Pistol Cartridge Rilfes for deer hunting proposed.

Here is another point to ponder:

We would like to see Hunters actually practice a bit before going afield wouldn't we?
Too bad Slugs cost between $0.80 & $5.00 each. Gee, for the cost of 20 el-cheepo Remington forster slugs I can buy almost 100 target-grade .357s. (Totally ignoring how much easier & inexpensive it is to reload High Quality Pistol Cartridges than Slug loads...)

Then, if you get to Hunting Ammo - Look Out! Hot commercial .357 Hunting Loads max out at about $1 ea. Hornady SST slugs are about $5 each. How much practicing is going on at those rates?

No. We don't need a Pistol Carbine rule. Nobody needs that much practice.

Welcome Old Ironsights. Glad to see you over here.

Ironsights, your preaching to the choir! ;d

Perhaps. Perhaps I just like passing out my Sermon Notes for others to use.

I bought some at Dick's not too in August for $9.99. I have also seen them at Bass Pro for that price.

Hey! Another Choir Preacher! ;D

Cost of practice is the #1 reason I hate shooting slugs.

Pain runs a close second.

IMO those two factors (on top of laziness) keep the majority of shooters from really becomming seriously proficient with their deer gun.

Not to say there aren't proficient folks out there, but Rules aren't made to protect us from the Proficient.

Call me whatever you like, but the animals deserve the quickest kill possible.

It sickens me to have seen guys in the gun shop the night before opening day of gun season, buying a new gun and scope, getting it bore-sighted, and they`re goin` huntin` in the mornin`.

If a guy isn`t going to shoot enough to be proficient with his chosen weapon, for whatever excuse he makes, he should change weapons to one he can handle/afford to shoot.

I suppose this falls into the category of ethics, and everyone has their own ideas of what’s ethical-kind of like opinions.

Green I believe that the 410 slug is considered more as a high power rifle bullet that a shotgun slug. As it is a caliber and not a weight as are the 12 and 20 gauge slugs. But then again I could be wrong.

More Sermon Notes for the Choir:

I wonder if anyone who is against this rule change actually understands what they are supporting.

By opposing the Rule Change, they are SUPPORTING the use of long-range spitzer bullets in “hand-rifles” like the Encore or Contender G2. That is hardly indicative of promoting safe shooting ranges.

The law as it stands could not withstand a legal challenge, and if it is allowed to stand Hoosier Hunters could lose everything they stand “for” in regards to "safety". Consider:

A TC Encore Pistol with a 16"+ barrel is currently legal in any caliber over (and including) .243.

Put an accessory thumbhole or Flex-Tech stock on it and it becomes “illegal” even though there is no change in ballistics.

How does adding a shoulder stock make the cartridge less safe?

The converse is also true. An "Illegal" .375 H&H (or 7mm Mag or whatever) Encore Rifle becomes "legal" by swapping stocks for a pistol grip.

The rule is simply absurd.

If challenged in court by someone who actually wants to shoot long-range spitzer cartridge rifles, it can and will be successfully argued that precedent has already been set in favor of allowing long-range spitzer cartridges.

That, as you say, would be disastrously dangerous.

The ONLY way to prevent this is to change the Rule to authorize only those cartridges that have trajectories consistent with safe hunting in close farmland – regardless of platform. Such a change/Rule would be defensible in court, as it is a empirically based ruling that leaves no room for exceptions like “hand Rifles”.

I don’t want Pistol Carbines because I necessarily thing they are “better”, I want the DNR to have rules that can support and resist a Legal Challenge from both Antis - who can use the "safe range" argument against us - and people who would use ballisticlaly inappropriate spitzer cartridges.

Those who don’t think a bad Rule won’t ever be challenged, are dangerously politically naive.