|
Post by drs on Mar 18, 2014 9:37:23 GMT -5
Give me a name ... I would like to contact them to see if they agree with the opinion they do not understand ballistics. That, my friend, you'll have to find someone up there, on your own, in Indianapolis; to whom you can discuss the issue of Ballistics or whatever you have on your mind with the topic on hand. I currently don't know anyone up there in the IDNR, but my Grandfather knew a former director, several years ago. My Father had one of the IDNR employee's wife as a patient once. That too was several years ago, before his death.
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Mar 18, 2014 9:39:46 GMT -5
Keep things the way they are, with the way urban sprawl is taking up hunting ground I feel that long range guns do not have a place in my part of the state. I also feel that the allowed guns should have sufficient knock down power to clean kill an animal, that being said I feel air rifles have no place in wild free roaming big game hunting. What difference does it make how a projectile is propelled to a velocity capable of delivering a kill? Somehow I just don't see the thrill of shooting a game animal at great distances,I love it when that animal is up close so close you can smell it. Although I no longer archery hunt I loved archery hunting for that very reason. I personally have never shot at or killed a deer beyond 40-50 yards. With our ever increasing population and urban sprawl we need to develop guns that can safely allow the use of them with the ability to take down a large animals without that long down range travel. Not everyone live in urban areas or even areas that are developing. It wouldn't be that difficult to divide the states into zones and set restrictions for each zone. I remember some years back when i lived in Buffalo, the zones we hunted were shotgun only, but if you went east into the Adirondak regions you were allowed to use rifles. I could see a situation similar to that working well in the state. I have posted about the PA study until I am blue in the face & it never seems to get anywhere so I am not going to bother providing links anymore. What it comes down to is unless you fire the high power rifle at an elevated angle it really won't make much difference if you have a modern inline muzzleloader, a sabot slug or a rifle from a safety standpoint. We can use them for varmints an other such things and somehow we haven't had to set up MASH units for all the causalities. These are the same kind of concerns the liberals bring up when opposing handgun carry licenses - there will be blood in the streets and all that. There are plenty of states that allow them and regardless of the percentage of rural vs more populated areas they still do have those more populated areas and somehow they mange to not kill each other - the safety argument is spurious - you will never get me to buy in to it; although it is so ingrained I have no doubt it will be impossible to dissuade some. As I understand it the thinking behind the shotgun only regulations when they were adopted was to limit the range so as to limit the harvest numbers; I can understand that. If you are going to allow rounds like the 358 Hoosier then it is silly to not allow them all in. I've said it before and I'll say it again: delete IN's hunting reg's, cut and paste the KY reg's in their place and press on.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Mar 18, 2014 9:42:44 GMT -5
Give me a name ... I would like to contact them to see if they agree with the opinion they do not understand ballistics. That, my friend, you'll have to find someone up there, on your own, in Indianapolis; to whom you can discuss the issue of Ballistics or whatever you have on your mind with the topic on hand. I currently don't know anyone up there in the IDNR, but my Grandfather knew a former director, several years ago. My Father had one of the IDNR employee's wife as a patient once. That too was several years ago, before his death. Thank you for proving my point ....
|
|
|
Post by drs on Mar 18, 2014 9:44:37 GMT -5
Drs, I disagree. While not everyone who works at the DNR knows as much about firearms as the average member here there are enough there that know what is what. I also believe that the hiarchy is smart enough to include those individuals in meetings when rifles are discussed. My belief is that the DNR is taking incremental steps towards full inclusion of all deer capable firearms. They feel they need to do that as the anti-propaganda in "high powered rifles" can be considerable. Heck, look at some of the anti talk we had with simple PCRs. Even among sportmen- they called us John Wayne wannabes that would spray the woods with rapid fire. I even saw some of that in the latest input. Some said "Ok, but no 'assault weapons' ". I guess they don't realize that some of the PCR caliber a now can be fired from an AR platform Most of the employees working for the IDNR are appointed by the Governor or another Bigshot politician. Other than State Biologists, none or very few have the proper education to conduct their job. Otherwise we would have no need for a thread on what cartridge is legal or ones that aren't.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Mar 18, 2014 9:47:21 GMT -5
You do not know a single person who works there but you know that most of them have no knowledge of ballistics and that most were appointed by the Gov or similar bigshot politician?
Just stop. Please?
|
|
|
Post by chriskline on Mar 18, 2014 9:48:50 GMT -5
Completely agree. Was just suggesting that the "zone idea" might be a valid compromise.
|
|
|
Post by featherduster on Mar 18, 2014 10:04:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by chriskline on Mar 18, 2014 10:07:56 GMT -5
I thought i saw it move.... better beat it some more
|
|
|
Post by drs on Mar 18, 2014 10:17:50 GMT -5
You do not know a single person who works there but you know that most of them have no knowledge of ballistics and that most were appointed by the Gov or similar bigshot politician? Just stop. Please? Just common knowledge........END-OF-MESSAGE........
|
|
|
Post by featherduster on Mar 18, 2014 10:26:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Mar 18, 2014 10:42:52 GMT -5
Really want to discuss common knowledge?
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 18, 2014 11:02:26 GMT -5
I dare say that I know more people at the DNR than 99 percent of the folks on here - that 1percent on here are actual DNR employees.
They are no where near as ignorant as some people try to make them out to be.
Again IMHO the DNR wants all center fires legal and are taking baby steps to get there.
|
|
|
Post by parson on Mar 18, 2014 12:02:51 GMT -5
Hey, I'm having flashbacks (maybe because of being a teen through the 60s) of sitting in some of the hearings on PCRs. One of the talking points seemed to be about them thar 30 round "clips" that were sure to result in wholesale slaughter of humans and wildlife alike.
Well, it didn't happen!
I'm gonna take a break and look for flight 370.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 18, 2014 13:16:24 GMT -5
Hey, I'm having flashbacks (maybe because of being a teen through the 60s) of sitting in some of the hearings on PCRs. One of the talking points seemed to be about them thar 30 round "clips" that were sure to result in wholesale slaughter of humans and wildlife alike. Well, it didn't happen! I'm gonna take a break and look for flight 370. Yep.. I remember it well. "John Wayne wannabes" they called us.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Mar 18, 2014 13:32:35 GMT -5
off plane would not be comparing apples to apples, sorry. We will agree to disagree my friend. If speaking in terms of off plane, these statistics can give anyone interested a little food for thought comparing how far rounds CAN go, even though none of us are shooting at flying whitetail, it lays a little ground work considering abilities of a few rounds. Depends on where you look I suppose but the distance I found on the "maximum distance a 12 gauge slug CAN travel" it was 800 yards. I will agree before hand it depends much on the slug/round chosen. We all know the "lowly" 22 lr will go further....comparing RANGE alone, not damage at that range. www.tpwd.state.tx.us/learning/hunter_education/homestudy/firearms/bullets.phtmlGod Bless Yes. The wind and gravity have no idea what is flying through the air ... all they know is velocity, mass and drag.
|
|
|
Post by bonecollector23 on Oct 31, 2014 10:13:49 GMT -5
I can't see why the use of cartridges like: .35 Rem., .30-30, 7.62 X 39 m/m, 7 X 57 m/m, .45-70 Springfield, shouldn't be allowed. After all one can use ANY caliber for hunting Coyotes, Groundhogs, and even Squirrels; so why not Deer. Sabot shogun loads & M/Ls currently have more "rifle like" ballistics similar to centerfire rifle calibers, than the old smoothbore foster slug firing shotguns. I understand that you can use all calibers for hunting coyotes, but the number of hunters and the location are limited for coyotes. There are 100x more deer hunters than coyote hunters in the local area. By allowing these extra calibers, all I think we are opening the door for way more accidents and property damage. I think we will also be wounding more deer due to poor marksmanship from 90% of the indiana hunters. I think we would be making a huge mistake by allowing this proposal to pass.
|
|
|
Post by esshup on Oct 31, 2014 11:14:01 GMT -5
I think it would be just the opposite in regarding to marksmanship. Cheaper ammo *should* mean that they go and practice more. Like I said earlier, Wi. opened up rifle hunting in the southern part of the state with no more accidents than when it was shotgun only. Marksmanship case in point. (as in you can'r fix stupid) Neighbors son. In his 30's, maybe early 40's. EVERY year goes out bowhunting and wounds, not recovering, at LEAST one deer. Last weekend, shot a doe "double lunged her" and she went over 1/2 mile, crossing a 2 lane highway, onto property that he didn't have permission to go onto. Really? A double lung shot and it went over 1/2 mile??? Talked to his dad, who's property he was hunting on, and he said that his son never picked up the bow once since last year. "The sights never changed, so why should it shoot any different?"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2014 11:23:02 GMT -5
The science says HPRs are no more dangerous than shotgun slugs. Data from other states confirms the science. Yet, here we sit debating whether Indiana will somehow be different. I'm not sure why things would be different here than anywhere else???
|
|
|
Post by squirrelhunter on Oct 31, 2014 13:06:49 GMT -5
I just can't believe they listed the .223,the diameter is under .243.
|
|
|
Post by bonecollector23 on Oct 31, 2014 13:22:00 GMT -5
I think it would be just the opposite in regarding to marksmanship. Cheaper ammo *should* mean that they go and practice more. Like I said earlier, Wi. opened up rifle hunting in the southern part of the state with no more accidents than when it was shotgun only. Marksmanship case in point. (as in you can'r fix stupid) Neighbors son. In his 30's, maybe early 40's. EVERY year goes out bowhunting and wounds, not recovering, at LEAST one deer. Last weekend, shot a doe "double lunged her" and she went over 1/2 mile, crossing a 2 lane highway, onto property that he didn't have permission to go onto. Really? A double lung shot and it went over 1/2 mile??? Talked to his dad, who's property he was hunting on, and he said that his son never picked up the bow once since last year. "The sights never changed, so why should it shoot any different?" Bows can not shoot but a fifth of the distance of a rifle. Where I live in Indiana it is pretty rural but I can still see roads and houses everywhere I hunt. As for shotguns, they shoot in a rainbow pattern with a much heavier shot and slower velocity. When everyone goes out and buys a 30-30 or etc. and we have bullets bouncing off of frozen ground and traveling through houses, cars, or past your buddy on the other side of the property, we will find out how good of an idea it is to adopt this proposal. There goes any type of trophy hunting. What states do you consider as comparable that has adopted these cartridges?
|
|