Stupid NRA at it again
Whitetail Deer
Yup I knew they would be trying this as soon as they got the straight walled cartridge passed.
If you want to hunt big bucks in iowa you better get here quick because your friendly NRA want to destroy the deer herd.
Best move the rifle hunt into the rut while you're at it....
I've never hunted in Iowa so maybe I'm missing something here. I thought the reason that Iowa's deer got so big was because they weren't hunted with rifles? So why would the state decide to allow the rifles? They no longer want Iowa's deer to grow up?
What does the NRA have to do with this? It looks like they are just reporting the passing of the bill.
elkstabber, I would say the reason our deer herd is so good is because Iowa doesn't have their gun season during peak rut like surrounding states and NR tags are limited.
What does this have to do with the NRA? Why are they stupid for reporting something on their website?
If this passes, I wonder how pissed off all those guys are going to be that just bought those Bushmasters, etc.
This would likely change the old Iowa deer drive tradition, too. I've seen it slowly changing over the years with range and accuracy improvements in shotguns and muzzleloaders. More and more shooting houses showing up, hunting from portable blinds, etc.
"deer herd is so good is because Iowa doesn't have their gun season during peak rut"... and the limited range of most shotguns, as it is a shotgun only. granted there are slug slingers that are quiet effective at 200 yards. alot of the shotgun hunts consist of deer drives and there not to selective at what pops out, during their short Dec. season. another factor Iowa is primarily private so doesn't matter when or what or how the season is if you don't have access, deer survive longer and grow bigger decorations.
Also, if you read the bill, this doesn't allow any bullet smaller than .350 to a max .500. It's not like we can start hunting with a .270, 7MM, .308, or 30-06 now.
Blame the NRA, seriously ?? I doubt that the NRA was lobbying for this, they reported the out come of some legislation. It’s about license money, call the Iowa DNR and you’ll find the culprit.
Midwest. That provision is only for pistols.
I agree, does Scrappy has an agenda against the NRA. (I am an avid archery hunter and I buy one gun landowner tag per year, which I have NOT filled in 7 years). What does the NRA have to do with this bill. It was the Iowa legislature that passed this bill NOT the NRA. Second where has Scrappy been when the Iowa DNR sold all those deer tags that last 10 years?? In many places the deer herd is adequate, however, in some places like mine (and the DNR agrees as I just attended a meeting) the herd has been way over harvested. As "Dale06" stated: $$$$ are in the DNR's eyes. Also check out "Midwest's" points which are on topic
my entire life most of va east of the blue ridge has been bow the month of Oct muzzleloader the 1st 2 weeks of nov & rifle 224 or larger till 1st sat in Jan &the deer heard has grown to almost overpopulated in Manny regions & all of the North & eastern counties are unlimited doe tags. I'm sorry to say but long range rifles will have a minimal impact. where I live the biggest hunt anymore is obtaining permission on good land & not which weapon you use if your lucky enough to get permission
"Midwest. That provision is only for pistols."
Same applies to rifles.
"A straight wall cartridge rifle that is allowed pursuant to this subsection shall be of the same caliber and use the same straight wall or other ammunition as is allowed for use in a pistol or revolver for hunting deer as provided in subsection 5 ."
I’d say Nick has got it right.
And the problem is what???? Any law in FAVOR of any expanded hunting opportunity or firearm freedom is a rare positive these days. Count your blessings its not a restriction, and just adapt, overcome, peresvere. Crikey, quit whining... Gun hunters are your friends believe it or not. shumer pelosi feinkinstein and bloomberg are not, and they just lost one.
I’m getting really tired of this “ all inclusive bullsh** “.
Is not even Iowa deer hunting sacred anymore!!?
Modern day muzzle loaders will shoot across any field I've ever seen in Iowa. Rolled up on a NR rifle hunter in Kansas in one day who actually had his portable bench and long range gun set up overlooking a large CRP field. He had about 600 yards below his location to watch over all day long from the comfort of his lawn chair.
Midwest. Your right. So what does this change? I can't think of a cartridge .35-.50 that doesn't have a straight wall except 35 Whelen
Number 1, 2, 6, and 11.
Let's try that .50 BMG and blow some deer up! Might work well for head shots! lol
Anyone that says the NRA isn't neck deep into this is being a little delusional. I'll make it simple, gun manufacturers give the NRA big money, the NRA makes sure the Republican legislatures toe the line or will be put on the list by the NRA.
The iowa deer herd is in pretty good shape so why does it need to be changed. Oh ya so the gun manufacturers can make more money so they can give more money to the NRA. Really just wish the NRA would stay out of the herd management and stick to real gun issues.
Yes the NRA doesnt give a rats ass about hunting except were they can milk some money off hunters.
:). I follow a "celebrity" Iowa hunter on Instagram that shot his late season buck this year with a muzzleloader at 300 yards. . . .
I believe Gunwerks makes a muzzleloader they advertise as being a 500 yard killer
My 15 year old T/C Encore .45 will shoot 200 yards easy with a $250 cheapie Leupold on it. I've never pushed it beyond that
Just wanted to stir the pot a little more. . . . . . :)
Nick, with that .50 BMG I could almost fill an Iowa deer tag from my front porch here in SD! Ha!
Wisconsin has had a rifle season for I don`t know how long....and the big argument here is the use of crossbows. Go figure.
The NRA probably spends more money and energy protecting the rights of ALL sportsman, not sure bashing them because we bowhunt is the thing we want to do.
I support the NRA and I don`t even own a gun.
The NRA promotes gun ownership and hunting. It's what they do! I don't have a problem with that. With all the habitat and private land in Iowa, I can't see where it will hurt bow hunting.
I am a lifetime NRA member... Having said that, I have twice written them e-mails telling them I do not like their political influence on two separate issues.
First, they push crossbows in the archery seasons. I think most of us agree that they should not be there.
Second, a few years ago they pushed the legislature here in Wyoming to allow hunters to carry guns during the archery season. Our local wardens did not like the idea so the Bowhunters of Wyoming tried to push for a compromise that said you could carry a handgun in Grizz occupied areas only. I received a postcard from the NRA stating the "a group of extremist bowhunters in your state is trying to deny your right to carry".
I know that many of you would be okay with the second, but I wasn't as the wardens already have enough problems with poaching in this state.....
I too with that they would stick strickly to protecting the second ammendment....
The NRA does more to preserve BOWhunting than many would give credit for...
Pistols go "boom" and leave a round hole with obvious tissue damage under the skin. There is no reason to disallow the carrying of pistols during archery season. The idea that it contributes to poaching in any significant way is hogwash.
If you are against carrying pistols during bow season you might as well have a Hillary bumper sticker on your Subaru
I Wyoming you can carry a rifle during the archery season, not just a handgun. Most of the game in this area is brought to the road in quarters, not whole so the chances of getting caught shooting it with a gun would be quite low...
I WAS an avid NRA supporter for years. They used to do good work for us. Now they've become a money hungry agency looking out only for themselves. I'm all for increased opportunities, but I'd like them to stick with gun rights, not hunting season change. They were a major part of crossbows getting pushed into WI and they are working hard to get rifles into states that currently don't allow hunting with them. There is plenty of work for the NRA to do regarding concealed carry, gun safety, education and the like. However, that doesn't generate revenue for them so they've focused on inclusion. Because of that I'm no longer a member.
Don't blame the NRA for you're own ignorance. This is on your game & fish department. Proud life member of the NRA.
Even if the NRA has pushed weapons into seasons or states that a person doesn't personally agree with or participate in, do remember it's another way to entrench hunting and recruit new/more hunters, which should make it harder for the many other groups out there who are trying to take those rights away. If that still isn't enough to support them, I hope organizations like SCI are getting your support. We need at least one or more loud and powerful voices on the national level as we are fighting an uphill battle nowadays.
I love bow hunting. I love that I have a group I give money too, that keeps my 2nd Amendment safe. For years I've heard how the NRA needs to get into hunting situations by the grass root groupies. Now, it appears it wads panty's when they do. Which is it boys?
Life member of NRA here, and I don't even hunt with firearms. Any position they've taken with regard to x-bow inclusion or deer cartridge expansion I will certainly disagree with, but will easily overlook, because they're the most effective advocacy org that has ever existed for protecting my/your freedoms. Without the NRA we'd probably have the same gun freedoms as Great Britain or Australia.
The idea that a poacher won’t poach because he can’t legally carry his rifle during the bow season is hog wash.
You seem to believe that the law Preventing the carry of said rifle will prevent poaching. So they’ll honor one law to avoid breaking another. Ok.
NRA isn't perfect but without them 2nd Amendment is gone by now...also
Sticksender, you are spot on.
Shotguns are guns too! Plenty of shotguns the NRA can support in Iowa without ruining the excellent deer hunting that rifles could threaten to destroy. There’s no need for rifles in Iowa.... there’s not a rifleman in the country that can’t handle a shotgun. Iowa’s deer season is not broken...... no need to fix it.
Iowa’s deer hunting is the best in the country. Shame on Fish and Game if they let anybody screw with. Plenty of bird and deer hunters using shotguns.
If the NRA is messing around and trying to get rifles introduced in shotgun season ...it’s no different than when they pushed crossbows into archery season.
and yes I know of a gunsmith in Richmond va that builds smokeless .45 cal muzzleloaders on rem 700 actions with trijicon scopes with ballistic coefficient matched turrets that are guaranteed to shoot 3" groups @ 500yds on a calm day & you want to bitch about pistol cartridges
Looks very similar to what IN did a few years ago. Maybe good for controlling the deer population, but not a step in the right direction if you are trying to grow bigger and older class structure of bucks.
Track the money back that it takes to lobby for things like this and it's usually the NRA that foots the bill. They did here in WI to get crossbows into archery season. I am very pro 2cnd, but very anti NRA.
I’m pro 2nd amendment.... I’m also a life member of the NRA. But , NRA isn’t going to be any stronger by messing with the Iowa deer season.
If this is play for more money .... whether it be Iowa DNR or NRA....... it’s just another sad example of this great country running out of ways to squeeze money out of us. Starts by wasting our tax money.... until they can’t tax us anymore.... then sell lottery tickets until they can’t squeeze another dime out of that idea..... then sell hunting licenses to every weapon available until there’s no weapon left to sell a license to. ...except maybe slingshots. What happens when they run out of money and the well runs dry??
When I read the title I was sure Scrappy was joking. I have been around long enough to hear a lot of game law changes that were going to ruin deer hunting forever. None of them did. Sometimes we have to admit that the changes will ruin OUR perception of deer hunting. I will tolerate a lot of methods that will get more people out there hunting. I am not a fan of inline muzzle loading rifles and shotguns that shoot accurately out to 150 yards but I don't have a quarrel with the guys who get proficient with them and scout well enough to take a deer. I believe the biggest danger we have is people who no longer see any value in hunting or the animals we hunt.
I’d assume this has a lot to do with what the public wants . You guys might think archery is king but it’s not . Your avg hunter much prefers guns over archery equipment. I’d say they are just giving the public what they want .
May have muzzleloaders like that but not everyone has the funds or is willing to pay what that takes to own one. My Ruger American Predator is cheap and with a decent scope can knock deer down out to 500 yards damn near out of the box. Why monkey with a state that is obviously doing something right? The cover in Iowa just isn’t there in a lot of places - add a 500 yard gun into the mix and watch the age structure go on a downhill slide. Voila - no longer the envy of many.
And no I don’t hate guns or even hunt Iowa but I do envy their management.
Lee
So let me get this straight.
The only effective gun rights lobby in the world shouldn't push to get as many hunters into the woods as possible?
It is not like hunter recruitment is at an all time high or anything. Could be leaning towards the opposite.
The old idea of 'leave it alone, do it like we always have' isn't helping hunter recruitment either.
How many kids never take up hunting (in a state that doesn't allow centerfire rifles) because they don't like the recoil from a shotgun? Or because they aren't into archery enough to practice like crazy to get good with a bow?
I wish the state that I live in (Illinois) would allow me to use centerfire cartridges that match the ballistics of the shotgun & muzzleloader I use now. The only reasons not to are fear & ignorance. Why should I have to pay $3 each for sabot slugs? My granddaughter is a little bity thing who may never get over 100 lbs. It sure would be nice to start her with a 44 magnum rifle. Should we really expect kids to handle recoil like adults who weigh twice as much?
Some of you all need to step back from (the perception) of 'what is best for me' and think of what is best for hunting & gun rights at a national level.
Is the NRA perfect? Of course not, it is run by humans. But what organization is better at a national level? I would really like to know.
All of you guys who get mad at the NRA & drop out - what better organization did you join? Tell me, I'll join too.
Yes, NRA life member.
In the first democratic presidential debate the candidates were asked "You've all made a few people upset over your political careers. Which enemy are you most proud of?"
Hillary Clintons' reply was "Well, in addition to the NRA, the health insurance companies, the drug companies, the Iranians. Probably the Republicans."
I'll stick with the NRA.
I did a little public land shed hunting in SE Iowa this weekend. All I found was 6 dead deer. More range with the rifles will just bring even more of the same :-(
Most don’t do as well at long range as they think they can...
Doc.... The next sentence after the sentence you quoted....
“If this is play for more money .... whether it be Iowa DNR or NRA”
I have no idea if there is evidence against NRA. Or if it is Iowa DNR. I was postulating.
A rifle recoils much less then a slug gun or a muzzleloader amped up with 150 grains of powder and a 285 grain bullet. They are more accurate, allow for quicker follow up shots, and are lighter. Yes they will shoot farther but, anybody suggesting it will lead to more wounded deer is speaking through the boner they got for their "bow" with cams, carbon limbs, string material that can be as strong as steel and stretches very little, their carbon arrows and, their $400 sight pins. If you can afford that, a $390 muzzleloader is pocket change.
Its not like the DNR is trying to put them in the bow season. They are trying to appease the public in IOWA. And, the NRA is showing its support for doing so. Until you big buck killers go back to stick bows, the hypocrisy spilling out of your mouth is pretty funny complaining about it too.
FWIW, I hunt with a compound too. So, I'm no elite snob. Just a guy pointing out the irony.
I was thinking along similar lines. How many opposed to firearm hunters being able to use a 30-06 (110 year old cartridge) don't see using the latest archery gear during bow season in the same light?
Another thing that many here are missing is that, in this case, they are talking .35 to .50 caliber. 50 BMG aside, most in those calibers are not used for longer ranges. Also, many of these are expensive and not super available. The bill also say cartridges to be the same as those used in handguns and 'straight wall or other ammunition' similar to what is used in the handguns. 50 BMG may not be all that similar to what is used in handguns.
The sky is falling! The sky is falling!
Can't really blame Scrappy. If you're an NRA basher, hard to pass up any opportunity even when unfounded.
Personally I support ANY hunter using ANY weapon. I see strength in numbers and the more the merrier.
The NRA is a "big picture" organization. They stopped trying to appease certain groups long ago, they leave that for other groups. Their mission is to get as many members and as much money they can, because in Washington where the bear shits in the buckwheat, money is power.
"Anyone that says the NRA isn't neck deep into this is being a little delusional." Yes, there is definitely a delusional person in the room, and it ain't the rest of us...
Personally I wish they'd allow straight wall pistol cartridge rifles here in southern MN. Which is a shotgun slug only zone. I hate slug guns! We can legally hunt deer with pistols,but not the same cartridge in a rifle. They say it's for safety sake in more populated areas. HA! It's all farm country. The only rifles me and my wife own are traditional flint or caplock muzzleloaders and old lever guns. I haven't gun hunted for decades,preferring my recurves,but those days are coming to an end.
This thread has just about the same merit as the witch hunt that recently concluded in Washington.
I hunt with trad bows compounds muzzleloader & rifle I will say that there's nothing more rewarding than killing deer with a trad bow however shooting from one end of a bean field to the other with my benchrest gun is quiet enjoyable as well.
I've never hunted in Iowa but allow me to pass on thoughts and observations about the NRA. The NRA is all about building the number of gun owners PERIOD.
In Virginia the NRA was a key player in us finally being allowed to hunt on Sundays. The NRA lobbied in favor of Sunday hunting, which finally got a lot of Republicans to support Sunday hunting. For years before the NRA got involved the Rs were undecided. They didn't know whether to support the churches or support hunters. So the Rs were conflicted. The Ds largely supported Sunday hunting because they had no reason not to. Then in 2014 the NRA supported Sunday hunting.
When the NRA takes a position on a topic that means that the lawmakers are being graded by the NRA for how each of them votes on that topic. In other words, every lawmaker has an NRA score which shows how much that lawmaker supports the NRA. Rs are proud of a high score, and sadly, some Ds are proud of a low score. This grading system has the benefit of holding lawmakers accountable for their votes but also has the drawback of removing any middle ground. The NRA pushes lawmakers (and the rest of us) out of the middle.
I don't know anything firsthand but from the fact that the NRA's ILA (Institute for Legislative Action) is reporting on the bill and asking for donations tells me that the NRA is backing and will be grading lawmakers on their votes. You can expect the Rs to support the bill and the Ds to oppose it.
This is the sponsor of the bill. He looks like he has the clout to push it through.
Shrewski, did you perform autopsies on those 6 deer? Find any evidence they were rifle kills? Maybe they were bow killed and lost. I for one personally know that I have lost more deer by bowhunting than by rifle hunting. And I find a lot of dead deer with obvious arrow wounds and arrows in them. Maybe they were winter kills. Are you speculating just to try to justify your position? "I am very pro 2cnd, but very anti NRA." Rutnstrut, where DOES your money go then? How DO you support the 2nd Amendment rights you so deserve?
A FWIW......when I hunted Iowa once on a guided hunt, I came across alot of dead bucks that died from wounds (ie...bad shots). I have pics of them somewhere. On the flip side....I never seen so many bucks running around as I did there.
True true, no autopsies. Just know and hate the gang hunting in the area that goes on during shotgun season. Got nothing against the NRA, life member here. And I am a NR that does not mind waiting 3-4 years for a tag as well. Iowa does many things right for quality deer hunting and this will be another “opportunity” that erodes it.
Tags are tags. People in Iowa deserve presidency over NR wishes. I understand everyone’s desire to go hunt huge bucks. What I can’t wrap my head around is how straight walked rifke cartridges are going to be the demise of deer hunting in Iowa. Makes no earthly sense to me. Same seasons dates. Same people hunting. Same everything. What in Pete’s sake is the problem?
A low NRA score helps candidates here in Colo-fornia.
Now that Dems have taken over everything they're about to ram through a law that can take your guns if a friend or family member gets mad at you, and you then have to somehow prove you aren't crazy, angry or dangerous to get them back. The sheriffs in the Republican part of the state (geographically) are saying they'll refuse to enforce it.
The NRA is helping lobby a little, but "standing up to the NRA" is a badge of honor. Might be more helpful if the NRA just stayed out of it.
It's been proven many times over in many states that adding weapons doesnt recruit new hunters. It simply shifts hunters numbers from one season to another. What it does for the NRA is get $ from the manufacture of said weapon into the NRAs pocket. Make no mistake the public isn't pushing for weapon inclusion, the manufacturers are. Average Joe hunter simply uses the most effective method hes allowed.
While I agree we need the NRA they've become a necessary evil in my eye instead of the symbol of pride they once were.
The NRA isn't the enemy of the Iowa deer hunter. Farm Bureau is.
SaltyB, same with inclusion of crossbows in archery season here in CO. There aren't a bunch of hunters clamoring for it. Only xbow manufacturers and the NRA.
I still don't get it. This only opens the door to straight wall cartridges, which most commonly would be 357 mag, 44 mag, 45-70, 444 Marlin. There can't be that many guys out there with those type of guns to get legislation passed.
Straight wall cartridges out of shoulder guns have been legal in Iowa since the 2017 season. This new law allows the use of necked down cartridges with bullet dia's the same as was allowed for the straight wall cartridges....from .350 to .500.
I agree Starfire, the hysteria here on this site is incredible...... I hunt Zone 10 when I get a chance, and I participated in a lot of gun drives in Tama County, and these guys that own the land, and let me hunt, when I get the tag, have a lot of fun on their hunts.
I remember when Wis went full rifle, my gosh all the writers and newspapers, talked about the "danger", the houses, and sheds and cars, and people that will get hit, in the more urban areas,,,,,, Never happened, hunting remains safe,,,,,,,
Regardless if I have my slug gun or 44 caliber Ruger, in Iowa, safety is in the hands of the person with the weapon.
Alot of fuss over nothing,,,,,,,,,,,,, Iowa has great hunting due to little predation, and setting seasons, with firearms at the right time, for the right length of time
If other states want great deer, they should follow suit.....
As for the NRA, I thank God we have that organization, because without it our gun rights and lots of hunting rights, would have been long gone......
^^^^^^^Boom^^^^^^. ground hunter said it better then anyone. Rational thought always portrays believable.
Hunters, one day, will only have themselves to thank for the loss of legal hunting rights...
Or the retention of those rights guaranteed by the Constitution - let's think positive! :) They are easier to retain than to lose and try to reclaim. We only have the NRA and a few others now like NAGR for one. Regardless of some of the side agendas, they are helping us win the war on our freedoms. I'll take that. The good outweighs the bad. Its fight, or die. Sometimes the fight can't help but get dirty right along with the opposition's dirty tactics. To the point about the reduction of quality in Iowa's deer herd, I do not believe this one proposal will have much negative impact on the overall situation. Just my opinion as a wildlife biol.
^^^Midwest X2—-Farm Bureau would like to completely eradicate them.
I think that the Roswell aliens supported it too! The people that passed this law were state and local relresentatives. Yes they take money from places like NRA but they get elected by locals. Make a big enough stink about it with them and they will do what you want. They mostly want to get re-elected so if 10,000 people call them against the law they won’t pass it. So don’t blame the NRA for your problem. Organize and talk to your representative. Don’t just complain here because in truth you can have way more impact than the NRA
Evidently I'm not the only iowa resident not happy with this bill.
Maybe calling the NRA stupid was to harsh, I just hate it when they stick their nose into conservation issues instead of sticking to 2A issues.
Yes the NRA has their nose in this or I wouldn't have gotten a call to action email.
If you read on the attached link you'll see why this bill is even being pushed. The guy that introduced it just so happens to have a dad that just so happens to own a gun shop.
Lots of good info on this over on iowa white tails website. I'm not very good at arguing on the internet. So everyone I pissed off on here with the thread tittle sorry.
Seem like every year someone is trying to take away what is great about Iowa's deer herd and it always seems the NRA is right in the middle of it.
Again sorry for pissing in everybody's cheerios.
That makes even less sense. It looks like foot in the door legislation regardless of who is behind it.
Wow, I am always amazed at the entitlement attitude of some bow hunters. Oh, gun hunters are going to ruin the deer herd, give me a break. God forbid if you don't kill a190 inch deer and you have to settle for a nice corn fed deer for the freezer. Not everyone can or wants to bowhunt, why shouldn't others have the right to shoot deer with a rifle. Think about it, a 45/70 has been legal and that will reach out a couple hundred yards, a modern day muzzle loader will do the same and yet the herd is fine. If you want want to secure yourself a trophy each year then do what lee and Tiffany do, buy land feed deer and hunt them When they grow big horns. The fact that a few more rifle calibers are added to the mix isn't going to ruin your hunt. Quit acting so friggin entitled, you don't own the deer. This horn porn is what's hurting hunting, and if making a few more calibers legal to increase hunters participation then I'm all for it. As far as the NRA! Give me a break, they are doing what they are suppose to, promoting firearm usage. I hope IL allows straight walled rifles, but I have no problem using a shotgun or handgun.
+3 for Midwest and T-roy, same thing here over the border from Iowa. The Farm Bureau and the Cattlemen's Association would love to see every deer eradicated yesterday if not sooner.
As far as rifle's for deer are concerned, centerfire rifles are legal here in SD, and right during the peak of the rut. We still have plenty of nice bucks running around. Manage the habitat and manage the opportunity and the deer will respond accordingly.
"As far as rifle's for deer are concerned, centerfire rifles are legal here in SD, and right during the peak of the rut. We still have plenty of nice bucks running around. "
Same for Wisconsin.
"As far as rifle's for deer are concerned, centerfire rifles are legal here in SD, and right during the peak of the rut. We still have plenty of nice bucks running around. "
We have the same here in ND. It has ruined our herd, so don't even bother applying for deer in ND! Nothing to see but fence posts and tumbleweeds. LOL!
Glad to see the NRA reporting on real issues.
Scrappy, you ruffled a lot of feathers, but I see your point and I think anyone who bowhunts Iowa, R or NR, would assume that changing the law from basically shotgun only to allowing rifles is a net negative for Iowa's deer herd, as we see it.
Still, as far as individual influences on the quality of the IA deer herd go, I'd guess that this is a very distant 3rd to especially 1) no guns in November and slightly less so, but still much more importantly than banning rifles, 2) no unlimited NR tags.
On another note and as to the subject of deer drives, a rifle does certainly increase the dangerousness aspect of the drive in certain situations and absolutely increases the effectiveness of a drive. You put a very accurate rifleman up on a high point at the end of a drive and the guys doing the driving carry shotguns "just in case" because the guy prone at the end of the line can fill everyone's tags. This has been done for decades where legal.
"Same for Wisconsin."
Yeah, not so much.
I really see this as the stepping stone effect to regular rifles in the gun seasons here. The change to straight wall cartridges was passed basically over nite without any resistance. The same thing is happening with this bill. The Iowa Bowhunter’s Association ruled undecided due to not wanting to waste political energy on it “bad sign”. What most people don’t understand is any change to more lenient seasons or weapons has a profound effect on public land or land open to random groups hunting it will have little effect on the deer neighborhoods . I really can’t believe anyone would waste the time to promote this, I can’t think of one caliber suitable for Iowa deer hunting over 35 caliber that isn’t already legal under the straight wall rule. Well if it passes I can hunt with my 375 H/H and will be set if any Cape buffalo or elephants stroll into the turnips.
Not if they keep the case length restriction which is currently 1.800".
Man, I got to do some huntin in SD while it's hot! Sounds like it is on par with Iowa.
"Same for Wisconsin." Yeah, not so much. Actually, yes.
this was taken 1992 that's my son he's 5 in that pic. that's one day deer doggin as we called it
this was taken 1992 that's my son he's 5 in that pic. that's one day deer doggin as we called it
35 weeling is an 06 necked up to 35. when I was a kid every sat we drove deer in the va hills & we used bows muzzleloader rifle it didn't matter we were like a pack of dogs. & we were good at it
& I forgot to say my favorite gun for driving was-is a ruger 44mag carbine an awsom deer gun to 150 yds
There is legislation in Minnesota right now that would do away with the shotgun zone making rifles legal statewide. Personally I think it would be a major safety issue.
Rifles now allowed in the southern tier of NY have not resulted in any significant increase in hunting related accidents from the past when shotguns were allowed only. In fact, 'significant' is not even the issue. There is virtually no increase in any shooting related safety issues with rifle vs. shotgun. Just an observation, not an argument.
2A would be long gone without the NRA. You should join
Like with the scoped crossbow, nothing will change other than reduced hunting opportunity if needed. This due to more efficient killing........ easier success. The herds are managed to herd numbers, not weapons.
I haven't hunted deer or any big game with a rifle since the 1980's. I am a life member of the NRA, and have been a member since the 80's. No organization can please everyone. I honestly don't know how anyone can say they are pro 2nd A. but anti NRA. We all know the NRA protects hunters, and they also protect bowhunters. I don't like there push for crossbows, but they are just trying to get more people involved in hunting. In my opinion, If not for the NRA we would not have the rights we have today, I will say that again if you want me to. And in my opinion, all wildelife departments in every state cater to the gun hunters because there are more gun hunters and that's where the money comes from.
Agree on the 2A protection from NRA. But as far as them pushing xbows into archery seasons, it has absolutely nothing to do with getting more hunters involved. It is about catering to the xbow manufacturers that are corporate NRA sponsors.
There is not one single nonhunter in this country sitting on the couch thinking, "Gee, I would take up deer hunting if only they'd allow crossbows into the general archery seasons!"
Thankfully the NRA is focused on those that would eliminate ALL our 2nd amendment rights and the activities that go with them which includes ALL forms of hunting. Not supporting them is your choice but to expect to see this pastime continue without them is ignorance.
Th NRA do no wrong crowd is laughable.
No one is saying the NRA is even close to perfect but will you please name the alternative organization I should send money to that even comes CLOSE to protecting my 2ndA rights as they do. I will wait for an answer...........
But I won’t hold my breath
Who exactly is the NRA do no wrong crowd?
Fanatical blind followers
I don’t have my seeing eye dog yet. Can I use my emotional support dog instead?
It is only laughable until the proponents for gun ownership are gone, lawful gun ownership it outlawed and the other side turns their attention ending all hunting because they believe it is inhuman.
What's laughable is the idea that if you don't agree with me 100 % on every issue, you're my enemy.
The 2nd amendment has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with hunting. As such, the NRA should just stay the hell out of it.
I'm a NRA member, but when it comes to hunting issues at the state level (where EVERY hunting issue resides), the NRA is absent, unless to push for crossbows. When the wolf and lion hunting ban proposals land on the ballot in CO, the NRA will stay silent and offer no support, just as with our bear hunting election.
Liv2, gun ownership and hunting are totally unrelated issues, not connected in any way. "The other side" are two distinctly different mindsets with different agendas. Remember, the huge majority of gun owners are NOT hunters.
Agree Zim and Lou.
The NRA has been MIA in NY for the most part. They want to pick and chose only the slam dunk cases to support in NY. When it comes to getting behind candidates for elections they are just about absent. But they have no problem asking for our money. Its quite the back room points among SCOPE leadership and groups that do pro bono work on 2A cases and issues in NY. The abbreviated version that we have to keep our mouths shut and the money flowing or we will end up on the NRA naughty list. And we saw how they NRA treats their friends that aren't in lockstep with them. This NRA life member has no further use for them.
GOA is way better place to send my money at this point.
Trial, when is the last time anyone ever heard a gun hating politician complain about the Gun Owners of America ? I'd venture to say that for the most part only gun owners know it exists. IMO, that's a pretty good yardstick of their influence versus the NRA's. The NRA is not perfect, but you tell me what org is. Like txhunter58, I ain't holding my breath...
Gheez, how does realty get twisted so easily? The NRA gets involved in hunting issues and we get the typical "they don't belong.....". The NRA doesn't get involved and we get the typical "I wish they represented hunters.". They get on board to be pro STATE legislation and we get "they pick and choose....".
Dang right they pick and choose. I'm sure they were asked for a show of support. Should they say no because it chaps someone's butt? Or, should the use the lobby power 2A people pay them for?
Justin, I agree, and my point was that the core mission of the NRA is not about hunting, although they support hunting because many gun owners hunt. But we shouldn't be surprised that they don't get involved in hunting issues at the state level. Disappointed, maybe, but hunting is not what they're fighting for.
Just as many hunters, myself included, sometimes get frustrated when groups like BHA won't get involved in hunting issues. But that isn't their core mission either, and the fact that some in leadership in those organizations may take positions that are detrimental or even antithetical to "all" hunting shouldn't be a surprise. Disappointed, sure, but their priorities are different.
Only a scab would think that de facto support for Cuomo ( because the NRA gave what amounted to zero support to any of his opponents) is a good deal for NY NRA members. After all why would they want him to loose when they profit from all his sound bites? Pick and choosing in this case amounted to tossing some of its membership under the bus.
The NRA has lost their way a long time ago, when they begain moving to a trade industry organization. They seem to have forgotten that the A in the NRA stands for association, the membership. So don't be surprised when they get forced to stick their nose in hunting issues that benefit their "partners". As you can see from page 5 membership isnt what is funding the the NRA anymore.
my understanding is that Maryland representatives are working on legislation that will give the law the ability to take your firearms if you've been or assumed to be mentally unstable depressed or potentially dangerous. a friend of my son lives in Md & has ptsd from his service in the army & takes meds for it & is worried about loosing his firearms rights
Colorado`s Senate just passed their version of the "Red Flag" law....it`s expected to be signed by their pillow biting Governor.
Basically ANYONE that served their country would fall under the "unstable or potentially dangerous" clause of these laws.
Great way to reward them for their service.
Classless quote of the day from none other then the ever low class Franklin. Thanks for staying true to your baseline.
"Pillow biting governor"
Lou, I understand that. My response wasn't directed at your stance. Because IT pisses me off too to see them get into bowhunting issues, when it hurts bowhunting. However, I'm a live and let live kinda guy. And, feel like if someone wants to hurt their experience by carrying a crossbow, then they should have that right. But, more importantly, we hunters need a group that does cross over. And, we must understand that no 2A means no hunting.
MY eagerness to see the NRA cross over and get involved in all hunting issues is opposite of my frustration with groups that won't cross over from their "specialty" when hunters need it. Example in point being the BHA concerning the wolf issue. They have no problems putting in their political stances on every conservation issue out there except the wolf issue. So, I'm not going to get upset that the NRA cross's over and takes up hunting issues. I see it as necessary in order for hunting to survive.
I'm not wanting to argue or cast a shadow on the BHA. Nor, am I saying the NRA is perfect. But, we gotta get on the same train fellas or these radical environmental movements are going to pick us apart as we stand firm for the Organization that best suits us individually. We have got to compromise and get focused. And, we have to have groups that are willing to take on multiple issues to best represent hunters. Not just 2A rights, access issues, etc....
Jaquomo
“Gun ownership and hunting are two separate issues and unrelated”
Separate issues, yes I agree but they are absolutely related as far as outlawing one is a step closer to outlawing the other. As far as the “other side” you can bet that gun hating polititions will come after bows at some point. The NRA and I don’t agree on every stance but I am a hunter and recreational shooter that believes both pastimes will suffer with less organizational proponents. I do believe every hunter should get involved with and support whatever organization they believe is fighting for their best interest.
"you can bet that gun hating polititions will come after bows at some point."
Hahaha! Thanks for the Sunday night laugh!
Lou, I think you are right about the crossbow . I did say the NRA was not perfect. And no organization can please everyone. And I'm sure the Crossbow companies were offering money. Money motivates everyone. I believe that is the reason crossbows are allowed during the archery season in my home state. No matter what else, Crossbows should not be allowed in any archery only season.
Offended you huh Trial....didn`t know you were into that sort of thing. Sorry....I keep forgetting you`re from NY. We don`t have a lot of this behavior in the Midwest so it`s strange to us. Once again I apologize for offending you.
"Fanatical blind followers" LOL! Yeah, right, You must be confused, there are very few radical leftists who are NRA supporters. If only butts had lips, people could understand this statement. "The 2nd amendment has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with hunting. As such, the NRA should just stay the hell out of it." Yup, you are SOO right. That's right they publish 'American Hunter'. Again, LOL! Get a grip sir. Ya know, I get pestered daily with phone calls from NRA trying to separate me from my funds. There is a very simple solution - just press 'Ignore call' on my phone. Although the NRA can be annoying, this does not detract from my quality of life or my attitude for the day. I still am happy to be alive. And a HUGE [part of the reason is that I am still FREE, free to do what I want, to still carry a weapon whenever and pretty much wherever I want (because I don't WANT to carry a firearm into a mall), and the reason that I am free to do this is because the NRA had been the single biggest influence on us retaining the 2nd A, period. Hey, you didn't all love everything about your parents when growing up, but they kept a roof over your head and food in your belly, didn't they? And if some of you went without either (or maybe some other kind of loving support parents provide their children), I would bet a big part of that is because you had some kind of parental absence issue, no? Just a bit of an analogy to make you think. Just keep that in mind the next time you want to bite the hand that feeds you. You would not even be on this site writing your opinions if not for the NRA because there would be no need for a shooting website forum. And one last thing, Franklin. Don't judge all NY'ers by one bad apple who can never seem to post anything but some controversial, negative slam. Not all people from NY are AH's so no need to say..."....I keep forgetting you`re from NY." Although I myself may be one (an AH), I know a lot of people in this state that are pretty darn good folks. Trial, the NRA is missing in NY because that $#!+bag Cuomo and all of his opponents are the same 2A and gun haters alike, there is no one worthy for them to support. There isn't a politician 2A supporter that is going to show his face and run against the corrupt NY dems and stand a chance here so why in hell would they bother even trying any more? You got 10 million citiots voting against common sense, so who upstate stands a chance against that? NRA and members are not stupid, why even bother with NY, its a lost cause - same with CA.
Wildlife should be managed by professional, educated wildlife managers, not money driven special interest groups nor unqualified greased Illinois politicians. Anyone who thinks otherwise has personal selfish motivations or is just plain stupid, like Sue Scherer.
"state Rep. Sue Scherer, D-Decatur, is working to expand the Second Amendment rights of archery hunters by allowing the full-inclusion of crossbows during archery season."
Wow, what a convoluted alternate reality she must live in.
"hankfully the NRA is focused on those that would eliminate ALL our 2nd amendment rights and the activities that go with them which includes ALL forms of hunting. Not supporting them is your choice but to expect to see this pastime continue without them is ignorance."
Actually the real ignorance are those that believe the 2cnd has anything to do with hunting.
"Colorado`s Senate just passed their version of the "Red Flag" law....it`s expected to be signed by their pillow biting Governor. Basically ANYONE that served their country would fall under the "unstable or potentially dangerous" clause of these laws."
Not a shock since Colorado is full of more liberal idiots than even California.
That's where they came from Rut.
Nice to see the NRA jumping on the bandwagon for red flag laws. Buts it's ok because their supporters will gloss over it and tell us all how we would be lost without them.
That didnt take long. If the shoe fits an idiot is sure to steal to it. See the post above. Perfect example
Red flag laws are worst form of gun control possible. They violate the constitution on several levels and totally Circumvent due process. Yet the mindless rabble continues to beat their tribes drums.
Trial, did you actually look at the conditions required for the NRA to support such laws? Go look at the conditions required and then get back to us. SHow us how the NRA in any shape or form would support any of the current red flag laws. They will not because no state has met the requirements.
Red Laws are the first step in stricter gun laws. Its a net loss for gun owners. And, one that the NRA has gotten wrong a couple times now. But, as stated earlier, no group is perfect. And Money does influence a groups direction. Which seems to only get lost when we talk about the questionable funding the BHA has received.
That's not a gotcha shot either James. It is a point that you were right on earlier in this thread when you posted it. And, it applies in lobbying for hunting laws. We hunters had better get a big tent group to consolidate with to represent our best interest. Or, we are going to lose these fights. I do not know the right answer. I just know we had better find one quickly. Or the following generations will not have the opportunity's we now have as hunters.
Maybe if we all leaned on our national hunting affiliations to get them further involved in all hunting issues, would be a good place to start. I've contacted the NRA about the wolf issue in Colorado and am awaiting their reply. Maybe a BHA member could do the same? Let's quit arguing and work together folks.
Don't be too critical of the NRA. Before I started bowhunting, I hunted with a rifle. The way I saw it, bowhunters were a bunch of snobs who thought they were better than everyone else. Still plenty of those out there ;)
Yeah, the NRA is not perfect, but I just cannot bring myself to believe Wayne La Pierre would ever support any kind of Red Flag Law, or any form of gun control, not from what I've seen from him.
Troll153, have you ever, or do you ever have anything positive to say about anything?? Not that I have ever seen you write... From what I've seen, I am not sure you are even a supporter of hunting or weapon ownership. Maybe its because I make it a point to not read all your BS posts.
