Thread: Need some help please!

I was hoping that a fellow police officer would be able to clear the air about the legal use of suppressors in a country that does not regulate them and their use in crime in that country(NZ). Australian police consider suppressor far to dangerous to allow because of the potential use in crime. Now I may be drawing a long bow here but I would have thought that the criminal use of suppressors would have prompted the introduction of regulations controlling their use. I would have thought that if a police officer could convey to another police officer that the legitimate use of suppressors out weighs the potential criminal use. Considering that the majority of gun crime in Australia is very much more intimidation than silent use. Most gun crime does not even involve firing the gun. Why would a suppressor, which increases the size, weight and ability to conceal the weapon. Be beneficial to a criminal?

Originally Posted by Malleeshooter

I was hoping that a fellow police officer would be able to clear the air about the legal use of suppressors in a country that does not regulate them and their use in crime in that country(NZ). Australian police consider suppressor far to dangerous to allow because of the potential use in crime. Now I may be drawing a long bow here but I would have thought that the criminal use of suppressors would have prompted the introduction of regulations controlling their use. I would have thought that if a police officer could convey to another police officer that the legitimate use of suppressors out weighs the potential criminal use. Considering that the majority of gun crime in Australia is very much more intimidation than silent use. Most gun crime does not even involve firing the gun. Why would a suppressor, which increases the size, weight and ability to conceal the weapon. Be beneficial to a criminal?

Id suggest you are asking the wrong person and a person who works for a very political organisation to make a public statement. My suggestion would be you need to talk / send letter to the pollie responsible for the Police / laws in this area.

My personal view is supressors are a good thing in that they reduce noise so disturb "the delicate" less. However like "big black assault weapons" ppl see nasty men using them to murder in movies so think they are bad.

Originally Posted by Malleeshooter

I was hoping that a fellow police officer would be able to clear the air about the legal use of suppressors in a country that does not regulate them and their use in crime in that country(NZ). Australian police consider suppressor far to dangerous to allow because of the potential use in crime. Now I may be drawing a long bow here but I would have thought that the criminal use of suppressors would have prompted the introduction of regulations controlling their use. I would have thought that if a police officer could convey to another police officer that the legitimate use of suppressors out weighs the potential criminal use. Considering that the majority of gun crime in Australia is very much more intimidation than silent use. Most gun crime does not even involve firing the gun. Why would a suppressor, which increases the size, weight and ability to conceal the weapon. Be beneficial to a criminal?

It seems damned strange to me that one professional would seek to contact another professional through a hunting and shooting site? Why not use your work contacts and net works?