|
Post by jbwhttail on Oct 5, 2005 19:45:36 GMT -5
Dang!!!!
All these great conservationists and hunters................ All the BS about "armcair biologists" and yet not ONE WORD about the "cowboy" guns being legislated and not being introduced by administrative rule as they should.
I'm against it for that very reason!!!
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Oct 6, 2005 6:24:56 GMT -5
While that makes a lot of sense it would also be nearly impossible for COs to enforce in the field. Since the number of legal cartridges would be pretty small, simply specifying them would probably be the way to go. I think the load choice should be left up to the individual hunter. Almost any commonly available .41 mag, .44 mag, or .454 Casull load should get the job done but it would be a little trickier with the .357 mag and .45 Colt.
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Oct 6, 2005 6:41:59 GMT -5
Dang!!!! All these great conservationists and hunters................ All the BS about "armcair biologists" and yet not ONE WORD about the "cowboy" guns being legislated and not being introduced by administrative rule as they should. I'm against it for that very reason!!! WOW! Just a month or so ago you applauded the legislative intervention on a game management decision that was made through administrative channels. I guess it just depends on the issue at hand....lol
|
|
|
Post by drs on Oct 6, 2005 6:52:45 GMT -5
I'm against it. I've been shot at with slugs by deer hunters before (while goose hunting). How far will a pistol caliber rifle bullet travel compared to a slug? If you are out hunting during Deer "Gun" season you should wear Hunter Orange jacket. Just makes prudent sense. A pistol bullet ie: from a .44 Magnum is no more or less powerful then a sabot load shotgun shell. For example a 12 gauge Winchester Supreme Gold sabot @ $12 per five shoots a bullet weighing 385 grains with a muzzle velocity of 1,900 FPS. A .44 Magnum shell with a bulet weight of 240 grains @ $30 per 50 shells has a muzzle velocity of 1,750 FPS from a 20" rifle barrel. You do the Math.
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Oct 6, 2005 8:08:20 GMT -5
Joe - this rule was introduced by a legislator not by the DNR.
Jack
|
|
|
Post by bowpro1 on Oct 6, 2005 9:03:58 GMT -5
The distance in the 2 are about the same.
|
|
|
Post by jbwhttail on Oct 6, 2005 16:31:21 GMT -5
Exactly my point Jack. Not one negative comment about legislative intervention.
|
|
|
Post by snakeeye on Oct 6, 2005 17:09:19 GMT -5
I've had a powerful handgun bullet whiz over my head when I was returning to my truck that was parked in the driveway of a farm where I deer hunt at, pretty scary experience, especially since they were unloading on a running doe in an open flat cut cornfield and probably at least 300 yards away from me, not sure this is a good idea in the flat areas of Indiana.
|
|
|
Post by duff on Oct 6, 2005 19:21:09 GMT -5
DRS, get a life. A goose hunter should wear hunter orange while goose hunting??? It wasn't like he was hiding in a ditch, but laying in a cornfield legally hunting geese where you do not need hunter orange. So it is his fault that someone shot AT him and his decoy spread. I don't think hunter orange would have changed one thing!!!
|
|
|
Post by tgrindlay on Oct 6, 2005 21:09:43 GMT -5
I'd be more inclined to vote "yes" if all firearms were plugged for 3 loads for deer.
In my case, that would have been 2 less slugs fired thru my dekes.
|
|
|
Post by drs on Oct 7, 2005 7:00:11 GMT -5
DRS, get a life. A goose hunter should wear hunter orange while goose hunting??? It wasn't like he was hiding in a ditch, but laying in a cornfield legally hunting geese where you do not need hunter orange. So it is his fault that someone shot AT him and his decoy spread. I don't think hunter orange would have changed one thing!!! First, I don't hunt Ducks, or Geese. If a Hunter is hunting Duck or Geese and it happens to be Deer (Gun) season, or Rabbit/Quail Season, then they should wear something to aleart their presents to other Hunters.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Oct 7, 2005 7:11:37 GMT -5
Goose hunting is somewhat similar to turkey hunting in that wearing orange would be a detriment to attracting the birds. I'm sure that goose hunters have managed to rain steel shot on or near deer hunters who were wearing hunter orange before. Hunter orange is not really the problem, the problem is that some people do not pay attention to what might be behind their target. This is just as true when deer hunting with shotguns and muzzleloaders as it is when using rifles or when hunting geese as it is when hunting deer. Safety lies between the ears not between the hands.
Drs, would you mind posting the letter you sent to DNR regarding the use of pistol caliber handguns? I will post mine as soon as I finish it so that anyone interested in this change can show their support.
|
|
|
Post by drs on Oct 7, 2005 8:06:03 GMT -5
I'll certainly look for it. I placed it on a couple of Hunting/shooting forums and I'll check there to see if the letter, I wrote, is still listed. When I find it I'll post it here on this thread.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Oct 7, 2005 8:16:00 GMT -5
Thanks drs! The following is the message I will be sending to the DNR in support of this proposal. Anyone who is interested is welcome to copy and send.
I was unable to attend the Natural Resources Study Committee meeting on Oct. 4th but I would like to offer my opinion on the issue of handgun caliber rifles. I think this is a great idea and long overdue. These carbines suffer the same range and performance limitations as shotguns and muzzle-loaders but offer hunters a third option if they do not like the recoil of a shotgun or the mess of muzzle-loaders.
Considering the recent efforts to recruit and retain more young hunters, the idea of legalizing pistol caliber carbines is even more appealing and adds greatly to that effort. Currently children and women of small stature have to choose from using an ineffective .410 or suffering the recoil of a 20 gauge. A carbine offers less recoil than a .410 but is even more effective than a 20 gauge for humanely killing deer.
Handgun hunters have successfully proven the effectiveness of these cartridges time and time again. Considering the importance of starting children at an earlier age with an effective but lightly recoiling weapon and also the side benefit of providing older hunters additional options while maintaining the safety of the current options, I think it would be a mistake not to allow pistol caliber carbines.
|
|
|
Post by drs on Oct 7, 2005 9:22:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Oct 7, 2005 11:51:03 GMT -5
Thanks drs! The following is the message I will be sending to the DNR in support of this proposal. Anyone who is interested is welcome to copy and send. I was unable to attend the Natural Resources Study Committee meeting on Oct. 4th but I would like to offer my opinion on the issue of handgun caliber rifles. I think this is a great idea and long overdue. These carbines suffer the same range and performance limitations as shotguns and muzzle-loaders but offer hunters a third option if they do not like the recoil of a shotgun or the mess of muzzle-loaders. Considering the recent efforts to recruit and retain more young hunters, the idea of legalizing pistol caliber carbines is even more appealing and adds greatly to that effort. Currently children and women of small stature have to choose from using an ineffective .410 or suffering the recoil of a 20 gauge. A carbine offers less recoil than a .410 but is even more effective than a 20 gauge for humanely killing deer. Handgun hunters have successfully proven the effectiveness of these cartridges time and time again. Considering the importance of starting children at an earlier age with an effective but lightly recoiling weapon and also the side benefit of providing older hunters additional options while maintaining the safety of the current options, I think it would be a mistake not to allow pistol caliber carbines. I agree, but from what I have gathered from some pros is that the .38 special and the .357 are too lightweight for hutning. Even in a rifle...
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Oct 7, 2005 11:58:32 GMT -5
Woody, imo, the .38 special should not even be considered but it is no worse than the .410. The .357 should have plenty of power to kill a deer if the correct load is chosen. It has accounted for many deer from handguns. I didn't want to cloud the issue with my letter but someone else may want to bring it up if they send a letter.
|
|
|
Post by varmint101 on Oct 8, 2005 10:18:49 GMT -5
I'm for it. I don't see pistol calibers going much farther than a slug or being more dangerous than a slug.
I know at walmart I can buy 50 240gr 44 mag soft points for $20.16. You just aren't going to beat that compared to slug ammo even with the cheap Sluggers. I would also assume since 454 and 480 are revolver cartridges that they would be added to the list.
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Oct 8, 2005 22:46:08 GMT -5
Matt - don't make any assumptions. These Hoosier legislators aren't exactly the sharpest people I know.
Jack
|
|
|
Post by drs on Oct 10, 2005 7:03:15 GMT -5
Matt - don't make any assumptions. These Hoosier legislators aren't exactly the sharpest people I know. Jack Also, I doubt if ANY of them actually go hunting. You're right inthat "They aren't the brightest "Stars" in the sky!"
|
|