Poll about allowing suppressors for hunting purposes

[getsum]

Most people who own supressors are law abiding citizens who either went through the process of having the LEO sign off, or have creaqted a Trust, LLP or corp.
Thus they are following the law to possess this item.
Knowing that the $ and time that was part of this process - I doubt that many people actually would BREAK THE LAW using their supressor.

Knowing the concequences and the fact taht they would lose the supressor and all the other things if caught.

I have no problem with it.

 

[mr ed]

You know everyone keeps saying that Poachers use them. Can anyone substantiate this? I am trying to remember, but I don't know of one published incident of poaching with a suppressor, certainly not in Oklahoma that I know of?

Keystone wma - Boston pool area North of cleveland Ok. Early 80's a guy wiped out entire turkey flock in roosting tree. with Homemade (unregistered) suppressor.
A-Hole didn't even do it for food, just mean-ness.
Luckily rangers saw his spotlight and caught him.

 

[RedTape]

I voted yes. I see no reason to keep them illegal.

 

[mr ed]

You must realize when we talk about a poacher using a NFA item. 99.9% of the time it is an unregistered "illegal" item.
People should also understand that for every 1 "Registered" MG,SBR,SBS,or Suppressor out there, Theres a 100 unregistered ones.

 

[patrickcudd]

To me this is like the gunbuster signs. If I'm going to break the law, will another law keep me from breaking the first law?

Poaching is illegal.......right now so is using a can......will the second law keep someone from breaking the first? For the Fudds, no....it won't....no matter how you spin it!


Let's make this a safety issue......My wife, an Audiologist, will not even shoot a .22 w/out plugs and muffs. My son's first shooting expierence was with a .22 and a can. We need to legalize it for the children!!!

 

[ez bake]

Poachers use whatever they want currently to accomplish their task. Why not allow licensed hunters to use them? Suppressors don't make a gun shot undetectable. They still have a report just not as much.

If I am hunting on my land I want to know who is out there. Even if they use a suppressor on a centerfire rifle I should still be able to hear them. It also allows me to keep what hearing I have left.

The current poaching laws should be looked at. If a suppressor is used was it legally purchased or made? Increase the penalties for poaching would be one way of trying to stop it. I doubt it will ever go away.

I don't hunt but we thought it would be something Oklahoma could benefit from and that is why we brought this issue to our State representatives.

I can understand not allowing it for deer hunting but for varmints and pest control. Texas currently allows suppressor for non game animals.

Thanks for all of the ideas and opinions.

Per the regs, technically Oklahoma doesn't prohibit suppressors being used for non-game animals (game animals, game and non-game birds are a different story):

http://wildlifedepartment.com/regs/generalregs.htm

Silencers

Silencers may not be used to hunt game animals, game or nongame birds.

 

[bigcountryok]

Where does the ODWC define game animals, game, and non-game birds? I didn't see it in the regs.

 

[rlt7272]

I like being able to hear who may be shooting around me. Granted they arent completely silent but they do reduce the sound to a point that it may be deceiving how close another hunter may be. As far as hearing loss, wear plugs or electronic protection. Not sure about the rest of you but I dont even notice the sound (or recoil for that matter) once I have taken a shot at an animal. There may still be damage but that is a part of hunting. It is a dangerous activity after all.

 

[Spiff]

People should also understand that for every 1 "Registered" MG,SBR,SBS,or Suppressor out there, Theres a 100 unregistered ones.

I'd be interested in seeing this particular claim substantiated.

 

[bigcountryok]

I like being able to hear who may be shooting around me. Granted they arent completely silent but they do reduce the sound to a point that it may be deceiving how close another hunter may be. As far as hearing loss, wear plugs or electronic protection. Not sure about the rest of you but I dont even notice the sound (or recoil for that matter) once I have taken a shot at an animal. There may still be damage but that is a part of hunting. It is a dangerous activity after all.

By the time they shoot its too late if you don't already know they are there.

While you may not notice the sound when you shoot, it still does damage to your ears.

Hunting is not a dangerous activity. Its perfectly safe just like any other activity as long as you use some common sense. If hunting is dangerous then driving a car is certain death.

Thinking more and more about it I don't see any reason why they should not be allowed. As for the hearing damage, I could buy a set of Walkers Game Ears (the good ear inserts) cheaper than I could get a can and tax stamp.

Hmm something to think about.