|
Post by js2397 on Apr 12, 2007 8:20:25 GMT -5
I would never be against any kind of hunting unless it was unsafe or if it did too much damage to the deer herd.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Apr 12, 2007 8:21:32 GMT -5
So, Woody ..... do you have an opinion one way or the other on HPR's?
More opportunity ... think of all the women and children that would benefit from the light recoil, cheap amunition and accuracy of rounds like the .243 .... 25-06 ..... 6mm ....
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Apr 12, 2007 8:23:44 GMT -5
You are right, the only thing unsafe about hunting is the hunters.
There is no way around that ..... just like unsafe drivers, unsafe bikers, unsafe knife sharpeners for the napkin makers union ........
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Apr 12, 2007 8:23:50 GMT -5
swilk,
A couple years ago the DNR floated a proposal to eliminate the smokeless powder muzzleloaders. It met a lot of resistance and they backed off. Not sure they are ready to tackle that one again or not.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Apr 12, 2007 8:25:13 GMT -5
You couldnt blame them if they did ..... it IS outside of the spirit of the law.
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Apr 12, 2007 8:30:35 GMT -5
I think the true spirit of the law is to use a gun that loads from the muzzle.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Apr 12, 2007 8:32:05 GMT -5
So, Woody ..... do you have an opinion one way or the other on HPR's? I'm afraid I'll be a fence sitter on this one. I wouldn't fight for it, nor oppose it. I think that we already have that with the PCRs, IF they pass.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Apr 12, 2007 8:36:56 GMT -5
I think the true spirit of the law is to use a gun that loads from the muzzle. Im sure others would think differently. I work with a couple of brothers .... they are both traditional archers and MZ guys. Im talking cast their own slugs, real black powder, iron sights .... buckskin possibles bags .... the whole 9 yards. I bet if you asked them about what was intended when the law was introduced you might find their answer different from yours.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Apr 12, 2007 8:38:13 GMT -5
aahh, so there is a limit to the amount of "opportunity" a person should have?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2007 8:51:22 GMT -5
I guess I can edit out my (so far at least) from the previous post. The sole purpose of this thread was to see if people who so adamately support PCR's and crossbows would stay true with HPR's. So far, with a few exceptions, you guys are at least staying consistant. I'd expect that trend to stay consistant as long as the side against them can't produce any logical reason as to why not other than they just don't like them. If there's a reason why, post why....otherwise it purely a social issue.
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Apr 12, 2007 8:52:42 GMT -5
I think the true spirit of the law is to use a gun that loads from the muzzle. Im sure others would think differently. I work with a couple of brothers .... they are both traditional archers and MZ guys. Im talking cast their own slugs, real black powder, iron sights .... buckskin possibles bags .... the whole 9 yards. I bet if you asked them about what was intended when the law was introduced you might find their answer different from yours. If you look at the weapons that were available when each season was added and said the intent was only for those weapons we would have to ban too many things. There would be no pellets, no sabots in shotguns or muzzleloaders, no carbon arrows, and no compound bows. The intent was to allow seasons for different equipment that feel into the same category. Archery for archery equipment, firearms for all firearms, and muzzleloader for all muzzle loading equipment.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Apr 12, 2007 8:59:04 GMT -5
Like I said .... Im sure others would think differently.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2007 9:05:42 GMT -5
There for awhile the P & Y Club made a distinction on the let off of a compound bow, but no DNR that I know of went by the same ruling on what was and was not a archery tool.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Apr 12, 2007 9:11:00 GMT -5
I think the true spirit of the law is to use a gun that loads from the muzzle. Im sure others would think differently. I work with a couple of brothers .... they are both traditional archers and MZ guys. Im talking cast their own slugs, real black powder, iron sights .... buckskin possibles bags .... the whole 9 yards. I bet if you asked them about what was intended when the law was introduced you might find their answer different from yours. Undoubtedly this regulation to allow a muzzleloading season happened when we all used side hammers and black powder. In-lines were not commercially available at that time, even though in-line had been in existance for over 200 years If the true spirit of the law was for "primitive muzzleloaders" they should have stated it that way in the beginning or changed it when the in-line hit the scene. When each "new" hunting tool comes upon the scene I am quite sure that the DNR makes a decision on whether to include it or not in that particular season. Since they have not disallowed the in-line or the smokeless powder muzzleloaders then there is no violation of the "spirit of the law". .
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Apr 12, 2007 9:16:29 GMT -5
aahh, so there is a limit to the amount of "opportunity" a person should have? Not sure how you came to that conclusion from my statement answering your question on youth and women.. IF the PCR passes, that need for a cheaper, less recoil gun for the youth and women has been fulfilled. That puts me on the fence in the HPR debate.. If PCRs were not in the mix and it was a HPR or nothing then I would more than likely support HPR because of the lower recoil for youth and women (.243s) - IE - filling a need in order to get them involved.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Apr 12, 2007 9:22:51 GMT -5
IF the PCR does not pass that need has already been filled.
Most any MZ loaded with 50gr. of powder is low recoil, extremely cheap to shoot, accurate .... everything a PCR is.
Heck, a kid can go out and pick up a $79 MZ .... get some loose pyrodex powder and some cheap lead bullets/sabots and be off to the range shooting his light recoil, accurate and cheap to shoot gun for about 1/5 the cost of a PCR.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Apr 12, 2007 9:30:42 GMT -5
Most any MZ loaded with 50gr. of powder is low recoil, extremely cheap to shoot, accurate .... everything a PCR is. Uh, I don't think so. 50 grains of powder is the "35# bow" all over again.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Apr 12, 2007 9:33:36 GMT -5
I do.
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Apr 12, 2007 9:35:12 GMT -5
Heck, a kid can go out and pick up a $79 MZ .... get some loose pyrodex powder and some cheap lead bullets/sabots and be off to the range shooting his light recoil, accurate and cheap to shoot gun for about 1/5 the cost of a PCR. Actually handi rifles run 160 to 200 so maybe 1/2 the price.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Apr 12, 2007 9:39:40 GMT -5
50gr of powder is more than enough to create 5 or 600 lbs of muzzle energy.
You could easily make a light recoiling MZ mirror whatever PCR's ballistics you wanted.
Just like a PCR .... as bullet weight, velocity and energy increase so does recoil.
|
|