|
Post by racktracker on Dec 19, 2006 21:25:16 GMT -5
paul3,
You bring up an excellent point.
93+% of the ground in Indiana is privately owned.
If a landowner didn't want the pistol cartridge rifles used on his ground all he has to do is say, "No pistol cartridge rilfes allowed." End of story.
By passing this proposal the NRC/IDNR is just giving permission to people that are deer hunting to be able to use them. The ultimate authority, in 93+% of the cases, on whether they can be used on a specific piece of gorund lies with the landowner.
|
|
|
Post by larryhagmansliver on Dec 19, 2006 21:31:15 GMT -5
I hunt with a rifle cartridge pistol and love it. My second choice would be my muzzleloader. Third choice would be a pc rifle. I'm all for the change. Shotguns are just too brutal to shoot for women and children, plus the ammo is cheaper, plus you would want to practice more. The pluses just kee[ going and I keep ramblin
|
|
yaz
Full Member
Posts: 67
|
Post by yaz on Dec 19, 2006 22:09:22 GMT -5
I've hunted with, and took three deer with a .308 Encore pistol. It was fun, but takes a lot of discipline, practice, practice, and more....... But I'll stick with a slug gun and my ML, for gun hunting.
As for shotguns being brutal for women and children, I don't buy that. My young 'un (now 15) was shooting a 20 ga. when he was seven. He was was a little rascal, and managed just fine. He's so confident in that gun now, he won't hunt with anything else. However, I don't disagree that pistol cartridge rifles would have even less felt recoil.
Pistol cartridges are capable of taking deer, but in the right hands, and with more limitations than slugs or ML's. Like anything else new, there will be people out there that won't know those limitations, and take marginal shots, thus possibly loosing more deer. I just feel that we owe it to the animals that we harvest to shoot the most effective gun/cartridge that we can handle. Thats my main concern.
|
|
|
Post by racktracker on Dec 19, 2006 22:34:42 GMT -5
Sorry yaz, I don't agree with you on the wounding aspect..
I believe that people will shoot a less recoil, cheaper to shoot gun a LOT more and will get very good at it compared to shooting a slug gun.
GETTING good with what you are hunting with should be everyones goal.
BEING good with what you are hunting with, will actually cut down on any wounded animals.
How much does anyone practice with a slug gun? A better question - Does anyone really "practice" with a slug gun?
I've watched way too many guys go to the range to shoot their slug guns (usually a couple days before season) and when they get it shooting where they want it to be they quit shooting. It is a matter of just sighting it in or making sure it isn't off from last year. No way, shape or form can anyone call that practicing.
Why did they stop?
1) Because that sucker is putting a hurt on the shoulder.
2) Each one of those shells can cost $2 a pop.
How can anyone get really good at it when they don't practice?
For those who haven't shot a pistol cartridge gun listen very closely....shooting them is fun. They don't hurt you. They are fairly cheap to shoot. That translates into shooting them more and getting good with them. No one can say that about a slug gun. Slug guns are NOT fun to shoot at all.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 20, 2006 9:09:22 GMT -5
Who is taking 150-200 yard shots at deer?...... Thats my whole argument it used to be 100 yards was the max, and to me unless that deer is standing broadside in a wide open field where you can see beyond the target, a 100 yards shot is irresponsible, at best. It's just flinging lead. So no, I won't support any changes. How does it create more opourtunities when a guy currently can hunt from Oct 1- into the first week of January. Demonstrating willful blindness or just ignorance Ridge? A Pistol Caliber Carbine is a 150yd gun AT BEST. Yet these new Super Sabots and Specialty Slug Guns are sold as 200yd+ guns. Please learn how to read ballistic tables. And idiots don't do this now with auto shotguns? Frankly I'd rather take my chances against a .357 or .44 bullet than a 300gr sabot slug. Good Posts Rack.
|
|
|
Post by dec on Dec 20, 2006 10:52:52 GMT -5
The problem with any gun or cartridge is that "Average Joe" does not read or care about ballistic charts. Not saying this is right, just is the case. I don't care if it is a slug gun, cowboy gun, or 30-06. "Average Joe" picks up the gun and thinks it will shoot like he's out west. "Average Joe" also won't take the time to practice regardless of cheap ammo and low recoil. They just don't do it. Yes, there will be a few inclined to shoot a little more with a cowboy gun, but most won't. "Average Joe" works 40+ hours a week, has to spend time with the kids, mow the lawn, fit in a round of golf, ect. He has little time to hunt, none the less spend time at a shooting range.
I'm not opposed to the pistol cartridge rifles, but I think it is an error in judgment to assume guys are going to shoot more and be more knowledgeable about their fire arms. Many of the "Average Joes" are going to look at these guns as ... rifles and equate them to a 30-06. These "Average Joes" will be taking 200 to 300 yard shots at deer. Granted, they won't hit them, but that lead has to land somewhere.
You have to remember, 90% of us that spend time obsessing about hunting on these forums are not "Average Joe" when it comes to hunting, guns, bows, etc. We obsess about what we love and take the time to be responsible. "Average Joe" who walks in to Wally World the week before season does not take the time to be responsible. So you can not assume that such an expansion of weapons will all the sudden make the woods any safer, result in less wounded deer, or even recruit mass numbers of new and educated "hunters".
Just my thoughts on the subject. Again, I'm not opposed to these guns, but then again, I'm certainly not going to hunt with one either.
|
|
|
Post by drs on Dec 20, 2006 10:59:01 GMT -5
DEC, what you said about the "Average Joes" if this is true then the "Average Joe" has NO BUSINESS hunting or even owning a firearm. Your discription of "Average Joes" sounds like they are more interested in NASCAR or Football while drinking a Beer.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 20, 2006 11:13:40 GMT -5
Unfortunately.
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Dec 20, 2006 11:18:58 GMT -5
The problem with any gun or cartridge is that "Average Joe" does not read or care about ballistic charts. Not saying this is right, just is the case. I don't care if it is a slug gun, cowboy gun, or 30-06. "Average Joe" picks up the gun and thinks it will shoot like he's out west. "Average Joe" also won't take the time to practice regardless of cheap ammo and low recoil. They just don't do it. Yes, there will be a few inclined to shoot a little more with a cowboy gun, but most won't. "Average Joe" works 40+ hours a week, has to spend time with the kids, mow the lawn, fit in a round of golf, ect. He has little time to hunt, none the less spend time at a shooting range. I'm not opposed to the pistol cartridge rifles, but I think it is an error in judgment to assume guys are going to shoot more and be more knowledgeable about their fire arms. Many of the "Average Joes" are going to look at these guns as ... rifles and equate them to a 30-06. These "Average Joes" will be taking 200 to 300 yard shots at deer. Granted, they won't hit them, but that lead has to land somewhere. You have to remember, 90% of us that spend time obsessing about hunting on these forums are not "Average Joe" when it comes to hunting, guns, bows, etc. We obsess about what we love and take the time to be responsible. "Average Joe" who walks in to Wally World the week before season does not take the time to be responsible. So you can not assume that such an expansion of weapons will all the sudden make the woods any safer, result in less wounded deer, or even recruit mass numbers of new and educated "hunters". Just my thoughts on the subject. Again, I'm not opposed to these guns, but then again, I'm certainly not going to hunt with one either. While i agree in part with your description of the average joe i disagree with them buying lever guns capable of shooting pistol cartridges. lever guns cost between 400 - 800.00 depending on the make and the average joe wont spend that much. he will buy a mossy 500 and cheap pumpkin ball slugs. specialty guns like center fire rifle cartridge handguns and pistol caliber rifles will mostly be used by experienced hunters in my opinion. mostly because of the cost of the weapon. If a average joe does buy a pistol cartridge rifle it will most like be an H&R or NEF single shot and so they wont fit the Chuck Connors shooter type. Most of the average joe hunters use the cheapest guns and ammo they can find. Dont believe me, look and see what kind of guns and slugs Walmart sells the most . h.h.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 20, 2006 11:21:23 GMT -5
The problem with any gun or cartridge is that "Average Joe" does not read or care about ballistic charts. Not saying this is right, just is the case. I don't care if it is a slug gun, cowboy gun, or 30-06. "Average Joe" picks up the gun and thinks it will shoot like he's out west. "Average Joe" also won't take the time to practice regardless of cheap ammo and low recoil. They just don't do it. Yes, there will be a few inclined to shoot a little more with a cowboy gun, but most won't. "Average Joe" works 40+ hours a week, has to spend time with the kids, mow the lawn, fit in a round of golf, ect. He has little time to hunt, none the less spend time at a shooting range. All the more reason for allowing guns that are easier to shoot. Yep. In the dirt. You can aim at somthing at 300 yds all you want, but the trajectory will put it in the dirt well before then. Might not, but it will make it easier to recruit & teach. As for wounded deer? Bullet placement is what kills. Easier shooting makes bullet placement easier. And that is an entirely appropriate way of adressing it.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 20, 2006 11:23:58 GMT -5
While i agree in part with your description of the average joe i disagree with them buying lever guns capable of shooting pistol cartridges. lever guns cost between 400 - 800.00 depending on the make and the average joe wont spend that much. he will buy a mossy 500 and cheap pumpkin ball slugs. specialty guns like center fire rifle cartridge handguns and pistol caliber rifles will mostly be used by experienced hunters in my opinion. mostly because of the cost of the weapon. If a average joe does buy a pistol cartridge rifle it will most like be an H&R or NEF single shot and so they wont fit the Chuck Connors shooter type. Most of the average joe hunters use the cheapest guns and ammo they can find. Dont believe me, look and see what kind of guns and slugs Walmart sells the most . h.h. Another good reason to not disallow it.
|
|
|
Post by dec on Dec 20, 2006 13:10:36 GMT -5
DEC, what you said about the "Average Joes" if this is true then the "Average Joe" has NO BUSINESS hunting or even owning a firearm. Your discription of "Average Joes" sounds like they are more interested in NASCAR or Football while drinking a Beer. We all know who we are talking about when I say "Average Joe". I used to work with these guys. These guys would get excited about deer season on the Monday before the opener and head to the woods on Saturday morning with the old smooth barrel pump in hand ready to sling lead. After about 4 mornings of hunting, they don't think about hunting until the next November. Yet if you ask them they'll tell you what a great and serious die hard hunter they are. Not a single one of them shoots a gun more then about 5 rounds at most before a season opens. Heck, I'm in business with one of these types right now. I love the guy to death, but he thinks he's God's greatest thing to hunting, yet he has deer hunted a grand total of 3 mornings this year and gone pheasant hunting once. He hasn't picked up a gun or bow (to my knowledge) to practice in years. Yet, every time a customer comes in and he's not here they ask if he's out hunting. I just shake my head at the legend of this "mighty hunter". He looks at me and doesn't understand how I can eat, breath, and live hunting 24/7. So "yes" Average Joe is more interested in NASCAR and drinking beer, and yes I agree they have no place in the woods, but as we all know they are in the woods and we have to accept it ... like it or not. That is the kind of Average Joe I'm talking about. We all know these guys. And while I agree that many are not going to run out and spend $500 or more on one of these guns, the few that do won't practice and will assume the gun will shoot 300 yards. When they find out it won't shoot that far, they'll just compensate and aim that much higher. Again, I'm not opposed to these guns. I'm just saying, don't kid yourself in what these guys will and won't do. I certainly would not use some of these arguments to support legislation for these guns because quite frankly they won't apply to the average hunter. Now I agree with the arguments for supporting legislation that in the hands of someone who wants to put in the time and reap the benefits of these guns, that positive things can come to hunting from this. Average Joe though won't be anymore responsible or proficient through the use of these guns.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 20, 2006 14:33:14 GMT -5
Average Joe though won't be anymore responsible or proficient through the use of these guns. Not until they find out how cheap & fun they are... Oh, and pistol caliber carbines run about $425 New... a lot cheaper used. ;D
|
|
|
Post by pbr on Dec 20, 2006 17:42:00 GMT -5
I don't think your "Average Joe" is an "Average Deer Hunter". You must see a lot different crowd than I do. There is NO doubt that more people will actually practice with a gun that: 1) Is a LOT cheaper to shoot than a slug gun - by far 2) Has a LOT less recoil than a slug gun - by far 3) Is a LOT more fun to shoot than a slug gun - by far. As Bobby Knight said," Perfect practice makes perfect". How many on here actually PRACTICE with their slug guns? Even us "internet hunting obsessors" How many slugs did any of us put through our slug guns prior to this past season? Please, let's be honest here - 6 or 7 shots is all that anyone wants to shoot them shoulder bangers. Now put that same gun in the hands of a woman or youngster. DOUBLE OUCH!! No wonder we cant recruit when we scare them to death with a slug gun. If we want to recruit new hunters we had better get new hunter friendly hunting equipment for them to use.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 20, 2006 18:16:03 GMT -5
Actually, I put nearly 100rounds ov various loads through my mossberg pre-season trying to get the stupid thing to be 1/2 as accurate at 100yds as either my Lever or my Flintlock. No, it was not fun. Not going to do that again. Even my .45-70 was easier to shoot consistantly. My minimum standards of accuracy are consistant 6" groups unsupported offhand with Iron Sights. (I'm not really happy until I'm consistantly sub 4" offhand...) My Choices for next year will be Accurate Lever or no centerfire.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Dec 20, 2006 18:29:41 GMT -5
Dec, I mostly agree with what you posted, but I would just like to add that the expansion of weapons will not make the woods any less safe nor likely result in more wounded deer either. Also, I have to think that if the expansion helps to recruit any new hunters (especially youngsters), then it is a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Dec 20, 2006 18:32:25 GMT -5
Ridgerunner, I'm not trying to pile on here, just curious, but can you give a good reason why not to allow pistol caliber rifles other than those based on speculation of how some people might use them.
|
|
|
Post by pbr on Dec 20, 2006 18:35:11 GMT -5
Actually, I put nearly 100rounds ov various loads through my mossberg pre-season trying to get the stupid thing to be 1/2 as accurate at 100yds as either my Lever or my Flintlock. Why did I just know that you would be the BIG exception to the rule? Question - Do you own a Lead Sled?
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 20, 2006 18:43:56 GMT -5
Why did I just know that you would be the BIG exception to the rule? Because I'm a gun nut who earned his Letterman's Jacket in HS by shooting every day? (Small-Bore Rifle Team... still have my 1943 Mil Issue Remington 513T.) No. I've found that my POI with heavy-recoiing low velocity rounds deviates too much from bench to offhand to make them worthwhile. Plus, they just aren't as useful for iron-sighters like me.
|
|
|
Post by ridgerunner on Dec 20, 2006 18:57:37 GMT -5
I put 30 rounds through my slug gun this year before season and always do every year, two weeks before season. I'll shoot severeal different brand slugs, different sizes( 2-3/4, 3in, 3-1/2 etc. Even though I only need about 4 shots to tell my scope was right on the money and what slug shoots well in my gun.
I raised two boys and a girl had them hunting with slug guns at the age of 10,10 and 12 years old. My daughter was shooting a twenty gauge with slugs at 12 years old and didn't have any problem, at all ,and she a little girl, 100 pounds soppin wet.
Thats a cop out pbr.
I worked with our local 4-h clubs in shooting sports and never had a kid complain about the kick, the just love hunting and love to shoot. Most times I couldn't get them to put the guns down, they wanted to continue shooting.
If their taught the proper technique to shoulder a shotgun( keep it tight to the shoulder, lean foward into the gun etc.) not to mention they make vest with shoulder padding for the recoil. You can add weight to the stock to reduce recoil to basically nothing.. I'm not buying that story about recoil and " it's for the kids etc..They can always bow hunt or now you can use a 4-10 with slugs to gun hunt which doesn't kick at all....
Of course my kids grew up hunting and we own 80 acres of prime hunting woods, so they were always in the woods hunting or trapping. I know some of the urbanite crowd are a little more delicate than us rural country folk, but come on........
|
|