|
Post by greghopper on May 19, 2015 13:01:21 GMT -5
Yep..... Not just a "social" issue......SAFETY concerns!!!
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on May 19, 2015 13:03:30 GMT -5
So did it pass? I can not find where it did or did not. The DNR withdrew the proposal . It will be back in a different form..
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 19, 2015 13:08:11 GMT -5
Yep..... Not just a "social" issue......SAFETY concerns!!! Already existing "safety" concerns. Nothing new .... Some people are afraid of the boogeyman and some arent .... nothing new. If there is no real data that says HPR's are any more or less dangerous in the hands of competent men and women then whatever fear folks may have of them is not my concern and should not be the states either. I believe they have actually come out and said as much. But .... that still does not mean that when folks voice their opinion in a social issue it should be ignored. Even when that opinion is based on nothing more than fear of the boogeyman. When people tell me guns should be outlawed because they are "scary" I ignore them too .....
|
|
|
Post by woody1071 on May 19, 2015 13:13:13 GMT -5
The current regs as it concerns legal weapons is not grey at all ..... It might be a pain and a guy may not understand how one thing can be legal while something else similar is not legal but it isn't a grey area. The rule is simple. The rule is well articulated. There is only one area I see as possibly problematic and that is if a case is measured after being shot and it happens to grow a 1/1000 over legal length. I actually finish my cases at 1.797 just to give me some wiggle room. This wasn't entirely on purpose. It is where my trimmer ended up after my last adjustment that got it under 1.800 so I left it. I have no worries about it's legality before or after. BUT, the way I see it is that I carry more than one round. A CO, if so inclined, can measure my spent one and a live one and determine if he wants to write me a ticket.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 19, 2015 13:16:41 GMT -5
I still shoot a 1.62 wildcat so I have no worries at all .... I doubt if the issue would ever come up but I was just trying to pick apart the wording and that is all I could come up with and it aint much.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 19, 2015 13:19:59 GMT -5
Yep..... Not just a "social" issue......SAFETY concerns!!! Already existing "safety" concerns. Nothing new .... Some people are afraid of the boogeyman and some arent .... nothing new. If there is no real data that says HPR's are any more or less dangerous in the hands of competent men and women then whatever fear folks may have of them is not my concern and should not be the states either. I believe they have actually come out and said as much. But .... that still does not mean that when folks voice their opinion in a social issue it should be ignored. Even when that opinion is based on nothing more than fear of the boogeyman. When people tell me guns should be outlawed because they are "scary" I ignore them too ..... Yep.......and folks don't need to DIE to establish SAFETY!!!
|
|
|
Post by nfalls116 on May 19, 2015 13:24:54 GMT -5
We are allowed to shoot 22 rounds into the sky after coon and squirrell like its going out of style we are allowed to hunt AT NIGHT for coyote with any round we choose to throw down range almost any yayhoo can go down to the local gun shop drop some cash and go spray lead down range at subsonic rates but the deer hunters who are often time hunting from an elevated stand so most generally their back drop is inherently dirt can't shoot semi auto hprs. The logic isn't there for me to not pass them. I like to use bolt action or single shot guns because they generally make me a better shooter but that's my own personal style what everyone else wants to shoot should be up to them not you and not the government
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 19, 2015 13:25:10 GMT -5
Safety is established. People are what is not safe .... not the weapon. Or the car. Or the booze. Or the stairs. Or the greasy food. Or the hot coffee.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 19, 2015 13:29:05 GMT -5
Wonder why we have seat belts and safety harness ... Hmmm guess it's the people!!!!
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 19, 2015 13:31:10 GMT -5
Dont hurt yourself wondering too hard ....
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 19, 2015 13:33:15 GMT -5
It's just the "people"........ Lmao
|
|
|
Post by jjas on May 19, 2015 14:16:37 GMT -5
As has been stated by several others, I see this coming back in a year or so and the major change to the language will likely be of a geographic nature.
Northern part of the state....no hprs, Southern part of the state, hprs.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 19, 2015 14:34:29 GMT -5
As has been stated by several others, I see this coming back in a year or so and the major change to the language will likely be of a geographic nature. Northern part of the state....no hprs, Southern part of the state, hprs. If it's turns to geographic your see a flood of folks heading south to over run areas to hunt... SMH
|
|
|
Post by jjas on May 19, 2015 14:46:11 GMT -5
As has been stated by several others, I see this coming back in a year or so and the major change to the language will likely be of a geographic nature. Northern part of the state....no hprs, Southern part of the state, hprs. If it's turns to geographic your see a flood of folks heading south to over run areas to hunt... SMH I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see that happen......
|
|
|
Post by jimstc on May 19, 2015 14:50:19 GMT -5
As has been stated by several others, I see this coming back in a year or so and the major change to the language will likely be of a geographic nature. Northern part of the state....no hprs, Southern part of the state, hprs. I sincerely hope you are right by saying that the proposal will be considered again. Unfortunately, the same safety/social concerns will still exist, albeit uninformed and based on emotions and myths. Whether northern or southern Indiana based. The 12 gauge sabot slug leaving my barrel at 1900 fps and maintaining kinetic energy of over 1700 at 100 yards is a much greater "safety" issue than any HPR but the opponents do not have the ballistic knowledge to grasp that fact. The ricochet risk is exponentially greater than a hollow point HPR bullet. So, I really struggle with the "safety" concerns. Why don't we just hunt with spears?? I also find it interesting to observe the pro vs anti arguments. The pros are based on reason and data. The antis are based on emotion. Then again that is my opinion as opposed to a statement of fact. Opinions are based on a belief. My beliefs are based on my perception of reality. Statements of fact are based on experience and empirical data. Real big difference between opinions and facts. I'll be the first to admit that......
|
|
|
Post by jjas on May 19, 2015 14:55:37 GMT -5
As has been stated by several others, I see this coming back in a year or so and the major change to the language will likely be of a geographic nature. Northern part of the state....no hprs, Southern part of the state, hprs. I sincerely hope you are right by saying that the proposal will be considered again. Unfortunately, the same safety/social concerns will still exist, albeit uninformed and based on emotions and myths. Whether northern or southern Indiana based. The 12 gauge sabot slug leaving my barrel at 1900 fps and maintaining kinetic energy of over 1700 at 100 yards is a much greater "safety" issue than any HPR but the opponents do not have the ballistic knowledge to grasp that fact. The ricochet risk is exponentially greater than a hollow point HPR bullet. So, I really struggle with the "safety" concerns. Why don't we just hunt with spears?? I also find it interesting to observe the pro vs anti arguments. The pros are based on reason and data. The antis are based on emotion. Then again that is my opinion as opposed to a statement of fact. Opinions are based on a belief. My beliefs are based on my perception of reality. Statements of fact are based on experience and empirical data. Real big difference between opinions and facts. I'll be the first to admit that...... In the end, while I do think it will come back in the form I (and others) have outlined, does that mean I think it will pass in that form? I have no idea. I thought it would pass this time......
|
|
|
Post by lawrencecountyhunter on May 19, 2015 15:15:34 GMT -5
I'd rather it not pass if they bring it back with geographic restrictions. From my point of view, it just makes the regulations even more complicated than they are now.
I hunt in several states for several critters, and Indiana's deer rules are the most nuanced I've ever had to interpret.
|
|
|
Post by jimstc on May 19, 2015 15:40:16 GMT -5
I'd rather it not pass if they bring it back with geographic restrictions. From my point of view, it just makes the regulations even more complicated than they are now. I hunt in several states for several critters, and Indiana's deer rules are the most nuanced I've ever had to interpret. I agree. Sorta all or none way of thinking. Personally, I don't need HPRs to hunt. Nor do the vast majority of the posts on this forum. Got plenty of effective options. Make it statewide or leave it as is.
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on May 19, 2015 17:26:14 GMT -5
Why must you have a suppressor...did you explain this elsewhere? I have a suppressor for every firearm I own with the exception of my muzzleloader (I don't currently have any shotguns). I don't want to wear any hearing protection while hunting. I did try a Walker's Game Ear once, but the sounds of me brushing up against my own clothing, trees, etc. was unbearable. LOL! It's bad enough that I've lost a lot of high-frequency hearing, so I always wear earplugs or use a suppressor when shooting -- except hunting. Now that we can finally hunt with suppressors, that problem should be solved, but it isn't, due to the fact that none of my suppressors are capable of firing a .358" HPR round.
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on May 19, 2015 17:31:30 GMT -5
As has been stated by several others, I see this coming back in a year or so and the major change to the language will likely be of a geographic nature. Northern part of the state....no hprs, Southern part of the state, hprs. If it's turns to geographic your see a flood of folks heading south to over run areas to hunt... SMH If everyone is so opposed to HPR's, there shouldn't be anyone eager to head south to hunt with them. Maybe those in the south who are terrified of them will head north to hunt. Seriously though. It would be rather easy to legalize HPR's then restrict certain areas for safety reasons. Obviously there are archery-only areas now, and places like Crane don't allow anything but shotguns and muzzeloaders now. Simply restrict HPR's where there are issues and allow everyone else to use them.
|
|