Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
NFA & Class III Discussion
New Suppressor Legislation for Hunters?
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Erick" data-source="post: 1696484" data-attributes="member: 11535"><p>Good stuff. </p><p></p><p>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? </p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>Yes, it would be easier and better if it was changed to "All game animals legal. "</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Erick, post: 1696484, member: 11535"] 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. " [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
NFA & Class III Discussion
New Suppressor Legislation for Hunters?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom