smccrory

Sorry, it's been a long week and it's late and I didn't get to ride today.

Nice try Gump, but I don't think he's capable of getting the point after this much trying.

Look, I'm with ya on getting new shooter started and kudos for your step-in approach. That's how ice started my daughter, nephew and friends' kids. A .410 slug is probably ok but I'd personally prefer a 20 or 12, or a 30-30 or stronger as soon as possible.

Nope, but the .38 is pathetic for a deer, and cruel.

I have idea what you're trying to say there. That I'm Joe Biden because...? I think you're grasping, but I doubt it matters. You're coming off to me like someone more focused on your GF's hunting experience than the ethics of taking another sentient creature's life. How many other hunters are like you these days?

I keep trying to picture in my mind how I could ride there on a CRF230L carrying two new tires, tubes and rim liner without looking like a complete dork. I'll probably end up driving, which risks ridicule just as badly... ;-/

Some are like that. I'm a fan of the .380, myself, because concealment is more important to me in that case than an ethical kill. But then again, I don't hunt humans. Except with sarcasm. I do hunt humans with sarcasm. Muahwhahaha....

It's about her isn't it. Poor GF. Why can't the deer just play nice, get in close and let hunters use something they can more easily handle? Darned inconsiderate deer.

And it's also these folks, and resulting situations that displays hunting in a negative light, thus jeopardizing those privileges for every hunter. Don't believe me? Ask Ducks Unlimited why public opinion is important to their mission.

Again, we're not taking issue with capability, but with ethics! Why can't you get that? Call it emotional or call it anthropomorphic, but I'm of the strong opinion and untold experience that animals are self-aware enough to merit consideration of how they should die. I'd rather put meat in a freezer knowing that I used a caliber sufficient enough to seriously expedite an animal's death, and not the smallest I could legal use.

Not exactly: Legal deer hunting rifles are chambered for the following calibers: .357 Magnum, .357 Maximum, .38 Special, .375 Super Magnum, .375 Winchester, .38-55, .41 Long Colt, .41 Magnum, .44 Special, .44 Magnum, .444 Marlin, .45 ACP, .45 Colt, .45 Long Colt, .45 Winchester Magnum, .45 Smith & Wesson, .454 Casull, .460 Smith & Wesson, .45-70, .45-90, .45-110, .475 Linebaugh, .50-70, .50-90, .50-100, .50-110 and .500 Smith & Wesson. It's the lower-energy calibers I'm taking issue with, particularly the .38 special.

I'll bring a Beretta 391 with foster slugs, an SKS, a Ruger LCP and a Beretta 92FS. Who's bringing the bill's author?

Your graph is flawed because of the very reason you state (I thought it was obvious, but I'm glad you typed it) - You don't see any of the classic long-gun rounds on it. You keep wanting to make comparisons with prior handgun caliber hunting privileges, missing that my statement is in comparison with rifle loads. Yes, that means I have an issue with most pistol calibers used on large animals. This excludes the Casul, .44, .45 long colt, all of the 50 calibers, etc. of course. Look, the 30-06 is a gold standard for deer hunting, as are 12g and 20g slugs. Hunting with FIVE TO SIX TIMES LESS kinetic energy using handgun rounds is, to me, more about the hunter's experience of the kill, than the game's, and that's what I have a problem with. I respect a hunter's quest to practice, practice, practice getting a heart shot or at the very least well-placed lung penetration. I respect a hunter selecting a high-energy projectile to maximize rapid blood loss and unconsciousness. I respect a hunter taking his or her time and selecting the right animal to take. I do not respect the use of low-energy handgun rounds, sloppy technique or settling for the first animal of the day so they don't get their tootsies cold.

Are you asking if I think a 30-06 is statistically more humane than a .410 slug or a .38 special? Yes, yes I do. KINETIC ENERGY CALCULATIONS: In descending order Projectile Weight Velocity Kinetic Energy .30-06 Rifle 180 grains 2600 fps 2701 ft. lbs. .357 magnum Pistol 125 grains 1450 583 Light Spear 2 pounds 73.5 167 Heavy Spear 5 pounds 37 106 Heavy Dart 6 ounces 103 62 Modern Arrow 540 grains 220 58 Light Dart 3 ounces 125 45 Primitive Arrow 500 grains 165 29

This is exactly my point as well. A basic used shotty costs, what, $200-300? That's cheaper than a handgun and has tons more projectile energy to make short an animal's suffering. Heck, even a Mosin Nagant 91/30 with a decent barrel can be had for under $150. Again, it's not about capability. A staple will kill a deer, <slowly>. It's about meeting an ethical obligation to minimize suffering when taking an animal's life. It's one of the most principled things that keeps me sympathetic with (ethical) wildlife management. To me, bow hunting is on the edge, mainly because it's a long, heavy projectile that slices open a bleed channel and allows an animal to lose consciousness relatively quickly. Small projectiles like a .38 or 9mm don't create the same physiological damage that a rifle round does. But you don't have to believe me - Google the ballistic charts yourself. The strausberg tests are also interesting reading, and will support what I'm saying. Unless you simply don't care about the animal's suffering - in which case we'll never reach consensus.

I never said it wouldn't kill a dear, I said that low-energy ammo is inhumane.

I rarely get to engage a deer at 7 yards while my pistol's muzzle energy is still strong at the relatively low velocity of a larger bullet shedding power logarithmically over distance and time.

Very interesting. Reverse psychology I suppose, makes an employee really think about their role and level of personal investment.

I can't read the article from work, but if that's the case, it's wrong IMHO. Hunting is one thing, but inadequate power to establish a quick, clean kill is no less than inhumane.

Street, Magz is right about this, and the US hasn't historically been ruled by a military state that established a national ID, so any comparison with Afghanistan is a poor one at best. Interestingly, I'd be willing to bet that a lot of republicans AND democrats would be staunchly against universal ID assignment for fear it would be used to track the movement of people, firearm transactions and more. Or are you saying you're in favor of an ID system similar to Europe's? Like I said, pay for universal IDs and I'll be right there with ya requiring them to vote, but until then, ID laws = voter suppression that asymmetrically favors the GOP.

Congrats jschaf! For some reason I've been admiring the look of the 70s and 80s BMW twins. I love the styling of old bikes.

Congrats Hutch!

Agreeing with Tonik - many repubs know this and have crunched the numbers. They're ginning up a sense of crisis to require voter IDs, limit mailed ballots, return times, etc. in a way that sociologically tips the scale towards their camp. Many dems want the opposite - to include everyone, not just because that's what the founding fathers wanted (as they repeat over and over), but also because they've done the math on whose votes would be disenfranchised. The exact same thing happens with district gerrymandering of course and any politician that doesn't claim partisan bias on either topic is a liar. Personally I believe that voters should ultimately present a reasonable proof of identity, but I don't call for changes at this time. Why? The problem is that many, many legitimate citizens lack sufficient state ID cards (like a driver's license) or national IDs (like a pilot's certificate or military ID), often due to socioeconomic factors and indeed, those citizens would be disenfranchised. If repubs were sincere about eliminating potential fraud while appreciating that a vote is a right, they would sponsor dollars to get valid IDs into the hands of every legal citizen who doesn't have one, AND they would say they're willing to pay for more accessible voting channels.

You're own your own with that comment Magz. Votes very much influence where we go to war, what companies we bail out, social program and defense spending, who controls your bedroom and a woman's body and a plethora of things totally worth mentioning but I'm on a short lunch break.

Or clothes. Not that there's anything wrong with that...