Suppressors Hunting with suppressors in Georgia: 2013 edition
- Thread starter Stubb
- Start date
Re: Hunting with suppressors in Georgia: 2013 edition
Op - thanks for posting!
Op - thanks for posting!
Re: Hunting with suppressors in Georgia: 2013 edition
I just wrote my reps and Gov. Deal asking them to support this bill. This is a case where everybody wins. Hunters would get a great option to protect their ears while still hearing everything going on around them. The general public would benefit from less noise during hunting season. And Georgia businesses like Advanced Armament Corporation in Lawrenceville would benefit from increased sales.
I just wrote my reps and Gov. Deal asking them to support this bill. This is a case where everybody wins. Hunters would get a great option to protect their ears while still hearing everything going on around them. The general public would benefit from less noise during hunting season. And Georgia businesses like Advanced Armament Corporation in Lawrenceville would benefit from increased sales.
Re: Hunting with suppressors in Georgia: 2013 edition
Thanks for posting. I just contacted my representatives. Last year SB 301 (similar bill) passed the Senate but did not make it out of committee in the House.
Thanks for posting. I just contacted my representatives. Last year SB 301 (similar bill) passed the Senate but did not make it out of committee in the House.
Re: Hunting with suppressors in Georgia: 2013 edition
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Andreas</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I just wrote my reps and Gov. Deal asking them to support this bill. This is a case where everybody wins. Hunters would get a great option to protect their ears while still hearing everything going on around them. The general public would benefit from less noise during hunting season. And Georgia businesses like Advanced Armament Corporation in Lawrenceville would benefit from increased sales. </div></div>
I concur 100%. I have written them as well thanks to this thread. Thanks for the information.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Andreas</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I just wrote my reps and Gov. Deal asking them to support this bill. This is a case where everybody wins. Hunters would get a great option to protect their ears while still hearing everything going on around them. The general public would benefit from less noise during hunting season. And Georgia businesses like Advanced Armament Corporation in Lawrenceville would benefit from increased sales. </div></div>
I concur 100%. I have written them as well thanks to this thread. Thanks for the information.
Re: Hunting with suppressors in Georgia: 2013 edition
Buy your suppressors now so you will have them for hunting season. Even if it does not pass you still get a suppressor.
Buy your suppressors now so you will have them for hunting season. Even if it does not pass you still get a suppressor.
Re: Hunting with suppressors in Georgia: 2013 edition
My Rep has been written. Does anyone know why it got stuck in committee last year?
My Rep has been written. Does anyone know why it got stuck in committee last year?
Re: Hunting with suppressors in Georgia: 2013 edition
Tagging to show everyone. Thanks for the thread. Hope it goes through this time.
I heard everyone was alright with it last time but the time limit to pass it ran out before it made it all the way through. Just what I heard.
Tagging to show everyone. Thanks for the thread. Hope it goes through this time.
I heard everyone was alright with it last time but the time limit to pass it ran out before it made it all the way through. Just what I heard.
Re: Hunting with suppressors in Georgia: 2013 edition
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MaxnMoses</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My Rep has been written. Does anyone know why it got stuck in committee last year? </div></div>
I think there was some political gamesmenship between the Republicans. Below is a quote I saw from another board. SB-301 was last year's bill, basically the same as this year's.
"My GA State House rep. called me to let me know he spoke with Rep. Jon Burns this afternoon about the status of SB 301 in his House committee. Rep. Burns basically said that he doesn't want to have a committee vote on SB 301 because they don't have the votes for it to pass out of committee. They don't want to go on record as appearing anti-gun or anti-hunting, so they'd rather not be faced with taking a stand on the issue. Many of the committee members have concerns over poaching, trespassing,"
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MaxnMoses</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My Rep has been written. Does anyone know why it got stuck in committee last year? </div></div>
I think there was some political gamesmenship between the Republicans. Below is a quote I saw from another board. SB-301 was last year's bill, basically the same as this year's.
"My GA State House rep. called me to let me know he spoke with Rep. Jon Burns this afternoon about the status of SB 301 in his House committee. Rep. Burns basically said that he doesn't want to have a committee vote on SB 301 because they don't have the votes for it to pass out of committee. They don't want to go on record as appearing anti-gun or anti-hunting, so they'd rather not be faced with taking a stand on the issue. Many of the committee members have concerns over poaching, trespassing,"
The suppressor bill in Georgia (SB 93) did not even make it to a vote this year - it did not make it past crossover day. Maybe next year. Not sure what the deal is, the GA House of Representatives passed another bill that allows concealed carry in more places, don't understand why the suppressor bill cannot make it through.
I was hoping to use a can this year, maybe not.
tag, thanks
I emailed my clowns (reps) and didn't even get a response this year. Burns supposedly didn't think suppressors would be a good idea because they had trouble with poaching on their property. He thought they would aid and encourage poaching. He did return my email last year even though it didn't sound promising which obviously was the case. I cant imagine them not being able to get enough votes since the senate overwhelmingly passed it last year. They didn't have enough votes because THEY didn't support it.
They all just got reelected so we probably shouldn't expect a response from them for another 3.5 years.
They all just got reelected so we probably shouldn't expect a response from them for another 3.5 years.
I'm in....writing now
It's already dead. Maybe next year.
GA suppressor bill is aparently still alive. It has been added as an amendment to another bill.
http://www.legis.ga.gov/legislation/...0132014/HB/155
http://www.legis.ga.gov/legislation/...0132014/HB/155
So what's the next step? Goveners signature? When will that be?
Last edited:
Wow, this is great news. Glad they finally came to their senses.
It has to pass the house again, and it is my understanding that it has to happen today.
Will keep an eye on it today and see if the house votes on it.
its not on todays docket yet...
its not on todays docket yet...
Last edited:
What exactly decides if it gets on today's docket or not?
its curently in (agree's/dissagree's) it could come up today but may not, i was reccomended to contact Rep. David Knight (origonal author) of HB 155, also contact Senator Heath (he proposed the ammendment to include suppressors) as well as my local rep.
im learning the process... you can feel free to contact also the Game Fish and Parks Committee secratary: (404) 656-5099
im learning the process... you can feel free to contact also the Game Fish and Parks Committee secratary: (404) 656-5099
I wish I had seen your post before today so I could have called them. Did it end up getting on the docket or not?
It did, but thanks to Rep. Knight the suppressor amendment was removed from the bill. We are screwed for another year.
Video Day 38 PM1 - Skip to 27:45 Day 38
I can't seem to get the audio to work on the video, what exactly does he say and what does he have against suppressor use?
nevermind, i got it working...what a douche. I still don't get why he's against suppressors.
Who is this woman representative henson who said that not being able to hear gunshots would be dangerous...she clearly has never seen or heard a suppressor (except in movies)
169 yes, 1 no to remove the verbage to allow suppressor use...
Last edited:
Representative David Knight <--click
rep David Knight of Griffin... call him up... I intend to.
rep David Knight of Griffin... call him up... I intend to.
call and ask you local game warden, i beleive that is a yes.
we shoot hogs in AL with a special permit that permits us to kill hogs at night with cans. it is not legal to hunt with cans in AL normaly.
we shoot hogs in AL with a special permit that permits us to kill hogs at night with cans. it is not legal to hunt with cans in AL normaly.
Just had a conversation with Mr Knight. The long and short of it is that the suppressor provision was attached to his bill without him knowing about it, and that the suppressor proviso would have killed the bill. At least he felt this way. He is an avid hunter himself and does not oppose suppressor use for hunting. He represented that there is widespread concern amongst land owners that suppressors will make poaching easier. Until this concern is alleviated he believes it unlikely a suppressor provision would pass on its own at this time.
I believe the landowner argument against suppressors to be logically flawed, but such concerns are not always rooted in logic. I have had my own property poached upon. Poaching is already illegal, be it shining for deer or hunting without permission, or something else. Why one would assume that by making suppressors legal people would be more likely to engage in illegal activity? If a poacher is already using a suppressor for that activity (which is likely), a change in the law certainly doesn't make poaching legal, doesn't make suppressors available to anyone that can't get them now, and doesn't hinder enforcement of current laws in any way. So, for now only criminals are using suppressors for poaching. Making suppressors legal for hunting will not create an entirely new criminal class where I find myself suddenly inclined to sneak off at night and hunt the park behind my house for the trophy buck I have seen on early morning jogs. If I were a poacher those antlers would have hung in my man cave long ago.
I have had my tree stand stolen. It was locked with a cable and was cut using bolt cutters. I can't blame the legality of bolt cutters on their nefarious use. Nor does the legality of bolt cutters ENCOURAGE their use for illegal activities.
Us hunters in GA need to band together and find a way to get such a bill through. I am certainly a newb at such political maneuverings, but I am more than willing to participate via letters, calls, speaking, or with my pocket book.
cc: The Honorable David Knight
I believe the landowner argument against suppressors to be logically flawed, but such concerns are not always rooted in logic. I have had my own property poached upon. Poaching is already illegal, be it shining for deer or hunting without permission, or something else. Why one would assume that by making suppressors legal people would be more likely to engage in illegal activity? If a poacher is already using a suppressor for that activity (which is likely), a change in the law certainly doesn't make poaching legal, doesn't make suppressors available to anyone that can't get them now, and doesn't hinder enforcement of current laws in any way. So, for now only criminals are using suppressors for poaching. Making suppressors legal for hunting will not create an entirely new criminal class where I find myself suddenly inclined to sneak off at night and hunt the park behind my house for the trophy buck I have seen on early morning jogs. If I were a poacher those antlers would have hung in my man cave long ago.
I have had my tree stand stolen. It was locked with a cable and was cut using bolt cutters. I can't blame the legality of bolt cutters on their nefarious use. Nor does the legality of bolt cutters ENCOURAGE their use for illegal activities.
Us hunters in GA need to band together and find a way to get such a bill through. I am certainly a newb at such political maneuverings, but I am more than willing to participate via letters, calls, speaking, or with my pocket book.
cc: The Honorable David Knight
So basically Rep Knight has no problem himself with suppressor use while hunting however some of the other reps, such as henson, are woefully misinformed about suppressors and are basically making this bills passage more difficult than it should be.
Michele Henson from Stone Mountain. Based on her comment I believe her knowledge of suppressors likely comes from Hollywood. To be fair, outside of the few boards such as this there are not many people who know what a suppressor is. But yes, it is representatives like her who would hold up such a bill. I do not know how one goes about educating and lobbying our reps. Those from urban centers are more likely to be those faced with gun violence and more removed from gun enthusiasts. A sad paradox. She represents Dekalb county, which I left 2 years ago because of numerous violent incidents and a few burglaries. But what about the rest of the state. What are you guys hearing from your reps as to their support?
Here is the link to her website:
Representative Michele Henson
Here is the link to her website:
Representative Michele Henson
Is anyone else from around her area? Perhaps she would be open to a demo by one of her concerned constituents, then she would have atleast a little real world knowledge on the thing of which she votes.
Has anyone heard an update about this lately?
Last year's SB 93 was "recommitted" on Jan 13, 2014, and it has sat there since. That means it is technically still alive, but it would have to make it out of committee and get passed by the senate, and then the house (it died in the house the last couple of years). I spoke with a DNR board member (who owns several cans) and he indicated it would unlikely happen this year. Too many people do not understand what they are. I think it is going to take some strong lobbying efforts to get this through, but it does not seem like any of the big players are pushing it hard. All gun lobbying efforts this year seem to be pointed at expanding concealed carry rights.
Good luck Georgia, I hope you get it passed. Montana had its bill make it to the govenor's desk only to have him veto it. Apparently a few people who have never heard a suppressed rifle convinced a bunch of other people who have never heard a suppressed rifle it would be a bad idea.
The GA senate committee favorably reported on the suppressor bill on 2/19/14. Hopefully this means it is going to pass the senate. If so, the big question will be whether it can pass in the house.
The Georgia Senate passed SB 93 today. Full press release below:
Senate Passes Bill Allowing Suppressors on Hunting Firearms
ATLANTA (February 26, 2014) | Senate Bill 93, sponsored by Sen. Bill Heath (R-Bremen), passed the Georgia State Senate today by a vote of 43 to 10. If signed into law, the bill will allow the use of suppressors on legal hunting firearms.
“I sponsored this legislation to allow responsible firearm owners to use suppressors while hunting in Georgia,” said Sen. Heath. “This is a good measure and I look forward to working with my colleagues in the House to make suppressors a reality.”
Under this bill, all suppressors must be registered in accordance with the National Firearms Act. Any violations of state or federal hunting laws will result in a misdemeanor and the revocation of privileges for three years. These violations include: hunting without explicit permission from the landowner, hunting in closed areas and hunting big game out of season or after dusk with a firearm equipped with a suppressor.
Suppressors also assist in protecting hunters’ hearing, effectively reducing the overall decibel level of the firearm.
Senate Bill 93 will now be passed to the House of Representatives for consideration.
Senate Passes Bill Allowing Suppressors on Hunting Firearms
ATLANTA (February 26, 2014) | Senate Bill 93, sponsored by Sen. Bill Heath (R-Bremen), passed the Georgia State Senate today by a vote of 43 to 10. If signed into law, the bill will allow the use of suppressors on legal hunting firearms.
“I sponsored this legislation to allow responsible firearm owners to use suppressors while hunting in Georgia,” said Sen. Heath. “This is a good measure and I look forward to working with my colleagues in the House to make suppressors a reality.”
Under this bill, all suppressors must be registered in accordance with the National Firearms Act. Any violations of state or federal hunting laws will result in a misdemeanor and the revocation of privileges for three years. These violations include: hunting without explicit permission from the landowner, hunting in closed areas and hunting big game out of season or after dusk with a firearm equipped with a suppressor.
Suppressors also assist in protecting hunters’ hearing, effectively reducing the overall decibel level of the firearm.
Senate Bill 93 will now be passed to the House of Representatives for consideration.
I got this reply after sending an email to a Representative. Does this mean this bill is dead?
"Chairmen of House Committees traditionally follow the rules of granting members a hearing on proposed legislation when requested. The author of SB 93 did not request a hearing so the bill was not considered in the Game, Fish and Parks Committee. Thank you for your concern on this important issue.
Thank you,"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"Chairmen of House Committees traditionally follow the rules of granting members a hearing on proposed legislation when requested. The author of SB 93 did not request a hearing so the bill was not considered in the Game, Fish and Parks Committee. Thank you for your concern on this important issue.
Thank you,"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
