The answer is NO. allowing others to access so called silencers strengthened gun laws because it removed an anomally.

Whenever laws are made fairer then they are strengthened.

Over in NZ they don't seem to have a problem with silencers.
http://www.lafo.com.au/suppressors-good-enough-nz-banned-aus/

The ease with which criminals or anyone else can make/improvise silencers makes a joke of Australia's obsession with banning them.

There is a vast difference between the slight pop of the film/tv silencer and their use in real life.

The OH&S aspect in the above link, whilst true, is in my professional opinion obfuscating bulldust.

I am hearing impaired by industrial deafness, too many years of test firing didn't help and some years in the Infantry where hearing protection is not only not worn but is strictly forbidden didn't help either.

I have no difficulty on the range however as I know the commands and the range officer always waits for my thumbs up that I'm up to speed on the orders before firing commences. I am not so deaf that I cannot hear a shouted CEASE FIRE, which is the most important command on the range, and it is always shouted.

Steele,

Here's an example of the strengthening of the gun laws, stupid, but an example none the less.

"Lever-action shotguns with a five-round magazine will no longer be a Category A firearm and will now be officially classed as a Category B firearm. A lever-action shotgun with a magazine capacity greater than five rounds will be classed Category D."

They have been Cat A since the introduction of the current post Port Arthur laws, one wonders why it has taken 20 years to suddenly become afraid of them.
http://ssaavic.com.au/lever-action-shotgun-reclassification-passed/?utm_source=SSAA+Victoria+e-newsletters&utm_campaign=5b9242665c-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_03_08_03_10&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_205558685a-5b9242665c-39047113

Hi there FOXY...

Not only you but yes you're chief among them. FOXY you would be one of the most erudite contributors on this Site, and certainly among one of the most intellectual. Your own thoughts are brilliant and well reasoned, and for me at least need no further explanation. And it's true; I'm at odds with some of your views and opinions, nevertheless, that's really what the Forum is all about; idea(s) and opinions.

Whereas I'm at the bottom end of the spectrum, and I write like a typical 'walloper,' which is very much a learned process, I'm afraid, often described as being 'stilted,' & 'conventional' Unlike your flowing narrative, easy to read and interesting to the last letter.

FOXY, I'm probably alone in my observations, and I appreciate, as a Librarian, you have a professional requirement to seek out and reproduce many quotes, extracts & references to underpin your arguments and opinions when others seek your advice, apropos all the relevant data on a particular subject. To me, a Librarian is very much like an encyclopedia. Only a 'human' font of knowledge?

Dear Is Mise,

Well there we have it. Changing legislation to allow recreational shooters to access silencers for their weapons would be deemed a weakening of gun laws by 99% of the population. To claim it is instead strengthening them as you say wouldn't pass the pub test in a single establishment across the country.

The only thing that addles a person's brain to such a degree is a fetish. You have one about guns. It permeates everything you say and do about them. It is dangerous, delusional, and likely adding to a mindset that will end up costing Australian lives.

Even o sung wu who feels it is important to have your back says quite clearly that “Such attachments should remain within the exclusive preserve of covert, military or law enforcement functionaries.” and I fully agree with him.

I clearly stated I didn't want to go down this path again with you because I knew the outcome, but you insisted. Well here we are again, you calling white black and in complete denial.

We are probably doomed to repeat this dance as you will walk away from this being convinced in your mind that I didn't demonstrate that the laws had been weakened. I think the few people who have had the patience to still be following this conversation would likely disagree not that it would make an iota of difference to you.

Go easy on the gun oil though mate, you might get RSI in that wrist of yours.

Hi there STEELEREDUX...

On one level it can be inferred the NSW decision might be seen as a weakening of the gun laws.On the other, there's been no weakening at all.

A sound suppressor is not an integral component of a F/A. It's merely an attachment to reduce the report of a F/A when discharged. All it does is reduce the level of that report, nothing else. Whenever the military/paramilitary covert groups, wish to reduce the sound of their guns, it's not only a suppressor they use but the type of ammunition as well. Both are important considerations, whenever these specialist operatives select their equipment and munitions.

To be quite truthful with you Steele I'm a bit out of the loop when it comes to the laws regulating the possession and use of F/A's and their various attachments like, 'bump stocks', 'suppressors' etc.

Steele,

I sincerely hope, for your sake, that you don't lose the sight of your other eye.

Nary a word about my example of the strengthening of the gun laws; and you can't shew one instance of them being weakened, suppressors, as O Sung Wu pointed out are not guns, and the National Firearms Agreement is not law, so any so-called weakening of it is not a weakening of the law.

So, go and hide.