|
Post by lugnutz on Dec 22, 2006 8:42:33 GMT -5
Yeah, maybe this thread does need locked. And the purpose of that would be? Stay on topic and learn from others thoughts and opinions, if we can't act like adults than we shouldn't be on the site at all. IMO
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Dec 22, 2006 8:48:04 GMT -5
Still waiting on a good reason why not to allow them, other than greghopper, ridgerunner, and jackryan think they are bad.
LMAO, at the irony in this statement given your position and lack of reasons.
Yes, less kick than a 12 gauge or even a 20 gauge and more power than a .410. Exactly in the middle of range and performance of current legal weapons. The links to the ballistics tables are posted repeatedly above.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Dec 22, 2006 8:52:50 GMT -5
What is the average total number of hunting licenses sold in Indiana in a given year? 250,000 or so? What is the total number of users on this site? 875?
To think that anything discussed on this sight represents what a majority of hunters may or may not think is ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Dec 22, 2006 9:12:33 GMT -5
What is the average total number of hunting licenses sold in Indiana in a given year? 250,000 or so? What is the total number of users on this site? 875? 225,799 deer tags were sold in 2006. Tags sales do not always accurately represent number of hunters. Tags sales are up from 213,709 in 2004 because of one thing - the huge increase in bonus antlerless permits allowed since then. The drop in price of the second bonus tags might have spurred a few more sales too. Jackc99 had some information on declining numbers of hunters in Indiana. So I think that less hunters are buying more tags. I don't think anyone can speak for the majority of hunters in Indiana except the majority of hunters in Indiana themselves. That goes for the so called "organized hunting groups" too. On occasions more than one of their leaders have claimed to be representing the "deer hunters/bowhunters of Indiana". I don't think anyone purported or claimed that we were representing the majority of hunters.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Dec 22, 2006 9:15:58 GMT -5
Gents,
Let's do clean up the rhetoric a tad.
Some are getting borderline personal.
This is an important subject and we would appreciate everyone honest input without any personal stuff thrown in.
Thanks in advance.
WW
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Dec 22, 2006 9:32:43 GMT -5
Woody - I just did a quick web search for number of hunting licenses sold in Indiana before I posted that and came up with a number around 230,000 in the year 2003. These were hunting licenses and not deer tags so the purchase of multiple license to one individual doenst really come into play.
And I would say there are some people on this site who are so adamant about their beliefs they honestly think "they" represent the thoughts of the majority of hunters.
For the topic at hand the only upside that I can see of these guns is reduced recoil. That is it. There is no downside as long as the rule doesnt get morphed over time.
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Dec 22, 2006 9:42:15 GMT -5
I was just agreeing that the thread was getting out of control, not necessarily saying it should be locked. That's one of the problems with on-line communication; none of the nuances come though.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Dec 22, 2006 9:45:40 GMT -5
Woody - I just did a quick web search for number of hunting licenses sold in Indiana before I posted that and came up with a number around 230,000 in the year 2003. These were hunting licenses and not deer tags so the purchase of multiple license to one individual doenst really come into play. This is from the IDNR...2003 Resident Deer - 220,469 Nonresident Deer - 4,394 Total – 224,863 That is down considerably from 2000 when the tags sales were.. Resident Deer - 328,649 Nonresident Deer - 5,683 Total – 334,332 Neither the hunting license sold or deer tags sold can be extrapolated to how many hunters are afield. There are way too many lifetime license holders, landowners, youth hunters, and military out there to get an accurate count. But we are getting off subject here. Maybe we can start another thread about tags sales and number of hunters so this one can get back on track? Probably true, but that is not just this site. I've seen some individuals say that the speak for all hunters in Indiana. Not sure when they conducted a total hunter survey.. I personally see no downside and I have yet to see any valid facts from the anti side against them. I don't see the morph coming.. .
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Dec 22, 2006 10:16:45 GMT -5
WW,
I think the ones against the rule change have a real reason why but they are afraid to post it. I really think their reason is they bow hunt mostly and don't want gun seasons or they would like to shorten the gun seasons. I feel their real reason comes down to growing big antlers again. h.h
|
|
|
Post by drs on Dec 22, 2006 10:26:39 GMT -5
WW, I think the ones against the rule change have a real reason why but they are afraid to post it. I really think their reason is they bow hunt mostly and don't want gun seasons or they would like to shorten the gun seasons. I feel their real reason comes down to growing big antlers again. h.h I believe you're 100% right "hornharvester"
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Dec 22, 2006 10:28:55 GMT -5
WW, I think the ones against the rule change have a real reason why but they are afraid to post it. I really think their reason is they bow hunt mostly and don't want gun seasons or they would like to shorten the gun seasons. I feel their real reason comes down to growing big antlers again. h.h I don't know. It is pretty tough to assign agendas to any one group. I do know that some anti-pistol cartridge guys are saying that the pro side want's to make all centerfires legal and this is just the first step. Unless the whole side (one way or the other) comes right out and says," This is what ALL of us believe", then assigning an agenda is counterproductive to discussions/debates. That is my feeling anywho.. I will say one thing - As long as one group does try to take away from another group there will be constant battles. Not only on here, but everywhere where hunters talk and meet. That is not good..... .
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Dec 22, 2006 10:32:53 GMT -5
I agree WW but not one of them has given a valid reason not to allow their use other than i just don't like it so it makes me think there is a real reason behind all the smoke. h.h.
|
|
|
Post by maddog on Dec 22, 2006 10:33:42 GMT -5
Having deer hunted in Ind. for about 30 yrs., I have used all weapons, except handgun[can't shoot em worth a durn cause of eye dominace]. That being said I'm all for the rifle season. My question is for those of you more computer literate than I. Has anyone tried to look up ballistic/trajectory tables, combine them, then cut/copy/paste and send them to those people? They don't need a book, cause they will just get lost. The following would be some suggestions.
1. 12 ga. Hornady SST 2. 12 ga. winchester nosler part gold sabot 3. Remington core lokt ultra sabo
4. .45 cal. ML 3 pellet load with sabots such as nosler
5. .357, .41 mag, .45LC, and .44 mag., with appropriate hunting loads. I might also add the .45-70, .444 marlin, and .450 marlin. These are also straight walled, and lall in line withe the above mentioned shotgun/ML ballistic/trajectory loads.
Maybe if you post them here, also, it will defuse some of the animosity towards the use of these rounds.
Just my thoughts......
Mad Dog
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Dec 22, 2006 10:43:36 GMT -5
WW, I think the ones against the rule change have a real reason why but they are afraid to post it. I really think their reason is they bow hunt mostly and don't want gun seasons or they would like to shorten the gun seasons. I feel their real reason comes down bto growing big antlers again. h.h B.S.dont even try to go there....lol
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Dec 22, 2006 10:44:46 GMT -5
Mad Dog,
Good suggestion..
Buried somewhere in all these discussions over the last year is that exact information.
Maybe it's time for a review of that..
Maybe whoever posted it can repost instead of doing a big search..
thanks..
|
|
|
Post by huxbux on Dec 22, 2006 10:45:11 GMT -5
WW, I think the ones against the rule change have a real reason why but they are afraid to post it. I really think their reason is they bow hunt mostly and don't want gun seasons or they would like to shorten the gun seasons. I feel their real reason comes down to growing big antlers again. h.h Personally, I think some people just have control issues.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Dec 22, 2006 10:47:15 GMT -5
To think that anything discussed on this sight represents what a majority of hunters may or may not think is ridiculous. Well said.......
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Dec 22, 2006 10:54:35 GMT -5
WW, I think the ones against the rule change have a real reason why but they are afraid to post it. I really think their reason is they bow hunt mostly and don't want gun seasons or they would like to shorten the gun seasons. I feel their real reason comes down bto growing big antlers again. h.h B.S.dont even try to go there....lol Ive looked threw your posts about the rule change and youve havent give one reason as to why you oppose the change. What is the reason greghopper? h.h.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Dec 22, 2006 11:32:02 GMT -5
I completely agree HH. Its an attempt to sway people to the anti side without revealing the real reason for the opposition. However, I think there are two camps on the anti side, one that wants big deer at any cost and one that simply doesn't want anymore people in the woods.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Dec 22, 2006 11:33:33 GMT -5
[quote author=greghopper board=deerhunting thread=1166456067 ipost=1166802216]B.S.dont even try to go there....lol Ive looked threw your posts about the rule change and youve havent give one reason as to why you oppose the change. What is the reason greghopper? h.h. [/quote]Its not about Antlers....Do I really need a reason??This is the USA...can I just NOT want them???
|
|