|
Post by lawrencecountyhunter on May 19, 2015 8:56:14 GMT -5
Not all. Legalizing them will in fact increase the availability of arms to hunters. Other than that there isnt much difference ballistically or otherwise from what we currently have. I, as Ive said numerous times, was not for them being legalized ..... but there really isnt any reason to not legalize them other than I dont like change. Similarly, there really is no reason to legalize them .... it all comes down to want. Yup.. and I respect anybody's right to argue for or against them. The "need" argument just boils my blood is all.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 19, 2015 9:05:20 GMT -5
No sense in letting it get to you that bad ....
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on May 19, 2015 9:15:46 GMT -5
Kinda like how you can shoot rifle rounds out of a pistol now but not a long gun? I personally am for not allowing semi's at all...too many fellas don't re-capture sight picture, check target and beyond target before checking off the second shot...or third...or 4th.....or 5th. Just me though, and I agree it would cause issues...so maybe the best and cleanest way to handle it all is to just make all rifle rounds illegal (pistols included) to avoid any confusion. haha. I'm just kidding, but I do feel they need to do one or the other...this middle gray crap is just stupid. I can work my 870 just about as fast as another hunter can trigger a semi.. So what is next? No pump guns? Not at all Woody, I in part was just jesting. You prove my point and like I've said a well practice hunter will work a pump/lever or bolt like butter and the "need" of a semi is a moot point to most of us...semi's however allow someone not proficient or well practiced to be more careless. Perhaps it is the safe gun nut in me coming out from working at an indoor range coming out of me but I just don't see the need for them. Want, I grant that and acknowledge that as real.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on May 19, 2015 9:17:57 GMT -5
Why must you have a suppressor...did you explain this elsewhere? Why do you "need" to hunt with a compound bow? It's not about need, it's about choice. I don't really care if HPRs are allowed or not, but all the reasons listed in this thread is a combination of opinion, misinformation/inexperience, and BS. Hence why I responded the way I did the first time...took speculation out and inserted IMO if appropriate. (I did goof on the accuracy thing though and take that). As for the "need" thing I wasn't attack m4 or even trying to make a point, I was and still am just genuinely interested in the reason for desiring to suppress his hunting guns that is all.
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on May 19, 2015 9:53:07 GMT -5
I can work my 870 just about as fast as another hunter can trigger a semi.. So what is next? No pump guns? Not at all Woody, I in part was just jesting. You prove my point and like I've said a well practice hunter will work a pump/lever or bolt like butter and the "need" of a semi is a moot point to most of us...semi's however allow someone not proficient or well practiced to be more careless. Perhaps it is the safe gun nut in me coming out from working at an indoor range coming out of me but I just don't see the need for them. Want, I grant that and acknowledge that as real. In essence your argument is no different than what anti gunners use. That is bad things will happen if people are allowed to have guns. In your case it is hunters have semiautos. In the end it is the same thing. Somehow other States allow HPRs and semiautos and the blood hasn't run. You argument simply doesn't hold true. As for all this being opinion educate yourself on firearm wounding mechanics. There are doctors who have studied the subject and know far more than you and me. Where I have seen fear blind emotion and unfounded opinion is from those who are opposed
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on May 19, 2015 11:25:33 GMT -5
You failed to see it isn't an argument it is a personal opinion...one from the very start I stated doesn't course through my veins hot enough to fight the passing of HPRs. When asked I express my concerns but honestly I'm shocked it didn't pass....to get rid of the gray area (rifle rounds out of pistols) bull it should have passed.
Also back off just a hint...I've defended on here, on other forums and to the face of the anti HPRs being allowed when they state the "safety" thing. Ballistically high powered center fired rounds suffer for next to no chance of ricochets that hold the potential for serious or fatal harm...shotguns slugs and even .44 mag rounds (currently legal) can retain up to 80% of their form after first impact and deflecting and hold the potential to serious or fatally wound someone. The only time, and I mean the only time HPR rifles would hold potentially a higher risk of injury would be judging them off of shear distance alone.
Where I was coming from with the use of "safe gun nut" in describing myself was the fact I don't see in a hunting environment the need for a semi-auto in that it takes more time than that to re-acquire our sight picture, put sights on target BUT NOT before knowing our target again and what is beyond it. No human being can do that in the amount of time it takes a semi-auto to reload a round (eye blink fast)...yes I may be drawing it to the extreme but that is proper gun safety at it's finest....it isn't a self defense situation (even then if possible we have to think of surroundings and what is beyond our target IF possible) it is an animal we are attempting to harvest, our lives are not in danger we should take the proper technique before squeezing the trigger each time.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on May 19, 2015 11:28:51 GMT -5
I personally wanted it to pass so I could just stop hearing the moaning and groaning about them not being allowed. It truly would effect very little in the ability to harvest animals for nearly all the hunters in Indiana. If you are proficient enough with what is available already...you won't be magically with a new one. Education on safety and proper gun safety is the only sure fire way to ensure safety while firearm hunting...in a perfect world only experience, well practiced and proficient people would hit the deer woods with more than a single shot (others should just watch bahaha )...but ain't the world we live in sadly and never will be.
|
|
|
Post by jimstc on May 19, 2015 11:31:15 GMT -5
I can work my 870 just about as fast as another hunter can trigger a semi.. So what is next? No pump guns? Not at all Woody, I in part was just jesting. You prove my point and like I've said a well practice hunter will work a pump/lever or bolt like butter and the "need" of a semi is a moot point to most of us...semi's however allow someone not proficient or well practiced to be more careless. Perhaps it is the safe gun nut in me coming out from working at an indoor range coming out of me but I just don't see the need for them. Want, I grant that and acknowledge that as real. To paraphrase you from a different thread. I pray this is your attempt at a joke, albeit a poor one. Your comments that indicate that certain people need to be protected from themselves is poorly conceived and a slippery slope at best. Your comments sound like something from Brady or Bloomberg whereby they opine that they know best what is best for us regular folk when it comes to gun ownership. Elitism as its worst....... You know what I need vs what I want? Don't think so, Ty.
|
|
|
Post by woody1071 on May 19, 2015 11:40:12 GMT -5
For the last 2 years I have been trimming .358 Win cases down to the 1.80 length. I take around 1/4" off of the case length. I use the EXACT same powder charge as a factory .358 Win load. When the round is assembled with a projectile the overall length is actually slightly longer than the factory round that I have.
The only steps that I really have to do differently than hand-loading a factory length round is using a little 2" chop saw to take off most of the length then using a case trimmer to get it exact.
I'm ok with doing this. It's different, it's fun, it's an excuse to shoot more. But the fact that one load is legal and the other is not is crazy. I was looking forward to not needing to trim cases is all....
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on May 19, 2015 11:58:35 GMT -5
For the last 2 years I have been trimming .358 Win cases down to the 1.80 length. I take around 1/4" off of the case length. I use the EXACT same powder charge as a factory .358 Win load. When the round is assembled with a projectile the overall length is actually slightly longer than the factory round that I have. The only steps that I really have to do differently than hand-loading a factory length round is using a little 2" chop saw to take off most of the length then using a case trimmer to get it exact. I'm ok with doing this. It's different, it's fun, it's an excuse to shoot more. But the fact that one load is legal and the other is not is crazy. I was looking forward to not needing to trim cases is all.... And I completely agree, and was shocked it didn't pass for this type of example alone (despite not being a fan personally). To paraphrase you from a different thread. I pray this is your attempt at a joke, albeit a poor one. Your comments that indicate that certain people need to be protected from themselves is poorly conceived and a slippery slope at best. Your comments sound like something from Brady or Bloomberg whereby they opine that they know best what is best for us regular folk when it comes to gun ownership. Elitism as its worst....... You know what I need vs what I want? Don't think so, Ty. Nicely played with quoting me from another thread. I can appreciate that. Trust me I get it, and I respect ones desire to not be limited by the government on gun ownership (shoot I own 5 semi-autos myself...one is that scary black tactical kind haha)...but to me ownership and hunting are separate...yet I've acknowledged every step that I never fought the inclusion of the HPRs. I've shared concerns and even filled out a questionairre thingy made available by the state if I remember right.....I stated I would vote yes, but I had some concerns is all. I think we'd be better off passing it, avoids confusion...avoids people complaining....avoids excuses some hold as to why they can't harvest deer...(I'd venture to say none here on this forum though)... You state from a valid point of view I am showing elitism in that I don't feel we "need" it therefore that fits everyone.....I just feel that could be said of both sides. Some feel they "need" HPR includes so everyone does, no. It is all a bunch of opinions is all...not one right fit for all. But I do believe a level headed individual sees the need for cohesive regs, and IN needed to pass the HPRs to step that direction more.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 19, 2015 12:03:34 GMT -5
The current regs as it concerns legal weapons is not grey at all ..... It might be a pain and a guy may not understand how one thing can be legal while something else similar is not legal but it isn't a grey area.
The rule is simple. The rule is well articulated. There is only one area I see as possibly problematic and that is if a case is measured after being shot and it happens to grow a 1/1000 over legal length.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on May 19, 2015 12:05:36 GMT -5
The current regs as it concerns legal weapons is not grey at all ..... It might be a pain and a guy may not understand how one thing can be legal while something else similar is not legal but it isn't a grey area. The rule is simple. The rule is well articulated. There is only one area I see as possibly problematic and that is if a case is measured after being shot and it happens to grow a 1/1000 over legal length. I concede swilk is right...there is no gray area. In my opinion though it is stupid to allow out of "x" but not "y" would be the better way to describe it.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 19, 2015 12:09:52 GMT -5
Wasn't necessarily in response to what you posted....was just saying.
|
|
|
Post by joekelly on May 19, 2015 12:15:30 GMT -5
So did it pass? I can not find where it did or did not.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 19, 2015 12:16:45 GMT -5
Think the final vote is today but all indications are it will not.
|
|
|
Post by joekelly on May 19, 2015 12:19:14 GMT -5
The suspense is killing me. It's ashame the dnr backed out citing it's a social issue.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on May 19, 2015 12:20:58 GMT -5
The suspense is killing me. It's ashame the dnr backed out citing it's a social issue. If they saw as much division on the topic as they claim, I don't see them being able to back it. I am guessing we see it back again....and while I know guys will hate to see it, but with some revisions I bet it passes...then after a few years is revised (cough: loosened up more). Who knows though we will see.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 19, 2015 12:22:09 GMT -5
It is a social issue. Some want it. Some don't.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 19, 2015 12:54:58 GMT -5
It is a social issue. Some want it. Some don't. That's true to a degree ...... There gonna be some places and property that's not gonna allow therm for safety concerns !!!! It happens now at state parks with PCR's...
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 19, 2015 12:58:53 GMT -5
Always been those sort of cases to a degree .... some go as far as archery only.
|
|