User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/5/2015 12:38:30 PM EDT
[#1]
Here is a sample letter for the Senate bill. Please do not copy/paste. Change the bill number for writing to the House of Representatives.
Senator XXXXX,
I am writing to express my support for bill SF 1435. This bill will bring MN law into line with federal law and allow Minnesota residents to purchase registered firearm suppressors. As you may know the federal government has strictly controlled these devices since 1934 by requiring any individual buying them to pay a $200 tax and obtain BATFE authorization to possess them. The person applying for the tax stamp must also obtain their local sheriff’s signature on the form and send it in along with their photographs and finger prints. Federal law has very severe sentencing enhancements for criminals who commit crimes with suppressors. Crime associated with suppressors is extremely rare in the United States as a whole. I believe there is no good reason to continue to restrict civilian possession of suppressors to the law abiding residents in Minnesota. While they can make a firearm significantly less noisy they are not capable of making them silent. A typical suppressed firearm will still be at least 110-140 decibels. While the short duration impulse noise does not seem harmful, hearing protect would still be required by the shooter for all but the most effectively suppressed and lower powered guns. The main benefit of using a suppressor is hearing protection; for the shooter and those nearby who might not be wearing hearing protection or wearing it improperly. Another benefit is the reduction of sound levels near shooting areas. As people encroach upon formerly remote areas used by shooters, noise complaints increase. The use of suppressors can reduce complaints and make a shooting range a better neighbor. I feel that allowing suppressor ownership in Minnesota will not significantly aid poachers. Typical hunting rifles with a suppressor attached can still be heard at long distances. Any law banning suppressor possession is probably not a deterrent to criminals that poach wild game animals in our state. Respectfully, Your Name Only by writing lots of letters are we going to be able to convince the legislature that these bills deserve a chance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/5/2015 1:15:47 PM EDT
[#2]
Not to complain about semantics but this is a SUPPRESSOR bill.
Thanks for taking action on this! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/5/2015 2:38:24 PM EDT
[#3]
Representative Bob Vogel (R) District 20A supports this legislation. I am waiting to hear back from Senator Kevin L. Dahle (DFL) District 20.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/5/2015 6:48:03 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not to complain about semantics but this is a SUPPRESSOR bill. The legal name for these devices is silencer, not suppressor; this is a silencer bill. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 8:43:20 AM EDT
[#5]
First round of emails are sent.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 10:41:07 AM EDT
[#6]
Done! I thought there would be more interest here considering.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 1:11:13 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The legal name for these devices is silencer, not suppressor; this is a silencer bill. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not to complain about semantics but this is a SUPPRESSOR bill. The legal name for these devices is silencer, not suppressor; this is a silencer bill. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 4:20:27 PM EDT
[#8]
Sent!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 4:34:23 PM EDT
[#9]
Strangely yes, they are suppressors, but the legal term when doing paperwork for them is silencer.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 5:10:40 PM EDT
[#10]
If anyone has legitimate references to suppressor statistics (crimes, murders committed, illegal game taken), it would be very valuable to post it here. I am receiving some responses:
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 5:11:12 PM EDT
[#11]
"Dear Dan,
Thank you for taking the time to write me about this issue. I am so encouraged when people in my district take an active role in politics. Constituent input is vital for me to properly represent our community, and I appreciate you taking the time to express your support for the legalization of sound suppressors. I am familiar with this issue, as it was brought forward in a previous legislative session when I served on the Senate Environment & Energy Committee. If I am given the chance this year, I would likely support the legalization of sound suppressors. However, it is important to know that this issue has been a difficult one in Minnesota due to the fear that allowing sound suppressors for hunting purposes would create enforcement issues for both the DNR and law enforcement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 5:11:51 PM EDT
[#12]
In the past, the DNR has opposed efforts to legalize sound suppressors over concern that the use of suppressors would limit DNR Conservation Officers' ability to enforce other hunting laws. For example, a hunter's ability to take game without making the traditional audible sound can encourage people to shoot prior to shooting hours, after shooting hours, sneak onto private posted property to take animals, hunt off season, and more easily hunt illegal game. In addition to DNR opposition, law enforcement agencies have also traditionally opposed this issue due to the fear that it could create a loop hole in criminal code by opening the door for sound suppressor owners to use the suppressors criminally.
The fact that 42 other states across the nation have legalized sound suppressors lends legitimacy to a pro-suppressor argument, but a battle for sound suppressor legalization will certainly not be an easy one in Minnesota due to the politics of our state. In response to your letter, I have reached out to the DNR about this issue to gauge their current attitude towards legalization, and they have indicated that their position has not changed. Again, though I see this issue as unlikely to succeed in the current political environment, I am a likely to support it given the chance. Thank you, again, for writing me about this issue. I greatly value your input, and appreciate you contacting me about this issue. Please call or write anytime with your ideas and concerns. I will always welcome your input and advice. Sincerely, Senator John Pederson" |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 5:12:42 PM EDT
[#13]
Who the hell cares what they're called, lets get them legalized.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 5:18:41 PM EDT
[#14]
FYI: https://www.defesa.org/dwp/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/silencers.pdf
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 6:06:26 PM EDT
[#15]
Messages sent.
Thank you to the OP for all the helpful links. I didn't copy/past your letter but I did plagiarize quite a bit, again thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 10:25:55 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Done! I thought there would be more interest here considering. I'm a little surprised too |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 10:34:58 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FYI: https://www.defesa.org/dwp/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/silencers.pdf This link is one of the finest documents I've ever seen on the criminal use (lack thereof) silencers in the USA. I referenced it in the silencer education video I made for MN residents and legislators. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDiLl6mPsuw HF 1434 is scheduled for a hearing on Thursday, March 12, 2015 10:15 AM Room: 10 State Office Building Details on speaking at committee hearings; FAQ Randy |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2015 12:29:08 AM EDT
[#18]
Thanks for the links OP, letter writing commencing now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2015 1:27:24 AM EDT
[#19]
I just spent a few hours emailing regarding several gun bills. I hope many people send in their comments and support for the bills. I hope suppressors are in our future!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2015 10:32:33 AM EDT
[#20]
Let all get break out the comms on this!
Hammer the politicians via Email, Phone, Fax, and Snail Mail! You're fighting an uphill battle considering the Governor will probably veto it, but it's still a battle worth fighting! It would be great to be able to bring NFA devices like cans into MN. I could bring a suppressed 22 pistol for dispatching critters in my traps, or bring them to DE classes in Princeton, or whatever. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2015 10:40:28 AM EDT
[#21]
It is very important that anyone who is able to show up at the Capital to speak at the hearing do so. If the only people who show up are against the bill, it will fail. You can be sure that if a person speaks out against the silencer bill they will use "facts" like it will increase poaching, crime will rise, they are for assassins, they make guns Hollywood quiet. If you know a police officer, game warden or other state/county official who is willing to support the bill, bring them with.
Randy |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2015 11:27:41 AM EDT
[#22]
Emailed everyone. Here is to hoping they listen with open ears..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2015 10:29:47 PM EDT
[#23]
A family friend out your way got in contact with Rep Tim Miller. He is 100% in favor of repealing this for you guys.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2015 11:52:19 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A family friend out your way got in contact with Rep Tim Miller. He is 100% in favor of repealing this for you guys. Awesome! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2015 11:55:51 PM EDT
[#25]
maybe i missed it in one of the links, when are the hearings?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2015 12:05:16 AM EDT
[#26]
"Ethan, I support the bill. Thx Denny"
Representative Denny McNamara Chair House Environment & Natural Resources Policy & Finance 365 State Office Building 100 Rev.Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. St. Paul, Mn. 55155-1298 Phone (651) 296-3135 |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2015 1:28:40 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
maybe i missed it in one of the links, when are the hearings? Quote HistoryQuoted:
maybe i missed it in one of the links, when are the hearings? Facebook Post By Minnesota Gun Owners Political Action Committee
Friday March 6, 2015 NEXT WEEK: The first pro-gun bills will be heard in the Minnesota House Public Safety & Crime Prevention Committee on March 12th at 10:15am in Room 10 of the State Office Building in Saint Paul. Over the past few months, we've been working hard with our friends at the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance (GOCRA) to advance our Joint 2015 Legislative Strategy to protect, restore, and advance your Second Amendment rights in Minnesota. HF1434 - by Representative Mark Anderson would legalize suppressors for use by law-abiding citizens for all lawful purposes. HF372 - by Representative Jim Nash would remove the obsolete notification requirement for Permit to Carry holders who enter any Capitol area state building. HF830 - by Representative Eric Lucero would, after 29 years, update Minnesota law to make it clear that Minnesotans are allowed by purchase long guns in other states. In addition, the committee will hear Representative Dan Fabian's HF305, which would add recognition of North Dakota carry permits in Minnesota. We hope you can join us there! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2015 7:32:24 AM EDT
[#28]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2015 10:28:35 AM EDT
[#29]
Rep. Daniels says he supports the bill.
Haven't heard back from Sen. Jensen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2015 10:29:20 PM EDT
[#30]
probably a dumb question but if the proposed bills pass would they become legal that same day or how does that work?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2015 10:33:52 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
maybe i missed it in one of the links, when are the hearings? Facebook Post By Minnesota Gun Owners Political Action Committee
Friday March 6, 2015 NEXT WEEK: The first pro-gun bills will be heard in the Minnesota House Public Safety & Crime Prevention Committee on March 12th at 10:15am in Room 10 of the State Office Building in Saint Paul. Over the past few months, we've been working hard with our friends at the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance (GOCRA) to advance our Joint 2015 Legislative Strategy to protect, restore, and advance your Second Amendment rights in Minnesota. HF1434 - by Representative Mark Anderson would legalize suppressors for use by law-abiding citizens for all lawful purposes. HF372 - by Representative Jim Nash would remove the obsolete notification requirement for Permit to Carry holders who enter any Capitol area state building. HF830 - by Representative Eric Lucero would, after 29 years, update Minnesota law to make it clear that Minnesotans are allowed by purchase long guns in other states. In addition, the committee will hear Representative Dan Fabian's HF305, which would add recognition of North Dakota carry permits in Minnesota. We hope you can join us there! Thanks, hopefully i can get off work for it. anyone else planning on going? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2015 11:43:54 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
probably a dumb question but if the proposed bills pass would they become legal that same day or how does that work? Not dumb at all. Depends on the bill. The authors usually include a start date. There may be a standard, say August 1. But I know of several bills that became law on Jan. 1, Jul. 1, and even sometimes the day it's signed by the guv. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2015 12:10:02 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not dumb at all. Depends on the bill. The authors usually include a start date. There may be a standard, say August 1. But I know of several bills that became law on Jan. 1, Jul. 1, and even sometimes the day it's signed by the guv. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
probably a dumb question but if the proposed bills pass would they become legal that same day or how does that work? Not dumb at all. Depends on the bill. The authors usually include a start date. There may be a standard, say August 1. But I know of several bills that became law on Jan. 1, Jul. 1, and even sometimes the day it's signed by the guv. Thanks, really just wondering if it were to pass with say an April start date if it would be okay to submit a form 1 on the 12th since the ATF's wait time will be a month + anyway. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2015 1:05:39 PM EDT
[#34]
How a Bill Becomes Law in MN
Most new laws go into effect on Aug. 1 following a legislative session unless a bill specifies another date. Exceptions are bills that contain an appropriation, which become effective July 1, the same date the fiscal year begins. Looks like August is it. I heard of people submitting ATF forms right after a bill was signed and hoping the examiner would not look at it until the effective date passed. I waited until the effective date in WA as the e-filed forms only took three weeks to be approved. Randy |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2015 3:35:19 PM EDT
[#35]
Unfortunately, Dayton will most likely not sign it because too many DFL'ers will tell him not to sign it. He's not a very independent thinker from what I have seen. Still though, if there are enough blue dogs that support it, it may have a chance. I'd say the people that we need most to contact and urge to sign are the moderate D's.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2015 3:36:44 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How a Bill Becomes Law in MN Looks like August is it. I heard of people submitting ATF forms right after a bill was signed and hoping the examiner would not look at it until the effective date passed. I waited until the effective date in WA as the e-filed forms only took three weeks to be approved. Randy Quote HistoryQuoted:
How a Bill Becomes Law in MN Most new laws go into effect on Aug. 1 following a legislative session unless a bill specifies another date. Exceptions are bills that contain an appropriation, which become effective July 1, the same date the fiscal year begins. Looks like August is it. I heard of people submitting ATF forms right after a bill was signed and hoping the examiner would not look at it until the effective date passed. I waited until the effective date in WA as the e-filed forms only took three weeks to be approved. Randy Just in time for 41P to screw half of us in this state from being able to take advantage of it. (if it were to pass) |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2015 4:57:17 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Unfortunately, Dayton will most likely not sign it because too many DFL'ers will tell him not to sign it. He's not a very independent thinker from what I have seen. Still though, if there are enough blue dogs that support it, it may have a chance. I'd say the people that we need most to contact and urge to sign are the moderate D's. Which legislators have actually come out in print or a letter/e-mail to oppose civilian silencer ownership in MN? In WA back in 2011 it was a non-issue for the most part. In fact it was such a "nothing" bill that the anti-gun groups did not oppose it at all. Randy |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2015 4:59:00 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks, hopefully i can get off work for it. anyone else planning on going? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
maybe i missed it in one of the links, when are the hearings? Facebook Post By Minnesota Gun Owners Political Action Committee
Friday March 6, 2015 NEXT WEEK: The first pro-gun bills will be heard in the Minnesota House Public Safety & Crime Prevention Committee on March 12th at 10:15am in Room 10 of the State Office Building in Saint Paul. Over the past few months, we've been working hard with our friends at the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance (GOCRA) to advance our Joint 2015 Legislative Strategy to protect, restore, and advance your Second Amendment rights in Minnesota. HF1434 - by Representative Mark Anderson would legalize suppressors for use by law-abiding citizens for all lawful purposes. HF372 - by Representative Jim Nash would remove the obsolete notification requirement for Permit to Carry holders who enter any Capitol area state building. HF830 - by Representative Eric Lucero would, after 29 years, update Minnesota law to make it clear that Minnesotans are allowed by purchase long guns in other states. In addition, the committee will hear Representative Dan Fabian's HF305, which would add recognition of North Dakota carry permits in Minnesota. We hope you can join us there! Thanks, hopefully i can get off work for it. anyone else planning on going? I wanted to be there for this but I am scheduled to be out west in South Dakota for work. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2015 5:01:16 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistorySen.Kevin Dahle
sbl23, I have heard from several people living in our district about SF 1435. I certainly understand your concerns. I will look into this bill and talk to my senate colleagues in order to hear arguments on both sides and make an informed decision in the event that this bill is heard on the floor. I certainly appreciate your input on these and other issues. Your thoughts are always welcome. Please feel free to contact me at any time. Regards, Sen.Kevin Dahle |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2015 7:28:50 PM EDT
[#40]
Emails sent to the committees. Sending to my reps next. Fingers crossed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2015 7:48:34 PM EDT
[#41]
I hope this passes in Minnesota, so I can bring my cans along when I come to visit the grandkids.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:28:07 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hope this passes in Minnesota, so I can bring my cans along when I come to visit the grandkids. I hope this passes so I can stop storing mine out of state. Moved here 2 years ago and only get to shoot suppressed when I go back home. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 11:45:30 AM EDT
[#43]
I plan to attend the hearing tomorrow. (should be interesting, I've never attended one before)
I've emailed each member of both committees (house and senate) to advocate for support on these bills. So far I've heard nothing but support, which is great but many have still not responded. Supporters I've heard from include: Rep Jeff Howe, 13A Rep. Brian Johnson, 32A Rep. Jim Newberger, 12B GOCRA has some good notes for anyone wanting to educate legislators on their website: http://www.gocra.org/news/2015/03/suppressor-capitol-carry-hearings-scheduled-for-next-week/ http://www.gocra.org/news/2015/03/gocra-briefing-sound-suppressors-mufflers-for-firearms/ Please, don't sit on the bench and 'see what happens' here. If you've ever had a sigh of disappointment at not being able to shoot suppressed because you live in MN, this is your time to take action and make a difference. Getting engaged and becoming active is the only way it will happen so let's all do our part. Worried that you aren't a politician, lobbyist, or activist? Getting involved can many things including: - Call or write an email to your local rep (after all, they work for YOU!) - Call or email other legislators on the committee (here's the list of all of them with their contact info - http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/comm/committeemembers.asp?comm=89019) - Come to the hearings, even if you don't say anything, stand with others and show that this bill matters And of course, as you're doing these things be polite, genuine, and to the point. :) Hope to see you all there at tomorrow's hearing! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 9:43:55 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which legislators have actually come out in print or a letter/e-mail to oppose civilian silencer ownership in MN? In WA back in 2011 it was a non-issue for the most part. In fact it was such a "nothing" bill that the anti-gun groups did not oppose it at all. Randy Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Unfortunately, Dayton will most likely not sign it because too many DFL'ers will tell him not to sign it. He's not a very independent thinker from what I have seen. Still though, if there are enough blue dogs that support it, it may have a chance. I'd say the people that we need most to contact and urge to sign are the moderate D's. Which legislators have actually come out in print or a letter/e-mail to oppose civilian silencer ownership in MN? In WA back in 2011 it was a non-issue for the most part. In fact it was such a "nothing" bill that the anti-gun groups did not oppose it at all. Randy Unfortunately our DNR is dead set against it. They are of the opinion that if they were legal every deer in the state would be dead before the next deer season. They believe it will encourage poaching, trespassing and other illegal activities. That gives Dayton the easy out of saying because of DNR recommendations he will not sign it. I believe that if the Minnesota DNR had the authority they would ban guns from us lowly civilians. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 9:53:55 PM EDT
[#45]
We have the same problem with our DNR in Michigan allowing us to hunt with suppressors. (Suppressor ownership is legal here in Michigan)
Duh, why would I spend several hundred dollars to just be able to poach dear, when I can purchase the best deer poaching weapon in the world. A crossbow. Plus they are legal to use to hunt deer here, just during normal hunting hours. The things make NO noise. Conservation Offers can't hear them, but they can hear a gun shot of a suppressed firearm. Their excuse is liberal BS |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 10:16:59 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Unfortunately our DNR is dead set against it. They are of the opinion that if they were legal every deer in the state would be dead before the next deer season. They believe it will encourage poaching, trespassing and other illegal activities. That gives Dayton the easy out of saying because of DNR recommendations he will not sign it. I believe that if the Minnesota DNR had the authority they would ban guns from us lowly civilians. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Unfortunately, Dayton will most likely not sign it because too many DFL'ers will tell him not to sign it. He's not a very independent thinker from what I have seen. Still though, if there are enough blue dogs that support it, it may have a chance. I'd say the people that we need most to contact and urge to sign are the moderate D's. Which legislators have actually come out in print or a letter/e-mail to oppose civilian silencer ownership in MN? In WA back in 2011 it was a non-issue for the most part. In fact it was such a "nothing" bill that the anti-gun groups did not oppose it at all. Randy Unfortunately our DNR is dead set against it. They are of the opinion that if they were legal every deer in the state would be dead before the next deer season. They believe it will encourage poaching, trespassing and other illegal activities. That gives Dayton the easy out of saying because of DNR recommendations he will not sign it. I believe that if the Minnesota DNR had the authority they would ban guns from us lowly civilians. But the DNR has Suppressors, if we can't have them they shouldn't either |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 10:17:11 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Unfortunately our DNR is dead set against it. They are of the opinion that if they were legal every deer in the state would be dead before the next deer season. They believe it will encourage poaching, trespassing and other illegal activities. That gives Dayton the easy out of saying because of DNR recommendations he will not sign it. I believe that if the Minnesota DNR had the authority they would ban guns from us lowly civilians. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Unfortunately, Dayton will most likely not sign it because too many DFL'ers will tell him not to sign it. He's not a very independent thinker from what I have seen. Still though, if there are enough blue dogs that support it, it may have a chance. I'd say the people that we need most to contact and urge to sign are the moderate D's. Which legislators have actually come out in print or a letter/e-mail to oppose civilian silencer ownership in MN? In WA back in 2011 it was a non-issue for the most part. In fact it was such a "nothing" bill that the anti-gun groups did not oppose it at all. Randy Unfortunately our DNR is dead set against it. They are of the opinion that if they were legal every deer in the state would be dead before the next deer season. They believe it will encourage poaching, trespassing and other illegal activities. That gives Dayton the easy out of saying because of DNR recommendations he will not sign it. I believe that if the Minnesota DNR had the authority they would ban guns from us lowly civilians. I also believe they would like us all to go to recurve bows or Atl-Atls and charge us $2000 per year for a permit so they can continue their "research" and "studies" and pay for their bureaucratic oversight and tracking of game taken with our evil assault Atl-Atl or bow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 10:52:13 AM EDT
[#48]
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/htv/htv.asp
House & Senate Broadcast Television Schedule - a list of upcoming events
Thursday, Mar. 12, 2015 Agenda: HF372 (Nash) Notice of possession of firearms at the Capitol complex requirement amended. HF830 (Lucero) Federal Gun Control Act; firearm sale and purchase permitted in any state where lawful under the act. HF1434 (Anderson) Suppressor possession and use prohibition repealed, chief law enforcement officers required to complete federal certifications relating to suppressors in a timely manner, and appeal process for denial of certification provided. Tune in at 1100 for the broadcast online. Looking forward to any info from those that are at the hearing. :) Randy |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 10:59:59 AM EDT
[#49]
dang will be in a meeting at 11... hopefully someone can post up as I will have internet access just cant watch the stream!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 11:14:09 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We have the same problem with our DNR in Michigan allowing us to hunt with suppressors. (Suppressor ownership is legal here in Michigan) Duh, why would I spend several hundred dollars to just be able to poach dear, when I can purchase the best deer poaching weapon in the world. A crossbow. Plus they are legal to use to hunt deer here, just during normal hunting hours. The things make NO noise. Conservation Offers can't hear them, but they can hear a gun shot of a suppressed firearm. Their excuse is liberal BS I have a crossbow. It makes more noise than a standard compound bow. They are legal for deer hunting in MN for certain groups. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
