A number of states allow hunting with a silencer. I think that it makes sense here in CT where you always seem to be within hearing range of a house. In the interest of homeowner relations, should and can we change the law in CT?
Note that 28 states allow this with about half requiring permission of the landowner.
It's an interesting question. I agree it makes sense in CT but the politics behind it will probably be impossible to overcome. There are noise reducing shotgun barrels legal for use in CT right now. The original one was called a "metrobarrel", they are stupid long (like 60") but they cut the noise down to a fraction of a regular barrel. Other manufacturers have tinkered with the concept, the shortest one I've seen was about 40". Not really silencers because they don't have a can. Also, as with traditional silencers you need to use sub-sonic ammo to realize the most sound reduction.
#1668741 - 02/01/1602:07 PM
Re: Hunting with a silencer
[Re: DeadBird]
Tod Osier
Member
Registered: 04/13/04
Posts: 1587
Loc: Newtown, CT
At least they are legal here (with a federal tax stamp). I haven't shot one or even shot at a range next to one, but I'd be interested in seeing what they can do. For deer hunting it would be tough for me to go subsonic, but like I said, I don't have a feel for how much they reduce sound (sub- or hyper-sonic).
Waterfowl would be nice, but in my understanding going subsonic there you need to go up in shot size (and shoot close), so the BB max size limit would be a problem for geese where it would be really interesting.
As far as I know hunting with Elmer Fudd would be perfectly legal. In terms of a silencer I can't think of a better example, and to this date I know of no actions taken against him for "shooshing" anyone even during wabbit season.
It's an interesting question. I agree it makes sense in CT but the politics behind it will probably be impossible to overcome. There are noise reducing shotgun barrels legal for use in CT right now. The original one was called a "metrobarrel", they are stupid long (like 60") but they cut the noise down to a fraction of a regular barrel. Other manufacturers have tinkered with the concept, the shortest one I've seen was about 40". Not really silencers because they don't have a can. Also, as with traditional silencers you need to use sub-sonic ammo to realize the most sound reduction.
Also the metro barrel requires you to use special ammo low noise/recoil for you to have the noise reduction. Federal was making it way back, when they first started making the barrels. So for example if you just used standard Remington steel shot you would not see much of a decrease in noise. Additionally the cost of this special ammo is greater than all the other non-toxic ammo out there. So as far as waterfowling goes most would be unwilling to use it. Now for suppressors for say deer hunting I am sure most of the hunting community would support it, it would get scrutinized by the bunny huggers as they wouldn't be able to complain about noise.
#1669168 - 02/04/1609:01 PM
Re: Hunting with a silencer
[Re: KeithA]
EnCon Police Moderator
Registered: 03/01/04
Posts: 3899
In order to change a law you would have to go to your state representative and get it through the legislature. If you feel that strongly about it, get a petition going to start. In my own opinion, I would stay away from that issue. If you are legal, why worry. I understand your point, but we as sportsmen and women should not shy away from our passion and rights. Also, it would give poachers another advantage, not that they care, they're poachers. Again, my own opinion, but I think that would be a hard one to sell here in CT with our ongoing gun issues.
Previous Topic
Index