Previous Post
Next Post

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?

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. 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.

    • 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.

      • 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.

        • 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.

        • 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

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

  6. 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.

    • 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.

  7. 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…

  8. 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.

  9. 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.

    • 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.

  10. 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.

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

    • 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.

      • 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. 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?

  12. 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!

  13. 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.

  14. 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…

  15. 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.

  16. 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}

    • 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.

  17. 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.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here