|
Post by shouldernuke on Jan 31, 2009 0:12:20 GMT -5
Sure why not !! But lets not stop there lets include all the medium yeild short range cartridges like the 35rem, 30-30 , 300 savage ,303 brit ,32 win special, 35 wheelin ,444, 45-70,450 bushmaster
That would cover all of the standard ,of what I consider medium yeild short range Hi-power cartriges
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2009 9:27:46 GMT -5
I'm not for gun control in any form.......I'd vote for "any center fire" such as the rule in Ky. Seems to work well there, even in the flat country in western Ky.
|
|
|
Post by danf on Jan 31, 2009 10:07:35 GMT -5
That's the only way I'd agree to adding any additional cartridges, timex. To develop a "list" would be asinine; OIS made a fairly comprehensive "example" list when the PCR's were being discussed, but I know there's a few wildcats that fit the bill that he didn't get on his list. There is NO way the DNR could make such a list- that is why it is by minimum caliber and minimum/maximum case length.
However, I don't see the INDNR passing an "any centerfire" rule any time soon. There was enough of a fight to allow the PCR's that I'd hate to see the fight put up to allow any centerfire!
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Jan 31, 2009 10:56:48 GMT -5
I'm not for gun control in any form.......I'd vote for "any center fire" such as the rule in Ky. Seems to work well there, even in the flat country in western Ky. Absolutely, it wouldn't be a problem - but fear plays so much better.
|
|
|
Post by mrfixit on Feb 1, 2009 7:00:16 GMT -5
The .45-70 cartridge is already legal in Indiana as long as you use it in a pistol. I have a couple friends that hunt with it in a TC Contender. Wow I bet that's a handful to hang onto. I think Indiana should allow any rifle in most counties and only limit their use in counties with high population density. I can understand not using them in Marion county but there is no and should be no reason why I can't use one here in Greene or say Lawrence or Sullivan counties. This whole PCR vs HPR pistols is rather silly. I can use a HPR round in a pistol with a 24" barrel but I can't use the same cartridge in a rifle with a 24 inch barrel? Think that through and then tell me the advantages of someone firing a high power rifle round through a pistol over a rifle? For the most part that extra point of contact at the shoulder provides for a more stable shooting platform that lends a person a little more accuracy which makes things more safe for you and I when we are out in the field. I've hunted with a Savage Stryker .243 and Remington XP100 .35 Remington to name a few and there is just no way anyone can be as safe shooting from a tree stand with a pistol as they are with a rifle. I personally don't care what anyone hunts with as long as they are safe with whatever they are using. If we legalize the 45/70 then I also believe the .35 Remington and the 30/30 Winchester should be legalized also as all three rounds are probably the most traditional deer rounds on the market. It sucks we can't use traditional deer hunting rounds while deer hunting here in Indiana. Aw heck just legalize all centerfires and be done with it. This whole centerfire rifle fear thing is just silly. /endrant thanks for reading LOL.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Feb 1, 2009 12:07:29 GMT -5
My only fear, and I know it's not right to think like this, is that there are a lot of idiots that hunt during firearms season. You know the guys that buy a gun the night before and don't sight it in, the guys with bandoliers of shotgun shells across their chests(seen this first hand), the guys that walked up on my cousin gutting his deer at Huntington Res. and said "I think that's the same kind we took a shot at", you guys know the people I'm talking about, the kind that would love to take a 500yd shot across a field just because their 30-06 can shoot that far, regardless what is beyond their intended target. I would LOVE to hunt with my '06! Maybe if we had to take some kind of special class to hunt with an HPR I'd feel better, because a lot of these slob "hunters" would be too lazy to take it.
|
|
|
Post by mrfixit on Feb 1, 2009 14:36:49 GMT -5
The kinda people you are speaking of are just as dangerous with 12 gauge firing modern slugs as they would be with a center fire rifle. They don't magically become safer hunters because they are armed with a shotgun.
If taking a class was placed out there as a compromise option I wouldn't object. It seems a little review wouldn't hurt anything and chances are everyone would take something of value away from a beginner/refresher course.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Feb 1, 2009 15:08:18 GMT -5
The kinda people you are speaking of are just as dangerous with 12 gauge firing modern slugs as they would be with a center fire rifle. They don't magically become safer hunters because they are armed with a shotgun. I don't remember saying anything about shooting slugs making anyone safer? It's just that because some people know their rifle is accurate out to 300-400 yards, they think they are entitled, no, OBLIGATED, to take those ultra long shots they wouldn't probably attempt with a shotgun.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Feb 1, 2009 17:25:19 GMT -5
My only fear, and I know it's not right to think like this, is that there are a lot of idiots that hunt during firearms season. You know the guys that buy a gun the night before and don't sight it in, the guys with bandoliers of shotgun shells across their chests(seen this first hand), the guys that walked up on my cousin gutting his deer at Huntington Res. and said "I think that's the same kind we took a shot at", you guys know the people I'm talking about, the kind that would love to take a 500yd shot across a field just because their 30-06 can shoot that far, regardless what is beyond their intended target. I would LOVE to hunt with my '06! Maybe if we had to take some kind of special class to hunt with an HPR I'd feel better, because a lot of these slob "hunters" would be too lazy to take it. Yep. That and there are way too many ways for all of that to be extended to Rapid Fire/box fed. Yes, I know it's not a problem for varminting/depredation. Different type of Hunter. Slobs will be slobs... there are ways to make slobs more dangerous though. PCRs at least keep to ballistic equivelency so that a slob with a $1500 PC-AR is not really any more dangerous over range than an idiot with a semi-auto benelli. But give an Urban Commando an FN, M-14 or even a Garand... I hate the very thought of "restrictions" for that kind reasoning, but it's true - and everyone knows it.
|
|
|
Post by mrfixit on Feb 1, 2009 18:27:57 GMT -5
One could always forbid any diameter smaller than a .243/no semi-auto and take the Garands, FN's and M1's etc out of the picture. Or limit it to single shot, bolt action or lever action only. To limit rifles to pistol calibers while allowing centerfire pistols is rather asinine anyway you choose to slice it.
|
|
|
Post by mrfixit on Feb 1, 2009 18:32:29 GMT -5
I don't even know why we are discussing this, it doesn't stand a chance of ever becoming law. Heck, some people around here would like to limit hunting to using only a pocket knife with a total length not to exceed 5 inches.
It's like debating the existence of Bigfoot, everyone has an opinion and no one really knows who's right and who's wrong.
|
|
|
Post by hoosier on Feb 2, 2009 0:07:58 GMT -5
It seems we got a little off track with our discussion. Lets talk about BPCR's (Black Powder Cartridge Rifles) and Indiana deer hunting! I want it.
|
|
|
Post by mrfixit on Feb 2, 2009 6:16:24 GMT -5
Unfortunately due to the fears of others you will probably never get it. It's easier to limit access to hunting than to look around at other states that allow centerfire rifles and see the fear of AKs, Garands etc being used in the field hunting is really only an imaginative fear, nothing really based on facts.
|
|
|
Post by maddog on Feb 2, 2009 7:00:44 GMT -5
Yes, I would have really loved it 1 yr. ago. Because I own/handload for a Marlin Guide Gun. Having said that, I bought a Marlin 1894, .44 mag, and used it last year. Straight walled cartridges, like the .45-70, .444, and .450 would be ok in my book. I've used the .45-70, in Tenn., Texas, Idaho, and South Africa. I'd love to legally take a whitetail with it, here in Indiana.
Mad Dog
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Feb 2, 2009 10:04:47 GMT -5
One could always forbid any diameter smaller than a .243/no semi-auto and take the Garands, FN's and M1's etc out of the picture. Or limit it to single shot, bolt action or lever action only. To limit rifles to pistol calibers while allowing centerfire pistols is rather asinine anyway you choose to slice it. Yes, it is asinine, but it is based on a very real logistical problem. The way the regs are currently configured, nobody needs to have a list of "approved" cartridges or guns. Got a Tape Measure? That's all you need. However, by creating a class of firearms that is only distinguishable by firearm Type &/or Cartridge Headstamp you add layer upon layer of complexity to enforcing the reg... and if you don't, then it's no longer about BPCRs. Like I said - the problem is Logistical, not Ballistic - and was part of the "cost" of getting to use brush guns at all.
|
|
|
Post by hp on Feb 2, 2009 10:59:13 GMT -5
sure,why not
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Feb 2, 2009 11:27:47 GMT -5
I sent my comments to the DNR that they should allow all cartridges .35 or larger. I don't think there are any of those cartridges that are considered long range. This would make it much easier for everyone to stay legal and it would allow several great deer cartridges.
|
|
|
Post by mrfixit on Feb 2, 2009 15:39:13 GMT -5
Yes, it is asinine, but it is based on a very real logistical problem. The way the regs are currently configured, nobody needs to have a list of "approved" cartridges or guns. Got a Tape Measure? That's all you need. However, by creating a class of firearms that is only distinguishable by firearm Type &/or Cartridge Headstamp you add layer upon layer of complexity to enforcing the reg... and if you don't, then it's no longer about BPCRs. Like I said - the problem is Logistical, not Ballistic - and was part of the "cost" of getting to use brush guns at all. The way it is now you need more than a tape measure LOL. I have yet to see a common tape measure that measures thousandths. The diameter is fairly easy to surmise but case lengths get pretty confusing in a hurry. Seems the logistics would be easier if the only requirement was diameter and no semi auto. Like I stated earlier, we all have opinions and that's all it is, opinions. No one is either right or wrong on this issue and we won't have to worry with it anyway as it probably will never change.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Feb 2, 2009 15:45:26 GMT -5
Yes, it is asinine, but it is based on a very real logistical problem. The way the regs are currently configured, nobody needs to have a list of "approved" cartridges or guns. Got a Tape Measure? That's all you need. However, by creating a class of firearms that is only distinguishable by firearm Type &/or Cartridge Headstamp you add layer upon layer of complexity to enforcing the reg... and if you don't, then it's no longer about BPCRs. Like I said - the problem is Logistical, not Ballistic - and was part of the "cost" of getting to use brush guns at all. The way it is now you need more than a tape measure LOL. I have yet to see a common tape measure that measures thousandths. The diameter is fairly easy to surmise but case lengths get pretty confusing in a hurry. That's why I supplied the DNR with a CNC/Plasma Template for a Go/No-Go guage the size of a credit-card. Yah, but that would then disqualify a whole bunch of guns that are currently legal... including, technicaly, Shotguns. Yep.
|
|
|
Post by mrfixit on Feb 2, 2009 16:04:37 GMT -5
I need one of your go/no cards lol. There are currently regulations for shotguns as well as rifles so no technically the semi auto requirement wouldn't necessarily include semi auto shotguns.
|
|