized? With all those registered firearms being used for gang related violence, you should know that legalizing suppressors will be the only way evil dooers will get them.

[rwm1273]

A suppressor reduces the effective range of the projectile, as well as it's power. How much of a reduction in sound is worth the reduction in power? I do understand the use at a range, but also a suppressor will change the ballistics of the bullet.

[fear 666]

Supressors should be legal, for shooting (wouldn't be so damn loud at the range). Hunting they would be great (if a buddy is a ways away and shoots it can scare game for some distance).

The only problem is the anti gun idiots thinks if we have so called silencers we will kill/assassinate all kind of people and no one will hear it (they have watched to many movies and actually think silencers completely silence a gun).

[OverTheHill]

Originally Posted by ShawnM

Anti-poaching is one of the reasons they are illegal in Canada but also the potential for illegal use of firearms i.e. robberies, shooting in parks, murders, etc.

At the end of the day they don't work to completely supress the report of the rifle but they do diminish it enough on small calibers and handguns that the sound wouldn't travel outside a thich wall. I've seen a supressed 9mm handgun and the slap of the bolt traveling was the loudest sound.

I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with them being legalized myself. Too much potential for illicit use IMO.

I respect your opinion but I don't agree with it.
So every male with a dick is a "potential" rapist?

With that mentality who needs freedom?
Seriously though.... The word "POTENTIALLY" is criminal within itself

Just MY OPINION

[762Russian]

I would rather like a simple one on the .17HMR and the .22LR for gopher popping. A lot of rounds are shot out in the field, not the best thing for hearing.

[OverTheHill]

Originally Posted by insurgus

Why the heck would you want suppressors legalized? With all those registered firearms being used for gang related violence, you should know that legalizing suppressors will be the only way evil dooers will get them.

Thank you

I hope others can see through the sarcasm....
Oops... I just realized... The "OTHERS" are not on this forum!!!!

I agree with you though 1000000%

[OverTheHill]

Originally Posted by fear 666

Supressors should be legal, for shooting (wouldn't be so damn loud at the range). Hunting they would be great (if a buddy is a ways away and shoots it can scare game for some distance).

The only problem is the anti gun idiots thinks if we have so called silencers we will kill/assassinate all kind of people and no one will hear it (they have watched to many movies and actually think silencers completely silence a gun).

And even if they did silence a gun 100%

Somehow that would make everyone turn into a killer.... Just like Xbox guys right???? Oh yeah those evil Xboxers anti nintendo guys...... etc etc...

I wish people would just WAKE UP

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by rwm1273

A suppressor reduces the effective range of the projectile, as well as it's power. How much of a reduction in sound is worth the reduction in power? I do understand the use at a range, but also a suppressor will change the ballistics of the bullet.

All these things need to be taken into account even when changing a load, so I don't see the problem here.
Many long range sniper rifles are now equipped with suppressors, so I don't think that distance is a limiting factor.
However, I for one would not be putting one on any of my rifles that I now own simply because it would make them ungainly , not to mention UGLY, and my hunting rifles for the most part are vintage or O/U express rifles.

I certainly do not see anything wrong with a suppressor however, if a person wants to hunt and shoot with one.
Cat

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by ShawnM

Anti-poaching is one of the reasons they are illegal in Canada but also the potential for illegal use of firearms i.e. robberies, shooting in parks, murders, etc.

At the end of the day they don't work to completely supress the report of the rifle but they do diminish it enough on small calibers and handguns that the sound wouldn't travel outside a thich wall. I've seen a supressed 9mm handgun and the slap of the bolt traveling was the loudest sound.

I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with them being legalized myself. Too much potential for illicit use IMO.

I see no issues with them on a rifle , dragging a suppressed rifle around is hardly concealable , when you think about it.
The people that would use them for illegal uses are likely using them now, those people do not worry about laws.
As far as poaching goes, I don't see an issue there either, for the same reasons.
Cat

[Armorman]

I know they look scary to the politicians, Fudds, and City folk but I'm 110% in favor of suppressors being re-classed into non-restricted status and would throw money behind any effort to do such. Anyone with a PAL should be able to own and transport one. Freedom being the main reason and the other is sound reduction for the shooter and those around. To argue against their use is just plain wrong on so many levels. We already have restricted status on Handguns and AR's so those firearms with suppressors would only be used at approved ranges anyway. I don't see too many guys using them on non-restricted hunting rifles. I'm not a hunter but I would think that the last thing a guy would want while hunting is an extra 12" added to the end of their rifle.

[Okotokian]

They would be great for gun ranges. But they would also be great for poaching. Pick your poison. To me this is one of those "I wouldn't bother fighting for it, but I wouldn't bother fighting against it either" sort of issues.

[winger7mm]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

They would be great for gun ranges. But they would also be great for poaching. Pick your poison. To me this is one of those "I wouldn't bother fighting for it, but I wouldn't bother fighting against it either" sort of issues.

I know that alot of guys think that, but poachers will poach regardless. Im not going to go, "oh look now I have a suppressor I may aswell start poaching" Like come on man, think about it. seatbelts you must wear one while driving as it is illegal, but how many people still dont wear them, people will do what they want regardless of the tools that are illegal. So I say legalize the suppressors, wont make a difference in the crime rates. It may make crime show more but that will mean they will be caught more, fairly simple concepts

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by winger7mm

I know that alot of guys think that, but poachers will poach regardless. Im not going to go, "oh look now I have a suppressor I may aswell start poaching"

Oh I don't think it will make anyone poach who wouldn't ordinarily do it. I just think it will make some more brazen, worried less about being heard and discovered, that's all.

[winger7mm]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Oh I don't think it will make anyone poach who wouldn't ordinarily do it. I just think it will make some more brazen, worried less about being heard and discovered, that's all.

Well if thats the case, sure they may be more brasen about it but then eventually they will be caught. But when F&W do the searches they get caught with more evidence, antlers, meat ect. So a larger sentence would apply. The F&W are getting alot better now-a-days at catching poachers, its a hard crime to solve but people are stupid and more guys need to "rat" on there buddies for it. Not hard to figure out after over a couple drinks the guy goes on to say he had shot 2 nice whitetail bucks the season we just had, blahblahblah. you get where im going with this right??

[wwbirds]

I can just imagine how many criminal elements would love to have a silenced firearm so that is why they will always remain a prohibited device.

[762Russian]

Originally Posted by wwbirds

I can just imagine how many criminal elements would love to have a silenced firearm so that is why they will always remain a prohibited device.

The thing is, silencers aren't that hard to make. They work on the same principles as a motorcycle exhaust pipe. (The ones that make them quieter, I mean.) They'd not be as effective as the military versions, sure, but knock-together jobs with subsonic ammo? Very quiet.

All a criminal needs is a welding kit (they steal them all the time, must have a few lying about,) and a bit if ingenuity. One yahoo on the wrong side of the law could pump them out if there really was a demand for them.

[Jamie Black R/T]

i would fit one to my varmint rifles for plinking and gopher shooting....hearing protection can sure get warm on a sunny summer day in the field.

big game rifles?...probably not....too ugly and not much gain when you only fire it once.

[jimbo1]

ive used supressors a fair bit on smallbore and big game rifles and they dont supress the noise enough to make them silent ,not even close, so i dont think poaching would be an issue as people who poach will do so supressor or no supressor, one thing they are good at is reducing recoil quite a bit

[OverTheHill]

Originally Posted by wwbirds

I can just imagine how many criminal elements would love to have a silenced firearm so that is why they will always remain a prohibited device.

So thats also why criminals that are prohibited from carrying any firearms actually follow the law and don't carry handguns and such anymore.... By making it illegal for the law abiding people????. Jeeeesh....

Criminals have MORE access to prohibited stuff than we do PERIOD

[Sputnik]

I would support the use of surpressors for the same reasons posted here, close in to city and acreage removal of pests where noise could be an issue. Particularily coyotes. It may also make ranges more acceptable.

I think the poaching arguement is moot, if I wanted to poach, and be quiet about it, I would use a bow, crossbow or snare. So I don't think allowing the use of supressors would make any difference.

One thing that COs may not like is it could make it more difficult to use sound as an indicator of hunting activity, and follow up on shots heard to see if the shooting parties have the appropriate licenses etc.

[Comstar]

I think that they should have something similar to hand gun/restricted weapon rules.

Just minus the rule that they can't be used outside of a range ( unless in the case it is for a restricted weapon).

If you took a test and if they wanted you to get a background check to make sure your not already a criminal that should be enough.

[wally338]

I am quite sure I would NOT turn into a hitman/poacher/gangbanger just because I could legally own a suppressor. The fact is criminals posse and use suppressors even if they are illegal just like they use handguns and long guns in illegal activities.The people that make the firearms laws could not point out the muzzle on a rifle of that I am quite certain.