32 replies [Last post]
CVC
CVC's picture
Offline
Grand Slam Challenge Winner!
Location: Kansas
Joined: 03/04/2006
Posts: 3586
Hunting Accident = Not How I would Classify It.

Andy, even though I disagree with you, my intent is not to "beat up" on you. I just don't see the need to ban rifles and fear that anytime someone, especially someone who is a hunter, pushes for any kind of gun ban, it further strengthens those that want to ban all guns and/or hunting.

People have differening opinions on how to hunt. Some believe only those that hunt with stick bows and homemade arrows are true hunters. The main thing is we are all hunters and division in our ranks weakens all of us.

I tend to leave my criticism to those activities that are illegal. If it is legal then each to their own even if it is not my idea of fun or sport.

redrider's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: NE Kansas
Joined: 03/20/2006
Posts: 2603
Hunting Accident = Not How I would Classify It.
aneria wrote:
I'm not anti hunting or anti guns.

How can you say this and want to ban hunting with rifles?
Careful what you wish for, your way of hunting could be the next ban the anti's will try to win!

redrider's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: NE Kansas
Joined: 03/20/2006
Posts: 2603
Hunting Accident = Not How I would Classify It.
aneria wrote:
The probability of a shotgun related accident is roughly 10 times greater.

If the risk is 10 times greater using a shotgun, why should the rifle be banned?

The main point is that as hunters we all need to support each others methods or we will all lose. You haven't convinced me that using a rifle is more dangerous than any other method used.

Offline
Location: NE Kansas
Joined: 11/14/2007
Posts: 16
Hunting Accident = Not How I would Classify It.

Red I'm not trying convince anyone of anything. I really don't care if people agree or disagree with me. I have my opinion. People have theirs. I have been called anti hunting, ignorant, anti guns all because I have an opinion that is different then someone. I haven't called anyone in particular anything. Let me tell you this. My brother and I were birdhunting a couple weeks ago during rifle season. We ran across a game warden and he was writing some notes down about two dead bucks in the ditch. These were whole deer with only the antlers missing. I told him that I had seen better then half a dozen deer just like that. He looked right at me and said "probably rifle hunters just like these two." You guys are going to be your own demise. Instead of worrying about me try policing yourselves. You guys are bringing a ban on rifle hunting to the forefront because of your own actions. You guys are supporting rifle hunting which indirectly supports these kinds of acts. Who really has the problem here you or me.

Andy

redrider's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: NE Kansas
Joined: 03/20/2006
Posts: 2603
Hunting Accident = Not How I would Classify It.

How exactly would banning rifle hunting keep these guys from shooting deer and taking their racks? They are already illegally shooting the deer just like the guy above was illegally shooting at decoys. They were not hunting at all. You make it sound like all rifle hunters act in the same matter you are describing. It only takes a few to make everyone look bad. I still don't see how rifle hunting is more dangerous than any other form of hunting. Instead of banning rifle hunting maybe we should have stricter punishments for those who use them illegally
I primarily bow hunt and I strongly feel by banning rifle hunting it will eventually come around to being our turn trying to protect our rights to use the bow.

CVC
CVC's picture
Offline
Grand Slam Challenge Winner!
Location: Kansas
Joined: 03/04/2006
Posts: 3586
Hunting Accident = Not How I would Classify It.

dittos to what redrider said.

Andy, you may say you're not anti-hunting or anti-guns, but you sure sound like them. Criminals (and that is what those people are that shot those deer and left them are) will use a rifle to commit an illegal act even if rifle hunting was banned.

Offline
Location: Southeast Colorado
Joined: 01/07/2007
Posts: 93
Hunting Accident = Not How I would Classify It.

OK Andy, I have a suggestion for you. Instead of trying to change the world for everyone else, why not find a place where the hunting community already agrees with your point of view?

Move to New Jersey.

No rifles, no short grass, no problems.

You'll love it. It's filled to overflowing with pin-head ACLU types who want to oversee and endlessly regulate every aspect of your life to make the world "safer". I know, I have in-laws there.

Safe, safe, safe!

Offline
Location: Paso Robles
Joined: 10/01/2007
Posts: 44
Hunting Accident = Not How I would Classify It.

Or just quit hunting and go shoot targets if fun and sport is all a person is in it for. No man should kill a deer unless he plans on eating it. Punishment for wrong doings in MY OPINION is the only thing that should come from some idiot doing something stupid. Not punishing a whole state for one idiot. Just be carful how you raise your kids teach them good edicit (sp) And we wont have problems like this.

Quote:
The main difference is that you can survive being peppered by a shotgun at 60 yards.
Quote:

Not so much if its a slug or buck shot. You have no valid point. Sorry andy but give it up your screwing it up for the rest of us.

I consider myself a HUNTER if i take to the field with a bow a rifle a flint lock a knife a rock a sling. I dont consider someone a hunter who dosent consider other peoples hunting tactics as hunters. You arent on my level obiviously and im only 23

Offline
Joined: 11/23/2005
Posts: 11
Hunting Accident = Not How I would Classify It.
aneria wrote:
Red I'm not trying convince anyone of anything. I really don't care if people agree or disagree with me. I have my opinion. People have theirs. I have been called anti hunting, ignorant, anti guns all because I have an opinion that is different then someone. I haven't called anyone in particular anything. Let me tell you this. My brother and I were birdhunting a couple weeks ago during rifle season. We ran across a game warden and he was writing some notes down about two dead bucks in the ditch. These were whole deer with only the antlers missing. I told him that I had seen better then half a dozen deer just like that. He looked right at me and said "probably rifle hunters just like these two." You guys are going to be your own demise. Instead of worrying about me try policing yourselves. You guys are bringing a ban on rifle hunting to the forefront because of your own actions. You guys are supporting rifle hunting which indirectly supports these kinds of acts. Who really has the problem here you or me.

Andy

You!!!!!!!

The same arguement could be said about drunk driving.

You guys are supporting automobile driving which indirectly supports drunk driving.

Kevin

Offline
Joined: 03/02/2008
Posts: 4
Hunting Accident = Not How I would Classify It.

RE: The supposed safety od shotguns over rifles. Take a look at
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_11_53/ai_n20512665
The state of Penn. commissioned a study that concludes this is not always true.

A quote from the article:

"Ah, but the big surprise comes at 0-degrees of elevation which would be more or less a typical shot at a deer on level terrain. Here the rifle, shotgun and muzzleloader projectiles travel 1,408', 840', and 686' respectfully plus ricochet distances of 3,427', 4,365', and 3,812' respectfully. Now the total distances traveled by the projectiles are 4,835' for the rifle, 5,205' for the shotgun and 4,498' for the muzzleloader."

Related Forum Threads You Might Like