# BFA Supressor Education Piece



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

*Buckeye Firearms Association hosts event to educate lawmakers and media on noise suppressors.*

Video and story at link:
http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/9313


----------



## flounder (May 15, 2004)

IMO suppressors have no place in hunting whatsoever.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

flounder said:


> IMO suppressors have no place in hunting whatsoever.


Why?

Where do suppressors have a place in your opinion?
:T


----------



## Sharp Charge (Jun 24, 2009)

I own that 45 can that they used on the pistol, it does make the weapon pretty quiet but I don't think it's the best comparison for the test. They should have shown the can on that .308 bolt gun or on a .223 to better show what a hunter may use while varmint hunting. The can I have for my AR reduces the report considerably but it's still about as loud as a .22 magnum. 

Hopefully they'll pass it some time in the near future.


----------



## joebertin (Mar 26, 2010)

There never seemed to be a good reason to make suppressors illegal.


----------



## flounder (May 15, 2004)

buckeye dan said:


> Why?
> 
> Where do suppressors have a place in your opinion?
> :T


Military use.

Use these instead if it's hearing protection that concerns you. They work great!

http://www.cabelas.com/product/Shoo...81280?WTz_l=SBC%3Bcat104792580%3Bcat104769180


----------



## Socom (Nov 3, 2005)

I hate when fear is used to make policy decisions


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

flounder said:


> Military use.
> 
> Use these instead if it's hearing protection that concerns you. They work great!
> 
> http://www.cabelas.com/product/Shoo...81280?WTz_l=SBC%3Bcat104792580%3Bcat104769180


You didn't answer the question...Why?

I think I'll just support the legalization of suppressors for hunting instead. They are a more reliable tool for the job.

It doesn't matter if a suppressor gets wet.
The wind isn't amplified when it blows with a suppressor.
Suppressors don't have an electronic noise or hum to them.
Suppressors don't take batteries.
Suppressors don't get snagged on the brush and go flying off somewhere into the darkness.
Suppressors don't interfere with the directional capability of my ears.
Suppressors don't have electronics in them to fail.
Muffs and plugs don't help my accuracy at all.

Other than people that have some sort of hearing loss, those hunter's ear devices are a solution to the problem of not being allowed to use suppressors in the first place.


----------



## bobk (Apr 30, 2004)

When is the vote Dan? 


Sent from my iPhone using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## flounder (May 15, 2004)

buckeye dan said:


> Why?
> 
> Where do suppressors have a place in your opinion?
> :T


okay, here's why:

When out in the field I would like to know for safety reasons when and roughly where someone is shooting (in what direction from my location so I don't walk into their area). I'd rather a shot be heard from a few thousand feet away rather than several hundred feet away. 

Suppressors can only be used on pistols and rifles. They are not used for shotguns on upland game, waterfowl (where multiple shots are common) and deer, so were a talking a very small minority of the hunting community and these folks have been doing fine without one since the early 1900s when the suppressor was invented. So why is it just now becoming an issue? 

If the effective range for hearing a shot is cut from a few thousand feet to several hundred feet how will a landowner know if someone is shooting illegally on their property (assuming a larger parcel of land)? This is a much larger and more serious issue in this state and beyond.

Electronic hearing devices work well and the only issue I have with mine is the very occasional drone of wind noise, fixed with a quick adjustment. 

Why not dedicate your organizations time and resources to issues that are much more of a problem like hunting trespassing, or perhaps working with the ODNR to identify opportunities to purchase public hunting lands in Ohio? 

I appreciate the work you do for CCW programs, safety and lobbying. This suppressor issue just seems so trivial in the grand scheme when we have issues with politicians that do not even want us to have any sort of firearm.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

I think the committee was originally supposed to vote on Jan 21st. The subject matter that started this thread delayed that vote. The legislators wanted to meet and experience suppressors first hand.

Now that meeting is out of the way, I would normally expect to hear something next week but the snow may have delayed things again.

I am pretty sure it's going to make it out of committee and be sent to the House floor for a vote. The House sessions happen Wednesdays so the earliest anything could happen would be Feb 12th but more likely a later Wednesday.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

@Flounder

I am going to paraphrase an analogy. It was one of the things that inspired me to stay involved in all of this.

Our gun rights are like a rare automobile that we left parked on the farm. The car represents full blown unregulated constitutional carry. We visit the farm occasionally and take the old car for a spin and it enjoy it without issue.

Later, our lives become busy with school, work and families. We don't have the time to visit the farm and tend to the old car as much as we should.

Well guess what's happened? The neighbors (our legislators) whom we have entrusted to keep an eye on things have decided that we shouldn't have that car. They spend years stealing parts off it in order to disable me from using it. For whatever reason. It's too powerful, it harms the environment, some people with those kinds of cars don't use them responsibly. That car would kill everyone in their tiny little economy box car if they ever collided.

So now we're left with an empty shell. Thankfully they didn't steal the whole car but there isn't enough of it left to operate it.

We spend decades trying to recover all those stolen parts to restore that old car to it's former glory. Some are lost and gone forever and our only option is to use replacement parts. Every now and then an original part is found and recovered but not often.

Well these suppressors represent the exhaust system that fit's our car. In this case it is an original part and not some modern fabrication. I don't have enough of the rest of the car to have immediate need for it but I know I had that part and will need it in order to restore the car completely.

Different people focus on different things in their own order of importance. Some people would obsess over the drive train and engine etc. You've got to have that and it is a most important piece of the puzzle.

What our gun rights look like in Ohio right now is, the car runs and drives but there are still many pieces of it missing. Some folks would settle for that. I am the sort that wants a complete restoration. I don't care if I encounter parts that have no immediate use to me because I am in it until the car is finished. If I die before it's finished, someone else can pick up where I left off and they won't have to search for the parts I've already recovered.

If the legislature is offering an muffler when I really need the front seat instead of the milk crate I am sitting on, I take the muffler and keep looking for other parts.

Using the car analogy, some folks like yourself aren't even looking for the original parts. Some may be in pursuit of more modern replacement parts. Instead of getting the suppressor back you are willing to settle for ear plugs. Nothing is wrong with that but the ear plugs aren't what was taken from us. Those were created as a workaround to replace our stolen muffler.

I am just a volunteer within the BFA these days. I spend most of my time focusing on hunters rights issues and little else. Leadership and other volunteers work on numerous different projects but the end game will restore the car. It may take decades but we will get back what was taken from us without turning our nose up to the less significant or "trivial" parts along the way. 

Regarding hunting trespassing. We have already been given an ear plug like solution to this problem. It's illegal. 

That replaced the original right that allowed you to defend property (Ohio Constitution Article I Section 1). Since we can't alter human behavior, I suggest fences, signs and security systems. Maybe if we come up with enough ear plug like solutions and apply them all, we'll forget about that silly old Constitution and no longer need it.

Land acquisition is already covered by other organizations and agencies that do a superior job at it. If hunter's rights and 2A stuff didn't occupy my time, I would probably focus some attention to that. But I would do it from within some other organization that specializes closer to that subject like, Pheasants Forever or something.


----------



## Sharp Charge (Jun 24, 2009)

I like that last post Dan. 

My take on the suppressor issue with hunting is the encroachment of neighborhoods and houses around hunting areas. I lease 730 acres to hunt on. But on 3 sides of that acreage are neighborhoods. Some finger into the property some are just along the boundary. 

If I'm hunting within the edges of my lease near the homes, you don't want to hear rifle fire when you're trying to put your kids to bed because I'm out hunting coyotes. It's just part of being a "good neighbor". This way the land owner doesn't decide to no longer allow hunting because he's sick of noise complaints.


----------



## handloader (Jan 13, 2014)

I just keep scratching my head when I read posts like the ones from "Flounder". Maybe he should not own a gun, 'cause the police will protect him....That is not a threat, it is an analogy. I hear banjo's when I read his posts. 
He is the type that would not care if the so called "Assault-Rifles" were banned, does not think that the people should have 30 round magazines, could care less if the government took away high capacity handguns,,etc.
The point is, some people can only see as far as the end of their driveway, and only care about what is in their gun safe.


----------



## TomC (Aug 14, 2007)

Hey if its legal and he doesn't want one, he shouldn't look at em or buy one. If it is legal those who want em will have them, that includes me! 
I just cant figure out which one to get. Im trying to stay in the 500-700 range.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

TomC said:


> Hey if its legal and he doesn't want one, he shouldn't look at em or buy one. If it is legal those who want em will have them, that includes me!
> I just cant figure out which one to get. Im trying to stay in the 500-700 range.


I highly recommend a type that can be disassembled and uses a solid baffle type system. The ATF takes issue with repacking the type that uses the pot scrubber like material in them.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

bobk said:


> When is the vote Dan?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Ohub Campfire mobile app


This has passed in the House yesterday and is off to the Senate. Remember these votes when it's election time:

http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/votes.cfm?ID=130_HB_234


----------



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

Months ago I was like flounder, however after really thinking about it, I don't see any real reason why not. Looks like I'm gonna need to bust out even more cash now...


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

ezbite said:


> Months ago I was like flounder, however after really thinking about it, I don't see any real reason why not. Looks like I'm gonna need to bust out even more cash now...


That is good news ezbite. The part about you changing your mind and not the part about it costing you more money of course.


----------

