This was because poachers were using silencers to get game without being heard by the game warden.
For three things, my understanding is that they don't really work very well, from a pure functional standpoint. Most times, the noise is still well beyond the level that would allow for no hearing protection. Even when the round is loaded sub-sonic, the dB level is still usually well above the safe threshold.... and who wants to limit their firearms to subsonic loads anyway?
I don't think that a mandatory suppressor law could threaten CCW. IMHO it could easily be challenged in court for an ironic reason- suppressors have not been commonplace anywhere in the USA for generations, which makes it hard to argue that suppressors are somehow suddenly necessary for legal self-defense.One of my concerns is that if silencers are made legal then they could become manditory. The cost of gun ownership would go up and concealled carry could be impractical.
RAnb said:Silencers are legal in 37 states, but Washington is the only state that bans their use.
I think that is very unlikely to happen. Silencers have been around for over 100 years and no jurisdiction in the USA has ever suggested making their use manditory as far as I know.One of my concerns is that if silencers are made legal then they could become manditory.
I don't understand this sentence....
If they're legal in 37 states then they're illegal in 13 states, yes? Do those 13 states not ban their use? How could they be illegal, but not banned?
carguychris said:OTOH I think a mandatory suppressor law could theoretically be a threat to legal hunting; I could easily see well-heeled NIMBYs with fancy country weekend homes pushing this so that their idyllic peace and quiet wouldn't be disturbed by (gasp!) gunfire,...
RAnb said:In fact, the use of any device that suppresses the report of a gun is banned. It does not matter if it is attached to the gun or not. I built a box to reduce the report of 50 bmg rifles at my local range. We are being sued in part over noise complaints. I was told by the local prosecutor that using the box would be a crime due to the broad nature of the law. RCW 9.41.250(c). I am trying to obtain an opinion from the state AG on whether the law includes devices not attached, but it is hard as he does not give opinions to the public and my district Reps do not want to ask.