Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Questions about Victorian gun and ammunition laws. Victorian Firearms Act 1996.

Re: Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Post by MontyShooter » 29 Jun 2018, 12:49 pm

Won't it just bring vic law in line with NSW?
Doesn't seem to be working too well there...
MontyShooter
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 339
Victoria

Re: Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Post by madang55 » 29 Jun 2018, 1:10 pm

withdrawn and re-submitted
Last edited by madang55 on 30 Jun 2018, 10:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
My wife knows me well.
The dog often reminds me of that
User avatar
madang55
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 368
Victoria

Re: Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Post by southwest shooter » 29 Jun 2018, 5:17 pm

We need them now , it's a joke .
Have any of these clowns heard a 22/250 at 3 am ?
southwest shooter
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 289
Victoria

Re: Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Post by Member-Deleted » 29 Jun 2018, 7:14 pm

southwest shooter wrote:We need them now , it's a joke .
Have any of these clowns heard a 22/250 at 3 am ?


Agree 100%, :thumbsup: but whether we get them, depends on how hard shooters are prepared to fight for them, we have the numbers of shooters, but we just can't seem to get enough shooters unified and involved enough to effectively use these numbers.
Member-Deleted
 

Re: Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Post by madang55 » 30 Jun 2018, 10:02 am

Sarco wrote:I disagree,

The bill is seeking that licenced recreational shooters will be able to APPLY to possess, carry and use "silencers". This is a gross fail, using the word "silencers" rather than "suppressors". It just about guarantees the bill will fail, as all most politicians know about "silencers" is what they see in Hollywood movies.

This also smacks of a politician trying to be seen to actually be doing something for his likely voter base, coming up to an election, with out actually having any likelihood of achieving anything. Then saying at least I tried.

It still comes down to even if the bill is passed and makes it into law, how many applications will be approved by the Chief Commissioner (or their delegate)? My suggestion is sweet FA.

Sarco

The bill uses the word "Silencer" or "Silencers" about 130 times. I tried to count. It does not mention the word Suppressor at all. I have to agree that the majority of folk only know what they see in movies and on television.There will have to be a lot of education accompanying this bill for it to have any chance at all. This is a long term project and personalities, opinions and tempers will play a big part. i.e. keep cool heads, make statements that do not appear to be red-necked and don't get angry. Losing ones temper in a debate, and this is a debate, means you lose the debate.
And I just started reading the whole Act and it says...
SILENCER: means any instrument or thing by means
of which the sound caused by the discharge
of a firearm is rendered less audible, whether
the instrument or thing forms part of the
firearm or is or can be affixed or attached to
the firearm;
My wife knows me well.
The dog often reminds me of that
User avatar
madang55
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 368
Victoria

Re: Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Post by winton » 03 Jul 2018, 2:04 pm

Shooters are not well represented in politics. Thats just the facts.

Most shooters are more interested in Border Security or Job security rather than firearm rights.

There have been politicians that have started out gung ho for shooters rights, but then they feel that its a good long term career and that means they need to go soft on gun rights in order to get votes from mainstream voters.

Just my opinion.

I just see Suppressors as being a bridge too far now. We let Howard take it away and it will cause an uproar if we bring it back in.

Still I look on the bright side. Being in Vic, we get to hunt alot. I'd rather have this accessibility than a suppressor, although a supressor would be nice.
winton
Lance Corporal
Lance Corporal
 
Posts: 152
Victoria

Re: Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Post by Member-Deleted » 04 Jul 2018, 9:54 pm

winton wrote:Shooters are not well represented in politics. Thats just the facts.

Most shooters are more interested in Border Security or Job security rather than firearm rights.

There have been politicians that have started out gung ho for shooters rights, but then they feel that its a good long term career and that means they need to go soft on gun rights in order to get votes from mainstream voters.

Just my opinion.

I just see Suppressors as being a bridge too far now. We let Howard take it away and it will cause an uproar if we bring it back in.

Still I look on the bright side. Being in Vic, we get to hunt alot. I'd rather have this accessibility than a suppressor, although a supressor would be nice.


That is the scary part, those who continue to vote for the major parties based on these concerns are not learning, one does not have to be real sharp to realise the major parties are making real mess of these things, continuing to vote for the majors in the hope that these issues and the others they have stuffed up will improve, is like putting your hand in a fire, getting burnt and then doing it again hoping for a better result.
Member-Deleted
 

Re: Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Post by dugachelli » 04 Sep 2018, 8:56 pm

Bill defeated 36 votes to 4......”deep sigh!” Well at least we are having a go.....only early days yet. I am looking to NSW, VIC and Tassy to keep plugging away at all this and by doing so, we might be able to claw back some or even most of what we have lost. Fingers crossed :))
User avatar
dugachelli
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 27
Western Australia

Re: Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Post by Gaznazdiak » 04 Sep 2018, 9:29 pm

Just a thought, but most of those who are granted one of the rare permits to own and use a suppressor are vets and rangers for whom it is considered as an OH&S issue.

If they are allowed to protect their hearing during the few shots they fire in the course of their employment, is it not a form of discrimination to prohibit hunters and sporting shooters from having the same protection?

After all we are the people who do the most to protect the country from invasive pest species, at our own expense, yet we are denied the protection supplied by a harmless, inert metal tube.

Perhaps we are approaching the issue from the wrong angle.
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales

Re: Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Post by Windston » 05 Sep 2018, 6:21 pm

I for one am pissed at the government for this. Why should I not be allowed to protect my hearing!? Or lifestock/dogs in the area around the shot?! Or even the bloody neighbours getting pissed off at shots?

It's just rediculus that the powers that be just don't seem to care about us enough. It works in the UK, new Zealand etc, why not here?
Windston
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 36
Queensland

Re: Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Post by Gaznazdiak » 05 Sep 2018, 6:48 pm

Windston wrote:I for one am pissed at the government for this. Why should I not be allowed to protect my hearing!? Or lifestock/dogs in the area around the shot?! Or even the bloody neighbours getting pissed off at shots?

It's just rediculus that the powers that be just don't seem to care about us enough. It works in the UK, new Zealand etc, why not here?


Why not here?

The politicians and the lace panties know that suppressors have no relation to crime in any of the countries where common sense prevails and they are available over the counter, but having already banned them and made such a fuss about the "danger" they pose, to make them legally available would be an admission that they have been wrong all along.

How often have you heard these microcephalic plague rats ever admit they were wrong about anything?
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales

Re: Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Post by bladeracer » 05 Sep 2018, 7:07 pm

Gaznazdiak wrote:Just a thought, but most of those who are granted one of the rare permits to own and use a suppressor are vets and rangers for whom it is considered as an OH&S issue.

If they are allowed to protect their hearing during the few shots they fire in the course of their employment, is it not a form of discrimination to prohibit hunters and sporting shooters from having the same protection?

After all we are the people who do the most to protect the country from invasive pest species, at our own expense, yet we are denied the protection supplied by a harmless, inert metal tube.

Perhaps we are approaching the issue from the wrong angle.


Except that most of us shoot voluntarily, if we want to protect our hearing we can simply stop shooting.
Practice Strict Gun Control - Precision Counts!
User avatar
bladeracer
Field Marshal
Field Marshal
 
Posts: 12656
Victoria

Re: Firearm Suppressors Victoria

Post by Gaznazdiak » 05 Sep 2018, 8:03 pm

bladeracer wrote:
Gaznazdiak wrote:Just a thought, but most of those who are granted one of the rare permits to own and use a suppressor are vets and rangers for whom it is considered as an OH&S issue.

If they are allowed to protect their hearing during the few shots they fire in the course of their employment, is it not a form of discrimination to prohibit hunters and sporting shooters from having the same protection?

After all we are the people who do the most to protect the country from invasive pest species, at our own expense, yet we are denied the protection supplied by a harmless, inert metal tube.

Perhaps we are approaching the issue from the wrong angle.


Except that most of us shoot voluntarily, if we want to protect our hearing we can simply stop shooting.


Quite true, but I don't recall ever hearing of anyone being forced to be a vet or a ranger either.

I had occasion to ask the local member here why, he said we can use earmuffs. When I asked him why the military use suppressors instead of muffs his reasoning was that muffs reduce one's situational awareness, a valid point, when I asked him why civilian shooters stuational awareness was less important considering we shoot in areas where we also need to be certain of what is around us and down range, he suddenly lost interest and remembered an appointment and I was ushered out of his presence.
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales

Next

Back to top
 
Return to Victorian gun laws