I heard that a senator is introducing legislation to make hunting with a suppressor legal for land owners and guests. Can someone in the know fill us in on the details. I would really like to throw some support out there to make this happen.
I'm not sure I support that. I recognize the whole "incremental steps" approach to getting legislation passed, but I don't think it's too much to ask that we all be allowed to legally hunt with legal suppressors. After all, my ears are just as valuable as a landowners.
This should be easier to support now that the NRA has publicly supported suppressors for hunting.
This should be easier to support now that the NRA has publicly supported suppressors for hunting.
It is Senator Russell. I hope he doesn't go with the landowner language too. It would be a step in the right direction, but I fear a step into a permanent situation where I can't use my legal cans on WMAs.
I agree, I hope they take the landowner language out of it and make it an option for all hunters. Regardless, I'm glad people are starting to come around to the idea.
Senator Russel has confirmed he submitted a new suppressor legislation bill. I have checked Oklahoma Congress site where they publish the bills and it has not shown up yet. I hope he didn't go the landowner route as well. It would be much easier to just strike through that one limitation in the regulations then add several more sentences that would have to be removed later to completely remove the prohibition.
With Texas proposing to open up class 5 game animals to hunting with suppressors and Arkansas already allowing it, I would think it would be easy to use these two cases to justify it in Oklahoma.
EDIT: Texas has proposed to open up class 5 game animals but has not yet approved this.
With Texas proposing to open up class 5 game animals to hunting with suppressors and Arkansas already allowing it, I would think it would be easy to use these two cases to justify it in Oklahoma.
EDIT: Texas has proposed to open up class 5 game animals but has not yet approved this.
Last edited:
Gem-tech has a PDF on their page showing the state by state legalities.. With the exception of TX, it looks like suppressors are legal for hunting in all of our neighboring states.
Here is the PDF..
right-click and Save
http://www.gem-tech.com/store/pc/pdf/HUNTING WITH SUPPRESSORS-STATE LAW COMPILATION.pdf
Here is the PDF..
right-click and Save
http://www.gem-tech.com/store/pc/pdf/HUNTING WITH SUPPRESSORS-STATE LAW COMPILATION.pdf
http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/busines...0126/agenda/regulations_committee/index.phtml
Texas Park and Wildlife Department has proposed to remove the restriction on hunting with suppressors for class 5 game animals. The measure is supposed to open up for comments sometime later this month and hopefully passes. With commission reporting they can find no resource- or enforcement-related reason to continue to prohibit their use, the amendment will pass and get implemented.
I have sent a letter to Senator Russell informing him of this so he might be able to use it to help with his bill. I have also included a link the Gem-Tech blog that talks about a letter they helped write that was sent to the TPWD regarding hunting with suppressors in hopes he will obtain a copy to use as well.
I suggest everyone that wants to see this happen write an email to Senator Russell telling him you support hunting with suppressors (hopefully you also support not just limiting it to landowners and guests, if so tell him that as well), and your own Senator and Reps to tell them you will be watching how they vote and support the measure for their next election.
Good stuff.
Correct me if I am wrong here, but if it was limited to land owners and guests, wouldn't that make it legal for everyone hunting on private land? Technically, if you are nunting on someone's land and you have permission, aren't you a guest?
I've never hunted on public land, but would hunting unsuppressed be better for safety since you could have a better idea of those around you? I tend to think that it would be better to be suppressed but maybe that is the argument the senator is using with this language. Maybe with the landowner/guest rule, he is trying to define it as illegal to use a suppressor if you don't have permission to hunt. So, if someone is poaching and the have a suppressor, they are using the suppressor illegally. Maybe he is trying to tack on more laws against those not using it properly. Who knows, these are just my assumptions with how it is written. I will support it the bill and encourage others as well.
Yes, it would be easier and better if it was changed to "All game animals legal. "
Correct me if I am wrong here, but if it was limited to land owners and guests, wouldn't that make it legal for everyone hunting on private land? Technically, if you are nunting on someone's land and you have permission, aren't you a guest?
I've never hunted on public land, but would hunting unsuppressed be better for safety since you could have a better idea of those around you? I tend to think that it would be better to be suppressed but maybe that is the argument the senator is using with this language. Maybe with the landowner/guest rule, he is trying to define it as illegal to use a suppressor if you don't have permission to hunt. So, if someone is poaching and the have a suppressor, they are using the suppressor illegally. Maybe he is trying to tack on more laws against those not using it properly. Who knows, these are just my assumptions with how it is written. I will support it the bill and encourage others as well.
Yes, it would be easier and better if it was changed to "All game animals legal. "
It is about time. I have been told that hunting with supressors is required in some areas of other countries. It would help save ears and also help limit the impact on other animals around the hunting area.
Similar threads
