The DNR withdrew the rifle proposal. It is officially dead.
it will be back in a different form in the next year or two.
The DNR withdrew the rifle proposal. It is officially dead.
it will be back in a different form in the next year or two.
Do you have a link?
I think what killed it was too many people thinking it was a shoe-in and not bothering to send comments in. I personally know a lot of people who were in favor of it, but never bothered to send in a comment. These people openly discussed their support, yet I never found their names when I searched the comment pdf. That's why we were outnumbered by the opposition. Hopefully this will be a valuable lesson learned and all will comment next time.
So how does that work with the Thompson Contenders? You can flip flop those back and forth all day?
I think what killed it was too many people thinking it was a shoe-in and not bothering to send comments in. I personally know a lot of people who were in favor of it, but never bothered to send in a comment. These people openly discussed their support, yet I never found their names when I searched the comment pdf. That's why we were outnumbered by the opposition. Hopefully this will be a valuable lesson learned and all will comment next time.
I would like to read what all the dnr said when it comes out. Pretty bummed.
A Large number of Comments were in opposition to the proposal for reasons that include:
· Public safety (particularly with the flat topography in the central and northern part of the state);
· Potential reduced hunter access with landowners or towns/cities further restricting the use of firearms because of increased concerns about safety;
· Amount of equipment that is already legal to use to take deer; and
· deer over-harvest.
Well, it looks as if DNR has provided the talking points to be refuted in the next go-around. If this is the best they can come up with, then it shouldn't be that difficult.
Yep.
· Public safety (particularly with the flat topography in the central and northern part of the state). This one can be beat by the simple fact that most hunters use treestands and aim at a downward angle. And if they are sitting on flat ground shooting out across a field, their barrel will probably be 30" off the ground when held horizontal. A .308 rifle on a 100-yard zero will put the bullet in the dirt at somewhere around 450 yards. There shouldn't be any steep upward angle shots on the flat topography that the detractors are citing in their excuse.
· Potential reduced hunter access with landowners or towns/cities further restricting the use of firearms because of increased concerns about safety; This one can be beat by simply hunting with whatever the landowner allows and continue hunting there. If a high-powered rifle is unsafe in the area of a city/town, then ALL firearms in that area are unsafe and should be prohibited.
· Amount of equipment that is already legal to use to take deer. Rifles are already legal for deer hunting, so adding more calibers doesn't change the amount of equipment.
· deer over-harvest. People are going to shoot the number of deer that they want and no more. The type of firearm has no bearing on the number killed. Even if it did allow more deer to be killed, the state can simply reduce the bag limit to control that.
First you have to convince them the earth isn't flat. No amount of facts will overcome some people's fears.I remember that telecheck in would lead to increase poaching.Yep.
· Public safety (particularly with the flat topography in the central and northern part of the state). This one can be beat by the simple fact that most hunters use treestands and aim at a downward angle. And if they are sitting on flat ground shooting out across a field, their barrel will probably be 30" off the ground when held horizontal. A .308 rifle on a 100-yard zero will put the bullet in the dirt at somewhere around 450 yards. There shouldn't be any steep upward angle shots on the flat topography that the detractors are citing in their excuse.
.
I think what killed it was too many people thinking it was a shoe-in and not bothering to send comments in. I personally know a lot of people who were in favor of it, but never bothered to send in a comment. These people openly discussed their support, yet I never found their names when I searched the comment pdf. That's why we were outnumbered by the opposition. Hopefully this will be a valuable lesson learned and all will comment next time.