by In the United States if you want to own a sound suppressor (or silencer) for your .22 rifle or pistol, you must fill out an ATF Form 4, pay a $200 tax, submit both a picture and fingerprints, get the signature of the chief law enforcement official in the jurisdiction of your place of residence, undergo a background investigation, and then wait. This is in addition to the cost of the suppressor which, I understand, begins in the $200 range.
In New Zealand, you drive on down to Gun City in Christchurch, pay NZ$39.99 or about $29.91 in U.S. dollars, and walk out with your suppressor. As their ad says, “There are no age or licence restrictions on silencer sales.”
Of course, for the price you aren’t getting the top of the line suppressor. However, if you want a suppressor for plinking on your .22 rifle or pistol, it will work just fine.
And your hearing is protected.
It is utterly ridiculous that at a time when so-called environmental groups are suing the EPA over lead ammunition to “protect hunters” from airborne lead exposure among other things that a reasonable method of reducing “noise pollution” and protecting the hearing of shooters still requires a $200 tax stamp.
H/T Oleg Volk
The lack of regulation of suppressors is an island of sanity in our otherwise insane gun control regime.
In NZ, licensed gun owners are explicitly forbidden from using a gun to defend themselves. If they do, criminal charges are usually laid.
New Zealand – not very civilized, but the scenery is nice.
Violent crime here in NZ is so low, it practically doesn't register compared to the US. The thought of needing a gun for safety here is a joke whereas when I lived in GA, NC and CA, the thought of NOT having an easily accessible firearm at home felt irresponsible.