Are Suppressors Legal in Canada?
By Travis Bader, founder of Silvercore Outdoors. Personally teaching CFSC and CRFSC since 1994.
This question comes up in nearly every course I teach, and I understand why. Anyone who has spent time around firearms knows how punishing muzzle blast is on hearing, and anyone who has looked abroad knows that much of the world treats suppressors as ordinary safety equipment. Canada does not. Here is what the law actually says, how we got here, and what it means for you.
The short answer
No. In Canada, a suppressor is a prohibited device under section 84(1) of the Criminal Code, which captures any device or contrivance designed or intended to muffle or stop the sound or report of a firearm. There is no licence, permit, or endorsement an individual can obtain to legally own one. The only exceptions are institutional: licensed businesses holding the relevant purpose codes and public agencies operating under specific authorizations. For individuals, this is not like restricted firearms, where training and licensing open a lawful path. No path exists, and possession is a criminal offence.
What a suppressor actually does
The name silencer is a marketing term that goes back to Hiram Maxim, and it has done more damage to this conversation than any other single word. A suppressor does not make a firearm silent. A good one takes somewhere in the range of 20 to 35 decibels off the report. That is a meaningful reduction, and it matters for hearing, but a suppressed rifle is still loud. The movie version, where a shot becomes a polite little puff, is fiction.
What a suppressor really is, is a muffler for a firearm. It moderates noise for the shooter, for the people beside them on the line, and for everyone living near a range. That is why so many countries treat them as health and safety equipment rather than crime tools.
How we got here
The prohibition did not start in Canada. It traces back to the United States National Firearms Act of 1934. My understanding from studying the history, and from digging into it with suppressor designer Kyle Grob on Episode 163 of the Silvercore Podcast, is that suppressors were swept into that law less over gangster crime and more over fears of poaching, at a time when people were hungry and taking game to feed their families. Canada then followed the American lead, and I have never seen crime statistics from that era that justified it.
Here is the part most Canadians do not realize: our law ended up stricter than the American one. In the United States there is a path to ownership, a tax stamp and a registration process. Canada's Criminal Code simply prohibits the device outright. There is no fee to pay, no process to follow, and no decibel threshold in the definition. The wording captures anything designed or intended to muffle or stop the sound of a firearm, which makes intent itself part of the offence. In my view, a law written that broadly would have a hard time passing today.
How other countries treat suppressors
When I was backpacking through Europe at nineteen, I met a farmer plinking away with a suppressed rifle. He was not hiding anything. Local noise bylaws required the suppressor because of how close his property sat to his neighbour's. Years later, walking from Inverness toward Loch Ness in Scotland, I heard the same thing from another shooter: he could not shoot his rifle there without one.
That is the norm across much of the world. In countries like New Zealand, Finland, Norway, and Sweden, suppressors are legal and easy to access, treated as ordinary equipment that protects hearing and keeps the peace with neighbours. Even in the United States, the restriction is not national in the way people assume. Most states allow ownership through the federal process, with only a handful, such as California, Illinois, Massachusetts, and New York, still prohibiting them. Canada stands apart with a blanket federal prohibition and no route to individual ownership at all.
The safety case nobody argues with
I will say this plainly: there are legitimate public safety and occupational health and safety problems that suppressors solve. Gunfire is loud enough to permanently damage hearing, and hearing loss in the shooting and hunting community is real and widespread. The peer-reviewed measurements are sobering: suppressors cut peak exposure at the shooter's ear by roughly 17 to 26 decibels, and even suppressed, no firearm tested could be considered hearing safe, so hearing protection is still recommended (Murphy et al., 2018). A suppressor reduces the problem. It does not eliminate it.
The literature also points to why telling people to just wear ear protection fails in the field: hunters actually wear hearing protection only about a fifth of the time, because plugs and muffs cost them the ability to hear game and their surroundings. On the crime side, published reviews of United States federal prosecution data, set against the millions of suppressors registered with the ATF, show that legally owned suppressors almost never appear in crime.
For me, this is not an abstract policy debate. I have been instructing since 1994, and anyone who has spent years running live fire courses or working as a range officer knows the exposure math is different for us. A recreational shooter chooses when to send a round. An instructor or range officer absorbs every shot fired on the line, hour after hour, season after season, and that exposure is cumulative even with disciplined use of hearing protection. Framed honestly, this is a workplace hearing safety problem, in the same category as guarding on machinery, not a shooting sports preference.
Could the law ever change?
Honestly, not without a government that wants to change it. Lawyer Ian Runkle covered this on the podcast: a Charter challenge is a long shot, so any change would come through legislation. The picture elsewhere is well documented. Several jurisdictions, including some with stricter overall firearms laws than Canada's, permit suppressors, and the question has been studied seriously, including a government-commissioned New South Wales investigation into whether sound moderators should be permitted for game and feral animal management (MacCarthy et al., 2011). Whether Canada revisits the question is a political decision. Until it does, the law is what it is.
Where that leaves you
Do not buy one, build one, or bring one across the border. A suppressor purchased legally in the United States or Europe becomes a prohibited device the moment it enters Canada. And the definition captures anything designed or intended to do the job, not just finished commercial products, so do not try to get clever with workarounds. Protect your hearing the legal way instead: quality ear protection at the range, electronic muffs in the field, and good habits around muzzle blast.
Continue on the Silvercore Path
- Listen: Banned in Canada. Why Suppressors Are Safer Than You Think (Ep. 163)
- How to Get Your PAL in Canada (Complete Guide)
- PAL vs RPAL: What's the Difference?
- Pro Tips to Pass Your CFSC/CRFSC
Frequently asked questions
Why are suppressors illegal in Canada?
The prohibition followed the American National Firearms Act of 1934, which was driven more by fears of poaching than by gangster crime. Canada adopted the prohibition without a body of crime statistics behind it, and unlike the American law, ours includes no path to individual ownership. The narrow exceptions are licensed businesses with the relevant purpose codes and public agencies operating under specific authorizations. The device sits in the Criminal Code's prohibited device definition and has stayed there ever since.
Can I hunt with a suppressor in Canada?
No. The prohibition is federal criminal law, so it applies in every province and territory, in the field and at the range alike. There is no hunting exemption, no landowner exemption, and no licence that changes this.
What is the penalty for owning a suppressor in Canada?
Possession of a prohibited device is a criminal offence under the Criminal Code. Charges and outcomes depend on the circumstances, and they can be serious, including consequences for your firearms licence and your ability to hold one. If you are facing anything in this territory, speak with a lawyer who works in firearms law before you do anything else.
Are suppressors legal in other countries?
Yes, widely. New Zealand, Finland, Norway, and Sweden all allow them, and in parts of Europe suppressor use is encouraged or even expected under noise rules. In the United States, most states permit ownership through a federal registration and tax stamp process. Canada is unusual in prohibiting them outright with no legal route for individuals.
Do suppressors make a gun silent?
No. That idea comes from the movies. A quality suppressor reduces the report by roughly 20 to 35 decibels, which meaningfully protects hearing but leaves the shot clearly audible. Think muffler, not mute button.
Firearms law in Canada moves, and keeping up with it is part of owning firearms responsibly. That is a big part of why the Silvercore Club exists. For $59 a year, membership keeps you sharp and has your back: $5 million in liability insurance, our online courses included free, partner discounts on gear, and a community that stays on top of exactly these kinds of changes.
Travis Bader
Silvercore Outdoors
