Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2007 18:30:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on May 3, 2007 19:41:10 GMT -5
That's cool! I found my emails. I guess they DO listen!
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on May 3, 2007 20:33:14 GMT -5
4 to 1 in favor..
That is what I had heard.
Interesting that 20% of the opposed had it all wrong on "high powered rilfes".
I wonder where they got that at?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2007 21:45:14 GMT -5
I actually started counted and wore out on page 30 or so. Yes, it's at least 4 to 1.
Note: that's counting the one from the IDHA President that actually asked for both, no PCR's(July 11) and then ALL centerfires(Dec. 26) -- must have gottena new rifle for Christmas? He even backed that request up with some pretty darn good data confirming that PCR's will fit in just fine.
Good work fellows.
|
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on May 3, 2007 23:18:09 GMT -5
I looked and scanned some to page 43 or so. Recognized a few names, besides my own, but then only because I knew their real name. Looked as if most of those opposed used almost the same words and ideas as to why not. Those pro were from simply yes to yes with some stats and some with lots of stats. I also found mine and did not realize that I had sent in that many. But then again I feel that that was for the good. With a 4 or 5 to one margin I would say that it should pass. So if you all want to go buy a new firearm you now have a good excuse. Right not I think that I am going to stay with my Knight Extreme or Savage Ml11.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on May 4, 2007 3:05:59 GMT -5
I actually started counted and wore out on page 30 or so. Yes, it's at least 4 to 1. Note: that's counting the one from the IDHA President that actually asked for both, no PCR's(July 11) and then ALL centerfires(Dec. 26) -- must have gottena new rifle for Christmas? He even backed that request up with some pretty darn good data confirming that PCR's will fit in just fine. Good work fellows. In the summation they said an little over 80% were in favor. Curious though......I did not see a position by the IDHA. Did I miss it? There was a lot of misinformation put out about what exactly this proposal was and it showed in the no votes.. |
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on May 4, 2007 6:46:15 GMT -5
Great news. Good to see some familiar names.
|
|
|
|
Post by tenring on May 4, 2007 7:32:08 GMT -5
Just shows the benefit of living in a Republic!
|
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on May 4, 2007 7:44:44 GMT -5
Man, some of those responses are pretty funny!
It was suposed to be about PCR's.....and some of the folks talked about muzzleloaders and pistols and all other sorts of things....lol
|
|
|
|
Post by drs on May 4, 2007 8:14:34 GMT -5
Great news. Good to see some familar names. GREAT NEWS! Yes, I also saw some familar names listed. |
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on May 4, 2007 9:19:08 GMT -5
I promised I wouldn't gloat...  But I sure like page 154-156... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by parson on May 4, 2007 10:14:00 GMT -5
So, does this mean that PCRs are a done deal and the May meeting is just a formality? If so, then I need to start melting some of these wheel weights!
parson
|
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on May 4, 2007 10:53:44 GMT -5
If you read the "recommendation for final adoption" beginning on page 147 you will note that it is still only a "recommendation".
But when has a "recommendation" like this ever been quashed?
|
|
|
|
Post by tenring on May 4, 2007 10:59:58 GMT -5
If you read the "recommendation for final adoption" beginning on page 147 you will note that it is still only a "recommendation". But when has a "recommendation" like this ever been quashed? Well, you know who is still out there talking it up to the antis'. He still has two and a half weeks to spread his version of "reality." |
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on May 4, 2007 13:08:58 GMT -5
If you read the "recommendation for final adoption" beginning on page 147 you will note that it is still only a "recommendation". But when has a "recommendation" like this ever been quashed? Not very often. Never when it is overwhelmingly in favor.. |
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on May 4, 2007 13:16:24 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure the public comment period is over. It is now in the lap of the NRC. I would think they will accept the DNR recommendation and vote to pass it on the 22nd but there are few certainies in life. I would like to commend all who responded with comments. The process works and it is inclusive of all. Don't miss your chance to comment anytime the opportunity presents itself.
Jack
|
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on May 4, 2007 14:00:05 GMT -5
Quite.
That the DNR posts ALL the responses (with annotated caviats) is a credit to the Organization and the concept of Open Government.
|
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on May 4, 2007 15:40:30 GMT -5
So, does this mean that PCRs are a done deal and the May meeting is just a formality? If so, then I need to start melting some of these wheel weights! parson The hearing officer believes any decision regarding the imposition of geographical limits based upon population density should be determined by the NRC members and for that reason offers no recommendation on this limited issue. Nevertheless, the hearing officer respectfully recommends that the rule, as revised, be granted final adoption either with or without geographical limitations as the members determine appropriate.Dated: April 18, 2007 Sandra L. Jensen Hearing Officer |
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on May 4, 2007 16:27:44 GMT -5
Hopefully, the silly idea that is termed "geographical limitations" will be dropped.
And again, I don't see the need for a revision to further clarify appropriate cartridge specifications. I fail to see how it could be any simpler or more clear than a minimum bullet diameter and a minimum and maximum case length.
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnSmiles on May 4, 2007 17:16:28 GMT -5
Well, #1, I think we should all email Jennifer Kane( jkane@nrc.in.gov ) and thank her for the wonderful job she has done in compiling and forwarding all of our emails. And also compliment Agenda Item #8 as being so straightforward, honest and directly to the point. I love the parts where certain un-named individuals are on record showing how very little they know concerning the proposed guns myself. ;D I mean, SURELY they were not deliberately exagerating or anything like that just to attempt to get the proposal voted down . . . |
|
