Bill seeks to allow Wyoming hunters to carry automatic weapons

Status
Not open for further replies.

Drizzt

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,647
Location
Moscow on the Colorado, TX
Bill seeks to allow Wyoming hunters to carry automatic weapons

By BEN NEARY
Associated Press Writer

CHEYENNE, Wyo. (AP) -- Wyoming hunters could carry automatic weapons and guns equipped with silencers in the field under proposed legislation that would also allow archery hunters to carry firearms.

Sen. Cale Case, R-Lander, is the primary sponsor of the bill. He says he's heard from many archery hunters who want to carry firearms for defense against grizzly bears.

Case's bill, Senate File 79, wouldn't allow anyone to hunt with automatic or silenced weapons. But it would remove the current prohibition against possessing such weapons in the state's game fields and forests.

Case said Wyoming's game laws shouldn't penalize hunters for possessing automatic weapons or silenced guns when they're otherwise legal. He questioned whether hunters could be cited under the current law if they merely had such a weapon in their car and weren't using it for hunting.

"It shouldn't matter what weapon you carry on your pack, on your shoulder, or on a hip holster," Case said. "We need to focus the law not on what weapon you're carrying, but what weapon you're using."

Case said he's unaware of any being cited for carrying an automatic or silenced weapon while otherwise hunting legally. However, he said he regards the current prohibition as a gray area of the law that should be cleared up.

Gov. Dave Freudenthal said Wednesday that he hadn't looked at Case's bill but didn't see why hunters needed to carry automatic or silenced weapons when they're not allowed to hunt with them.

"If you can't take your wildlife with them, I don't know," said Freudenthal, himself an avid hunter. "To me, it would be just that much more weight you'd have to carry while you're walking around hunting."

Case's proposal doesn't sit well with at least one Wyoming game warden.

"Of course it would be a poacher's dream, to be able to shoot something, especially with a silencer, and not have it be heard," said Mark Nelson, a Cheyenne game warden and vice president of the Wyoming Game Wardens Association. "That would be very detrimental to wildlife."

On the question of automatic weapons, Nelson said, "That wouldn't be a good idea, either. The first shot should count. If a guy was out there with an automatic weapon, that would be dangerous for one, and I don't think it would be very ethical either."

Nelson also said he would be reluctant to repeal the prohibition against archery hunters carrying firearms.

"Some people could take advantage of shooting an animal with a weapon, and then saying they got it with a bow," Nelson said.

Nelson said he understands the concern of many hunters who enter grizzly country, but said they would be better off trying to defend themselves against a big bear with pepper spray.

Rep. Del McOmie, R-Lander, is co-sponsoring the legislation with Case. He said he's heard concern from many archery hunters that they want to be able to carry guns for self defense, especially in areas where grizzlies are becoming more prevalent.

"Up around Dubois, they've started taking over some of the prime areas where people have hunted for years," McOmie said. "Even with rifles, they're reluctant to go in there."

Ron Niziolek of Cody, vice president of Bowhunters of Wyoming, said his 400-member group isn't taking a position on whether bow hunters should be allowed to carry firearms.

"We don't support the idea of having firearms during the archery season," Niziolek said. "But if it were to progress and go a little bit farther, the only thing we could support would be having an unscoped handgun, or a shotgun with buckshot."

Allowing archery hunters to carry rifles or shotguns loaded with slugs could lead to poaching, Niziolek said.

Niziolek said he understands hunters' concerns about grizzlies. He said he and his father have been charged by grizzly bears the last two times they have hunted elk near Cody.

"We had our bear spray out and didn't have to use it," Niziolek said, adding that he could see that if someone had a rifle in a similar situation they might be tempted to use it.

Dennis Biddle of Lander said he and some friends had collected 2,600 signatures from people in Fremont, Hot Springs and Park County who support allowing archery hunters to carry firearms.

"I don't want a bear chewing on me when I'm bowhunting," Biddle said. "It's a dangerous situation, and it's going to get worse in our country."

http://www.jacksonholestartrib.com/.../wyoming/c46741f0be7fa75187257110006178c1.txt
 
they would be better off trying to defend themselves against a big bear with pepper spray.

....try it.
Tell him to get his can of seasoning, go into the woods, find a pissed off bear and try it.
No more theory, go do it then write back and tell us how well that works out for ya.
 
Niziolek said he understands hunters' concerns about grizzlies. He said he and his father have been charged by grizzly bears the last two times they have hunted elk near Cody.
What a couple of Peter Panners, they must have imagined those bears. :neener: ET
 
"Of course it would be a poacher's dream, to be able to shoot something, especially with a silencer, and not have it be heard," said Mark Nelson, a Cheyenne game warden and vice president of the Wyoming Game Wardens Association. "That would be very detrimental to wildlife."

Yeah, God forbid that some hunters might want to prevent hearing damage and be considerate of their neighbors by equipping their firearms with a peice of gear that's required by law to be on automobiles.
 
Drizzt said:
Allowing archery hunters to carry rifles or shotguns loaded with slugs could lead to poaching, Niziolek said.

Then how about this crazy idea: bust them for poaching.
 
The negative comments are no more than the usual reactions to an idea that's new and different. Instinctively, the "No!" response pops up and the mouth opens before the brain is engaged. All manner of irrelevant and inane comments get urped out by folks in positions of authority.

Just like a lot of folks on this Board. :D

Art
 
Gov. Dave Freudenthal said Wednesday that he hadn't looked at Case's bill but didn't see why hunters needed to carry automatic or silenced weapons when they're not allowed to hunt with them.

The Governor hasn't read the legislation, but since he doesn't see the need, there must not be one. :scrutiny:

"Of course it would be a poacher's dream, to be able to shoot something, especially with a silencer, and not have it be heard," said Mark Nelson, a Cheyenne game warden and vice president of the Wyoming Game Wardens Association. "That would be very detrimental to wildlife."

On the question of automatic weapons, Nelson said, "That wouldn't be a good idea, either. The first shot should count. If a guy was out there with an automatic weapon, that would be dangerous for one, and I don't think it would be very ethical either."

Nelson also said he would be reluctant to repeal the prohibition against archery hunters carrying firearms.

"Some people could take advantage of shooting an animal with a weapon, and then saying they got it with a bow," Nelson said.

And the warden doesn't want you out there killing HIS animals with those things. We can't have THAT! IT'S FOR THE ANIMALS!!! :banghead:
 
Of course it would be a poacher's dream, to be able to shoot something, especially with a silencer, and not have it be heard
Because a poacher would never break the law and use a silencer if it's illegal? And they would never poach with a crossbow or compound bow.

:banghead:
 
The bow and arrow guys....

can just shoot their deer then stick an arrow in the hole........I have heard of this before.........as far as full auto..........the city slickers are bad enough with their spray and pray at the deer they think they "heard" in the brush now....gezzzzzzz....chris3
 
Sounds like fun, Pennsylvania won't even let hunters carry semi-auto weapons unless is't a shotgun plugged to a 3 shot limit. :eek: :barf:
 
The Griz is there, scat, prints seen in a lot of places. A big bull elk found chewed on early morning, prints everywhere . Elk must of been shot right before dusk and not recovered. Early next day, we came through the woods.
Deregulation of the Grizzley and limited hunting of them would help to change their ideas about who's on the top of the food chain. Hunters around here can tell stories about seeing a mama griz teaching her cub to stalk hunters.
To hear some game wardens talk about "their" game, their bears, makes you think they're trying to run a zoo. But not all wardens are like that though. Taking a HD shotgun with slugs to recover an elk here is better insurance.
 
"No carrying guns during archery season" is a law written for lazy wardens and for no other reason.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't backpackers allowed to carry guns all year?
 
I find the wardens comment on shooting game and then sticking a arrow in it to be nothing but smoke and mirrors. As if there is no difference between a bullet wound and an arrow wound. I don't know if you have to check game in Wyoming but it would certainly be clear an animal had been shot with a gun. The comment about silencers reveals a lot about how this warden does his enforcing. He has to hear a gun shot before he thinks about doing anything. The whole idea that a suppressor will make a gun silent is comical.
 
I had the same thought about the difference between an arrow and gun wound. Any competent game official would easily be able to tell the difference. Heck, any experienced game processor would as well.

I agree with the comment that mufflers are required on cars, why not allow them on guns? It's only polite. And yeah, the warden seems to concentrate on hearing gunfire for 'investigative purposes'. A criminal poaching with an illegal silencer or a bow, would easily be able to get away with it.
 
As if there is no difference between a bullet wound and an arrow wound. I don't know if you have to check game in Wyoming but it would certainly be clear an animal had been shot with a gun.
Good point ;)

Which hole do I stick the arrow into ... the entrance wound or the exit wound ...? :p
 
"Of course it would be a poacher's dream, to be able to shoot something, especially with a silencer, and not have it be heard," said Mark Nelson, a Cheyenne game warden and vice president of the Wyoming Game Wardens Association. "That would be very detrimental to wildlife."

Yes, because a gamewarden has superhuman hearing and can pinpoint the location of a unsilenced .300 magnum 20 miles from nowhere in Wyoming.:rolleyes:

Ron Niziolek of Cody, vice president of Bowhunters of Wyoming, said his 400-member group isn't taking a position on whether bow hunters should be allowed to carry firearms.

I don't think Ron should be allowed to have brakes on his car either, because it could lead to illegal speeding.:fire:

On the question of automatic weapons, Nelson said, "That wouldn't be a good idea, either. The first shot should count. If a guy was out there with an automatic weapon, that would be dangerous for one, and I don't think it would be very ethical either."

His parent's having sexual intercourse was obvbiously dangerous too.


"We had our bear spray out and didn't have to use it," Niziolek said, adding that he could see that if someone had a rifle in a similar situation they might be tempted to use it.

heaven forbid that a bear is killed in order to defend one's life... that's completely un-American.:rolleyes:

I thought Wyoming was full of pretty much level headed people, did they have to handpick 2 or 3 of the dumbest people in the state for this article?
 
There may be some dummies in Wyoming, but if you pause a moment to consider the laws Wyoming is considering versus those Illinois is considering, I think you'll agree even Wyoming's dummies are a few miles ahead of most of the politicians in Illinois.
 
Perfect, we'll appoint them the trustee's of Stupid Jail. ;)

You are exactly right, we need to recognize shades of better and applaud incremental improvement.
 
somehow i think a select fire AK will stop a griz faster, and could bring a whole new meaning to the term "bear spray". just have to use steel core or some other FMJ.
 
I didn't even realize there was a rule concerning full automatics and silencers, and I've never even heard anyone ever mention either of those terms in the same sentence as hunting. I have a hard time conceptualizing who this change would benefit.

The backup gun for bow hunting is a big deal for a lot of people. I am trying to conceptualize how a bow hunting group could be neutral or anti on the proposition. All I can speculate is that they already have conceptually crossed the bridge and hunt without a backup, and they know a rule change willl bring more archers into the field. I dunno.

I realize the train of thought that bear spray makes a better bear deterrent than a handgun, but bear spray isn't as effective a signalling device in my opinion. :)

I also don't think that allowing archers to carry handgun is going to encourage poaching or make enforcement any harder, because the handguns are short range weapons as well. It also sounds a bit inconsistent for wardens to oppose silencers because poachers could get more sneaky, while seeking to prevent silent archers from carrying noisemakers for fear of poaching.
 
Making backup handguns legal for bowhunters won't necessarily bring more archers into the NW WY field. There are many rifle hunters in WY that won't hunt there, due to the increasing Grizzley numbers, and the intricately defined "burden of proof" required by F&G that one was eminently threatening, neccessitating a kill by a hunter. The same burden of proof will be required of bowhunters if backups are allowed, meaning if you ain't being chewed on, you ain't being threatened. I agree though that a handgun is a good signaling device as well as last resort protection, and that archers should be allowed to carry one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top