NRA Poised to Approve Suppressors in Competition?

[Heman]

I think the last 4 years especially the 3 letter agency's have done a pretty good job of that themselves.

It's only certain agents. I've had no issues with my agent. When he saw my range he said he'd block more time out so he could come shoot. Wants to try my 9mm and 22subguns.

Again its where you live and probably how you treat them. I've built a good relationship with my guy over the years. But yes some people think they are the KGB on steroids.

 

[distinguished]

I think there are something like 4 ATF agents in Oklahoma. I don't know the actual number, but when I talked to the agent responsible for my area, he said something like it's only a few people.

People have made them into the ultimate KGB.

There are a lot more than 4 around here!

 

[ARK]

I love shooting next to competitor with suppressed rifle! We are shooting from under the roof and its damn loud. Hate having to pug my ears under the muffs. It's time to get rid of this idiotic laws like the government wants us all to be deaf by the time we are 40.

 

[drop_point]

I love shooting next to competitor with suppressed rifle! We are shooting from under the roof and its damn loud. Hate having to pug my ears under the muffs. It's time to get rid of this idiotic laws like the government wants us all to be deaf by the time we are 40.

Huh? I can't hear you!

 

[ARK]

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/95/related-bills

For a while I thought that the Congers will act on it but I don't see any recent action.

 

[danny]

"They would have to have a warrant..." Lots of folks don't know this. They can't just march into your gun room without one (at least, legally).

ETA: To the NRA: Either allow suppressors or not, based upon technical issues with regards to rifles and peoples hearing. It is and should be up to the individual shooter to figure out if it's legal or not. We are (most of us) smart enough to figure it out. If you want, put a disclaimer in regs: It is up to the individual to comply with all firearms laws and the NRA is not responsible for any of that stuff....

Guys that shoot suppressor-legal matches: Have you ever seen an ATF agent there? Just curious...

You never know and can sometimes not know who people are. My wife used to exercise at some fitness place and got somewhat friendly with one of the patrons. This girl was from somewhere in Europe, and we later found out, was illegally here. ALSO one of the other regular patrons was working for then INS in our area, working on marriage based cases. Ok, so most of the times, match patrons know each other, at least if they are regulars, and if the others are regulars, but there are often new members and members who don't attend regularly.

Danny

 

[jthor]

Mirage is easy to deal with just throw a suppressor cover on. So that issue is null and void.

While shooting, suppressor cover on, and while not shooting suppressor cover pulled back to allow the suppressor to cool.

I have yet to see a solid reason to keep suppressors “illegal” in any of the HP sports. “It just makes the sport more expensive” excuse isn’t valid when it’s not a forced requirement, it’s an option. The Palma reason is valid, but that’s a simple issue specific to that rifle system.

At the end of the day shooting around suppressors is a lot nicer than bare muzzles or muzzle brakes.

As far as states that suppressors are an issue, cool, don’t run them. The same exact thing happens to 2 day Pro PRS matches that are ran in California. This is not a hard issue to navigate, just allow suppressors and stop being fudds about the topic.

 

[jackieschmidt]

Mirage is easy to deal with just throw a suppressor cover on. So that issue is null and void.

While shooting, suppressor cover on, and while not shooting suppressor cover pulled back to allow the suppressor to cool.

I have yet to see a solid reason to keep suppressors “illegal” in any of the HP sports. “It just makes the sport more expensive” excuse isn’t valid when it’s not a forced requirement, it’s an option. The Palma reason is valid, but that’s a simple issue specific to that rifle system.

At the end of the day shooting around suppressors is a lot nicer than bare muzzles or muzzle brakes.

As far as states that suppressors are an issue, cool, don’t run them. The same exact thing happens to 2 day Pro PRS matches that are ran in California. This is not a hard issue to navigate, just allow suppressors and stop being fudds about the topic.

I agree.
As long as the Suppressor doesn’t put the rifle over weight in a class that has a specific weight limit, why not.
They are not legal in NBRSA and IBS Short Range Benchrest. But it would not surprise me that if in the not too distant future, a proposal will be introduced to make them legal.

It ‘s a lot like tuners. It darned near took a Constitutional Amendment to finally allow them. Once allowed, shooters saw it was no big deal. If you wanted to use a tuner, fine. If not, that was fine as well.

 

[memilanuk]

I have yet to see a solid reason to keep suppressors “illegal” in any of the HP sports.

The usual argument is that they also provide recoil reduction.

Maybe not a big deal for slingers shooting 223, or a 308 with 155s. It probably would open up another arms race in F-Open as 338s started to creep onto the line. Not sure if FTR could swing the weight, but if they can find a way, a lot more people would probably bump up a few notches in bullet weight.

Gunsmiths will probably be ecstatic.

 

[Heman]

From my standpoint the argument isn't if people use them or not. It's that with all the things that could be addressed to help the sport, this is what they deem is important?

 

[6fatrat]

Please leave us alone

 

[jthor]

The usual argument is that they also provide recoil reduction.

Maybe not a big deal for slingers shooting 223, or a 308 with 155s. It probably would open up another arms race in F-Open as 338s started to creep onto the line. Not sure if FTR could swing the weight, but if they can find a way, a lot more people would probably bump up a few notches in bullet weight.

Gunsmiths will probably be ecstatic.

Valid. However, would that even matter? 338s would also come with worse barrel life depending on how this was approached.

 

[Heman]

Valid. However, would that even matter? 338s would also come with worse barrel life depending on how this was approached.

Friend has been shooting 338 for several years now with 300s. Not thumping them just running the Sierra manual accuracy load and it shoots very nice. Barrel life isn't really any worse than anything else.

 

[jthor]

Friend has been shooting 338 for several years now with 300s. Not thumping them just running the Sierra manual accuracy load and it shoots very nice. Barrel life isn't really any worse than anything else.

Within FClass standards?

 

[Heman]

Within FClass standards?

Sling prone

 

[jthor]

Sling prone

Gotcha. The Fclass community would have to see if it’s even feasible for them then. Sling vs Fclass precision and accuracy standards aren’t necessarily equal. I’d see heavier 30 cal bullets taking the stage before 338s. 338s do also require more maintenance/cleaning too. Everything is a give and take, no free lunch.

 

[memilanuk]

338s would also come with worse barrel life depending on how this was approached.

That's pretty low in the list of concerns for the F-O guys gunning for gold.

 

[jthor]

That's pretty low in the list of concerns for the F-O guys gunning for gold.

Is it?

 

[clowdis]

Is anything over .30 caliber legal in NRA Long Range or F-class shooting?

 

[davidjoe]

Is anything over .30 caliber legal in NRA Long Range or F-class shooting?

.35 caliber is the limit. Presently, the highest BC lead core bullets are not made in .338, but .30 caliber, the .878 G1 250 A-Tip. This bullet exceeds the BC of the 300 grain A-Tip.