Suppresors in Montana
- Thread starter Blackbart
- Start date
Yep it IS legal to hunt big game with them. No you do not need a license to own one. All you need to do is fill out the proper paperwork and wait about 8 months. Just be warned that if you buy one, you're going to want 2 or 3 or 4. They're addicting...
Sorry about the typo
Sorry about the typo
Last edited:
T
tjones
Guest
IIRC last session Bullock signed a bill making it legal to hunt big game with a suppressor.
FAIR CHASE
Well-known member
Suppressors can be used in MT for hunting. All you need is $200 for the stamp, funds for the suppressor and time (8-10 months).
RobG
Well-known member
Last session Governor Steve Bullock (D) signed HB 250 to make suppressors legal .
Anyone want to critique the NRA's take on the action?
Marredbutt's reaction is precious too.
Anyone want to critique the NRA's take on the action?
Marredbutt's reaction is precious too.
Last edited:
marksjeep
Well-known member
One can only hope.
How would that affect HB250 in Montana? Seems to me that newly acquired (non-nfa registered suppressors) would be illegal to hunt with. Or do I read that incorrectly?
sbhooper
Well-known member
I totally agree, but for those that like them, Trump Jr. wants to make it easier to buy/own one. We will see what happens.
They are too expensive for what you get in my opinion. I have a friend that has one and I am not impressed. It is still too loud to have been "silenced". Unless you shoot subsonic loads, the crack of the bullet is still way loud.
I was surprised at how loud the rifles still were with one attached. I think they should be legal to hunt with, and easier to get, but I'll never have one on a hunting rifle. Why have all that extra weight on the end of a barrel? mtmuley
TimeOnTarget
Well-known member
To each their own but Firing an AR with one, I thought the loudest part was the action cycling. Maybe their louder in MT
Semi rifles will be louder than a bolt gun as the gasses are traveling back towards your face. I currently have a rugged surge in jail. For me a suppressor is worth it for hearing. I bring foamies and ear pro but never use it in the heat of the moment.
To each their own but Firing an AR with one, I thought the loudest part was the action cycling. Maybe their louder in MT
marksjeep
Well-known member
I doubt I would use one on my big game rifles. I agree that they are not worth the cost, weight, or limited use.
However, I would very much like to suppress my .22LR and varmint rigs. And doing so without a $200 per stamp tax, paperwork, interstate travel restrictions, wait times, etc., would be much more appealing.
If they become non-NFA items, I think market forces will drive costs down considerably.
However, I would very much like to suppress my .22LR and varmint rigs. And doing so without a $200 per stamp tax, paperwork, interstate travel restrictions, wait times, etc., would be much more appealing.
If they become non-NFA items, I think market forces will drive costs down considerably.
fishing4sanity
Well-known member
Blackbart, if you start the process of getting one now and H.R.3799 (National Hearing Protection Act) passes, then you'll get your $200 tax stamp refunded. If that passes, I'm sure you'll see a spike in suppressor sales and later a drop in price, but if you want one I'd start the process now. Here's a link showing where they're legal to own and hunt with Suppressor Map. I wish I had started using one a few decades ago, tinnitus is not much fun 24/7.
To each their own but Firing an AR with one, I thought the loudest part was the action cycling. Maybe their louder in MT
They aren't quiet enough to warrant the cost. And I fired two different ARs. And I was in Wyoming. mtmuley
Probably a silly question, but why would you need several of them? Can't you exchange them between rifles?
