quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Good news

more tacticool stuff on the market. Plenty of folks are interested, I'm not one of them though.

why a bill? i thought the new ruler was only done by executive order?

quote:

Originally posted by medved:
why a bill? i thought the new ruler was only done by executive order?

EO's can be changed with the next administration, once something becomes law it is much more difficult to alter.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Good news

This is classic Trump, raise an issue that divides us while costing no extra money.

He could not do it by EO. We will see if the Bill passes.

I would vote no.

A bill will not survive filibuster.

At least, everyone will kind of be on the record.

I also thought that he was expected to can the head of the BATF on day 1. Guess not.

To spendy for what you get in my book.
But,.... it would be great to have one on a rifle to teach kids who are moving up from a .22
Muffs are hard to position for many kids, and it doesnt take many harsh cracks of a centerfire for a kid to develop a flinch.
I dont have to worry about neighbors complaining about noise, but in many places they do. it would be a plus for them. Nothing I would want to lug through the thick woods stuck on the end of my barrel. But, people in many other countries without restrictions do just that, and get along fine.

Well I just went through the whole NFA background check rigmarole and paid my $200 tax for my first suppressor. So it follows that they’ll do away with the present system now.

I’d be happy if suppressors, SBRs and SBSs were simply moved to the instant background check system and kept the full auto and destructive devices with the enhanced background check.

quote:

To spendy for what you get in my book.

Prices of suppressors who fall greatly if taken out of the NFA.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:

quote:

To spendy for what you get in my book.

Prices of suppressors who fall greatly if taken out of the NFA.

Homemade ones would be sufficient, it's not rocket science. Start with a lawn mower muffler and drill out the middle. Not an excellent rig but enough to get one arrested in our current environment.

However the federal case goes, there are state laws to contend with as well.

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
Nothing I would want to lug through the thick woods stuck on the end of my barrel. But, people in many other countries without restrictions do just that, and get along fine.

Mine is a Deadair Sandman S, I put a mount on my Ruger Scout rifle and with the can it’s still 1 1/2” shorter than a boltgun with a 24” barrel. Mounted on a 16” AR it’s over an inch shorter still.

Why any one in the gun culture would be against removing suppressors is amazing.

Seems they want less freedom instead of more.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:

quote:

To spendy for what you get in my book.

Prices of suppressors who fall greatly if taken out of the NFA.

Yes they will.

Trump could have an amnesty declare.

Allow them to be registered for free without background checks.

He could do the same with full auto's

Both the NFA34 and GCA68 allow for 90 day amnesties. Any time the government wants to impose one.

Well, full autos made prior to 1986.

All new manufacturers new suppressors are registered.

I've never understood the issue with obtaining suppressors so difficult? They are common in many other countries for hunting rifles.

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
I've never understood the issue with obtaining suppressors so difficult? They are common in many other countries for hunting rifles.

It is about control.

The anti's do not want to give up anything.

Frankly, I've never understood it either.

But, I wouldn't hold my breath. An EO can't abrogate or override a federal statute like the NFA. It will require congressional action, not just trump waving his magic EO wand.

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
I've never understood the issue with obtaining suppressors so difficult? They are common in many other countries for hunting rifles.

I could explain. Short answer any we pin or device that made killing concealable was added to the NFA. Handguns were part of the first draft.

Congress based on a bunch of S. Ct., precedent I have provided previously did not believe they could ban anything . However, Congress knew they could tax. The S. Cr., agreed. The power to tax is Congress number one function.

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
I've never understood the issue with obtaining suppressors so difficult? They are common in many other countries for hunting rifles.

The story I read was that suppressors were added at the behest of the game wardens as that time period was when they were trying to get a handle on deer populations and poaching.
Everything else was to stop gangsters from doing gangster stuff.

Interestingly enough you need to submit a request to ATF and get permission when you want to move a full auto, or SBR, or SBS, or destructive device from one state to another. But you don’t with suppressors.

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
I've never understood the issue with obtaining suppressors so difficult? They are common in many other countries for hunting rifles.

Me either, I don’t own a rifle which hasn’t got one fitted.

Not having to wear ear cans whilst out make you so much more aware of what is going on around you.

quote:

Originally posted by nute:

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
I've never understood the issue with obtaining suppressors so difficult? They are common in many other countries for hunting rifles.

Me either, I don’t own a rifle which hasn’t got one fitted.

Not having to wear ear cans whilst out make you so much more aware of what is going on around you.

This would be my primary reason for wanting these. Would make target sessions much more enjoyable let alone hunting. I reckon these restrictions are also why they are so expensive? Sine they are so $$$ I won't buy any.

To me, the point is that I don't understand what the purpose of the law is....99.99% of the folks committing gun violence don't spend money on suppressors.

As for the game warden argument, I'd also say that I'd be willing to bet that about 99.99% of folks poaching game are not going to spend money on suppressors.

That might be because of the NFA.

If Congress wants to remove them from the NFA, so be it. Congress can. The President cannot. Such a bill will not survive filibuster. However, there is merit in making folks vote, go on the record.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
That might be because of the NFA.

If Congress wants to remove them from the NFA, so be it. Congress can. The President cannot. Such a bill will not survive filibuster. However, there is merit in making folks vote, go on the record.

It's not going to happen. Media consistently portrays suppressors as only being used by criminals for nefarious purposes.

It's not real but it is what the public believes.

quote:

As for the game warden argument, I'd also say that I'd be willing to bet that about 99.99% of folks poaching game are not going to spend money on suppressors.

They do most poaching at night anyway.

I don't buy that silencers help all that much with protecting your hearing... some, sure, but not enough to make things hearing safe if you are using standard (non subsonic) loads.

I've got a few. I do think they are useful in some situations. I don't think they are a panacea.

They certainly don't make it so that you can hunt deer in a park and no one knows that you are shooting.

I also rather doubt that congress, being as close as it is, that this will pass through and hit Trump's desk.

If it does, odds are it will be attached to some compromise legislation with something Trump finds rather unpalatable on it.

That being said, if it passes, that's a good thing.

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:

quote:

As for the game warden argument, I'd also say that I'd be willing to bet that about 99.99% of folks poaching game are not going to spend money on suppressors.

They do most poaching at night anyway.

I doubt that poachers buy a suppressor but that threat of 10 years in club Fed keeps them from having their cousin whip one up at his machine shop.

Poachers do shoot at night and conservation cops sit around with their windows rolled down in the wee hours too.

I also think “poaching” is a different business than what it was in the 1920-30’s.
Nobody is selling the meat these days, they’re whacking that 14 point buck you only see on the game camera at 2:30AM.

"This is classic Trump, raise an issue that divides us while costing no extra money."

Not quite. His Gulf of America Bullshit will cost over 1.025 billion dollars for all the changes to made because of it, maritime maps, etc. But it magats feel good, so there is that.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
I don't buy that silencers help all that much with protecting your hearing... some, sure, but not enough to make things hearing safe if you are using standard (non subsonic) loads.

I've got a few. I do think they are useful in some situations. I don't think they are a panacea.

They certainly don't make it so that you can hunt deer in a park and no one knows that you are shooting.

I also rather doubt that congress, being as close as it is, that this will pass through and hit Trump's desk.

If it does, odds are it will be attached to some compromise legislation with something Trump finds rather unpalatable on it.

That being said, if it passes, that's a good thing.

OK, doc. It surprises me to hear you say this. My ears have been ringing since I fired a Colt 1911 .45 ACP Stainless to dispatch a deer from about 10 feet without hearing protection. My hearing has never been the same.

That sucks Mike. I'm surprised a 45 is high enough decibel to cause permanent damage, but obviously it is.
My nephew works for the USDA. They have a rack of suppressed rifle and handguns for shooting near populated areas. If the Gov thinks they need them, why wouldnt hunters?
Depending the op, we sometimes carried suppressed. The most impressive was a bolt action 50 cal, with a full barrel length suppresser. No, not quiet, but used as overwatch, it was hard to tell where the noise came from.
Not like they are tough to make, as stated.
Any teenage farm kid could weld up threaded parts to take a tractor hydraulic filter. It works very well..... so I'm told.

quote:

Originally posted by wymple:
"This is classic Trump, raise an issue that divides us while costing no extra money."

Not quite. His Gulf of America Bullshit will cost over 1.025 billion dollars for all the changes to made because of it, maritime maps, etc. But it magats feel good, so there is that.

He probably does not know a cost for the revisions. Not a municipal zoning issue...

Your situation would be one of the very few. Yes, the .45 is subsonic, so it would be possible to get it down to safe levels.

A 1911 .45 is generally a carry gun. Tack a can about as big as the gun on it, and what happens to concealed or regular carry? Somehow, I doubt you would have had the gun with you if you had a suppressor attached.

I have to wear ear protection with the suppressed rifles I have... even the subsonics on the .300 BLK are unpleasant enough.

The only thing I have that I agree is hearing safe is a .22 rimfire ruger pistol. That is hearing safe... assuming I'm using something subsonic in it like CCI green tag... but I also don't carry the thing because with the suppressor its damn near as long as a shorty AR 15. I do keep it on the seat next to me riding the side by side when we have rodent problems, and there the dang vehicle is probably louder than the gun would be.

The suppressors tend to make something "less bad" rather than "safe".

The military application of making it less obvious where the sound is coming from is a use; but that is not really a civilian use.

When someone a couple of farms away shoots his AR suppressed, you know a gun is going off... just where and how far away is he?

Again, I am not against making suppressors OTC available. I just don't buy that we "have to do it to save folk's hearing."

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
I don't buy that silencers help all that much with protecting your hearing... some, sure, but not enough to make things hearing safe if you are using standard (non subsonic) loads.

I've got a few. I do think they are useful in some situations. I don't think they are a panacea.

They certainly don't make it so that you can hunt deer in a park and no one knows that you are shooting.

I also rather doubt that congress, being as close as it is, that this will pass through and hit Trump's desk.

If it does, odds are it will be attached to some compromise legislation with something Trump finds rather unpalatable on it.

That being said, if it passes, that's a good thing.

OK, doc. It surprises me to hear you say this. My ears have been ringing since I fired a Colt 1911 .45 ACP Stainless to dispatch a deer from about 10 feet without hearing protection. My hearing has never been the same.

I’m surprised at that. I never wear hearing protection whilst out shooting but I don’t have anything bigger than 25-06, although I used to use a 308. I’m not using the suppressors for any other reason that I can hear what’s going on around me without ear cans on.

I do have a suppressed 12g I sometimes use in the garden with subsonic ammo and it’s very quiet.

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
To spendy for what you get in my book.
But,.... it would be great to have one on a rifle to teach kids who are moving up from a .22
Muffs are hard to position for many kids, and it doesnt take many harsh cracks of a centerfire for a kid to develop a flinch.
I dont have to worry about neighbors complaining about noise, but in many places they do. it would be a plus for them. Nothing I would want to lug through the thick woods stuck on the end of my barrel. But, people in many other countries without restrictions do just that, and get along fine.

The 22 rimfire suppressors are insane neato. You hear the action cycle and the bullet strike the target, nothing else.
I have four, yes, I went a little overboard.
I'd recommend to you getting two.

In town hunting has been approved.

quote:

The 22 rimfire suppressors are insane neato. You hear the action cycle and the bullet strike the target, nothing else.
I have four, yes, I went a little overboard.
I'd recommend to you getting two.

My grandson wad a bit afraid of the noise. Until he heard the report or lack of it. From a suppressed 22.

Now he loves shooting.

Interesting that in town hunting was allowed with firearms.

Here, while towns occasionally hire people to hunt in town (the whole reason I brought a suppressor for a shotgun) they tend to restrict in town hunting to bowhunting with a proficiency permit that really doesn't spell out what their requirements are.

It remains illegal to discharge a firearm within city limits for the hoi polloi.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
To spendy for what you get in my book.
But,.... it would be great to have one on a rifle to teach kids who are moving up from a .22
Muffs are hard to position for many kids, and it doesnt take many harsh cracks of a centerfire for a kid to develop a flinch.
I dont have to worry about neighbors complaining about noise, but in many places they do. it would be a plus for them. Nothing I would want to lug through the thick woods stuck on the end of my barrel. But, people in many other countries without restrictions do just that, and get along fine.

The 22 rimfire suppressors are insane neato. You hear the action cycle and the bullet strike the target, nothing else.
I have four, yes, I went a little overboard.
I'd recommend to you getting two.

In town hunting has been approved.

Actually I think in Dillingham it is only legal to hunt with a shotgun or bow.
I think the usual rules about so many feet from the road or not across a road, , so many feet of houses and buildings,......
I think within city limits rifles and pistols are restricted to the gun range.
I think.

I do know from personal experience that a suppressed shooter can use the gun outside the house and the people inside and watching you thru the window can't hear you. Crazy cool.

There was a rumor going around that someone in my neighborhood was keeping the zombie apocalypse Spruce Grouse at bay last fall.

quote:

There was a rumor going around that someone in my neighborhood was keeping the zombie apocalypse Spruce Grouse at bay last fall

Those nasty rumors.

How do your spruce grouse taste.

The ones in ONT. taste like earing turpentine. No matter how I tried fixing them.