New Suppressor Legislation for Hunters?

[Glocktogo]

Numerous other states seem to have no problems getting it passed and have not had any issues with rampant poaching. As the Texas Wildlife Department stated in their report, they could not find any reason to prohibit the use of suppressors on any land while hunting. That statement right there speaks volumes!!! Maybe Oklahoma should pay some of them to come up here and educate our Wildlife Department on suppressors. However, the WMA's are vastly different than other government property since they are actually open for hunting and firearms. A government building is not for either of those purposes.

Yes, but the FUDD is strong in Oklahoma.

 

[Erick]

The Landowner's Hunting Freedom Act (SB 1743) Update:

The bill that will legalize hunting with a suppressor on private land is now being read by the Tourism and Wildlife committee. While this bill is not perfect (Not allowing hunting with suppressors on public land or by people without permission to hunt) It is the only bill in the near future that would allow hunting with suppressors completely legal. (One other bill would allow the Wildlife Department to issue one day permits for special purposes)

If you support this bill please send an email to the Chair, Senator Harry Coates, thanking him for hearing the bill in his committee and asking him for his support. His email address is: [email protected]


If you would like to send an email urging the other senators in the committee to support the bill, you can find their addresses here. In most cases their last name is the name before "@"

[email protected] (Senator Ellis)
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected] (Senator Brown)
[email protected] (Senator Fields)
[email protected] (Sen Earl Garrison)
[email protected]
[email protected]

 

[OK Hog Shooter]

I asked the Senator why doens't the bill open it up for all hunters. His reply was that "I wanted to narrow the focus to landowners and their rights on their property for this bill. There are many states that allow this type of hunting (even Connecticut) for all the good reasons that seem to connect on both sides of the aisle. With regard to public lands, the argument erodes into useless discussions on poaching and government control of lands. This bill addresses the need and allows hopefully for a common sense approach to the issue.

So it looks like the worry was that it couldn't get passed now (for what ever reason) if the government land was involved. Hopefully this will be a slam dunk and we can use our firearm mounted hearing protection while hunting on private land soon.

As a hunter/shooter/land owner... I like this. Let's make sure the bill gets passed and then if the legislators want to add a provision dealing with WMAs later, it will be easier for them to do then, IMHO.

 

[338Shooter]

The bill is being modified in committee Erick. Will include WMAs with the new version.

 

[rifleman 1981]

any new updates on how this is panning out so far?

 

[MLR]

The bill is being modified in committee Erick. Will include WMAs with the new version.

Were WMA's added to enhance or to kill the bill?

Michael

 

[vdub]

Were WMA's added to enhance or to kill the bill?

Michael

Public land, as well as WMA's, were added to enhance the bill. Unfortunately that version of the bill was not seconded for a vote in the first committee. It was changed back to private land only and has since passed the second committee vote as well as the Senate vote. The bill is now in the House and I believed assigned to a committee there.

There are several threads about SB1743 in the Second Amendment forum and you can check www.oksenate.gov site for all the latest info.