Question of the Day: Why Aren’t YOU Hunting with a Suppressor?

Suppressor Laws By State Map

“A New Hampshire House subcommittee gave its approval last week to HB 500,” the National Shooting Sports Foundation reports [via Ammoland] which would repeal current prohibitions on using suppressors for hunting. “If HB 500 is approved and enacted, New Hampshire would become the 38th state to legalize the use of suppressors for hunting.” Wow. Who knew? No wonder the suppressor business is going nuts. Why wouldn’t you hunt with a suppressor? Time to ask resident of M-states; Montana and Minnesota recently legalized hunting with suppressors. Mainiacs hunting with cans are good to go mid-October. Do you live in a suppressor-friendly state? Do you hunt with one? Which one(s)? If not, why not?

comments

  1. avatar Jolly Roger Out says:

    Because if I tried to buy a can today, it might clear the ATF’s offices by deer season 2016

    1. avatar mark s. says:

      Simple enough answer . Cost to benefit ratio . Cost would include hassle in acquisition , anonymity , and price / versus / quieter , reduced flash , mussel lift . Make them easier to get and reduce the cost and they’ll be as routine as a scope .

      1. avatar ben2russia says:

        That’s it for me too. It’s just too expensive.

      2. avatar Ethan says:

        Its time to strike suppressors from the NFA list.

  2. avatar davidx says:

    Legal here in Vermont (for ranges) as of July, but we still have some work to do.

    https://www.guntrustlawyer.com/2015/06/suppressor-legal-to-purchase-in-vermont-beginning-july-2-2015.html

  3. avatar syms says:

    Because Illinois…

    1. avatar usmc says:

      +1, I live in Shitcago

    2. avatar Illinois_Minion says:

      +2

  4. avatar Kyle V. says:

    It’s still relatively new in Michigan (having a can legally) but for small game the Sparrow works nicely.

    1. avatar Bob in mi says:

      You do realize that although they are legal to own, you cannot hunt with them in our state legally?

  5. avatar Ralph says:

    Time to ask resident of M-states

    Massachusetts is an M-state. Possession of a silencer is illegal here, except for cops, FFLs and manufacturers. Subjects — oops, I mean ordinary citizens — are SOL and face ten years in Walpole for possessing something that’s legal to own in 41 states and legal for hunting in 37.

    There was a committee hearing on suppressor legalization early this summer. I’m not holding my breath. Well, actually, I am holding my breath, since the situation around here stinks.

    https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150713/massachusetts-suppressor-legislation-to-be-heard-in-committee

    1. avatar davidx says:

      We used to call it “Walpole” decades ago but it’s been “Cedar Junction” for quite a while now. Is it still the only max prison down there? I moved to VT nearly 20 years ago.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        There are now two maximum security prisons in MA. Aside from Walpole, there’s the Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center in Shirley, which opened for business in the late nineties. It’s received very good ratings on Yelp, with many customers saying that they would go there again and would recommend it to a friend.

        1. avatar davidx says:

          Aha, thanks for the update, and the laugh. There used to be one out in bee-yoo-tee-ful Gahdnuh that was supposedly medium-security but they had some real demented killers in there during my last residence in the Commonwealth.

        2. avatar Ralph says:

          Gardner is now medium/minimum security. Supposedly. The problem is that sometimes hard core bad guys get pinched for small potatoes crimes and end up doing short time in Gardner.

  6. avatar skrobie says:

    I don’t because I live in the Republic of New York. Soon to be a Pennsylvania resident!

  7. avatar LNJK says:

    Yes we do, as we only hunt predetors, at night, that are attacking our herds. That way it doesn’t spook the cattle or horses. Our ‘tool’ of choice is a DDM4 setup in 300 blackout, and my 12yo daughter is a crack shot with her night eyes and custom loaded ammo.

  8. avatar Larry says:

    In NY as well. I take 2 to 4 deer each year between bow and gun, last year I fired my .270 twice in deer season not sure why I would hunt with one if I could.

  9. avatar Eric L says:

    I’d like to get a can for hunting but for the foreseeable future I just can’t afford it

    1. avatar Cameron b says:

      My situation too. I’d love to rig up a 308 bolt gun but I can’t afford the can or the time.

  10. avatar Shire-man says:

    Besides the current illegality of it in NH suppressors don’t make enough of a decibel difference to me to justify the cost, tax and wait. Suppressed shots are still obnoxiously loud IMO.

    That said if the US went the way of Europe and suppressors could be had for cheap off any shelf without the hassle of a wait and tax I’d definitely have more than a few because as loud as suppressed shots are unsuppressed shots are even louder and as much as I love shooting I really, really, really hate loud things and noises.

  11. avatar Irock350 says:

    I hunt with a surpressor…I hunt with a silencer.

  12. avatar More Dead Soldiers :) says:

    Because friends don’t let friends give $200 to the enemy.

    There is no “suppressor friendly” state.

  13. avatar ColdNorth says:

    In Canada, it’s because too many idiots in previous governments watched too many hollywood films and regulated accordingly.

  14. avatar MiniMe says:

    Won’t until the Burros of Booze, Cancer Twigs, Boom Sticks and Big Baddabooms stop extorting money from citizens.

  15. avatar derfel cadarn says:

    Rifles without recoil and a bang, what the point ? Man-up Dudes !

    1. avatar Jeff O. says:

      …because hearing is SOOOO overrated.

      1. avatar Timmy! says:

        WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE ANSWER THAT PHONE!?!?!

  16. avatar JTPhilly says:

    Working on it here in Alabama. Hopefully will be good to go deer season 2016. Really looking forward to it.

  17. avatar Matt in Maine says:

    Maine passed a law removing the restriction on hunting with suppressors this year. However, it added a bunch of BS to actually be able to. Additional background checks, LEO sign off and it appears that there still isnt paperwork or procedure available on how to actually get approved.

  18. $1000 suppressor, $200 tax stamp, need to get threaded barrel. So I just made hunting about $1600 more expensive for no reason.

    1. avatar Ethan says:

      Modern center-fire rifle cans (base model) most suitable for hunting are in the $600-$700 range, and most modern rifles are available threaded from the factory.

      I’m not saying its for everybody, but your numbers are about $400 high by my math.

  19. avatar Nate in Michigan says:

    I’m 18 and (according to the government) am not old enough be trusted with such a health and safety device. Oh, and when I turn 21(thus becoming responsible) I’ll still live in Michigan. And be a broke college student…

  20. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    Just bought a Silencerco Omega for my medium bores last week. Tic-tock, tic tock….

    1. avatar Patrick M says:

      Just got paid. Saker 762 in my near future….

    2. avatar OODAloop says:

      Ooo, that will be great for the 2016 hunting season….

      1. avatar Patrick M says:

        Indeed it will… and hopefully numerous coyotes in between 🙂

  21. avatar Josh R. says:

    Because a can for a 7mm remington mag is $1200 plus. I cant afford or justify the purchase.

    1. avatar Lance F says:

      Same for me, and do I really want to thread a BAR?

  22. avatar vioshi says:

    Haven’t been hunting yet. Suppressors are ridiculously expensive. The game is better off if I spent the money on ammo and practice. If my name was Trump, I would use one.

  23. avatar DaveK says:

    I live in WI, so good to go on hunting with a can, however, I would want an AR in 300 BLK, 10.5″ SBR with a suppressor. I could do the pistol arm brace thing and avoid another tax stamp but then I “can’t” shoulder it for a proper cheek weld. So, money and NFA is why not.

    1. avatar Kapeltam says:

      Wisconsin also. Money issue. Refuse to give the government more money than I need to. Too expensive to purchase. I’d love to our one on my 6.8 spc or convert my M77/44 to an integrally suppressed barrel though.

  24. avatar Grindstone says:

    Because I still have a truck payment.

  25. avatar cogline says:

    If I lived in a free country where you can just walk into a store and pick up a really inexpensive one like New Zealand I would. Too much expense and hassle here in the United States.

  26. avatar Julio says:

    Peoples’ Republic of Kalifornistan say “no way, Jose–er, Julio. Did you say that you have a gun?” “Um, no. Nevermind.”

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      In California, everything is prohibited except that which is allowed, Suppressors are not allowed, nor are SBR’s Barret .50 Cal rifles, machine guns (unless owned before 1991 and registered with the state, but cannot be sold in state), 10+ round mags, and most handguns. For about half the state, only copper ammo is allowed for hunting, and next year it will be the whole state. They’ve outlawed using dogs to run down bears, and if they could outlaw all hunting, they would.

      1. avatar Alex says:

        california here as well.
        dont forget about the 10 day waiting period for rifle and pistol purchases, the 1 handgun every 30 days, no concealed or open carry, and a whole lot more thats escaping me now.. F**K you Sacramento.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          +1. Phuck sacramento also. Also SIGH.

          And why does a site that counts on comments to stay in business has a warning that I’m posting comments too quickly? And then deletes my too quickly posted comment? Does this make any business sense?

          Bueller? Bueller?

  27. avatar Hippi says:

    “Because in peoples republic of Illinois government suppresses you” in my best yakof smirnoff

  28. avatar Spaceman Brown says:

    I’m not a hunter, but I do have a Silencerco Omega on my fighting rifle.

  29. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    Because I’m not a hunter and I live in Illinois.

  30. avatar geeknik says:

    Two reasons:

    1) I can’t afford a suppressor; and even if I could,
    2) I refuse to pay for a tax stamp and help fund the ATFs war on lawful gun ownership.

  31. avatar Michael says:

    Why Aren’t YOU Hunting with a Suppressor? Because I have to ask permission and invite the “man” into my life. And I have to pay a “tax” to own one. It’s just plain BS!

  32. avatar Will in Oregon says:

    Because I elk hunt with either a .338-378 or .300 RUM and I just can’t fit a can in to my lowly E-5 budget

    1. avatar Cameron b says:

      How can you afford ammo for those lol.

  33. avatar Mark-in-Indy says:

    Two words – “Tax Stamp”

  34. avatar SteveM says:

    I’m not because idiocy and bigotry in our country has made owning a very useful tool expensive, a huge hassle to purchase, and a liability to own. Maybe we should made it a health care issue and put forward a bill called “The Affordable Health Care Act” to remove the $200 tax and all restrictions on manufacture, sales, and possession.

  35. avatar OODAloop says:

    Picked up a Mystic-X to go with a .300 BLK SBR for this year’s season. The benefit of buying a silencer is the government kindly spreads the completion of your rifle out over a year- silencer purchased last October, AR lower bought in January, SBR tax stamp arrives in June and silencer tax stamp arrives in September…

    1. avatar Adam says:

      I’m currently Uber driving to pay for my Mystic X and .300 SBR. I Should have both by Christmas.

  36. avatar beerwhisperer says:

    Quit hunting 35 years ago +/-, did order a can recently (Minnesota), might order a couple more.

  37. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    Too cheap. Still waiting since 1980 on indiana to legalize deer hunting with real rifles. Long wait.

    1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      In Indiana, you can have the can, just not a real rifle.

  38. avatar amanofdragons says:

    Simple. 20 years old so I can’t legally own one. Can’t afford one, and cannot justify the cost of I could. Plus none of my rifles are threaded, tacticool be darned, I like my wood. Next is the fact that my rifles tend to fall into custom can range.

  39. avatar Kap says:

    Recently suppressors became legal in this state to use!
    Reasons not buying, Cost, Hassle from ATF, {bringing undo attention to self}, weight, awkward to use, especially if still hunting ( adds about a foot of barrel length} changes balance, POI changes when Installed, selective caliber {need one with universal calibration}

    1. avatar Ethan says:

      In regards to balance shift when using a suppressor – I’m surprised there aren’t more micro cans on the market. If you could market some kind of modular system, people could have a 8″ super-quiet can for range time, and a 3″ blast muffler for home defense work.

      I personally keep a 5″ micro suppressor (home-made Form 1) on my HD rifle, and it does very little to change the way it handles.

  40. avatar Dustin says:

    No. Because there’s no way I’m buying one, and I’m still waiting on my Form 1s. Four. Years. Later.

  41. avatar Libertarian says:

    Herea my more detail map
    http://www.bilderload.com/bild/373874/end2012EWQF2.jpg
    It was an bigger movement as knife premptions from 2013 arround to 2016 🙂
    Now it get closed to finished, only iowa and illinois for legalizing and Oklahoma, Vermont, Michigan and New Hampshire hunting.

  42. avatar Ben S. says:

    I don’t because it would be registered. I’d be on the radar from that point on. The aquisition cost would hurt very badly, but I would save and do it if only there was no permanent record of the sale created. The tax should be repealed anyway, it was only a form of gun control originally because only the VERY, very rich could ever hope to be able to afford the $200 tax back in the day. It was a way to keep the average Joe from even attempting to own one. $200 was a lot of money back then.

  43. avatar jug says:

    Don’t do that much hunting anymore, but if I do, it will be used!

  44. avatar adverse4 says:

    If I am going to shoot something I am not going to worry about it’s hearing.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email