Virginia County Bans Rifles for Deer Hunting

[darkvibe]

Originally Posted by Bree

I think NY has similar laws for Westchester County and all of Long Island. I could be wrong as I'm not a hunter.

NY didn't let anyone use a rifle anywhere in the southern tier for a long time. Southern tier is roughly anywhere south of I-90 which goes basically from Buffalo to Albany for you out of stat people. Over the past 2 or 3 years they've been allowing rifles in certain counties again.

[Bree]

Originally Posted by darkvibe

NY didn't let anyone use a rifle anywhere in the southern tier for a long time. Southern tier is roughly anywhere south of I-90 which goes basically from Buffalo to Albany for you out of stat people. Over the past 2 or 3 years they've been allowing rifles in certain counties again.

I believe that NY would have such restrictions. I don't think you can hunt deer with a rifle in or near Buffalo. Quite frankly, that doesn't bother me in the least. I am kind of happy that people aren't taking shots at whatever moves in and around Buffalo. They might mistake me on my motorcycle for a deer or a moose or a bear or something else and then start blasting!!

Out in the rural areas and the forests is a different ballgame.

[Reno82]

Wait a second.... is a muzzleloader a rifle??? Which bullet is going to hit a person. The first shot or the second after I reload!! Most hunting rifles are bolts... so its one bullet loaded to shot at a time. Some muzzleloaders are shooting very flat and straight. If you restrict rifles it should be all rifles or if you allow muzzleloaders then all rifles should be allowed. Just my 2 cents....

[darkvibe]

Originally Posted by Reno82

Wait a second.... is a muzzleloader a rifle??? Which bullet is going to hit a person. The first shot or the second after I reload!! Most hunting rifles are bolts... so its one bullet loaded to shot at a time. Some muzzleloaders are shooting very flat and straight. If you restrict rifles it should be all rifles or if you allow muzzleloaders then all rifles should be allowed. Just my 2 cents....

I think it's a typical liberal feel-good law. Doesn't solve a thing.

Than again you have idiots coming up here from areas without hunting (NYC) that end up shooting livestock because they don't have a clue how to hunt or use common sense. There was a farmer somewhere around here that took orange paint and painted "COW" on the side of all of his cows so no one would shoot them.

[eric_t12]

Originally Posted by Cannibul

I don't support the DC gun ban based on population density. But if they had a deer season I would suspect it would be limited to an archery season due to population density and safety.

And this law is NOT a gun ban. You are not banned from owning a rifle. You are however restricted from using it for hunting deer. There is a difference. I agree. however, anything you can do with that rifle to cause harm or damage to one's person or property, is already illegal. if you're arguing it from a safety standpoint, So does DC.

"The District of Columbia City Council concluded that prohibiting the easily concealable handguns preferred by criminals, and imposing prudent safety rules on rifles and shotguns, was a good, practical strategy for reducing crime, suicide, domestic violence and accidental shootings. Far from a blanket ban, the law strikes a balance between gun owners and the larger community."

If you want to buy an out of state license and hunt deer with your rifle in West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee or North Carolina you are free to do so. However if you want to hunt in Illinois you MUST use a shotgun with slugs. Have had to do so for a long time. Yet I don't see ANY of you bitching like some old woman about that. Why? Because the "old" restriction is good and the "new" restriction is bad? errrr, maybe because we didn't know there was a prior restriction.

and knowing that, i feel it begs this question. if the prior restriction was so effective why another?

sorry, maybe its my old age creeping up on me,

An by the logic of some of the people on this thread I should be allowed to use my M40 recoilless rifle for deer hunting.

and by that statement, you have given the same defense as the anti-gunners as to why the second amendment should be inherently restricted:

"well do you think we should all be able to own nukes?!"

yet again ---------->

In my eyes you are either fools or hypocrites. Complain about ALL rifle restricted states and units or complain about none of them.

well, since i am quite vocal on almost any thread i find concerning these 'further common-sense regulations', i feel i'm in that third category, the one you didn't mention...

and as for hypocrites, thanks for using the tired ol' anti-gunner standby of going straight to the worst-case scenario without regard to common sense, or the fact that before any regulation of firearms, i dont know of one person who hunted deer with this personal cannon. if you can find one, and make sure that use was legal and harmful to someone else, please post it.

...hypocrites...

There was most likely two options. Ban all hunting or restrict the type of weapon used.

while i'm not debating the stupid politicians saw it that way, i still haven't seen a report of droves of people shot by missed hunter's bullets... the old 'temporary safety for liberty' argument comes to mind.

The majority of you who live in states who have fairly unrestricted hunting laws seem to have really have your panties in a bunch over this. The rest of us who have hunted or lived under these laws for over 50 years in some cases see no problem with it and actually understand it.

well considering my state had 9 murders in 2006, for a massive murder rate of 1.2/100,000 people, even with our panties being so caught in a bunch we have much less crime than you do, and incredibly LOOOOW restrictions on firearms... alaska, vermond, and montana also have incredibly low rates, you should check them out.

well ok, when your laws start permeating the other states and their common-sense overtakes my state's legislature, i hope you will be equally as caring.

A rifle bullet can travel over two miles. In a state like Virginia it's really hard to know what is two miles away in every direction all the time.

This restriction is not a anti-gun law in any way shape or form. No more than a archery only season or unit is.

i disagree. you attempt to legislate away a problem that (imo,) probably doesn't exist. not to mention think that legislation of intelligence (knowing what's behind your target) is good policy, instead of teaching it to the hunters themselves; thereby expecting them to accept the consequences of not knowing what's behind their target, and accepting the (already on the books) consequences for their (destruction of property, manslaughter, ad nauseum) ations.

...or at least that's how it looks to me.

maybe my panties are too tight...