Suppressors

James Riley

Banned
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
1,821
I didn't read the article 'cause I didn't want answer the question etc. to see it. My gut reaction, without thinking about it is "fine." I'm all for less noise and less reminders that I am not alone. I hunt bow but sometimes I'm out and about during rifle and on the first shot I hear the song from "The Sound of Music" comes into my head, except I sing "The Hills Are Alive, With the Sound of Gunfire . . . "

Too bad Uncle Sam is so anal about suppressors. I want one just because so many folks don't want me to have it. I'm juvenile that way. :hump: :D
 

MT_elk

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2012
Messages
2,684
Location
MT
Interesting. I have never used a suppressor, but am intrigued by the idea. I have tinnitus (constant ringing in my ears) from a friend's muzzle blast in a hunting situation.

Does anyone have any experience with suppressors? It does look like a lot of hassle in getting it registered Federally etc.
 

Carl

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2008
Messages
393
Location
Bozeman
Suppressors keep getting better, and I've been scheming to procure one anyways. I sure wouldn't mind being able to use one in select big game hunting circumstances.
 

HSi-ESi

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 1, 2012
Messages
1,122
Location
Corvallis, MT
The biggest question I have on this is how will it influence divorce rates in MT?

Proponents of the bill can argue that divorce rates will decrease with better communication skills between spouses. Opponents of the bill can argue that increased "husband comprehension" will cause more marriages to fail.

Maybe we need to get Sen. Fielder on board to propose a study.
 

Southwind

New member
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
1,575
Location
Augusta, KS
I don't have a problem with them. I have shot with them and have several friends that have them and see no reason why you shouldn't be able to hunt with them.

Personally I don't see spending the money for one, I would rather save my cash it for the hunt. I have ear plugs that work just fine.
 

Hummer

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
319
Location
Western Colorado

James Riley

Banned
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
1,821
Suppressors keep getting better, . . .

That's what I hear (get it, "hear", :D, sorry, :(). Anyway, yes, they tell me at gun shows the technology is WAY better than back in the day. Thus, I'm thinking about it. But you have to license it or get a pass or some crap from ATF, I think. $200.00?? plus the cost of the suppressor. It's not the money so much as the idea.

I went to an anti-counter-terrorism/hostage rescue course at the F.B.I. Academy and we had Ingrams and Uzis and whatnot with suppressors. All you could hear for the first five to ten rounds of subsonic ammo was the cycling of the bolt. But then it got gradually louder, quick, as the suppressor began to foul up. I'm not sure how well they work on supersonic weapons.

The most quiet was a semi-auto .22. If you held your thumb on the bolt lever to keep it from cycling you could not hear a damn thing. Not even a phhht.

decisions.jpg


FBIM10.jpg
 

Mthuntr

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
4,670
Location
In the Sagebrush of SW Montana
I can see arguments both ways and really don't feel strongly about either side. Considering the amount of time it takes to get your first Tax Stamp and the costs associated with a good suppressor it my take awhile to catch on. I've considered it for my varmint hunting. I too have Tinnitus and would love to be able reduce the risk of further damaging my ears (even when using earplugs).
 

FAIR CHASE

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
937
Location
Montana
From the view point of someone (ME) with sever tinnitus and who owns more than one suppressor, it is money well spent. The 'hassle' factor does not exist (other than the $200 stamp) and is usually falsely described by those who do not own a suppressor. I received my latest suppressor a few days ago and the wait time is down dramatically; 3 months 8 days.

I suggest going the trust route and purchase from a dealer who does lots of suppressor sales. A trust is very easy to set up and does not require paying a lawyer big bucks. You can do it yourself or find a dealer that will help you set up the trust.
 

James Riley

Banned
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
1,821
I suggest going the trust route and purchase from a dealer who does lots of suppressor sales. A trust is very easy to set up and does not require paying a lawyer big bucks. You can do it yourself or find a dealer that will help you set up the trust.

Okay, now I feel dumb. What is the trust all about? Why set up a trust to buy a suppressor? :confused:
 

FAIR CHASE

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
937
Location
Montana
Many advantages to a trust .........

Anyone on the trust can use the suppressor without you needing to be present.
Speeds up the process (i.e. no finger prints needed or local law signoff).
Suppressor goes to the primary on the trust when you die and which eliminates the stamp cost (again).

There are other advantages but those are the biggest.

Basically most buyers of suppressors and those that understand the system go the trust route. Politicians have been trying to eliminate the trust route for suppressors.

You could also contact http://www.dakotasilencer.com/ to purchase a suppressor if a class III dealer is not in your area. I have never used Dakota Silencer and I have heard good and bad things about them.

35 states now allow hunting with suppressors and more will follow.

I suggest visiting http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/ to gain a better understanding of a much understood subject.

For anyone that wants their first suppressor, I suggest a 22lr can. It truly is 'Hollywood' quiet.

Using a can on a center fire is hearing safe (95-97% sound reduction) but the sonic crack of the bullet is obviously still there.
 
Last edited:

James Riley

Banned
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
1,821
Many advantages to a trust .........

Anyone on the trust can use the suppressor without you needing to be present.
Speeds up the process (i.e. no finger prints needed or local law signoff).
Suppressor goes to the primary on the trust when you die and which eliminates the stamp cost (again).

There are other advantages but those are the biggest.

Basically most buyers of suppressors and those that understand the system go the trust route. Politicians have been trying to eliminate the trust route for suppressors.

You could also contact http://www.dakotasilencer.com/ to purchase a suppressor if a class III dealer is not in your area. I have never used Dakota Silencer and I have heard good and bad things about them.

35 of the states now allow hunting with suppressors and more will follow.

I suggest visiting http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/ to gain a better understanding of a much understood subject.

For anyone that wants their first suppressor, I suggest a 22lr can. It truly is 'Hollywood' quiet.

Using a can on a center fire is hearing safe (95-97% sound reduction) but the sonic crack of the bullet is obviously still there.

Wow, never knew; never would have thought of that. Thanks for sharing.
 

FAIR CHASE

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
937
Location
Montana
Yes, there is a decrease in recoil but nothing compared to a brake.

Another advantage to a suppressor is generally an increase in accuracy.
 

fishing4sanity

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
5,037
Location
eastern Washington
When my son bought a suppressor I told him it was a foolish choice and that I didn't see the value in it, then I went to the range with him, at the end of the day he was helping me get started in the process of buying mine. After using one, it really changed my attitude, I love shooting with suppressors. I cringe now when someone with a brake shoots and thank the people using 'cans.' Fair Chase's info about the trust is good advice and the best way to get one. I think the recoil reduction from a suppressor is very noticeable and the comfort to my ears is a big benefit.
 

devon deer

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
2,444
Location
Devon, England
If you get one choose wisely, i went on recommendation, result is mine remains in the gun cabinet and is never used, it totally unbalances the rifle, like a scaffolding pole attached to the end, don't forget you can't just remove and reattach them without re-zeroing.


But my friend uses a different make, although it still unbalances the rifle it does handle better.


Cheers

Richard
 

1_pointer

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 20, 2000
Messages
18,123
Location
Indiana
They are legal now in IN to hunt with and I do plan on getting one via the trust route. Just being able to shoot with my two young boys without hearing protection would be worth the cost to me. Saves our hearing and they are much better able to hear my instruction.

A suppressed 22lr would be real fun in the squirrel woods...
 

sbhooper

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Messages
4,178
Location
North Platte, Nebraska
Unless the technology has changed drastically, they drop the velocity of the round quite a bit, which I do not want. I personally would not want the additional weight on the end of the barrel, either.. It would be fun to have a .22 silenced, though.

Silenced weapons would really help a serious poacher.
 

tjones

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
3,830
Last session when this same bill came around I was dead set against it, this time around, meh.

Poachers can all ready own them after jumping through the hoops. This bill does not make them any easier to get. Here in Montana you have always been able to hunt non game animals such as coyotes with one. You could legally have one on a 22LR.


This bill allows someone to hunt big game with a suppressor. I might be wrong but I don't think many big game hunters will actually go get one.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
94,618
Messages
1,411,948
Members
29,678
Latest member
Luke2000
Top