Excluding Deer rifles on PUBLIC LAND for 5 yrs is Bogus Man!

[HoughMade]

Yes, you're right. It is the law. I'm just stating that I don't think it's right (in a philosophical sense).

...and there's nothing wrong with trying to get a law changed.

As to the rifle thing thing on public land, I think letting the new law be in place for a at least a season before agitating for changes may be a more wise approach. Methinks limiting it to private land was a compromise necessary to get it out of committee and (or get the votes) and when it is clear the world didn't come to an end during the 2016 dear season, further reforms may be in order.

...but As to who owns the wildlife, Ind. Code 14-22-1-1 and 6-1.

 

[Whosyer]

Seed, sorry, dude, that's the law.

I hate being the cold bucket of truth on INGO, but Title 14 clearly states that all game critters belong to the State of Indiana.

The deer belong to the State, until they eat your crops or crash through your windshield. Then they become Gods creatures.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Glad we're back to medieval times where the king owns the game animals and rules over who may hunt and eat them. Just because something is law doesn't make it right, and doesn't mean you shouldn't complain about it and try to make it right.

I can understand where you are coming from, but look at it this way. The state is the people of the state not a king, the governor,or the legislature but the whole of the people of the state, the animals belong to the people of the state. We elect representatives to set the rules on regard to our communal property the animals.

Yes, you're right. It is the law. I'm just stating that I don't think it's right (in a philosophical sense).

As I stated above I can understand your viewpoint.

 

[DragonGunner]

...and there's nothing wrong with trying to get a law changed.

As to the rifle thing thing on public land, I think letting the new law be in place for a at least a season before agitating for changes may be a more wise approach. Methinks limiting it to private land was a compromise necessary to get it out of committee and (or get the votes) and when it is clear the world didn't come to an end during the 2016 dear season, further reforms may be in order.

...but As to who owns the wildlife, Ind. Code 14-22-1-1 and 6-1.

Agree….but its a 5 year program that the DNR will be watching so don't see any soon changes for public land. Most likely a compromise though as you may have a bunch of hunters very close to each other on public land with rifles that shoot much farther than shotguns so most likely more a concern than a guy on his own 100 acre woods.

 

[pudly]

Feel free to vent your spleen here. Doesn't mean they will do what you want, but at least you will be speaking to the right people.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/great-outdoors/410720-dnr-seeks-input-fish-hunt-trap-regulations.html

 

[amboy49]

Nope.....so much nope.

If you don't have a safe line of fire where you know nobody is behind it, you should NOT be taking a shot.

And it's not about safety. Don't kid yourself. Guns kill. Doesn't matter if it's a 358 hoosier bullet or a 308 win bullet.

"Guns kill." REALLY, we're back to that ? !

 

[mom45]

Agree….but its a 5 year program that the DNR will be watching so don't see any soon changes for public land. Most likely a compromise though as you may have a bunch of hunters very close to each other on public land with rifles that shoot much farther than shotguns so most likely more a concern than a guy on his own 100 acre woods.

But I read a response to my comment to this effect that it has nothing to do with safety. After all, I am sure that EVERYONE hunting on public land is well aware of the location of each and every other person out there hunting. Also, I expect there are many trees out there...those make excellent backstops.