-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
2016 centerfire deer rifle push?
- Thread starter avboiler11
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Matching handgun and rifle regulations would be the simplest way to do things, especally from an enforcement aspect.
Hookeye, the state considers a SBR to be a handgun. The hunting regulations used to say that that a handgun had to meet the state's definition of one and be .243 or larger for deer. It was discussed that since a SBR met the state's handgun definition, one could be used in a legal handgun caliber. Once made aware of the loophole, the DNR promptly closed it. SBR's are still legal for deer as long as they are chambered in a legal rifle round.
Hookeye, the state considers a SBR to be a handgun. The hunting regulations used to say that that a handgun had to meet the state's definition of one and be .243 or larger for deer. It was discussed that since a SBR met the state's handgun definition, one could be used in a legal handgun caliber. Once made aware of the loophole, the DNR promptly closed it. SBR's are still legal for deer as long as they are chambered in a legal rifle round.
Loophole?
My guess is that since SBR could exist in Fed view as handgun or rifle (dual under special classification), that folks were wanting to run their SBRs with buttstocks attached and go by handgun spec.
Making the declaration that the end form within SBR classification determins cartridge spec, that would negate the slide some folks might have tried.
The state told me "once a rifle, always a rifle" and SBR was even in handgun form, by their view for sporting use, still a rifle.
I was told I could run one, as a handgun, but it had to go by rifle cartridge spec.
So................the state would recognize it partway as a handgun?
That made no sense. And they got a bit snippy when I mentioned it.
All they had to do was recognize form within SBR and rule on that.
And I thought that's what they finally did in the last yr or so.
Contender, in handgun form.........goes by handgun cartridge spec.
Contender, in rifle form.............goes by rifle cartridge spec.
A Contender can exist as either rifle or handgun........without anything special.
Hell, one can even SBR a Contender.
(which would have mucked things up under the old ruling LOL).
For sporting use, the end form (as long as not an SBR, like the Contender example) dictates the spec.
Same should be for SBR.
Slap a stock on an SBR..........It becomes a rifle by sporting use designation.
Not nearly as complicated as the state thought it was.
And why I thought they went along with the Feds not all that long ago.
Now you're telling me they didn't?
Would not surprise me, but that'd be a bit of a change considering the flow.
I'd like to see what was ruled in the last 3 yrs.
My guess is that since SBR could exist in Fed view as handgun or rifle (dual under special classification), that folks were wanting to run their SBRs with buttstocks attached and go by handgun spec.
Making the declaration that the end form within SBR classification determins cartridge spec, that would negate the slide some folks might have tried.
The state told me "once a rifle, always a rifle" and SBR was even in handgun form, by their view for sporting use, still a rifle.
I was told I could run one, as a handgun, but it had to go by rifle cartridge spec.
So................the state would recognize it partway as a handgun?
That made no sense. And they got a bit snippy when I mentioned it.
All they had to do was recognize form within SBR and rule on that.
And I thought that's what they finally did in the last yr or so.
Contender, in handgun form.........goes by handgun cartridge spec.
Contender, in rifle form.............goes by rifle cartridge spec.
A Contender can exist as either rifle or handgun........without anything special.
Hell, one can even SBR a Contender.
(which would have mucked things up under the old ruling LOL).
For sporting use, the end form (as long as not an SBR, like the Contender example) dictates the spec.
Same should be for SBR.
Slap a stock on an SBR..........It becomes a rifle by sporting use designation.
Not nearly as complicated as the state thought it was.
And why I thought they went along with the Feds not all that long ago.
Now you're telling me they didn't?
Would not surprise me, but that'd be a bit of a change considering the flow.
I'd like to see what was ruled in the last 3 yrs.
Last edited:
I know the way it was (state's view)
Heard it changed recently.
Now you are saying that the change did not take place (I never got confirmation of the change).
Am wondering why any further legal if things are still as they once were (maybe a more specific ruling- just say SBR with buttstock is a rifle that can have short bbl, goes by rifle spec for deer sporting use).
I have seen how laws morph due to previous intent/other...........but this one, if what you say is true, is pretty odd.
IMHO it didn't need to take the route it did.
Of course, if the regs open to same for HG and rifle on deer, it doesn't matter.
Maybe, just maybe..........that was the fear of the state, that SBR would usher in the HP rifle by fed classification over state. But then states can be more specific.
But then again, SBS is now legal, and once wasn't.
But game laws can be different.
Hmmmmmmmmm.
Much ado about nothing, state legals fearful of that they really don't understand.
Lawyers will muck everything up.
Job security.
Heard it changed recently.
Now you are saying that the change did not take place (I never got confirmation of the change).
Am wondering why any further legal if things are still as they once were (maybe a more specific ruling- just say SBR with buttstock is a rifle that can have short bbl, goes by rifle spec for deer sporting use).
I have seen how laws morph due to previous intent/other...........but this one, if what you say is true, is pretty odd.
IMHO it didn't need to take the route it did.
Of course, if the regs open to same for HG and rifle on deer, it doesn't matter.
Maybe, just maybe..........that was the fear of the state, that SBR would usher in the HP rifle by fed classification over state. But then states can be more specific.
But then again, SBS is now legal, and once wasn't.
But game laws can be different.
Hmmmmmmmmm.
Much ado about nothing, state legals fearful of that they really don't understand.
Lawyers will muck everything up.
Job security.
Indiana Code § 35-47-1-6
"Handgun" means any firearm:
(1) designed or adapted so as to be aimed and fired from one (1) hand, regardless of barrel length; or
(2) any firearm with:
(A) a barrel less than sixteen (16) inches in length; or
(B) an overall length of less than twenty-six (26) inches.
"Handgun" means any firearm:
(1) designed or adapted so as to be aimed and fired from one (1) hand, regardless of barrel length; or
(2) any firearm with:
(A) a barrel less than sixteen (16) inches in length; or
(B) an overall length of less than twenty-six (26) inches.
I don't see how that skirts Federal SBR laws.
By IN code cited, a rifle bought for handgun deer cartridge spec, converted to handgun..........would require NFA work.
And adding the buttstock would take it to rifle status, and require rifle cartridge spec.
Keeping an SBR in handgun form (no stock) should allow it to run the handgun cartridge spec............but per the old IN specialist's emails....................it would not.
Again, a change supposedly took place not all that long ago.
I'd like to see what was said about SBR' for deer hunting, with respect to form and cartridge allowance due to it.
By IN code cited, a rifle bought for handgun deer cartridge spec, converted to handgun..........would require NFA work.
And adding the buttstock would take it to rifle status, and require rifle cartridge spec.
Keeping an SBR in handgun form (no stock) should allow it to run the handgun cartridge spec............but per the old IN specialist's emails....................it would not.
Again, a change supposedly took place not all that long ago.
I'd like to see what was said about SBR' for deer hunting, with respect to form and cartridge allowance due to it.
I have not seen anything that says the state changed their mind, and nothing to say they didn't (or if they did, they didn't change it again).
Still think a 7600 .243 handgun would be fun for deer. Unique and actually a simple conversion.
Still think a 7600 .243 handgun would be fun for deer. Unique and actually a simple conversion.
That's the thing -- you cannot legally convert a rifle to handgun configuration. If it starts life as a rifle, it must stay a rifle. However, a pistol can be converted into a rifle and back to a pistol at will.
This should clarify the CURRENT SBR regulations in Indiana. M4Madness you may recognize this as you posted in the thread over on ar15.com
From Big-Bore on AR15.com (He's a fellow Hoosier too)
Before someone breaks out the tin-foil hat or starts thinking they have found a loop-hole for their SBR in .300 Weatherby, here is an e-mail that I got from the DNR on August 3 2009 concerning this exact topic. The correct answer has already been given but this is direct from the DNR. The only change since then is the maximum case length taken to 1.800 inches instead of 1.625 inches:
Dear Big-Bore (name obviously changed),
The proposed rule change makes it clear that a short-barreled rifle can only be used to fire a rifle cartridge that meets the specifications in the rule (see below) for rifles.
A short-barreled rifle must fire a cartridge that meets the rifle cartridge requirements. Even with this rule change, a short-barreled rifle can still be used during the deer firearms season in accordance with federal law with a cartridge that is at least .357 in diameter, has a minimum case length of 1.16 inches, and a maximum case length of 1.625 inches. (ed. to add: this maximum case length is now 1.800 inches)
The DNR considers a short-barreled rifle to be a rifle, as defined by federal law, not a handgun.
The .458 SOCOM would still be legal to use as a rifle cartridge during the deer firearms season.
The actual rule language reads as follows (proposed new language is in bold font):
(2) A handgun must:
(A) conform to the requirements of IC 35-47-2;
(B) have a barrel at least four (4) inches long; and
(C) fire a bullet of two hundred forty-three thousandths (.243) inch diameter or larger; and
(D) not be a rifle that has a barrel less than eighteen (18) inches or is designed or redesigned to be fired from the shoulder.
(4) A rifle must fire a cartridge that meets the following specifications:
(A) fire a bullet of three hundred fifty-seven thousandths (.357) of an inch diameter or larger;
(B) have a minimum case length of one and sixteen-hundredths (1.16) inches; and
(C) have a maximum case length of one and six hundred twenty-five thousandths (1.625) inches. (this is now 1.800 inches)
Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions.
Sincerely,
Linnea Petercheff
Operations Staff Specialist
Division of Fish and Wildlife
402 W. Washington Street, Room W273
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Phone: (317) 233-6527
Fax: (317) 232-8150
From Big-Bore on AR15.com (He's a fellow Hoosier too)
Before someone breaks out the tin-foil hat or starts thinking they have found a loop-hole for their SBR in .300 Weatherby, here is an e-mail that I got from the DNR on August 3 2009 concerning this exact topic. The correct answer has already been given but this is direct from the DNR. The only change since then is the maximum case length taken to 1.800 inches instead of 1.625 inches:
Dear Big-Bore (name obviously changed),
The proposed rule change makes it clear that a short-barreled rifle can only be used to fire a rifle cartridge that meets the specifications in the rule (see below) for rifles.
A short-barreled rifle must fire a cartridge that meets the rifle cartridge requirements. Even with this rule change, a short-barreled rifle can still be used during the deer firearms season in accordance with federal law with a cartridge that is at least .357 in diameter, has a minimum case length of 1.16 inches, and a maximum case length of 1.625 inches. (ed. to add: this maximum case length is now 1.800 inches)
The DNR considers a short-barreled rifle to be a rifle, as defined by federal law, not a handgun.
The .458 SOCOM would still be legal to use as a rifle cartridge during the deer firearms season.
The actual rule language reads as follows (proposed new language is in bold font):
(2) A handgun must:
(A) conform to the requirements of IC 35-47-2;
(B) have a barrel at least four (4) inches long; and
(C) fire a bullet of two hundred forty-three thousandths (.243) inch diameter or larger; and
(D) not be a rifle that has a barrel less than eighteen (18) inches or is designed or redesigned to be fired from the shoulder.
(4) A rifle must fire a cartridge that meets the following specifications:
(A) fire a bullet of three hundred fifty-seven thousandths (.357) of an inch diameter or larger;
(B) have a minimum case length of one and sixteen-hundredths (1.16) inches; and
(C) have a maximum case length of one and six hundred twenty-five thousandths (1.625) inches. (this is now 1.800 inches)
Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions.
Sincerely,
Linnea Petercheff
Operations Staff Specialist
Division of Fish and Wildlife
402 W. Washington Street, Room W273
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Phone: (317) 233-6527
Fax: (317) 232-8150
There was no loophole outside of SBR classification allowing both rifle and handgun form within.
Some might have thought that then allowed a buttstock and handgun cartridge spec............IMHO quite the stretch.
To say no meant the state defined the differences, or allowed form within SBR to define- all rifles wear buttstocks).
The state yrs ago said SBR, even in handgun form (could be run as handgun for deer) was still a rifle, and governed by rifle cartridge spec. No buttstock needed.
Again, that was some time ago, and it was reported that a change had happened (maybe just further clarification and no change- dunno, have yet to see what was or wasn't done - in the last 3 yrs).
My question...............does the state now recognize an SBR in handgun form as a handgun, governed by handgun deer cartridge spec?
Yrs ago it was yes on seeing is as sporting handgun, but not on the handgun cartridge spec (I bet simply because the term is Short Barrel Rifle)
Thought they recently recognized the difference by form, within encompassing special SBR classification.
This kinda along the lines of now allowing SBS............the state more aligning with federal.
Some might have thought that then allowed a buttstock and handgun cartridge spec............IMHO quite the stretch.
To say no meant the state defined the differences, or allowed form within SBR to define- all rifles wear buttstocks).
The state yrs ago said SBR, even in handgun form (could be run as handgun for deer) was still a rifle, and governed by rifle cartridge spec. No buttstock needed.
Again, that was some time ago, and it was reported that a change had happened (maybe just further clarification and no change- dunno, have yet to see what was or wasn't done - in the last 3 yrs).
My question...............does the state now recognize an SBR in handgun form as a handgun, governed by handgun deer cartridge spec?
Yrs ago it was yes on seeing is as sporting handgun, but not on the handgun cartridge spec (I bet simply because the term is Short Barrel Rifle)
Thought they recently recognized the difference by form, within encompassing special SBR classification.
This kinda along the lines of now allowing SBS............the state more aligning with federal.
Last edited:
What the state is saying is one cannot take a handgun and make it a rifle, and run it as a "handgun" (using handgun deer cartridge spec).
Initial classification does not trump end form.
That should have been a no brainer.
But SBR allows for both forms within that classification and that is a different deal.
Again, does the state now recognize an SBR in handgun form (no buttstock) as a handgun (for sporting use on deer now governed by handgun cartridge spec)?
Initial classification does not trump end form.
That should have been a no brainer.
But SBR allows for both forms within that classification and that is a different deal.
Again, does the state now recognize an SBR in handgun form (no buttstock) as a handgun (for sporting use on deer now governed by handgun cartridge spec)?
This statement is what keeps throwing me off. A short-barreled RIFLE cannot be converted to handgun configuration, as rifles must stay rifles. One could register a pistol as a SBR then add the stock after the approved paperwork comes back, but if you change it back to pistol form, it is no longer classified as a SBR. That's similar to how guys can take their SBR out of state without doing paperwork. Tbey simply add a 16"+ barrel and it is no longer considered a SBR until they reinstall their short barrel when back in Indiana.
My guess is that the only reason the 16" line was added in this new HPR proposal was just some crazy redundancy defining a rifle. With both rifle and handgun regs matching if it passes, there is no reason to exclude SBR's, especially considering that they are currently legal.
I agree with you. It's an effort to define a rifle and not have any confusion. If they would just copy federal law it would be easy.
There is no reason to exclude SBR's at all, i totally agree. But the way it's currently written it would.
M4.......you're telling me that an SBR is not legal without a buttstock?
Is that overall or just in deer hunting use?
The state told me an SBR in handgun form was legal (years ago) but it was by classification still a "rifle" (as far as they were concerned) and as such had to go by rifle cartridge spec.
Either the state didn't really know what they were talking about, was in error, or has since made changes.
Was specifically asked if a Remington 7600 having gone SBR, with less than 16" bbl and no buttstock could be run as a handgun for deer in IN.
I got "yes, but had to go by rifle cartridge spec".
Maybe they misunderstood and thought I was just wanting a 7600 rifle with less than 16" bbl...............but I asked TWICE about it being used in handgun form.
Maybe by legal they were confused and it has since been better explained/defined. I dunno.
Is that overall or just in deer hunting use?
The state told me an SBR in handgun form was legal (years ago) but it was by classification still a "rifle" (as far as they were concerned) and as such had to go by rifle cartridge spec.
Either the state didn't really know what they were talking about, was in error, or has since made changes.
Was specifically asked if a Remington 7600 having gone SBR, with less than 16" bbl and no buttstock could be run as a handgun for deer in IN.
I got "yes, but had to go by rifle cartridge spec".
Maybe they misunderstood and thought I was just wanting a 7600 rifle with less than 16" bbl...............but I asked TWICE about it being used in handgun form.
Maybe by legal they were confused and it has since been better explained/defined. I dunno.
Last edited:
If SBR can't run without buttstock for deer as handgun............then the build is pointless (no matter what the cartridge)
Still would be cool though (if SBR without stock is legal outside of deer hunting).
Funny, I have a Super 16 TC bbl and can run my Contender as either rifle or handgun, by the change in grip/stock.
It however is in .35 Rem so works under either cartridge spec (trimmed for rifle use of course).
Still would be cool though (if SBR without stock is legal outside of deer hunting).
Funny, I have a Super 16 TC bbl and can run my Contender as either rifle or handgun, by the change in grip/stock.
It however is in .35 Rem so works under either cartridge spec (trimmed for rifle use of course).
Last edited:
I wouldn't trust the DNR regarding NFA questions. They weren't even aware of the SBR "loophole" until it was shoved in their faces. The DNR used to state that a handgun must meet the state's definition of a handgun to be hunted with under handgun regs. Little did they know that the State of Indiana classified all SBR's as handguns. That's why they had to add line "D" to the code listed on the preceding page of this thread. That made it where SBR's were considered rifles as far as hunting is concerned, even though the state STILL considers them handguns.
A rifle without a stock is no longer a rifle. It is a handgun, or perhaps an AOW.
A rifle without a stock is no longer a rifle. It is a handgun, or perhaps an AOW.
Last edited:
Remember, an Encore or Contender sold brand new in rifle configuration can NEVER be converted to a handgun. That's why it is best to buy them as a handgun, so you can switch between handgun and rifle configurations at will. It's a stupid law, but a law nonetheless.
EDIT: I only clarified the T/C issue for others' reference, not that I thought you were doing anything illegal. Lol!
Last edited:
Site Supporter
Members online
- Ingomike
- bogus
- Stubbleducker
- Jeffforpresident
- oze
- red_zr24x4
- profjeremy
- JayCo
- Gandalf
- squeals99
- scattergunner
- bacon#1
- injb
- PTSC
- Godbybe
- Leadeye
- Jim McKalip
- DoggyDaddy
- NyleRN
- KRN123060
- Judamonster
- XDdreams
- bkflyer
- jamil
- 10mm
- Mgderf
- Kirk Freeman
- irl104
- Born2vette
- RugerRog
- thedreamer
- Bennettjh
- Mikey1911
- nucular
- Ethanhoosier1
- Jmoody27
- racegunz
- tcecil88
- SolidDragon74
- INPatriot
- Capvideo
- Wstar425
- VERT
- atticachert
- derrickgoins
- Walking Bear
- INP8riot
- printcraft
- Ark
- Dog1