If you're seeing this topic then another mass shooting hap…

On December 26 2018 05:13 micronesia wrote:
As far as I'm aware, hunting does not require more than five rounds before reload. Many formats of non-hunting sports shooting require larger magazines. It's not really that big of a deal if people need to do things a little differently than they did before, provided there is some level of consistency across regions, but implementation would be pretty difficult. Many firearms cannot be easily converted over to 5-round capacity, so you might have to use half-measures like standing rules never to put more than five rounds into a magazine even if it's capacity is larger, which kind of defeats the purpose. It might be possible to implement 5 rounds in a reasonable way if the law included a large and complex list of rules and exemptions regarding how to handle various situations, but that would require buy-in and participation from experts, which will only happen if the NRA curbs their tendency to oppose almost every conceivable restriction, and advocates of stricter gun laws express a willingness to act in good faith and permit some flexibility.

On December 26 2018 05:13 micronesia wrote:
As far as I'm aware, hunting does not require more than five rounds before reload. Many formats of non-hunting sports shooting require larger magazines. It's not really that big of a deal if people need to do things a little differently than they did before, provided there is some level of consistency across regions, but implementation would be pretty difficult. Many firearms cannot be easily converted over to 5-round capacity, so you might have to use half-measures like standing rules never to put more than five rounds into a magazine even if it's capacity is larger, which kind of defeats the purpose. It might be possible to implement 5 rounds in a reasonable way if the law included a large and complex list of rules and exemptions regarding how to handle various situations, but that would require buy-in and participation from experts, which will only happen if the NRA curbs their tendency to oppose almost every conceivable restriction, and advocates of stricter gun laws express a willingness to act in good faith and permit some flexibility.

On December 26 2018 11:05 JimmiC wrote:
I agree, I have been advocating for bolt action weapons and have no problems with them. I dont hunt but I sure enjoy the meat. I used to own a 22 but gave it to cousin since I never go to the farm anymore. I also dont claim to be a gun expert. Only that many countries allow guns and have far fewer gin related fatalities and injuries. It would be wise to look at what those places are doing and adopt similar rules and practices.

On December 26 2018 10:36 Sermokala wrote:
I would argue the line to be a 7 round magazine. Thats how many you can load into the average 30-30 that is used so ubiquitously. Danglers was saying he was compromising on the mag size like he stated in his previous post.

People that say you only need one bullet have never hunted and should be ignored. The idea that you should have one chance at a large animal is really dumb and we already have examples of how that would go with muzzle shooting season. You might as well just say we don't even need guns we can just use crossbows and long bows. First off putting more rounds into a deer is better then just wounding it once and making it suffer for that for years or days until it finally dies. Two you might see more then one deer. I personally have seen groups of 4-6 deer let alone the years when its really warm and they're just sitting in marshland and you need to set up a drive for them.

A clever person who actually knew firearms would advocate for an out of gun magazine ban ie that you can't have a magazine that extrudes from the receiver. On old bolt actions, you'd have small clips of rounds whose magazine became flush with the rest of the receiver. That would limit the size of magazine rounds and still appeal to the traditions and aesthetics of hunting instead of more=bad.

On December 26 2018 14:34 Sermokala wrote:
Well my point was with the first paragraph that mag sizes get tricky when they aren't mags anymore. Ie 30-30s and their toob magazine thing.

You're silly if you're going to seriously tell someone not to shoot at more then one animal if you see one. My great uncle shot 3 from his moisin nagant the day he dropped dead and they all went down.

Even if this was a serious argument the last argument you will win is to talk down to rednecks and how they hunt. Cletus may not speak the good English but he brings meat home every year.

On December 26 2018 14:49 Excludos wrote:


Well learning how to hunt should definitively be a prerequisite for owning a hunting rifle as well, which includes things like hunting culture. Do not under any circumstance shoot at packs of animals (taking down one in a pack is fine btw, just make sure you're not taking the mother away from her calfs or similar). If respect for animals isn't taught before people go hunting, these types of gung ho rambo hunters who shoot at anything that moves is what you're going to end up with. I'd say this is right up there with the most needed type of regulation out there. More than magazine size, bump stock, "assault weapons", pistol grips, adjustable stocks or anything else: People need to be properly taught how and when to use their wrapons before they are issued one. Be it for self defence, hunting or sports.

On December 27 2018 04:16 Sermokala wrote:

These hunting rifles are most often passed down through the family. Cletus learns how to hunt from his father or uncle teaching him from the age of 13 and then hunt with their family group in November until they die. Do you see the inherent problem with your points now or do we have to keep circling around where you spout how your theoretically good ideas and I clearly show how they're inviable?

On December 27 2018 05:36 Excludos wrote:


I don't see how that impacts my point at all. Every other first world nation has managed to implement this successsfully, often with longer hunting history. It's not impossible in the US "just because".

Also how is this "circling around"? I have not seen you make this argument yet.. we haven't circled from or to anywhere

On December 27 2018 06:10 JimmiC wrote:
Well yes, good responsible people will teach responsible things and the bad will teach bad things. If you had no issues keeping tge status quo was the goal then sticking with tge current system would nake sense.

On December 27 2018 07:31 Sermokala wrote:

Beacuse I'm telling you why it doesn't work for the real situation on the ground and you keep describing what would be best reguardless of the situation on the ground. Its circular talking that doesn't have any value outside of a coffe house in france.

Its like GH and abolishing the police. Sure it would be great to rebuild the police from scratch into exactly what would work for a modern world but it would probably be worse then before and have a period of mass anarchy in the meantime.

You're not going to go into these small communities and tell them that their way is wrong and they need to do the way the government tells them to do it. The NRA does gun safety courses as it is and thats pretty much all we have for hunting regulation in America. Trying to backstop what families have been doing on their private land for generations with what the big government wants them to do isn't going to work. Enforcing these dictates on them isn't going to happen. It works in other nations because they have a tradition of the government telling them what they can and can't do in their lives but America is a federation where it can get really thin on actual government that isn't reliant directly on the small amount of people they govern allowing them to govern.

If you want to talk about what would be best in a perfect world then have that discussion with everyone else that agrees with you already. But if you want to debate what would actually work then try to apply some perspective of the actual issue.


And the hunting communities are the last people any gun control advocate person wants to spark a fight with. They do more for the environment then almost all other demographics and the NRA is just sitting in the corner with a bag full of quarters waiting to jump to their defence.

On December 27 2018 18:19 Falling wrote:
Yeah, lots and lots of hunters in my community. I don't know of any Rambos. They're just your average mechanics, contractors, teachers, and doctors. They're concerned about conservation and personal gun safety because they're in it for the long haul. They're annoyed with long gun registries and bans on hunting grizzly bears, but they aren't a bunch of shoot 'em up yahoos. I'd expect the culture to be somewhat the same amongst hunters down south, by and large.