Mr VJP

In the May 2011 issue of Outdoor Life magazine they have an article on the best towns in America for Sportsman to live in. They rank many factors in their decision such as hunting and fishing opportunities, plus cost of living, taxes, gun laws, job opportunities, household incomes, schools, unemployment, quality of life, etc.,etc. The #1 town on the list is Bend, Oregon. #2 is Pinedale, Wyoming. NY has only one town on the list, at #98 is Saratoga Springs, NY. Get a copy of the magazine and check it out. It answers the question first posted in this thread very well.

I think the jamming issue may simply be caused by the type of bullet being used. Some semi-auto rifles will jam as you describe if soft point ammo is used. You may want to try 150 grain bullets with a harder tip on them, such as Winchester Supreme Ballistic Tip bullets or some such type. I don't think the 168 grain bullets can be found in anything other than Match ammo for a .308. They don't make good hunting bullets though, as they are usually full jacket hollow points. You will find 165 grain bullets in .308 though, and I would try some of those. I'd check out these different bullet choices prior to tearing a lot of the gun's action apart. Also, always clean it from the action forward, or use a crown protection device. The crown itself isn't what ruins accuracy if it gets damaged, it's the actual rifling at the crown that has to be perfect to insure accuracy, and that can be damaged by a lot of cleaning from the muzzle if you don't watch for it.

Micro-Stamping Legislation Passes New York Assembly Thursday, May 26, 2011 On Tuesday, May 24, Assembly Bill 1157 passed in the New York Assembly by a 84 to 55 vote. The bill has been delivered to the state Senate and will be considered in the Senate Codes Committee. Introduced by state Assemblyman Michelle Schimel (D-16), A1157 would require all current semi-automatic pistols in production and all newly designed semi-automatic pistols delivered to any licensed firearms dealer in New York to mechanically stamp an alpha-numeric or geometric code that would imprint the make, model and serial number onto the cartridge case when the gun is discharged. This bill would vastly increase the cost of these firearms and will likely result in firearms manufacturers not selling new handguns in New York. Of course, that is the ultimate goal of this legislation. A1157 would also require micro-stamping on all new semi-automatic pistols sold in New York after January 1, 2013 or whenever the State Police receive notification from one or more “micro-stamp job shops” that they can produce micro-stamp structures on two internal surfaces of a semi-automatic pistol for $12 or less, whichever occurs later. Gun control advocates know that micro-stamping is unproven technology, is easily circumvented, and will be very costly to gun owners. Desperate to pass a bill and create a loophole, this legislation would do nothing to safeguard gun owners from the costly, unproven gimmick we know as micro-stamping. Enemies of the Second Amendment are determined to pass New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's pet project at any cost. Please contact your state Senator and respectfully urge him or her to OPPOSE A1157. Contact information can be found here.

[table][tr][td] Gun Ownership Skyrockets, While Violent Crime Drops…Again [/td] [/tr] [tr] [td] [/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]Friday, May 27, 2011 [/td] [/tr] [tr] [td] [/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]This week, the FBI estimated that the number of violent crimes decreased 5.5 percent from 2009 to 2010, including a 4.4 percent decrease in the number of murders. Because the U.S. population increased during the period, the figures imply that the total violent crime per capita rate and the murder rate decreased more than six percent and five percent, respectively. Based upon the preliminary data, it appears that violent crime fell to a 37-year low and murder fell to a 47-year low. The FBI will report final figures for 2010 later this year. We’re repeating ourselves, but, as has been the case for quite a while, the decrease in crime coincided with an increase in the number of privately owned guns—particularly handguns and detachable magazine semi-automatic rifles. For example, Americans bought over 400,000 AR-15s in 2009, and trends in AR-15 sales over the last few years suggest a similar number for 2010. Those who have followed the gun control issue for a few years probably have noticed that with crime declining and gun numbers rising year after year, gun control groups have all but abandoned their previously perennial claims that more guns equal more crime. Even their friends in the news media don’t believe it anymore. The Violence Policy Center and, breaking with past habit, the Brady Campaign didn’t even try to claim that the decrease in crime in 2010 was attributable to gun control. Neither did Mayors Against Illegal Guns, headed by New York City’s gun control activist mayor, Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg’s rare and welcomed silence is to be expected in this instance, however. New York City’s murder rate rose 15 percent despite its severe gun laws, while Bloomberg dedicated himself and lots of money to criticizing the less restrictive laws that are in place in other parts of the country. Speaking of cities with less restrictive gun laws, El Paso had the greatest decrease in murder—58 percent— among cities of over 500,000 population in 2010. For those who are counting, El Paso’s estimated murder rate was 0.8 per 100,000 population, while New York City’s was eight times higher at 6.4. Across the border from El Paso, in Juarez, where the gun laws are more to Bloomberg’s liking, the murder rate is over 100 per 100,000. Adding to the bad news for gun control supporters, the District of Columbia and Chicago—the handgun bans of which were repealed following the Supreme Court’s decisions in the Heller and McDonald cases in 2008 and 2010—experienced decreases in murder of eight percent and six percent, respectively. [/td][/tr][/table]

Put it in the moat we're building along the Mexican border.

Would you feel better about it if they required everyone on the land to wear blaze orange?

Welcome aboard.

Welcome aboard. It would be a good idea to post this question in another area like "General Hunting"

I disagree. I look forward to an area that would be a true wilderness hunt area, devoid of vehicles, litter, noise and other modern inconveniences. Men have successfully hunted that area for over 300 years, and native Americans even farther back than that. Have modern day hunters become so dependent on the excess trappings used in the hunting field today, to not be able to hunt at all without them? The change in the law in no way prohibits hunting, so legally, hunters have no case. And I can assure you the change will not intimidate me. On the contrary, it will become even more alluring as a place to hunt like a purist in peace and solitude, as well as a challenge that tests a man's self sufficiency and woodsmanship. Currently, there is no area in NY that provides for such adventure.

I'm now more convinced than before that there is a major deficit in comprehending the English language in it's written form here, and a fantastic ability to read things in posts that are not there, while ignoring things that are there. The level of assumption, presumption, and misinterpretation contained in rebuttals to my posts, is astounding. To continue this debate would be totally obtuse, based on that flawed reading skill and miniscule capacity for understanding logical thought. I'll just ignore any further posts going forward, because to me, they are now insignificant.

Welcome to the forum

They're pushing micro-stamping on pistols again too!

Usually, it's the local elected officials who decide if a hunt happens, or cops get to bait and shoot. Seems it's more about controlling the shooters than the deer.

I've hunted the Adirondacks for a week with a muzzle loader. I was 14 miles into the woods too. You can still get there on horseback, which is what I did. you can take a deer in there and have no trouble getting the meat out when it comes time to go at the end of the week. Makes for a real wilderness experience. You can also easily back pack and hunt Grouse for a week. that's not a bad week of hunting either.

I don't know why you keep repeating the lie that I am in favor of breaking the law, as I have stated many times, that is false. Perhaps you can not read or comprehend what I post. I said no one should support it. I said turning another gun owner in for possession is supporting the law. A non-resident of NY cannot get a NY pistol permit. Do you understand that? Anyone who would turn in another gun owner for violation of this unconstitutional law is a RAT! Unless the man threatens you personally with it, you are a RAT if you Rat him out for mere possession. Just like the people in Germany who ratted out the Jews! If you can't see the comparison, you are in denial to justify being a RAT! What fuels the anti-gun agenda is gun owners who agree with the anti-gun agenda!

It's that time of year again -- the time when the Brady Campaign releases its annual scores and rankings, lavishing praise on state governments that infringe upon the rights of their citizens and scorn on those that respect the Constitution. This year, the occasion was met with about as much enthusiasm as that other spring ritual, the income tax filing deadline. If this is the first you're hearing of the new rankings, let's hope that's because the mainstream media has finally come to its senses about this annual publicity stunt. As it has since 1997, the Brady Campaign's grading system works by assigning points to a state based on whether it has adopted a specific type of gun control law. The Brady Campaign then assigns each state a grade -- now measured in "stars," undoubtedly because percentage grades would show that the group has been unable to prevent most states from failing its test. Most states receive fewer than 10 points and no stars. The group does not try to measure the effectiveness of any of these laws when assigning points and grades, instead implying that simply having laws restricting the right to keep and bear arms somehow makes a state better and safer. This, of course, is a false premise. Measuring restrictive laws simply for the sake of having restrictive laws only assesses a state government's lack of respect for the rights of its citizenry. This "more is better" gun law fallacy is evidenced when the Brady Campaign gives states points for restricting the Right to Carry and punishes with "demerits" (negative points) those states that don't require permits. Today, 37 states have "shall issue" permit systems and as of July 1, 2011 three of those states will also allow for permitless carry (as does Vermont, which has no permit system). This has resulted in an estimated 6 million Americans exercising this right. With all of these "guns in public places," in 2009 the country experienced a 39-year low in its violent rate crime and a 45-year low in its murder rate, according to the FBI. These historic lows also occurred in the absence of a federal "assault weapons" ban, a law for which the Brady Campaign awards yet more points at the state level. When studying individual state rankings, the Brady Campaign's delusions prove even more foolish. In a press release accompanying the rankings, California is praised as a "model of sensible gun laws," receiving 80 points out of a possible 100 and earning the organization's only four-star ranking. Conversely, Arizona and Utah are scolded as "Do-Nothing" states, receiving no points or stars for restrictive gun measures. Someone must have forgotten to alert California's criminals of this prestigious honor, as the 2009 FBI Uniform Crime Report shows that the violent crime rates in Arizona and Utah are 13 and 55 percent lower, respectively, than those in California. Times must be tough for the Brady Campaign, which acknowledges cribbing the information used for the state scorecard from its fellow gun control group, the Legal Community Against Violence. With an inability to conduct its own research, it is no wonder the information Brady supplies to the public and the press often proves misleading or false. Or perhaps the Brady Campaign deems such research irrelevant, as its main tactic remains the exploitation of tragedy.

More "common sense" gun legislation for the fools with their heads in the sand... [table][tr][td] New York: Micro-Stamping Legislation Passes Assembly Committee [/td] [/tr] [tr] [td] [/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]Wednesday, May 04, 2011[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td] [/td] [/tr] [tr] [td] On May 3, Assembly Bill 1157 passed in the Assembly Codes Committee by a vote of 15 to 7 and will now head to the Assembly floor for consideration. Introduced by state Assemblyman Michelle Schimel (D-16), A1157 would mandate micro-stamping on all new semi-automatic pistols sold in New York after January 1, 2013. A1157 would require all semi-automatic pistols delivered to any licensed firearms dealer in New York for sale after January 1, 2013, to mechanically stamp an alpha-numeric or geometric code that would identify the make, model and serial number onto the cartridge case when the gun is discharged. This bill would require models currently available to be redesigned by their manufacturers to have a micro-stamping component, which would vastly increase the cost of these firearms. Micro-stamping is an unproven technology that is easily defeated with common household tools and the replacement of a few small parts. If passed, the availability of semi-automatic handguns in New York will be in serious doubt, as manufacturers simply may choose not to build or sell firearms for purchase in the state. Of course, that is the ultimate goal of this legislation. Make no mistake, this is a gun ban and it must be stopped. Please contact your Assemblyman and respectfully ask him or her to OPPOSE A1157. Contact information can be found here.[/td][/tr][/table]

With the attitude some gun owners have about guns and freedom, I don't think we need the anti's in America at all. : Fanaticism in defense of freedom is no vice. Giving up a little freedom for some sense of security is the path of the spineless. Should one follow all laws? The law in Germany under Hitler said Jews had to be shipped off to concentration camps. Many people followed the law and turned in the Jews that were hiding. They did it to save their own skins. They did it under the false belief it would help their own situation. They were wrong then, and this type of gun owner is wrong today. As for the typical gun owner in America today, I do know a lot about them. They are fools. Typically trusting, complacent and lazy, with no real understanding their right to own a gun is under attack. If we were all like that, we would already be disarmed, like gun owners in other lands that had the same foolish attitude. That's why so many of them don't even belong to an organization like the NRA. They should thank God not all gun owners in America are stupid.

http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/

“John Lott’s More Guns, Less Crime revives the wisdom of the past by using the latest tools of social science. By constructing careful statistical models and deploying a wealth of crime data he shows that laws permitting the carrying of concealed weapons actually lead to a drop in crime in the jurisdictions that enact them. . . . By providing strong empirical evidence that yet another liberal policy is a cause of the very evil it purports to cure, he has permanently changed the terms of debate on gun control. . . . Lott’s book could hardly be more timely. . . . Lott’s work is a model of the meticulous application of economics and statistics to law and policy.”—John O. McGinnis, National Review

Ok, lets start here: No one ever said anyone and everyone. How about just law abiding citizens and no criminals? Would you be OK with that? Do you believe states like Nevada, Louisiana, New Mexico, Tennessee and Arizona topped the FBI list as far as crime was concerned because these states do not have restrictive gun laws? First, that is overall crime, not just firearm related crime. And how about one has Vegas and the mob, one had Katrina and roving mobs, two have a Mexican border and one has Nashville. States like Wyoming, Montana, Vermont and Idaho have similar gun laws and very little crime. How can that be explained? The states like NY, Calif, NJ, Massachusetts and Maryland have some of the most oppressive gun laws, but their statewide firearms crime rates are higher than all other states in the union. As far as support for laws, if one is not actively opposing it, one is supporting it. Especially when it only affects others and one believes violators should be arrested and imprisoned for a violation. It is easy for someone to be tough with a law that has no impact on one's self. By condemning others, one supports the enforcement, ergo one supports the law. I am referring here to anyone who believes in "common sense" laws and is willing to prosecute innocent violators of this one. Please tell me how this law is even remotely close to "common sense"?

And a non resident of NY with a Concealed Carry permit valid in 38 states isn't even allowed to be in possession of a handgun while he is in NY state. And it ain't no slap on the wrist if he violates the law either, it's a few years in prison! And a lot of NY state gun owners support this law because it seems "reasonable". >

A more precise analogy would be to ask why we allow ownership of cars that are powerful enough to exceed 100 MPH? What if Obama signed a law saying a car that can exceed 100 MPH can not be owned, no less registered or driven. The logic being no one needs such a powerful car, they eat too much fuel and they present a danger to every other driver on the road. You now have to turn it in for destruction, without any monetary compensation, or face 10 years in prison for violating this "common sense" law. This could easily be passed too, as there is no constitutional amendment protecting your right to own a sports car!

Culver said: "The one comment you made I just have a hard time seeing work.......is us being able to convince those in favor of tighter restrictions that we are not a threat. The avenues I see them take makes me think they really hate guns.....we could all be church going.....charity contributing....models of a citizen and they don't want them in our hands.....I just can't figure out the motivation. It doesn't make logical sense to me......" It's quite simple really........It's not just firearms they want to eliminate in America. They want to fundamentally change many of the things gun owners hold dear. They intend to restrict freedoms in many other areas as well. Religion, speech, employment, marriage, taxes, child rearing and parenthood are all things they want to change. It's a lot easier to do when you force people to agree to it because the oppressed have no ability to revolt.

I guess these anti gunners think if they keep calling unconstitutionally oppressive gun laws "common sense" laws, some people will actually start to believe they are. I guess common sense also says liberties and freedoms of all types should be restricted for the betterment of all societies. They claim these laws save lives but can't explain why the states with the most "common sense" gun laws have the highest gun crime rates. : If you never read John Lott's book, "More Guns, Less Crime!" You need to read it. The guy is a statistician with no ax to grind and completely objective on the subject. His facts are irrefutable. But the anti's still try to throw mud on him with proven lies. These folks will not be happy until ALL firearms are banned for possession by any private citizen. They have said so many times in the past and have never retracted any of those statements. Give them an inch..... This is also borne out by the multiple infringements on firearms ownership since the first encroachments in 1968. These folks are not "reasonable", nor do they believe their laws are "common sense", unless you mean as far as banning all guns is concerned. If you don't like guns, don't own one, but nobody in America has the right to tell others what they can and cannot do, if it is legal. Therefore, they strive to make it illegal. A simple power and control strategy. Agreeing with any of their proposals simply emboldens them to take the next step.