|
|
Post by jkd on Jan 4, 2006 14:59:25 GMT -5
As of 1/4/06 listing of bills before the legislature, there appears to be NO bills pertaining to canned deer hunting or captive cervids...  There does appear to be a bill authorizing lifetime hunting/fishing/trapping licenses (HB 1039), and one relating to spotlighting (HB 1066), which seem to be the only bills that might be germane to canned hunting, and thus would be eligible for amendment later on... If there is indeed no legislation introduced during the short session, this would mean Kyle's ban would go into effect at the end of the session without further action by the legislature. At that point, only court challenges, e.g. Rodney, would be an issue. Will keep watching the bill list! Interesting... www.in.gov/apps/lsa/session/billwatch/billinfo?year=2006&session=1&request=all |
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 4, 2006 15:15:25 GMT -5
Interesting..
Thanks for posting that.
Of course the canned hunt proponents can do the stealth approach and tack it onto a germane bill..
keep an eye out..guys..
|
|
|
|
Post by jkd on Jan 4, 2006 15:36:37 GMT -5
Their deadline for filing house bills is 1/10/06... after that, it would take an amendment to an existing bill or a rules suspension... Current deadlines for legislative action in 2006 session is at: www.in.gov/legislative/pdf/2006_SESSION_SHT.PDF |
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Jan 5, 2006 6:22:01 GMT -5
I'm no lawyer , but HB1039 seems to be reinstating the lifetime license that was so recently discontinued . Am I seeing things ?
|
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Jan 5, 2006 6:37:43 GMT -5
They just won't quit with that stupid spotlighting law. The proposed improvement of the handgun permit renewal process sounds good though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 5, 2006 9:14:23 GMT -5
I'm no lawyer , but HB1039 seems to be reinstating the lifetime license that was so recently discontinued . Am I seeing things ? Nope... It is there.. Since it was voted away last year I doubt it will come back. Maybe a compromise of a yearly "Sportsman's License"? mbogo, The true believers never quit trying.. |
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jan 5, 2006 9:53:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by jkd on Jan 5, 2006 11:28:52 GMT -5
There are a couple of senate bills that we need to watch too... one on shooting ranges near state wildlife areas/preserves that could be amended...
Not germane to hunting, but there is a self-defense bill listed that would among other things, amend one's self-defense rights in that it would eliminate the "duty to retreat" from the current statute, which is interesting...
I'll try to get a summary and more complete listing of both senate and house bills that are natural resource related on here by the weekend.
KD
|
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on Jan 6, 2006 0:46:50 GMT -5
I wonder if it would take a bill to change the regulation against bowhunting while in possession of a sidearm? That always seemed to me to be a really ridiculous regulation. A guy gets a carry permit to have some protection with him when it might be needed, then can't take it with him because someone's afraid he'll plug a deer and stick an arrow in the hole?
Come on! In the first place, any handgun capable of taking deer is going to be LOUD! Kind of hard to not notice the difference in sound. Also, you wouldn't have to have a degree in forensics to see the difference between a wound channel from a .357 and one from a broadhead. And finally, there wouldn't be any particular advantage to trying to cheat and beat the system in that manner, since you could just buy a compound and release and get the same accuracy with the same amount of practice, and have a more potent killing machine that was perfectly legal.
So for what good reason are we denying bowhunters their second amendment right to personal protection, in this day of increased crime in the woods? I haven't run across a meth lab yet, but did run into a couple of recently-harvested pot fields some years ago. Could have been an ugly confrontation, and as much as I like my compound, I'd rather have the Ruger for that situation! Then there are the dogs, such as the pack that kept a friend treed for a couple hours once. When he told me about it, on a later hunt, he was packing a concealed .38. Said he'd shoot next time and worry about the legalities afterwards. My son and I had a treestand stolen while we were out for a bite of lunch, and I'm pretty sure the guys who stole it were the ones who were just leaving the adjacent parking spot when we came back from lunch. No, I wouldn't have pulled the piece to get the stand back, but if we'd come back a couple minutes earlier and found them loading my stand in their truck, there could have been another ugly confrontation. The Ruger could have prevented me from having to whip all four of those guys, which might have taken most of our remaining daylight (they looked kind of tough). Point is, I've had potential need for the weapon more times in the woods than in town, and there's very little danger of collateral damage to innocent bystanders there, and much less chance that Officer Friendly will be around to help. That all makes it seem to me that our right to carry should trump the unfounded fear that we'd turn into poachers if we only had the weapon handy.
Could that change be made by simple regulation change by the department, or is a change in actual law required?
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 6, 2006 9:25:01 GMT -5
I agree Russ..
We have way too many rules, laws and regulations against what we MIGHT do.
This one is a prime example.
Back last year the IDNR wanted to do away with the Urban Deer Zone buck. Why? Because some people might take advantage of it and kill a buck in another county and register it as an UDZ buck.
Forget that 99% of the other hunters that hunt there would be affected.
With a little prodding that got left alone.
This new bill on spotlighting is another example. Just because some people will use a light to poach they want to penalize everyone else.
It is not just the government either. P & Y has a "no lighted sight pin rule". Why? Because someone MIGHT hunt too late. Forget that it could help a legal hunter aim better in a low light condition.
I consider this type of thinking right along iwth the gun banner's thinking - If we get rid of guns there won't be any crime. Yeah, right..
|
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jan 6, 2006 9:40:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 6, 2006 10:27:34 GMT -5
They caught a lot of a flack on that one from a LOT of people.. My bowhunting club sent them a petition with a couple hundred signatures on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkd on Jan 6, 2006 11:22:31 GMT -5
Russ,
I too have experienced the dog pack visit during late bow season, and I was on the ground at the time... three dogs with my back to a large tree, luckily with some brush around me... they decided that I was no fun after I put a broadhead into the shepard mix that was the leader... it's amazing how quickly you can nock a second arrow when the adrenaline is going...
I've always felt the if someone had a valid CCP, got written up and took this one to court, it would be thrown out. My feeling is one's right to self-defense trumps the need to enforce a questionable game law every time...
Great minds think alike... Ruger P95 DC 9MM for c.c., GP100 .357 mag for occasional deer hunting and varmint problems...
|
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on Jan 6, 2006 22:06:02 GMT -5
jkd, You're probably right. Not sure I've got the nerve to be the test case on purpose, though. I'll probably keep mine out of sight unless really necessary. SP101 for c.c., not into handgun hunting...yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on Jan 6, 2006 22:19:52 GMT -5
Woody, yeah the lighted pin thing gets me too. IN is ok on that, but ND says "no battery-powered lights". I bought a Trophy Ridge to get around that goofy requirement. It takes the little light sticks that work by some kind of luminescence magic, but no electricity. I still don't need additional light when hunting unless I'm in the blind, then it gets pretty darn dim. I do need additonal lighting when target shooting indoors on the targets with white centers. I can see the pin just fine until it gets into the white, then it disappears.
|
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Jan 25, 2006 13:14:18 GMT -5
I still say the politicians have way too much free time on their hands & way too much money in their pockets "at our expense" to come up with the stupid crap they do.
|
|
