|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Oct 20, 2006 9:53:26 GMT -5
Great post pbr.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Oct 20, 2006 9:59:29 GMT -5
Old Ironsights, I really enjoy your posts that are not only factual but laced with humor. Please keep it up. Thanks. I intend to. Yep. Then they will wonder why there aren't enough hunters to make up a voting block sufficient to keep HSUS from shutting down sport hunting alltogether. We should all be about expanding and promoting opportunities, not limiting them. Limit opportunities, limit hunter numbers, kill hunting. That simple.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Oct 20, 2006 10:09:14 GMT -5
I even was told by a couple of guys on “that other” site ... They are funny. They had a tantrum and are holding their breath till they turn blue. Won't talk about it any more. Left me with the Last Word. Cut'N-Run they did... ;D Wonder how many are French? Yep. The Ballistic Tables don't lie. Next time someone says that the Ballistic Tables are immaterial to the argument, move quickly to another shooting lane. They probably don't trust the Reloading Tables either.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Oct 20, 2006 10:17:49 GMT -5
Old Ironsights, I couldn't agree more and I also wanted to let you know that I enjoy your posts as well. It sure didn't take you long to catch onto how most deer hunting arguments typically are conducted around this state. ;D
|
|
|
Post by pbr on Oct 20, 2006 11:55:46 GMT -5
I even was told by a couple of guys on “that other” site ... They are funny. They had a tantrum and are holding their breath till they turn blue. Won't talk about it any more. Left me with the Last Word. Cut'N-Run they did... ;D Wonder how many are French? Yep. The Ballistic Tables don't lie. Next time someone says that the Ballistic Tables are immaterial to the argument, move quickly to another shooting lane. They probably don't trust the Reloading Tables either. Old Ironsights, I'm not registered there and very, very seldom ever visit there , but I was keenly interested in the pistol cartridge threads "debates". Not sure what your handle was there, but a few members expressed some real good facts for the pistol cartridge rifles. The three main opponents are all officers in the IDHA. Not sure which is which as they seem to take turns being El Presidenty. Same train of thought for all three, so it probably really doesn't matter who is what. Thier rhetoric reminded me of the way the anti-gunners decry all guns. According to them everyone knows that a certain gun will make a person do bad things. Their slippery slope argument of if pistol cartridge rilfes are allowed will the 30.06s be far behind was laughable at best. I really do not understand how a hunting organization's leadership can be so against more hunter opportunities to hunt. Confusing to say the least.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Oct 20, 2006 12:14:22 GMT -5
I'm the same everywhere (at least on Gun related forums)
As of yet no one has co opted my Screen Name.
I would venture to guess they have 1/3 or less the traffic we see here. (YAY WOODY!)
I went to the IDHA website and it is probably one of the most lame, unmanaged, un-updated website I've ever seen. Most of the Links hit 404s, and their most "recent legislation" is from 2004.
Truly Pathetic. I wouldn't let them speak for me if they were handing out $100 bills.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Oct 20, 2006 12:18:08 GMT -5
<snip> It sure didn't take you long to catch onto how most deer hunting arguments typically are conducted around this state. ;D I've found that most of the time NIMBYs are the same everywhere, in every political circumstance. Once in a while you will run into one that has a cogent argument, but usually they just don't want other kids in their sandbox. But we all know what Fat Cats do in an unoccupied sandbox don't we...
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Oct 20, 2006 12:51:47 GMT -5
<snip> It sure didn't take you long to catch onto how most deer hunting arguments typically are conducted around this state. ;D I've found that most of the time NIMBYs are the same everywhere, in every political circumstance. Once in a while you will run into one that has a cogent argument, but usually they just don't want other kids in their sandbox. But we all know what Fat Cats do in an unoccupied sandbox don't we... Could we just speak english and not impress everyone with the vocablary?
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Oct 20, 2006 13:02:39 GMT -5
Sorry. I type like I talk.
NIMBY = Not In My Backyard. The only argument most can muster is "because I don't like it". Once in a while someone opposing somthing will have facts and data to support their position, but what makes a NIMBY a NIMBY is their "Tantrum over Topic" debate style.
|
|
|
Post by drs on Oct 20, 2006 13:45:14 GMT -5
I think we have, existing in the State of Indiana, too many "Soccer Moms", NIMBY's, and those folks that lack general knowledge, in the field of Ballistics and Firearms. The sad fact they are the majority, and lots of them are elected or appointed officials
|
|
|
Post by reloader on Oct 23, 2006 14:59:36 GMT -5
But we already got'em ,no long stocks and a short barrel,with any caliber[pistols],so whats the problem with a model 94 in 44mag and such,its just another option that few would notice.I'd rather use that than a bulky shotgun. Not needed in Indiana....NO Rifles.period
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Oct 23, 2006 15:10:26 GMT -5
But we already got'em ,no long stocks and a short barrel,with any caliber[pistols],so whats the problem with a model 94 in 44mag and such,its just another option that few would notice.I'd rather use that than a bulky shotgun. Not needed in Indiana....NO Rifles.period I never thought about it that way.. Just a tad longer barrel and a stock. Thanks.. .
|
|
|
Post by pbr on Oct 23, 2006 15:47:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Oct 23, 2006 16:38:10 GMT -5
No. No rimless automatic cartridge would comply. IAC9.3.3 (2) A handgun must: (A) conform to the requirements of IC 35-47-2 www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title35/ar47/ch2.html; (B) have a barrel at least four (4) inches long; and (C) fire a bullet of two hundred forty-three thousandths (.243) inch diameter or larger. All 38 special ammunition is prohibited. The handgun cartridge case, without bullet, must be at least one and sixteen-hundredths (1.16) inches long. A handgun must not be concealed. Full metal jacketed bullets are unlawful. A handgun may be possessed in the field outside lawful shooting hours only if there are no shells in the chamber or magazine. All 25/20, 32/20, 30 carbine, and 38 special ammunition is prohibited. And Woody, all that stuff I've said about Encores & Contenders (see Reply #68...) and you are just realizing that? I'm wounded.
|
|
|
Post by deerdemon on Oct 23, 2006 21:48:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Oct 23, 2006 22:13:53 GMT -5
Do you have somthing to contribute deerdemon, or are you content to act like a teenager and just roll your eyes without even informing us of your opinion? If the idea is a bad one, please tell us why. If you approve, again, tell us why. Edit: Never mind. Likely another hit and run, jut like September. See you in a month dd. (Trollish behavior is so unbecomming...)
|
|
|
Post by greenhunter111 on Oct 24, 2006 0:17:12 GMT -5
There is no logical reason to disallow rifles for legally hunting deer in Indiana. Just do it. It's gonna increase license sales. It's gonna increase doe harvests. It's gonna help manage the herd better. It will probably bring in more out of state hunters as well, which is good for the economy too.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Oct 24, 2006 6:14:04 GMT -5
It will probably bring in more out of state hunters as well, which is good for the economy too. If that's the case, I say NO to rifles! Why would anyone want to encourage out of staters here? Have you not heard of Illinois?
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Oct 24, 2006 6:58:28 GMT -5
If that's the case, I say NO to rifles! Why would anyone want to encourage out of staters here? Have you not heard of Illinois? So everybody has their own exclusive sandbox and no one else is invited? There's a bunch of guys who hunt Kentucky who might take issue with that. How about if you ever get the itch to bust a Montana Elk? Hunting is about SHARING. You share info. You share meat. You sare tactics. Sometimes you share equipment. But you don't want to share the State? Bizzare. The Sport is more important than your Spot.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Oct 24, 2006 7:14:55 GMT -5
If that's the case, I say NO to rifles! Why would anyone want to encourage out of staters here? Have you not heard of Illinois? So everybody has their own exclusive sandbox and no one else is invited? There's a bunch of guys who hunt Kentucky who might take issue with that. How about if you ever get the itch to bust a Montana Elk? Hunting is about SHARING. You share info. You share meat. You sare tactics. Sometimes you share equipment. But you don't want to share the State? Bizzare. The Sport is more important than your Spot.That's all well and good, but what I'm referring to is how a lot of Illinois hunters have been priced out of deer hunting by outlandish lease prices. I don't blame landowners at all for making the money, they deserve it, but if too many people lose their "spot", there will be no "sport". As far as wanting to shoot an elk, Montana "needs" our tourist dollars to help make it, Indiana doesn't. I didn't say I didn't want ANYBODY to come and play in my "sandbox", I was just stating I pray we never end up like our neighbor to the west.
|
|