1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Correct: It does not take 10 bullets to kill a deer.

Discussion in 'Legal' started by bushmaster1313, Jan 9, 2013.

  1. bushmaster1313

    bushmaster1313 Well-Known Member

    But what relevance does that have to any question concerning gun control or the 2nd Amendment?

    It's not about hunting.

    For what it's worth, the Constitution would NOT prohibit a total ban on all hunting.
  2. zorro45

    zorro45 Well-Known Member

    depends if it is 9mm or 45
  3. bushmaster1313

    bushmaster1313 Well-Known Member

    Good point.
  4. BP44

    BP44 Well-Known Member

    Well, you obviously have not been deer hunting with me:neener: 10 rds just get them started running.
  5. MacGyver77

    MacGyver77 Member

    People that use the argument of not needing more than 10 rounds for hunting don't know ANYTHING about hunting. In florida, and probably most of the rest of the country, laws for hunting limit capacity to 5 round anyway.
  6. bushmaster1313

    bushmaster1313 Well-Known Member

    You could probably shoot this 17 foot Burmese Python all day long and still not kill it.

  7. Rob G

    Rob G Well-Known Member

    Well it might take 10 rounds if you were using a .22. As far as hunting in general goes, I might only load a couple for deer, but when I go hog hunting I load the whole 30 rounder. There's nothing worse than scaring a bunch of hogs out in the open and only having a couple rounds in the mag.
  8. bushmaster1313

    bushmaster1313 Well-Known Member

    Wasn't there a movie about that called "The Porcine Horror Picture Show?"
  9. MacGyver77

    MacGyver77 Member

    Deer hunting at least. I know their are limits on duck/bird hunting as well. These only pertain to the amount of rounds actually loaded in the gun available to shoot without reloading. As far as I know, there are no restrictions on how many reloads or extra ammo you can carry.

    EDITED TO ADD: I should have further clarified, I am talking about semi autos. No limits that I am aware of for other actions. Looking for the florida statute now.
    Last edited: Jan 9, 2013
  10. joeschmoe

    joeschmoe Well-Known Member

    Politics is the art of speaking, while saying nothing.
  11. Sheepdog1968

    Sheepdog1968 Well-Known Member

    I worry about capacity when it comes to self defense as there may be more than one bag guy. For hunting capacity isn't so much of issue. Yet, in restrictive ca there is no restriction on rounds for mammals. In fact there is no law requiring hunter orange in ca. Go figure.
  12. joustin

    joustin Well-Known Member

    Capacity can be an issue depending on where and what you hunt. If you are hunting in hog country a few fast shots could be beneficial.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
  13. Pointshoot

    Pointshoot Well-Known Member

    I wouldnt get into such arguments, anyway. They put us on the defensive and give control of the argument to the other side. Instead I would bring up the points mentioned in the thread on the Michael Moore video on Drugging Our Children. Thats what has been found common in just about all of these type of mass shootings. Regards, - - -
  14. Trent

    Trent Resident Wiseguy

    Last I checked, it only takes one well placed shot to kill ANY beast, including humans.

    Let's hope they don't figure out that the bolt actions we own are the ones which are most capable of anti-tyranny duty, or they'll go for the single shot rifles too. I mean, heck, some of those are good out to a mile (and I'm not talking 50 cal; 338 Lapua stays supersonic - and quite accurate - out to a mile).
  15. miner1975

    miner1975 New Member

    We r grown adult y should they b able to tell us what we can or can't own
  16. Deanimator

    Deanimator Well-Known Member

    Who says you need to kill a deer?

    Anybody who thinks that anti-gun and anti-hunting are mutually exclusive is a simpleton.
  17. Matthew Temkin

    Matthew Temkin Well-Known Member

    We do not need guns to hunt.
    Nor do we need guns for self defense.
    But what we really do not need is a government telling us what we need.
  18. duck911

    duck911 Well-Known Member

    On a different forum, someone had said, paraphrasing:

    "...so the liberal asked my why I would POSSIBLY need more than 10 rounds in a magazine. I answered, 'suppressive fire, of course'. I don't think he appreciated my reply"

    There is a lot of truth in the OP's reply....

  19. medalguy

    medalguy Well-Known Member

    I have lots of guns, lots and lots of high capacity mags, and.....well.....lots and lots and lots of ammo. But I haven't been hunting in over 30 years.

    Where's any connection between the two subjects???
  20. mister_murphy

    mister_murphy Well-Known Member

    First of all. The second ammendment has nothing to do with hunting. Get that out of your head...

    Second, you dont even need a firearm to hunt, nor X rounds of ammo. Talk to some primative hunters. YOU DO NOT NEED A FIREARM TO HUNT! What more can I say?

Share This Page