|
|
Post by dadfsr on Jan 9, 2012 12:16:28 GMT -5
And the attraction for a hunter is what?  The first use that comes to mind is in hunting/eliminating feral hogs  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2012 13:18:32 GMT -5
I killed about 50 last year and don't have one. Being that there are very few if any huntable populationds of hogs in Indiana, there has to be something else?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2012 13:24:22 GMT -5
Hearing protection - however with the $200 stamp, plus the cost of threading a barrel, plus the suppressor I don't expect to see too many out there were it approved. It would be nice to have the option though. Realisticly, I don't see hardly anyone dropping over a $1000 and a bunch of paperwork for one of these devices. |
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jan 9, 2012 14:04:42 GMT -5
I dont either .... but I cant see a reason why they shouldnt be allowed to if they would want to.
Not really sure how much noise a persons boomstick makes should matter. At all.
The fact that they are regulated in the first place is asinine .....
|
|
|
|
Post by danf on Jan 9, 2012 14:05:15 GMT -5
I haven't priced a suppressor lately, but I'd think $1000 would be on the very high end. Most suppressors could likely be picked up in the $200-300 range, and I would bet it's less than $100 to get a barrel threaded. Most AR barrels are already threaded so those would be the natural choice.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2012 14:34:35 GMT -5
My point is that this needs to be challenged on a Federal level. instead of a state level. Start with doing away with the paperwork and tax.
As for the price of them, I see them from $300 on up, and a direct link to the quietness factor the higher they go. You can make oe from a two-liter pop bottle for a little of nothing, but they aren't too deluxe.I'd guess that a $200 one would be twice as loud as a $400 and so on.
|
|
|
|
Post by tenring on Jan 9, 2012 14:58:09 GMT -5
Hearing protection - however with the $200 stamp, plus the cost of threading a barrel, plus the suppressor I don't expect to see too many out there were it approved. It would be nice to have the option though. 80 bucks at Elmores, and comes with a thread protector. Had my AR done so I could put a good flash suppressor on to keep my NV scope from temporarily shutting down due to the muzzle flash. Only took one week for job to be done. Excellent work too. |
|
|
|
Post by shinglemonkey on Jan 9, 2012 19:30:04 GMT -5
My point is that this needs to be challenged on a Federal level. instead of a state level. Start with doing away with the paperwork and tax. As for the price of them, I see them from $300 on up, and a direct link to the quietness factor the higher they go. You can make oe from a two-liter pop bottle for a little of nothing, but they aren't too deluxe.I'd guess that a $200 one would be twice as loud as a $400 and so on. That law has been on the books since 1936. Good luck with that. Its a breath of fresh air to see people with knowledge discuss suppressors instead of using fear mongering. A 22 suppressor is going to run 169.00 retail up. .223 can is 379.00 and up 7.62 can is 400.00 and up 9mm can is 375.00 and up 45 can is 400.00 and up. |
|
|
|
Post by shinglemonkey on Jan 9, 2012 19:31:29 GMT -5
Hearing protection - however with the $200 stamp, plus the cost of threading a barrel, plus the suppressor I don't expect to see too many out there were it approved. It would be nice to have the option though. Realisticly, I don't see hardly anyone dropping over a $1000 and a bunch of paperwork for one of these devices. I know of a few people that would move a suppressor purchase higher on the list if they could use them for small game. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2012 21:11:51 GMT -5
How hard is it to kill a limit of squauks with what is legal now, I just don't see it being that popular.
|
|
|
|
Post by shinglemonkey on Jan 9, 2012 21:16:06 GMT -5
I dont see crossbows being popular too but that worked its way in.
I would guess that there are more than 30k suppressors in Indiana.
We are not asking for regular rifle calibers or anything that is going to give us an advantage to kill animals.
we just want to use what we have and practice with.
|
|
|
|
Post by duff on Jan 9, 2012 22:15:10 GMT -5
When you think about it, why are they illegal anyways? What are they protecting by outlawing them from use? And the way the gov't wants to get into everyones biz, it really wouldn't be a stretch to see the feds get invovled and require them on new gun sales inorder to promote hearing protection or whatever. Just really a stupid law (tax stamp and outlawed in indiana)
|
|
|
|
Post by shinglemonkey on Jan 9, 2012 22:27:52 GMT -5
Its not like we are asking for the use of SBR's.(short barrel rifles)
Would anyone like to guess what that would open up?
Ill give you a hint. A SBR in Indiana is considered a handgun because it has a barrel less than 16". Handguns are legal in Indiana to hunt deer with.
That would mean we could deer hunt with anything larger than a 243 with a shoulder stock and a barrel less than 16".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2012 6:46:11 GMT -5
Federal law defines a rifle and pistol by barrel length. States always mirror those same standards. Has to do with concealing a rifle or shotgun(sawed off shotgun)
|
|
|
|
Post by danf on Jan 10, 2012 9:36:55 GMT -5
Just a point of clarification. Among other things, guns are defined by barrel length as well as overall length, not just barrel length. Rifles must have a barrel over 16" and an overall length greater than 26". To change a registered rifle receiver combination to anything less than that requires another tax stamp for that receiver and it would then be a "short barreled rifle" as shinglemonkey referred to. It also matters how the action was designated when it left the factory.
Frames/receivers are designated one of 3 ways from the factory and once they leave that designation can not be changed without a ton of paperwork and the tax stamp. They will either leave as a pistol, rifle or as an 'un-designated' frame/receiver. An un-designated frame/receiver can be turned into either a pistol or rifle by whomever purchases it. Savage is currently offering bolt action receivers like this, T/C has put out some Endeavor frames with that designation. Others have or do the same as well.
Oh, and it's a heck of a lot cheaper to get the tax stamp for a short-barreled shotgun than it is a short-barreled rifle (SBR). A sawed-off shotgun requires a $5 any-other-weapon (AOW) stamp, whereas a SBR is $200. From what I know, both require about the same amount of paperwork...
|
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Jan 10, 2012 15:21:14 GMT -5
I thought Idaho or maybe another state out west passed a law making it legal to buy and sell suppressors without any federal checks as long as they were manufactured and sold in state.
|
|
|
|
Post by shinglemonkey on Jan 10, 2012 20:20:23 GMT -5
Federal law defines a rifle and pistol by barrel length. States always mirror those same standards. Has to do with concealing a rifle or shotgun(sawed off shotgun) Not really, Here is how Indiana defines a pistol. Thats why shotguns with pistol grips only are sold as pistols. I have the case law to it to if you are interested. Indiana doesnt recognize an SBR because it falls under the handgun definition. IC 35-47-1-6 "Handgun" Sec. 6. "Handgun" means any firearm: (1) designed or adapted so as to be aimed and fired from one (1) hand, regardless of barrel length; or (2) any firearm with: (A) a barrel less than sixteen (16) inches in length; or (B) an overall length of less than twenty-six (26) inches. As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.32. It only has to have meet one of the requirements. |
|
|
|
Post by shinglemonkey on Jan 10, 2012 20:21:11 GMT -5
I thought Idaho or maybe another state out west passed a law making it legal to buy and sell suppressors without any federal checks as long as they were manufactured and sold in state. Montana was trying to tell the federal government to FO, I dont know how far it has gone. |
|
|
|
Post by shinglemonkey on Jan 10, 2012 20:24:59 GMT -5
Oh, and it's a heck of a lot cheaper to get the tax stamp for a short-barreled shotgun than it is a short-barreled rifle (SBR). A sawed-off shotgun requires a $5 any-other-weapon (AOW) stamp, whereas a SBR is $200. From what I know, both require about the same amount of paperwork... If you find a virgin Remington 870 receiver and form 1 it to an AOW its a 200.00 stamp for manufacturing the AOW. If you sell it it goes to the 5.00 stamp. AOW can never have a stock put on it as it then makes it a SBS(which are a no go in Indiana) |
|
|
|
Post by danf on Jan 10, 2012 20:32:44 GMT -5
Thanks for the clarification.  |
|
