Change TX Law on Suppressor Use for Hunting Game Animals?

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DougD

Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
39
Location
Texas (DFW)
To all Texas Hunters on THR: As many of us know, we can legally use suppressors when hunting non-game animals (e.g. coyotes and feral hogs) but we cannot use them while hunting game animals (i.e. deer). I know there's a lot of us who would like to use suppressors while deer hunting. After a significant hearing-related hunting incident I had a couple of weeks ago, I am now more in favor of using suppressors for hunting than ever before.

I found this map which shows the status of U.S. suppressor laws regarding hunting:
SuppressorMap.gif

I also found THIS THREAD regarding an attempt to change Montana law on hunting game animals with a suppressor.

With these things in mind, I'm trying to gauge how much support there is for changing the Texas law to allow hunting of game animals while using suppressors.

I created a Survey Monkey survey on this. If I can collect a significant number of responses, I'll post the results. Here's the link(s):

Survey: Texas Law on Suppressor Use for Hunting Game Animals

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/YR9Y8Q5

Please spread this survey far and wide so we can get some valid results.

I think any reasonable effort to get the law changed would include:

  • filing of open records requests to determine how many poachers have been caught using suppressors
  • a survey of game wardens to determine their position on the issue
  • determining the # of successful prosecutions of poachers who used suppressors
  • facts/stats/figures related to even the "alleged" use of suppressors for hunting
  • an exploration of the origin of the current law (who wrote it, when, and why)
  • the listed benefits of the current law (why do we keep it)
  • a cogent explanation of why the law should be changed
  • benefits of suppressor use for hunting (for hunters, landowners, the game itself, etc.)
  • a coordinated and meaningful letter writing campaign by Texas hunters from multiple districts
  • getting at least two legislators to sponsor a bill
  • a determination of what groups would oppose the bill

What are your thoughts on this?
 
Why? I don't care if the game hears me. I guess it could be handy for wiping out herds of hogs. Most of my hunting, though, is one shot, one kill, except when I double up on doves, ducks, or geese which is what I hunt the most. I'm not really a kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out kinda guy. Perhaps an exception to the law could be made for hogs, though, especially for those guys trying to eradicate them from an area. I could see that.

Gunshots are a tool of the wardens, but just like gun laws, if an outlaw is out there, is he really worried about breaking another law? What the wardens input to this idea probably should be taken with a grain of salt, just like Chiefs of Police testifying for an "assault weapons ban" or "Saturday night special ban" somewhere. :rolleyes: Also, repeat offenders aren't going to be able to legally buy/register a suppressor, anyway.

Just some thoughts on the subject. I don't own nor need a suppressor to hunt with, myself, but for those who would like to eradicate hogs, I could see the utility there. A .300 whisper could be an awesome tool in hog management. :D
 
I like the idea of using a suppressor for hunting. I don't think I would get more game with it, I just like the idea of not suffering hearing damage or having to wear hearing protection.
 
MCgunner said:
I don't own nor need a suppressor to hunt with, myself, but for those who would like to eradicate hogs, I could see the utility there.
Click to expand...

What about those who want to shoot deer? Are you for or against it?
 
Eh, whazzat? Whaddya say?

Actually, I've never hunted with hearing protection, even birds, and my hearing was fine last year when tested. I'm 57 and still going. I hunt mostly with shotguns. Not sure how you'd suppress those. I always wear hearing protection at the range, but never in the field. Probably should, just never have. One exception is with that compensated 12 inch .30-30 contender. I stand hunt with it and leave my muffs on top of my head so I can pull 'em down before a shot. That gun is just too damned LOUD. :rolleyes:
 
What about those who want to shoot deer? Are you for or against it?
Click to expand...

Neither for OR against it. Just don't really see the utility in it. Well, guys that worry about their hearing, I guess, but it's only one shot, after all, and I've been shootin' 'em all my life. Besides, in a supersonic caliber, why bother? If they wanna legalize suppressors, I don't see why not. I mean, it's neither here nor there for me. I'm not going to buy one. Why should they be illegal, after all? What does it hurt to use one? People use bows all over the state and they don't make noise. Even crossbows are legal now. Just because I don't want one don't mean I'm a "my way or the highway" kinda guy. I see no reason why one should be barred the use of 'em just because I won't use 'em. Hearing loss IS a problem, too.
 
I would like to see the law expanded to include squirrels and javelina, at least. If I'm chasing squirrels, I'd like to take 4-5 shots in rapid succession when there's a group of them out rather than having to wait for them to peek out once again after each shot.

Javelina as well - keep them close for easier eradication.

Not so sure about deer, but I can see the utility of using a suppressor in areas that have lots of neighbors close by. I can go either way on the deer question.
 
I would like to see the law expanded to include squirrels and javelina, at least. If I'm chasing squirrels, I'd like to take 4-5 shots in rapid succession when there's a group of them out rather than having to wait for them to peek out once again after each shot.

Javelina as well - keep them close for easier eradication.
Click to expand...

Javelina are a game species and you can only "eradicate" 2 per year legally. They're hell on prickly pear, but who cares? LOL

I can and have handled the squirrel thing with CB shorts, quite accurate out of my old Remington M512X. You have to hold a little higher way out at 50 yards, but the thing is accurate and has plenty of power for squirrel hunting with CB shorts. The thing is quieter than my Crossman spring gun and a whole heck of a lot more effective.
 
I see a few good reasons:
I ended up perpendicular to the barrel of a 300 Win a couple years ago, permanent damage. Very nice buck, not worth it.

Spotlighting would be much more considerate without waking everyone up at all hours with gunshots. Fewer calls that the warden has to check out as well.

Don't attract the warden. I'm all in favor of the GW not knowing my name, property, or when I take a shot. I'm not doing anything illegal and he's not a buddy of mine checking out the kill. He's looking to nail me for anything he can.

Politically, whatever hunters do is considered the norm for gun owners. That's one great reason to have hunters take out their EBRs after deer.
 
I hunt with suppressors even sporlighting but only non game-animals. I don't see any reason for it not to be legal
 
MCgunner said:
Javelina are a game species and you can only "eradicate" 2 per year legally. They're hell on prickly pear, but who cares? LOL

I can and have handled the squirrel thing with CB shorts, quite accurate out of my old Remington M512X. You have to hold a little higher way out at 50 yards, but the thing is accurate and has plenty of power for squirrel hunting with CB shorts. The thing is quieter than my Crossman spring gun and a whole heck of a lot more effective.
Click to expand...
It's been *ahem* a few years since I've hunted javelina. Back in those days there were far more of them, I suppose, and the limits were more generous. They tended to make a mess of things on the deer lease back in the pre-satellite TV days.

I may have to try the CB shorts out.
 
Only 20 response thus far. Here are the comments from the survey:

1. 16 Other states allow suppressors for hunting game animals. It doesn't seem to be a problem for them.
2. TX Game Wardens as a whole will never support this. Too many cases are made by hearing the gun shot...
3. I don't know that I would use one for deer, but i would certainly prefer to use one for squirrels and javelina.
4. I hunt on my family's property south of San Antonio. It is in an area with a lot of houses around their property and it is also overrun with deer. Using a suppressed rifle would be more acceptable than an unsuppressed centerfire rlfle, even a .223.
5. When approaching the legislators involved, it would behoove this effort to point out how many "enlightened" anti gun countries encourage the use of suppressors on hunting rifles.
6. The benefits far outweigh the unsubstantiated concern over poachers using suppressors --- on top of the fact that with supersonic rounds a warden would still be able to located poachers if they were shooting game.
7. Hearing loss is permanent and cumulative. I'm all for anything that minimizes noise.
 
I vote yes. I hunt with ear protection now. It would be nice to hunt without it. I have a recoil reducing muzzle brake on my rifle because of soulder problems, the can will reduce noise and recoil, win win.
 
I'd vote "yes" on general principles. Given the paperwork and record-keeping, aside from the cost, I doubt that poachers would jump into their use.

As far as a warden's hearing a shot, suppressors reduce noise, they don't eliminate it.
 
I would have to say "Yes" as well. Honest people are going to be honest....crooks will be crooks. I don't think that the legality of suppressor use will change that. If it were legal to use supressed weapons on game animals, the poachers would probably view that as just another law that didn't apply to them.....maybe the Game Wardens could write a few more tickets for illegal cans!

We use registered suppressors extensively in our hog control operation. Without them, our ability to communicate, while shooting, would be significantly reduced .....because of the need for hearing protection. It would be a different ball game without them.

One concern I have is that, while trying to gain more rights, we may open the door for the politicians to take some of those we already have.....it's a double-edged sword.
 
You wouldn't get a ticket for an illegal can from a game warden.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Louisiana:Hunting with Suppressor Bill Passes House, Goes to Senate
Replies
5
Views
977
WNTFW
W
S
  • Locked
PA- Legislature approves game law changes
Replies
0
Views
545
sm
S
G
  • Locked
What are the deer hunting laws in your state?
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
d2wing
d2wing
D
  • Locked
Magazine survey tells much about state of hunting in U.S.
Replies
1
Views
630
rebbryan
R
M
  • Locked
Oklahoma: Suppressor Bill Unanimously Passes Out of Committee
Replies
4
Views
1K
Midwest
M
Back
Top