Hunting With Suppressor in WA

[KillBilly]

Killbilly,

Thank you for doing the follow up research, too much bad info gets spread about these days. Once we correct our old beliefs and hearsay rumors we can provide better info to those looking to pursue new adventures. I really hope that WDFW allows us to use the suppressors for at minimum, predator control. I hunt on several ranches with cattle nearby and would much rather not piss off the rancher while taking out a dog or two while he is out feeding. However, I'm not holding my breath knowing how the State Game Dept. is. 

I am looking at this on the bright side... right now it is legal to use a suppressor on a hunting/target rifle or pistol. I cannot imagine what would drive WDFW to make it unlawful in the future.

[FALFire]

I agree with you, as of right now there are no laws on the books that prohibit the use of suppressors for hunting, only because they have never been legal to use in this state up until a few weeks ago. So we'll see what the great minds in Olympia come up with! 

 I can hear the WDFW in a meeting now....... If we allow suppressors "There will be thousands of big game animals poached every year" by the improper use of these evil attachments, SO THEY SHOULD BE BANNED FOR ALL HUNTING!    Now for the next item.... We need to get our wolf population up! Get the helicopters and the dart guns ready we're off to Montana!!  Note to those that don't get it......It's sarcasm

[JimmyHoffa]

  Now for the next item.... We need to get our wolf population up! Get the helicopters and the dart guns ready we're off to Montana!!  Note to those that don't get it......It's sarcasm

Not trying to thread jack....but WDFW doesn't need to do that.  That's what they'll use the Park Service for.  Kind of like how Olympic National Park reintroduced a bunch of fishers from Canada...but only a handful still live in the actual park.  From what I've been told, as soon as Olympic National Park has removed the dams it is shifting over to bring in wolves---because they are replanting the area that used to be a lake and don't want the elk to eat everything.

[Swannytheswan]

Olympic National Park has removed the dams it is shifting over to bring in wolves---because they are replanting the area that used to be a lake and don't want the elk to eat everything.

I hope your wrong Jimmy... I hope your wrong....in other news I wish I had the money for a gun and a suppressor to put on it!

[addicted]

  I have several and have sold several Thunderbeast can's and they work very well. 

I'm interested in your future toolings but for curiosity sake about how much do you charge fo a thunderbeast?

[Mookie]

I am looking at this on the bright side... right now it is legal to use a suppressor on a hunting/target rifle or pistol. I cannot imagine what would drive WDFW to make it unlawful in the future.

Really? We are talking about the same group of people who blame over fishing and squaw fish on the decline of kokanee and bull trout, when it is those idiots that lower the water level right after they spawn in shallow water. Those same idiots who won't give us more doe tags when the stupid things are nothing but a pest because there are so many.

These dunderheads will make a law just to justify waking up in the morning.

[rbros]

Not yet......I do have my Class 2 NFA manufacturers license, but I haven't had time to build any yet.  I have several and have sold several Thunderbeast can's and they work very well.  Hopefully will experiment this winter once rifle builds are caught up.

I was looking at the Thunderbeasts cans a couple of days ago, I believe it was the 30P-1 (?) Titanium model. I am looking to use it on a 308 and quite possibly my 243. Have you any experience using a 30 cal can on a 6mm caliber or even 223?  I'm certain the maximum efficiency is not there but I'm really only planning on using it for coyotes, raccoons and target shooting.

Thanks

I have sold several 30p's and have a couple personally.  They work well from 6mm-30cal.  They are a little big on the 223's.  They work really well on my 7WSM and will reside on there for hunting season. 

[KillBilly]

I agree with you, as of right now there are no laws on the books that prohibit the use of suppressors for hunting, only because they have never been legal to use in this state up until a few weeks ago. So we'll see what the great minds in Olympia come up with! 

 I can hear the WDFW in a meeting now....... If we allow suppressors "There will be thousands of big game animals poached every year" by the improper use of these evil attachments, SO THEY SHOULD BE BANNED FOR ALL HUNTING!    Now for the next item.... We need to get our wolf population up! Get the helicopters and the dart guns ready we're off to Montana!!  Note to those that don't get it......It's sarcasm

Poaching has already been discussed in length by the lawmakers and opponents to the law. bottom line is that poachers will still poach. lawbreakers should not be able to obtain a suppressor legally. So like always the lawbreakwers will still break laws and obtain a suppressor illegallly and continue to poach as always. I don't see potential poachers being the issue. Since this law drove the amendment of one RCW it seems that they could just as easily amended others as well.
Just me, but I don't see it happeningany time soon.

[KillBilly]

I am looking at this on the bright side... right now it is legal to use a suppressor on a hunting/target rifle or pistol. I cannot imagine what would drive WDFW to make it unlawful in the future.

Really? We are talking about the same group of people who blame over fishing and squaw fish on the decline of kokanee and bull trout, when it is those idiots that lower the water level right after they spawn in shallow water. Those same idiots who won't give us more doe tags when the stupid things are nothing but a pest because there are so many.

These dunderheads will make a law just to justify waking up in the morning.

It's your rant but I don't agree that we need to kill more Does. we will need them to keep population up.

[GEARHEAD]

Anybody Aware of any planned suppressor demos. i heard a commercial for a demo in north central wa, a month ago, anybody have one planned this side of the state. i want one for my AR, for yotes, so as not to scare the stock or wake the kids, but it seems maybe they dont really reduce noise hardly at all, maybe 20-25% hope i'm wrong. would like to hear for myself.

[h2ofowlr]

Anybody Aware of any planned suppressor demos. i heard a commercial for a demo in north central wa, a month ago, anybody have one planned this side of the state. i want one for my AR, for yotes, so as not to scare the stock or wake the kids, but it seems maybe they dont really reduce noise hardly at all, maybe 20-25% hope i'm wrong. would like to hear for myself.

One of the clubs in Bellevue I believe has had several suppressor shoots.  I would look at WA guns.  They have a supressor section and have posted various shoots, so you probably could check it out.
As for ballistics, the military places them on the Rem. 700, .308 sniper rifles.  My buddy said it has not effected his accuracy.  He has been dead on.   

[demontang]

There is a noticeable difference in noise but the only way to get movie quite is with sub sonic ammo. Accuracy isn't affected with a good one but max range is affected seen as the muzzle velocity is lower. The big thing I see people saying against them for hunting is poachers using them but like has been said you need a class 3 lic to have one so not just anyone can get one.

[h2ofowlr]

You don't need a class 3 to own one.  Just to sell one.  Any legal individual can purchase one.  They do an extensive background check and the paperwork takes 12 plus weeks to get one.  It's a $200 tax stamp plus cost of suppressor.  So your average poacher will probably stick with a bow.  It's a dumb association that people assume people with suppressed weapons are going to run out and poach.  If that was the case they are already doing it with a homemade version thats off the radar.

[FALFire]

  It's a dumb association that people assume people with suppressed weapons are going to run out and poach.  If that was the case they are already doing it with a homemade version thats off the radar.

You may just be giving too much credit to the WDFW 

It's pretty obvious poachers would not spend a dime on a device to muffle the sound of any weapon they use, I'm certain most of us here would agree. However, the State Game Dept, I'm sure would rather pass a law to protect us from ourselves     Where I live one could shoot 10 deer per day for a month and never get caught using a bazooka so I really doubt a poacher would ever consider such a device as using a suppressor does not make poaching any more illegal.

I feel very confident that those of us that would purchase a suppressor are like more of the "shooter" category than "hunter" anyway. 

[rbros]

Keep in mind guys, using standard ammo with a suppressor you will still have the "crack" as the bullet breaks the sound barrier.  With our environment on the West side, anything the sound can bounce off of will magnify the crack.  In the timber, there will be less difference in sound reduction vs wide open area.  Using subsonic ammo, it will always be quiet.  My point is, if poachers are going to use one, the chances of them using subsonic ammo is pretty slim.  There is still going to be a sound there.  It will be a little less, but still a gunshot.  I also personally don't think alot of poachers will go through the trouble of the tax stamp process....$200, 3-5 month wait, background check, etc...... 

Of all the suppressors I have tested, shooting a 308 in a treed area brings it down to a little louder than a 22LR.  The 223 AR is about 22LR level.  Using them in open spaces, Eastern Wa, the 308 is down to 22 or a little less, and the AR is pretty much about like a high power pellet gun.  Played with a full auto 300AAC AR using subsonics and all you heard was the bolt coming back and forth.