[zahc]

Here in OH we have to plug our shot guns so they only hold I think 3+1. Do you think this is a good law, bad, fair, don't care?

[Joe Demko]

We have them here in PA, too. They've never much mattered to me.

[zahc]

Don't you have lots of other stupid laws like not being able to hunt with semi-auto's in PA?

[Joe Demko]

Semiauto rifles and handguns can't be used. Semiauto shotguns are legal, though not with slugs for deer.

[gun-fucious]

i never get more than 2 shots on a pheasant before it cackles off into yonder corn field

[Dr.Rob]

That rule never made sense to me.

But I abide by it.

You can't hunt big game with a semi auto centerfire that holds more than six rounds in the mag and chamber, but varminting you can use whatever you want.

[Larry Ashcraft]

Third shot's usually a prayer anyway, part of the reason I started using an over/under several years ago.

[Hkmp5sd]

You should be allowed to hunt with any firearm you want. Who cares if the animal is killed on the first shot or the fifth. Who cares how the next round gets into the chamber of your firearm. If someone is dumb enough to go after a bear with a .22LR, provided he doesn't earn a Darwin Award, he'll learn to use enough gun.

In fact, the magazine limit may cause an animal to suffer instead of a quick death. If you hit an animal on your last shot and it does not cause an immediately fatal injury, the animal could be long gone before you can reload and get back on target. Now you have a wounded animal loose in the woods that could suffer for days before dying.

[Art Eatman]

I don't guess the thought of a limit to a rifle's magazine capacity ever crossed my mind, insofar as deer hunting. I did have one stupid, complacent deer stand around while I missed and missed and missed...But most of the time I only needed one shot, plus maybe a coup de grace.

Shotgunning? I use an old Model 12, mostly. I grew up on 2+1 for dove, and while I've never understood it, I never worried about it. After dove season, I pull the plug for quail hunting and "other uses". :) However, my Beretta semi-auto 12 Gauge only holds three...

:), Art

[cordex]

Restrictions like that should be a personal challenge, not a governmentally enforced one.

[Joe Demko]

You should be allowed to hunt with any firearm you want.

Why? Given that hunting is heavily regulated on the basis that the state "owns" the animals (and in some situations the land) and hunting is absolutely NOT a Second Ammendment matter, on what are you basing this assertion other than that you personally would like more rounds in your gun?

[Larry Ashcraft]

I did have one stupid, complacent deer stand around while I missed and missed and missed
OK, off topic, but that brought back a story. Many years ago, while hunting elk, I carried a Ruger .22 for blue grouse. Saw one ambling around and started shooting at it. Missed it 8 times and decided if I missed again, the grouse won. On the 9th shot I hit him in the FOOT. He was hobbling around so I grabbed another mag from my pocket, found a rest this time and got him on the first shot.

OK, back to your regularly scheduled programming. :D

[Hkmp5sd]

on what are you basing this assertion

On the fact that *I* (Tax Paying American Citizen) *own* (Public Land) and *I* should be able to exercise my *Freedom* of choice in making the decision of what firearm I wish to hunt with.

Why should I be allowed to hunt with a 10-round SKS but not a 30-round AK? Same bullet. Why should I be allowed to hunt with a 30.06 Remington 700 but not a M1 Garand? Same bullet.

Since roads are owned by the city/county/state/feds and are heavily regulated, should they be allowed to dictate the size of the gas tank in your vehicle or whether or not its a manual or automatic transmission?

[HSMITH]

In WI and some other states where the deer woods get very crowded you should hear the bullets flinging through the trees. These arsepipes have Remington 7400's with 10 shot mags (usually several) and when they see a deer they start blazing, REGARDLESS of who and what is near or beyond it. Added magazine capacity would just get them spraying faster and wilder. I watched one "hunter" shoot 44 times (I counted) at a single deer crossing a field and he never touched a hair.

It is guys like that idiot that are the cause of laws preventing the rest of us responsible citizens from being able to use whatever we want.

Until we get a good dose of chlorine in the gene pool or start holding people accountable for their own actions this garbage is only going to get worse.

[zahc]

I agree. But I, the ethical hunter I am, would still like to hunt deer with 5+1...

[TrapperReady]

HSMITH - My dad was a WWII vet... infantryman in the ETO... two Bronze Stars, a Purple Heart and a battlefield commission. After the war he got a job in Schenectady, NY and spent as much time as possible fly-fishing and hunting in the Adirondacks.

In 1961, he was deer hunting and was nearly shot by a yahoo cutting loose with a mess of rounds at what the guy "thought" was a buck. He said the last time he'd heard rounds ripping that close through the trees, he'd been in the Ardennes.

The "hunter" in question came ambling along, looking for his deer, when dad lit into him. He didn't actually touch the guy, but spent quite a while ripping him a new one. Immediately afterwards, he hiked back to camp and decided that "If the :cuss: ing Germans didn't kill me, I'm not going to die hunting deer." After that, he was strictly a fly-fisherman and bird-hunter.

[Art Eatman]

You're gonna have to ask somebody in the federal gummint about the three-shot limit on migratory birds...

I'd have to just guess, of course, but it probably came about as a result of the "styles" of the market hunters of ducks and such, way, way back. Limiting the size of shotguns to ten-gauge and limiting the number of rounds in the gun to three was probably seen as a way to help the populations recover.

And, since the majority of our hunting is "sport" hunting, with fair chase and ethics and such, I don't see any harm. Are you really gonna kill more doves or ducks with more shells in your gun? Really?

:), Art

[Greybeard]

Experience sez that any more than the first rwo rounds is generally just turning money into noise ...

[HSMITH]

Trapper, I will not gun hunt for deer on public land here. Been there, was nearly shot on several occasions, and will never go again. I know just how your dad felt about it. Until it is legal for me to shoot the MORONS that are endangering my life it just not going to happen.

[Lennyjoe]

Cant have more than 3 shells in the gun here in Arizona. So the 835 I just picked up needs a 9 1/2" plug so I can only have 3 each 2 3/4" shells in it.

I think the law sucks too but I have seen plenty of folks get busted for it and fined. Not worth getting fined for so I will plug it accordingly till the law gets changed.

[Greybeard]

Yea, the 3-shot limit even trips up even a lot of older guys taking Hunter Ed. "Home Study Completion" test. There are 2 questions out of 50 on the subject. In Tejas anyway, the correct answer when involving non-migratory birds is "unrestricted". Amazing how many quail hunters miss that one ... And lots of folks don't know it's illegal to shoot game birds with an air gun ... And mucho illegal to shoot migratory birds (definite 3-shot capacity) with anything except a shotgun ...

[Atticus]

Zahh- In Ohio it is 2+1. As others have said, it seems like a stupid law until you watch some stupid guy (or several of them) blindly fire shotgun slugs at a running deer that is 100 yards away. If I hear mutliple shots in the distance, I always get set to shoot, since a nice (untouched) buck is likely hauling butt for cover (hopefully my cover).

[Fuzzy]

Here in AZ, we have the 2+1 rule for shotguns and a 5+1 rule for centerfire rifles. I believe that handguns and rimfire rifles are unlimited.

I don't mind the rule. It keeps the idiots from spraying ammo. It doesn't matter if it's a rifle or a shotgun, you can hurt someone if you aren't carefull. And during hunting season, things can get crowded.

I don't know of any gun you can't get smaller mags for though. I have a Garand and I can buy 1, 2, 5, or 8 round mags. Same fo SKSs. What's the big deal?

-Fuzzy

[Hkmp5sd]

It's seems strange seeing people giving an assortment of reasons in favor of magazine/tube capacity limits while hunting, yet they are the same ones complaining about magazine capacity limits for other firearms. In fact, they are using the same arguments used by the antis such as "idiots spraying bullets."

[Art Eatman]

Magazine limits for a self-defense weapon isn't the same as the limits for a sport-hunting weapon.

As with most game laws, these were proposed by hunters themselves.

Art

[HSMITH]

Idiots spraying bullets at deer has nothing to do with the second amendment, zero zilch nada.

[Hkmp5sd]

I'm not saying the limits for hunting are a bad thing nor that it has anything to do with the 2A. It just seems strange to support magazine limits in one case to prevent idiots from harming themselves or others while spraying bullets and then try to attack the arguments made by the Feinstein types who (claim to) want to prevent idiots from harming themselves or others while spraying bullets.

[Joe Demko]

Idiots spraying bullets at deer has nothing to do with the second amendment, zero zilch nada
Hunting has nothing to do with the 2nd Ammendment. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

[Fuzzy]

Hunting and the second amendment are two entirely separate things. In most states there is not a constitutional right to hunt. Even in the states that do guarantee the right to hunt, their constitutions also state that hunting must be regulated by the state.

I believe that I have the right to carry a handgun with with as many rounds as I'd like for self protection. I also believe that I have the right to own a long gun or shotgun with whatever magazine capacity I want.

But hunting is different. If someone can't hit a deer by the fifth shot, then that person needs to pack it up and head off to the range. I've seen idiots hunt before. A few years ago I was hunting deer on some very crowded public land (it's really the only kind we have out here, only about 12% of our land is private) and I personally saw, through my binoculars, a guy shoot a deer 20 times before he realized that it was dead. He had to reload 4 times to do it too. The deer was bedded down and he just kept shooting.

Situations like that not only re-enforce my belief in magazine limits for hunting but also push me closer into believing in mandatory hunter education classes.

[Art Eatman]

Fuzzy, that sounds like "buck fever", and it takes many forms.

There are numerous stories of guys who have racked an entire magazine load of shells through their rifles, without pulling trigger at all. When they puzzle over why they "missed" the deer, somebody points to all those shiny cartridges lying on the ground.

All the hunter ed in the world won't help with a case of "nerves". Only experience does that.

:), Art

[cordex]

If someone can't hit a deer by the fifth shot, then that person needs to pack it up and head off to the range.
Y'know what? I agree.

I just have a hard time seeing that we need to legislate my opinion.

[HankB]

If you have and enforce bag limits anyway, magazine capacity is irrelevant.

Of course, often the law doesn't specify the number of shotguns you can have . . . I know waterfowlers who have taken as many as three (!) shotguns into the duck blind, each plugged to a 3-round capacity.

(I only hunt upland birds, and usually use a O/U or SXS, so mag plugs are moot unless/until I hunt with my Benelli.)

[zahc]

Very interesting HankB! Clever people obeying rules. Cool.

I'm with cordex on the issue.

[nygunguy]

Long gun - 5 Shot Limit for deer. I think you need to be plugged to 3 for turkey.

Fuzzy - I agree !

I never liked using semiautos for deer hunting. I've seen too many guys worry so much about getting the second shot off that they completely forget about the first. Others send the first in the general direction of the deer and the next four up in the air.

One hunting buddy started in with the idea that he should keep shooting until the deer went down. He could handle is 1100. Regular note from butcher: "Not much meat - deer all shot up". I finally convinced him to test out 1 well placed shot.

When I carry a repeater long gun its one in the chamber, one in the magazine (for the second deer) and four in my pocket. When I carry my .44 The cylander is full, none in my pocket.

When I'm fishing the Lower Genesee River (Ghetto - North Part of the City of Rochester, NY) its one in the chamber, 10 in the mag and a spare mag in my pocket.

Let's see - That's 21 for fishing and 6 for hunting. When the AWB sunsets or I find some quality hi-caps it'll be more for fishing and still 6 for hunting.

[zahc]

Why do people not seem to realize that you can fire accurate, slow, aimed fire with a semi-auto, and that having the capability for rapidfire doesnt require you to use it all the time?

[Guyon]

For reasons already stated, I actually like the limits. I don't like the fact that we have to legislate mag capacity, but given the "shoot-em-up" mentality of some so-called "hunters" out there, these mag limits are a necessary evil with regard to public-land hunts.

If dove hunts allowed "unrestricted" magazines, I bet you that at almost every public hunt, some yahoo would show up with an 8-shell magazine and blaze away at everything in flight. When you start following a flying dove and firing shot after shot, a person tends to lose focus on what's beyond the target--"low bird" be damned. I've been hit by 8-shot while dove hunting. Stings like hell and can put out an eye if you're not wearing glasses. Limited shots makes you think more about shot quality and not about shot quantity.

Same goes for deer hunting in the public woods as HSMITH points out. I don't care to hunt in a war zone.

Now, if we're talking about hunting on land I own outright, then that's a different story. I should be able to hunt with whatever I want to--even a Sherman tank if I own it legally. :D

[Jeeper]

I dont really see the point of the limit for shotguns but for rifles I agree completely. Most people that hunt cant shoot worth a crap anyway. letting them use a 20 round mag would make this even worse. I think it would increase the number of injured deer. I have seen hunters standing and shooting at elk 500 yards off. They were just shooting into the herd. Imagine if that same idiot har a big clip. You could end up with 10 wounded deer. It really isnt a bad rule and there is no right that it infringes on.

[Hkmp5sd]

It really isnt a bad rule and there is no right that it infringes on.

So the government needs to regulate every aspect of a persons life, so long as not directly infringing on a right, to protect themselves from their own stupidity?

Another way to look at it. The group appears to support magazine limits while hunting for essentially two reasons, idiots with lots of bullets and hunting isn't a right, so there is nothing wrong with putting limits on it.

Since many people in this country believe there is no right to own firearms for any reason other than "sporting" purposes, how do you go about convincing them that there are reasons for owning magazines exceeding 10 rounds? You have already agreed with their perception of gun use and gun control.

You cannot legislate stupidity. We constantly preach responsible use of firearms, regardless of the category the firearm falls under. Leave it up to the individual using the weapon and if he does anything improper, throw him in jail.

Yet, it seems some people are willing to remove that responsibility from the individual and have the government regulate that use while participating in one activity. If you cannot leave the responsibility for proper firearm use with the individual while hunting, how can you claim that for all other firearm uses, we do need to leave the individual responsible instead of passing magazine limits and gun bans?

[Guyon]

You cannot legislate stupidity. We constantly preach responsible use of firearms, regardless of the category the firearm falls under. Leave it up to the individual using the weapon and if he does anything improper, throw him in jail.

Hk5mp5sd: A lot of your points are good... in theory. But when it comes to practice, they are highly impractical.

Whose going to determine what's "improper"? In a dove field, are you going to be the one to determine that unloading 7 shells at a single low bird is improper? You going to be the one to challenge that offender and throw him in jail? Are you going to challenge the idiot with a semi-auto who's firing an entire magazine of .223 rounds into the woods?

Probably not. That job falls to wildlife officials, and these people already have jobs that are hard enough. When it comes to enforcing what's improper, it's far easier to check guns--far harder to determine exactly who let loose with a barrage of shots.

There IS a difference, in my mind, between the contexts you try to equate. On a range where all the rounds (hopefully) go down range to targets, it shouldn't matter how many rounds are in the mag. Also, in a self defense scenario, more ammo might equate into greater chances for survival.

However, in a field or in the woods where other folks are around, the chances of an accidental shooting are greater when people are carelessly spraying bullets or shot. Shot direction is contingent upon where the game flies or runs. Adrenaline is involved (Art's "buck fever"), and some folks tend to take less care with safety when wild game comes into the picture. Certainly, the most efficient way for wildlife officials to keep pressure on such folks (I refuse to call them "hunters") is to have the ability to check magazines.

I hunt on public land. Do you? I don't like the restrictions in theory. But when my rear end is at risk in the woods, I sure like the restrictions in practice.

[Art Eatman]

Again: Ideas of this sort originated with hunters, even though today they're enforced by law. Just look at it as self-regulation against fools and game hogs...

Art

[nygunguy]

I think its important for hunters to regulate themselves. We need to be more vocal with eachother and try very hard to convince the idiots that its not necessary to have a semi-auto with a 10 round mag for any type of hunting. Most hunters respond well to tactful suggestions about their shooting/hunting techniques because their ultimate goal is to bag game - they just go about it wrong.

I'm a firm supporter of hunter education and believe that most classes don't go far enough.

We may never get government imposed limits repealed but at least we can try to eliminate the need for them.

[BlkHawk73]

How amny shots do you need. I always get disgusted with those hunters that just "let the lead fly" and hope they hit a vital spot. Usually they're they ones that go to the range once and figure that's good enough. Even stupider (no offence to any here that this applis to) is when these same people "hunt" from a stand. OH yeah, that sporting and quite a challange. Sit in a tree overlooking an area waiting to ambush a deer so you can pump multiple rounds into while using a stable rest.:rolleyes: :banghead:

[Oleg Volk]

Just an opinion: should be no magazine limits. If somone wants to hunt with a Maxim belt-fed, let him. The hunter will tire out soon enough.

[Mike Irwin]

Handguns aren't legal for deer in Pennsylvania?

Since when?

More than a few of the people I used to hunt with hunted exclusively with handguns.

As for magazine limits, I never needed more than 1 shot for any of the deer that I took...

[Lennyjoe]

Lets think outside the bun so to speak.

If your an average patient deer hunter then 1 shot should be all you need. But what about upland game, such as ducks, quail, dove and bunnies. Why not allow shotgunners to carry more than 3 rounds?

[cordex]

Why not allow shotgunners to carry more than 3 rounds?
But ... but ... blasting! If you let anyone have more than 3 rounds in their gun, they'll just cut loose at every moving thing! An ethical small-game hunter doesn't need to kill half-a-dozen birdies or fluffy aminals in a row anyway. They can stop and reload.

Since it only takes most of us a single shot to kill anything, we should pass a "Barney's Law". Hunters should only carry one cartridge or shell per animal they're legally allowed to kill, and they should only be allowed to load one shot into their weapon at a time. That way, people'll learn to make their shots count!

Injured, but crippled animal? Better know how to use that knife.
Wounded and running? Hope your shoes are comfortable. It's going to be a long day.

Come to think of it, I don't know why we're allowing these newfangled 'repeaters' anyhow. They just make people blaze away at everything. Make 'em all use frontstuffers. That'll give 'em a proper appreciation of the value of a single round.

[Atticus]

"Even stupider (no offence to any here that this applis to) is when these same people "hunt" from a stand. OH yeah, that sporting and quite a challange."

No offense? That statement reminds me of the attitude that many Urban city park visitors have toward deer hunting in general ("I'ts so EASY to get close to deer- and they are so docile -it isn't FAIR". I don't usually gun hunt from stand, but I do a lot of bowhunting from stands. I've killed about the same number of deer from the ground as I have from a stand, with both gun and bow...maybe more. I don't find it any more challenging to have a deer cross my path when I'm on the gound, than I do when I'm in a stand (or simply sitting on a branch). I suppose you could tie one hand behind your back and hang upside down if that makes you feel better. Many people in the Midwest and North East (I'll call them "hunters" ) don't have unfettered access to 10,000 acres, or even 40; nor can they use high powered rifles. Stalking is great ...until the deer runs across the property line.

[nygunguy]

I know its dangerous but...

How will the rising popularity of muzzleloading play out in the legal aspects of this discussion? The pols here in NYS don't seem to have any problem passing new regulations allowing muzzleloaders. Not that I think that there's some kind of conspiracy, but muzzloading's popularity just might create enough apathy that they can grab all of the repeaters. Thoughts ?

[MeekandMild]

Oleg, I totally disagree. I'm one of the hunters who would propose mag limits if they weren't already in effect. There is nothing more frustrating than to stalk a deer through the woods for half a day then have it spook off because some nimrod a half mile down the road decides he needs to unload his magazine.

Plus there is the risk of dying. I've had the experiance of having a guy rain buckshot all around me, shooting at a pair of deer. He killed both the deer in the first two shots and his second two shots were high, like over the ridge and all around me. It is seldom a first shot will go over the hill but repeat shots go wild.


Cordex, I disagree with you too. While a Barney Law would be fine for upland hunting I believe a deer hunter should carry a few extra cartridges in his pocket. Having to hike back to the truck to get a bullet for the coup de grace might be cruel to a wounded deer and using a knife is sometimes not feasible. I wouldn't mind seeing a rule against more than 1 in the gun however.

(I wonder how you propose they stop down the mag for a lever action rifle. A bolt action is pretty simple, just put in a sled like you'd use for target shooting.)

[zahc]

Injured, but crippled animal? Better know how to use that knife. Wounded and running? Hope your shoes are comfortable. It's going to be a long day.


That's the main reason I hate mag limits. Oh, but you only need three rounds, because some people shoot unsafely, so you can't be trusted. It's for the children.

Having lots of ammo handy, along with using enough gun, is just a safety measure to make sure you can kill your quarry quickly even if something bad happens. It's never happened to me, I've never shot more than once at anything in my short hunting career. I do not like being legislated into what I feel is a less effective, potentially evel less humane setup based on abstract reasoning that doesn't really apply to me.

"Even stupider (no offence to any here that this applis to) is when these same people "hunt" from a stand. OH yeah, that sporting and quite a challange."

Who said anything about a challenge? Hunting is about killing animals. If you want to make it more challenging, great. Bowhunting from a stand is challenging enough for me. :p Deer are not exactly endangered around here. I do not like your arrogant attitude. I respect your anti hunting opinion.

[cordex]

There is nothing more frustrating than to stalk a deer through the woods for half a day then have it spook off because some nimrod a half mile down the road decides he needs to unload his magazine.
Right-o.
Well, if it makes your personal hunting experience more enjoyable, let's make sure the law stays in place.

Your deer are an odd sort. They don't run if "some nimrod half mile down the road" shoots one shot? They don't run if "some nimrod half mile down the road" decides to go target shooting with his M1A in the middle of deer season?

Maybe ... maybe we should pass a law saying that no one can use a gun except to take a deer during deer season. And mandate the use of sound suppressors too. After all, that would make it less frustrating for us, wouldn't it?
Plus there is the risk of dying.
*sigh*
You have a greater risk of dying while driving to get your deer tag than you do hunting - mag limits or no.


How amny shots do you need. I always get disgusted with those hunters that just "let the lead fly" and hope they hit a vital spot. Usually they're they ones that go to the range once and figure that's good enough. Even stupider (no offence to any here that this applis to) is when these same people "hunt" from a stand. OH yeah, that sporting and quite a challange. Sit in a tree overlooking an area waiting to ambush a deer so you can pump multiple rounds into while using a stable rest.
Y'know who really bug me? The folk who use bow and arrow to slaughter a deer. I mean seriously, where is the sport in shooting a nearly silent, relatively long-ranged weapon at a deer who is just standing there? Them and the guys who use a firearm of any sort. Where is the challenge or sport in that? Hmmm?

I mean, seriously ... is it too much work to strip naked, gird yourself with thorns and poison ivy, chip a chunk of rock into a stone axe head with your teeth, bind it with a few of your own tendons to a wooden handle that you've carved from the heart of a stump with your fingernails and then really hunt a deer?

All of you modern hunters with your "broadheads" and your "releases" and your "compound bows" and your "sights" and your "pyrodex" and your "bullets" and your "camo" and your "insulation" and your "steel knives" and your fancy "matches" to start a so-called "fire" to cook the meat ... you're not really hunting.

I know I'm no purist, what with my weapon and everything (a real hunter would use their bare hands, and instead of using plant matter to clothe themselves, would simply soak themselves in tannic acid, thus making their entire hide a tough leather, but I've got a bum knee), but at least I'm not sullying the sport with all the trappings you so-called "hunters" use.

Fancy pants, johnny-come-lately little .... why I bet you don't even pack your whole deer sixteen miles uphill on foot. What with your "trucks" and "SUVs" and "ATVs" and "horses".

*sigh*

[Mike Irwin]

"I mean seriously, where is the sport in shooting a nearly silent, relatively long-ranged weapon at a deer who is just standing there?"

Yep, I came to that conclusion a long time ago.

That's why I started hunting with just a pocket knife. I'd wait in the low branches of a tree, and when a deer walked by, I'd do my best Tarzan impression and drop down on to it for a little "mano a hoof" combat...



Honestly, though, I never viewed hunting as a sport.

I always viewed it as a way of getting meat.

[cordex]

That's why I started hunting with just a pocket knife. I'd wait in the low branches of a tree, and when a deer walked by, I'd do my best Tarzan impression and drop down on to it for a little "mano a hoof" combat...
Attaboy, Mike!

[zahc]

mean, seriously ... is it too much work to strip naked, gird yourself with thorns and poison ivy, chip a chunk of rock into a stone axe head with your teeth, bind it with a few of your own tendons to a wooden handle that you've carved from the heart of a stump with your fingernails and then really hunt a deer?

This si the basis most like 80% of the anti-hunting aruments i field. That it's not "fair' or 'equal'. ( like that's the point).

Honestly, though, I never viewed hunting as a sport. I always viewed it as a way of getting meat

Wise words, there.

[Byron Quick]

I've rarely shot my Browning semi-auto dry. On the few occasions, I have...I've rarely had anything to show for it.

Three shots on birds? Rarely have had a decent third shot after shooting twice.

I have shot a dove, a rabbit, and a squirrel with one three shot swing through 270 degrees. Even then, I didn't need a fourth shot immediately...nothing else jumped up.

I just don't see the need for larger capacities while hunting. I wouldn't carry the extra weight even if it was legal.

It would be fine with me if you did so. I wouldn't be comfortable hunting with you. I'd be a mite concerned that after your 13th shot at that bounding deer that you might have forgotten that the direction you're now shooting in just happens to be MY direction.

Oh, yeah...I've killed a running deer with an Ak-47. Five round magazine. First four shots were clean misses. Got the lead figured on the last shot. Shot through the neck...she was DRT.

[Guyon]

Hunting is a challenge, but it isn't exactly a sport, IMO. "Sport" implies that both sides have an equal chance. Given the fact that homo sapiens have been blessed with much larger frontal lobes, it's kind of hard to turn hunting into a sport unless you do initiate hand-to-hoof combat.

I hunt with a rifle. From a tree stand at times, no less. Sue me.

I'm out there to relax, enjoy being in nature, and put some meat in the freezer. Not to engage in mortal combat with an animal much dumber than me and not to get shot by an idiot with a 30-round mag.

[cordex]

I'm out there to relax, enjoy being in nature, and put some meat in the freezer. Not to engage in mortal combat with an animal much dumber than me and not to get shot by an idiot with a 30-round mag.
That's pretty much why I go out there too.

But thank goodness there are laws against using 30 round mags while hunting, eh wot? I mean, it hurts way more to get shot when the bullets come from a gun fitted with a 30 round magazine. Still ... wouldn't it be more effective to have a law about not shooting other people, and being responsible for where your gunfire goes, or something?

If someone is an idiot with a 30 round magazine, they're not likely to be an uber-responsible person with a 15 or 10, or 8, or 5, or 3 round magazine. Hell, I'd be cautious if they had a single shot. If someone tracks a deer across their huntin' buddies blazing away with a 15 round magazine, they're liable to do it with a 5 round magazine too. They may not fire as many shots, but if they don't pay attention, there's no reason to assume you're safe one way or another.

Just to be clear, my hunting shotgun is a bone-stock Remington 870 with a rifled barrel. 4+1.
I don't defend bad hunters of any sort, but what I see in this thread is less criticism of bad hunters and more the same logic that leads gun-banners to try to ban certain weapons - because the weapon itself (or the ammunition feeding device) makes people do bad things.

This elitism - "I only need x shot(s), so x+1 is baaaaaaad" - is part of what gives hunters a bad name.

[Joe Demko]

A bad name with whom? You know what gives hunters a bad name? Trespassing, littering, vandalism, and generalized stupidity on the part of idiots with guns. Except perhaps to other hunters, the elitism you just mentioned isn't even on the radar screen of things that antis don't like about hunters.

[cordex]

A bad name with whom?
Sorry, I wasn't clear.
With other gunnies.
the elitism you just mentioned isn't even on the radar screen of things that antis don't like about hunters.
Agreed, but I so rarely care what the anti's like or dislike about me. :)

[Sunray]

Migratory Bird Act it's called up here. Your lot, ours and Mexico signed a treaty a very long time ago dealing with ducks and geese. 3 rounds while hunting is part of it. I think.
Our law says 3 in the shotgun. Anymore than that and you're skybusting anyway.

[MeekandMild]

Gee Cordex, I never heard of reductio ad absurdum until I met you. :rolleyes: I'd like to see the trick where you sit in the snow naked except for a cotton sheet soaked with icewater.

Maybe you are right. We should have the privilage of deer hunting with an axial mounted drum fed quad 50. :what:

[cordex]

Maybe you are right. We should have the privilage of deer hunting with an axial mounted drum fed quad 50.
If the hunter wants to, does so in a safe manner and bows to the great Lords of Game Management in taking only the amount of deer they are licensed to take ... why not?

[zahc]

seriously.