|
Post by drs on May 12, 2015 3:37:30 GMT -5
Only in Indiana. Back to what I have said before. I will continue to put a rifle cartridge in a handgun and a pistol cartridge in a rifle. That makes a lot of sense. Well really I will put a shortened 444 in a rifle. Only because it isn't a "high power rifle cartridge". Indiana's DNR says NO on allowing H.P. Rifles, while in the State of Ohio they can now use a .45-70 or other "straight-walled" cartridge for Deer Hunting.
|
|
|
Post by drs on May 12, 2015 3:49:04 GMT -5
I thought this was a done deal. So convinced of being approved that I bought a Savage model 10 in 308 on sale at Wal-Mart. Well, unless someone invites me to go hunting out of state, that Savage stays NIB. First, Gov. Pence caved in to the Gay Mafia on the Religious Freedom bill and now it looks like his NRC is caving in to the Luddites on the rifle rule change. He sure isn't the Governor I thought he would be. Go ahead and shoot your Savage .308 at a target range and use light-weight bullets for hunting groundhogs, coyotes. Nothing on the books that prohibits this use for a High-Powered Rifle. A Savage rifle from Walmart will not gain value anyway.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on May 12, 2015 7:19:31 GMT -5
I know, I read a lot of the negative comments and that's what most were. Nothing but fear. Some of it coming from the our own fellow hunters. Not at all...I've long been an advocate of limiting rounds on deer hunters just as we do with waterfowl. I will admit though, that stupid will be stupid no matter what is in their hands, HOWEVER there has never been a valid and true argument presented to me that would justify or warrant the need to have over 3 rounds or 5 or whatever. Myself I'm amazed this didn't pass...despite my personal opposition to it I never really seeked my voice to be heard because I truly did feel the majority desired it and it would happen. The only concern I ever voiced to the state was the ignoring of round limitation or long gun style (bolt/single shot vs an armalite style gun with a 30 round mag). To me that is an oversight which shows the state's ignorance. Personally speaking, I feel semi-autos have no place in the deer woods...the only time one would need one is running shots, which I personally will never be convinced is an ethical or proper shot choice by anyone no matter if they've been hunting for 1 year or 50 years. Bolts/levers/pumps/single shots. I truly feel you would get this thing passed with just that being changed, and to be honest at least to me personally it makes a whole heck a lot of common sense to do so. In the end though I could care less what happens...I'll continue to carry my bow from opening weekend, during gun, and till the last day as that's the type of hunter I am (rarely picking up a gun)...however there are hunting brethren of mine that desire to use their .257 or 30-06 and are capable and safe hunters...who don't desire to launch bullets across an open field...they simply want the option and I have zero justification for denying their use of rifle rounds....I just have a caveat of common sense on not including semi-autos.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 12, 2015 7:24:32 GMT -5
I knew I hated my 1187 for a reason .... here I thought it was because it was finicky about which shells it would cycle but it turns out I must hate it because the only reason a semi-auto is needed is to take running shots which are obviously never an ethical choice.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on May 12, 2015 7:32:02 GMT -5
I knew I hated my 1187 for a reason .... here I thought it was because it was finicky about which shells it would cycle but it turns out I must hate it because the only reason a semi-auto is needed is to take running shots which are obviously never an ethical choice. Swilk I own semi's I hunt with semi's (squirrel, yotes and such) do not twist the words I used to assume I'm saying they are only designed for that. My point was I was only stating they absolutely are not a must or even a need when it comes to deer hunting. Honestly, if they even would just put a capacity limit on deer hunters I'd be fine if someone wanted to walk out with a freaking AK47...in my opinion it limits the stupid. I'd say 80-95% of the guys on this forum I wouldn't hesitate to let shoot a deer standing beside me 5 feet either side...however that is here, this forum. Our hunting brothers and sisters is a very broad group...and trust me working at a gun range part time has even shown me more and more just what kind of hunters we are sharing the woods/fields with and honestly limiting how fast these yahoos can shoot another round is a good thing. Besides I bet a guy like yourself or I could pump a shotgun, work a bolt or rack a lever and be ready for an ACCURATE SECOND SHOT before these yahoos have even hit paper with 5 (that paper could be a deer).
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on May 12, 2015 7:32:27 GMT -5
(deleted)
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 12, 2015 7:44:08 GMT -5
All I was saying is that semi-autos are already legal for use .... some guys I wouldnt trust with a BB-gun and some guys I have no problem if they want to use an M60. That wont change no matter which weapons are legal ....
As for the running shot thing ... the buck I killed this past year was shot on a half run. From a treestand. With a bolt gun. Twice. My buddy texted me wanting to know who was shooting so close to use .... when I told him it was me he didnt believe me because the shots were too close together.
Both hits. Both through the upper shoulder.
I was, and am, against the legalization of rifles for the same reason I am against most other changes ... because I just dont like change. I guess my reasoning isnt any better than me trying to push my ethics off on others ..... or to tell other men what is and what is not safe for them to use .... but it at least feels a little better.
|
|
|
Post by throbak on May 12, 2015 7:48:05 GMT -5
They made a decision just like they ere supposed to it was not a vote on comments and we dont want her in SE Indiana just the weekenders we have the best chance for a problem Most deer killed most hunters per acre right choice IMO
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on May 12, 2015 7:49:30 GMT -5
I can respect that. The running shots though we'll never see eye to eye and I'm fine with that I will state a touch of that probably does come from being primarily a bow hunter myself.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 12, 2015 7:57:46 GMT -5
The deer was 20 yards away .... a shot I knew, with very little doubt, I could make time and time again. 50 yards away I dont take the shot .... 20 yards was a no brainer for me. There are guys out there that could make the 50 yard shot time and time again. There are likely guys out there who can make that shot from 100 yards away time and time again.
And there are guys who cant hit a stationary deer, standing broadside, 5 out of 10 times from 50 yards. There is no proficiency test before going deer hunting. What I do myself, what I will teach my kids to do ... and what I expect out of others are different.
|
|
|
Post by drs on May 12, 2015 8:23:31 GMT -5
I knew I hated my 1187 for a reason .... here I thought it was because it was finicky about which shells it would cycle but it turns out I must hate it because the only reason a semi-auto is needed is to take running shots which are obviously never an ethical choice. I harvested my first Deer using a Remington Model 1100 12 gauge, back in 1977, using Foster type slugs.
|
|
|
Post by thecommissioner on May 12, 2015 9:07:33 GMT -5
"This one would have sailed through if we were only talking about bolt guns or limited magazine capacity to less than 10" Wow, Jim Zumbo is alive and well and right here in Indiana.
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on May 12, 2015 9:10:44 GMT -5
"This one would have sailed through if we were only talking about bolt guns or limited magazine capacity to less than 10" Wow, Jim Zumbo is alive and well and right here in Indiana. The problem is he may well be right.
|
|
|
Post by omegahunter on May 12, 2015 9:42:13 GMT -5
I thought this was a done deal. So convinced of being approved that I bought a Savage model 10 in 308 on sale at Wal-Mart. Well, unless someone invites me to go hunting out of state, that Savage stays NIB. First, Gov. Pence caved in to the Gay Mafia on the Religious Freedom bill and now it looks like his NRC is caving in to the Luddites on the rifle rule change. He sure isn't the Governor I thought he would be. Go ahead and shoot your Savage .308 at a target range and use light-weight bullets for hunting groundhogs, coyotes. Nothing on the books that prohibits this use for a High-Powered Rifle. A Savage rifle from Walmart will not gain value anyway. The way prices on EVERYTHING keep going up, it may not take long to see an appreciated value on that Savage.
|
|
|
Post by drs on May 12, 2015 10:14:51 GMT -5
Go ahead and shoot your Savage .308 at a target range and use light-weight bullets for hunting groundhogs, coyotes. Nothing on the books that prohibits this use for a High-Powered Rifle. A Savage rifle from Walmart will not gain value anyway. The way prices on EVERYTHING keep going up, it may not take long to see an appreciated value on that Savage. You have a point there, Jason. I never thought of that fact, concerning inflation.
|
|
|
Post by barton174 on May 12, 2015 13:41:17 GMT -5
I know, I read a lot of the negative comments and that's what most were. Nothing but fear. Some of it coming from the our own fellow hunters. Not at all...I've long been an advocate of limiting rounds on deer hunters just as we do with waterfowl. I will admit though, that stupid will be stupid no matter what is in their hands, HOWEVER there has never been a valid and true argument presented to me that would justify or warrant the need to have over 3 rounds or 5 or whatever. Myself I'm amazed this didn't pass...despite my personal opposition to it I never really seeked my voice to be heard because I truly did feel the majority desired it and it would happen. The only concern I ever voiced to the state was the ignoring of round limitation or long gun style (bolt/single shot vs an armalite style gun with a 30 round mag). To me that is an oversight which shows the state's ignorance. Personally speaking, I feel semi-autos have no place in the deer woods...the only time one would need one is running shots, which I personally will never be convinced is an ethical or proper shot choice by anyone no matter if they've been hunting for 1 year or 50 years. Bolts/levers/pumps/single shots. I truly feel you would get this thing passed with just that being changed, and to be honest at least to me personally it makes a whole heck a lot of common sense to do so. In the end though I could care less what happens...I'll continue to carry my bow from opening weekend, during gun, and till the last day as that's the type of hunter I am (rarely picking up a gun)...however there are hunting brethren of mine that desire to use their .257 or 30-06 and are capable and safe hunters...who don't desire to launch bullets across an open field...they simply want the option and I have zero justification for denying their use of rifle rounds....I just have a caveat of common sense on not including semi-autos. My current deer rifle is a .458 SOCOM AR-15. I've been shooting competitively since I was 13 (21 years ago), and am an NRA Master class Hi-Power shooter. I've never taken a running shot at a deer. Only once (the day before I bought a range-finder) have I taken more than one shot at a single deer. I used to only deer hunt with my ML or 870, until the second time that I shot a deer 80 yards away through the woods, and it dropped, but it's friend didn't run away. It just stood there and looked around and listened. It heard/saw me putting the next round in, and took off. Once with my ML, and once with the 870. I said screw it and went semi-auto. I went with the AR platform because I only hunt weekends, rain or shine, and got tired of caring whether my weapon got wet or how quickly it dried out. Part of the reason I would like HP rifles is because I do want to be able to shoot across the field (private, family land) and have enough energy and accuracy at 300-350yrds to humanely kill a deer. I'm an engineer, so ballistics math isn't above my head. The other reason I would like to be able to use HP rifles is to have easy access to rounds that are both powerful and low-recoiling that a 9-10 year old nephew (and in a few years, daughter) can practice with their hunting weapon without developing a flinch. The 6.8 SPCII AR is perfect for this. Now, having said that, I don't have a problem with a 5-rd mag limit on a deer gun. I just think (as opposed to "feel") that the type of weapon that people should be allowed to use should be because of its characteristics, and not whether it's "icky" or "scary" or not. Mike
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on May 12, 2015 15:31:44 GMT -5
Mike just for the record I never have fought this passing I merely shared my thoughts when the proper time came and they were receiving emails/notes. (you didn't come at me like I did, just in case you thought I did)
As for the distance of desiring a 300-350 yards...while I don't see the desire to doing that, I have numerous friends that do that with their inline muzzleloaders already. But I get some people don't desire the 1 shot and done style of ML...each their own I guess.
I love introducing deer hunters desiring to use a firearm with 20 gauges or MLs. Both can shoot light, especially ML at first.
I 100% agree with you, the whole "scary" thing is a moot point when it comes to what is legal or illegal for hunting purposes, or at least should be in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 19, 2015 14:38:14 GMT -5
(From another site) The NRC meeting went pretty much as expected. The 2 items of concern for me were agenda item#9 (Forestry fees) and agenda item #10 (HPR's). Item #9 www.in.gov/nrc/files/item_9_nrc_may_2015.pdf Very interesting discussion on fee increases for Parks and Forestry. It seems that there was a $4,800,000 deficit last year in these divisions. Also it was revealed that 70% of funding for these divisions comes from user fees. The last fee increase in this area was in 2006. The attached fees increases would make up that shortfall. Hunters and fishermen need to be aware that a license fee increase is in the works for us as well. Item #10 www.in.gov/nrc/files/item_10_report.pdf The proposed rule allowing HPR's was withdrawn. DNR views it as a social issue and sees no reason to oppose such a rule but the public is split on allowing a new weapon category. I would expect the rule proposal to resurface someday with some restrictions on it (mag capacity, overall bullet size, geographical considerations, etc). Also withdrawn was the coyote rule allowing verbal rather than written permission to take coyotes. Seems that the statue requires written permission and would have to be changed by the legislature. The rule limiting the bag on bluegill was also withdrawn. Fiscal issues that had not been considered by the agency were revealed in the public comment and persuaded DNR to withdraw this request. One correction was made to the walleye issue. Now it will be a size limit of 16" on all walleye taken north of S.R. 26 in Indiana.
|
|