Nonresident hunting in ny with 30 cal ar

[stubby68]

                               I couldn't care less if someone owns an AR. I would never own one I do not need to look like Rambo while I am hunting. Do not give the crap that they are used because they are so versatile, accurate or dependable. They are used because people feel the need to look like Rambo while they are out hunting.  I believe that if someone wants to own an ar they should be able to, but to say they own it for anything then it is cool that is bs.

 

 

 

                              ohh more horror, another one with the buck it killed and the damage it did( this is in 5.56) as you can see, the ar platform is entirely incapable of taking deer...........stunning that these guns operate on a 100 year old technology, yet some people are afraid of them.

 

                            It isn't the gun they are scared of so much as it is the mentality of most of the nut jobs who have to have them. If you saw someone walking around with a sword on there side and asked them why, and they said because It is more versital to use then a pocket knife wouldn't you think they were a little off?

 

[Slaynbux]

How many people u seen carrying swords. That's a ridiculous comparison.

[stubby68]

                        I don't see many carrying ar either but they both look ridiculous. My point was if you saw someone using a sword  when I pocket knife would be just as good you would think them a bit off there rocker wouldn't you? If you do not need to look like you are going into a military battle when hunting then why must folks look that way. Oh the cool factor thats right.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

 

 I thought yours fell into a lake anyhow?

 

 No all my other ones did. Unfortunately I have never owned one but it is on my list.  Fist one will be the AR 10 though. I have hunted with one on several occasions and have thousands of rounds through them. Where in the country are hunters allowed to use 30 round mags?

 

For Stubby --I guess those evil rifles like the Enfield, Garand, Mauser and any listing of shotguns used during WW2 would make those carrying them Patton wannbees?

[Slaynbux]

Stubby,I have to agree with u on the Rambo thing. If I saw guys carrying a m60 machine in woods i might think he was a little off or even a m 16 with a bayonet ,but they don't.

[jrm]

I couldn't care less if someone owns an AR. I would never own one I do not need to look like Rambo while I am hunting. Do not give the crap that they are used because they are so versatile, accurate or dependable. They are used because people feel the need to look like Rambo while they are out hunting.  I believe that if someone wants to own an ar they should be able to, but to say they own it for anything then it is cool that is bs.

 

 

Stubby,I have to agree with u on the Rambo thing. If I saw guys carrying a m60 machine in woods i might think he was a little off or even a m 16 with a bayonet ,but they don't.

Wow. Are you guys serious, or are you kidding?

I bought a bow for hunting. Mine is black. I simply liked the way it looked better than that camo version. Does that make me a kook in the woods? Get it in black and you want to be rambo, but get it in camo and you are a "normal" responsible hunter?

Talk about stereotyping and division within the gun community.

This is the kind of absurd thinking that gets "black" rifles classified as AWs which only "nutjob preppers" want to own.

Guess what... after they collect all those "scary black rifles" from the crazy "rambo" guys, they are coming for your "bambi murdering" camo rifles, "wild west shootout" wood stocks and "lightweight/easy to transport to crime scene" synthetic stocks.

A divided gun community is a problem. "No one needs xxx to kill a deer" is the mentality the gun-grabbers use to divide us. Guess what... you don't NEED to kill a deer at all. When all that's left is what a small group believes is "appropriate" for hunting, all they need to do is eliminate hunting and they have an excuse to take away everything else.

Edited March 27, 2015 by jrm

[Culvercreek hunt club]

 

 

Wow. Are you guys serious, or are you kidding?

I bought a bow for hunting. Mine is black. I simply liked the way it looked better than that camo version. Does that make me a kook in the woods? Get it in black and you want to be rambo, but get it in camo and you are a "normal" responsible hunter?

Talk about stereotyping and division within the gun community.

This is the kind of absurd thinking that gets "black" rifles classified as AWs which only "nutjob preppers" want to own.

Guess what... after they collect all those "scary black rifles" from the crazy "rambo" guys, they are coming for your "bambi murdering" camo rifles, "wild west shootout" wood stocks and "lightweight/easy to transport to crime scene" synthetic stocks.

A divided gun community is a problem. "No one needs xxx to kill a deer" is the mentality the gun-grabbers use to divide us. Guess what... you don't NEED to kill a deer at all. When all that's left is what a small group believes is "appropriate" for hunting, all they need to do is eliminate hunting and they have an excuse to take away everything else.

Slaynbux was joking. Unfortunately I believe Stubby was all too serious.

[steve863]

I honestly can't disagree with Stubby on the Rambo thing.  I surely can't stop anyone from hunting with an AR if it's legal to do so and if they want to, but just look at any gun magazine, gun catalog or walk into any gun shop these days.  It's para-military this or para-miitary that from freakin head to toe without even getting into the gun section.  I go back a ways and it sure as hell wasn't this way when I started hunting and getting interested in guns.  And I'm sure it wasn't when those before me starting bringing the Mausers and Enfields with them to hunt.  No way!  The guns being marketed these days have a MUCH greater emphasis on military and law enforcement than they ever did before.  Is this a good thing for gun ownership in this country?  My opinion is that it surely is NOT.  But gun owners are making their own beds here, so I reckon they will have to sleep in them.

 

 

[Five Seasons]

I wonder if some nitwit 100 years ago said that about soldiers bringing home their battle rifles and hunting with them, bolt action mausers. And garands.

 

you continue to use childish name calling to defend your point and it doesn't help. The garands and mausers were still preferred by snipers. At least understand the advantages and disadvantages of the bolt action. They didn't just stop making bolt action guns when semi's came out. They didn't stop making semi's when autos came out. They didn't offer select fire on military rifles because they thought it was neat.

 

We just had a thread talking about having both a 30-06 and 270. And it was pretty unanimous that someone should buy and own what he likes, but essentially they're not very different. A good percentage agreed that being good at one good precision tool is more valuable then being a master of none. So snipers (which are what all hunters should aspire to be) prefer the bolt action vs the infantrymen needing multiple rounds.

 

[Single_shot]

I say to each their own as long as it's legal and you can take game in a manner which is humane. What you look like makes no difference. I mean, look at some of the flintlock guys and the way they dress....buck skins, coon hats, squirrel pouches...haha

[HectorBuckBuster]

Stubby, so I bet you still think the Safe Act does not effect you. So no one needs a black bow then since Rambo had one.Also I believe the cops where the only ones that had AR's in First Blood.

[Five Seasons]

 No all my other ones did. Unfortunately I have never owned one but it is on my list.  Fist one will be the AR 10 though. I have hunted with one on several occasions and have thousands of rounds through them. Where in the country are hunters allowed to use 30 round mags?

 

For Stubby --I guess those evil rifles like the Enfield, Garand, Mauser and any listing of shotguns used during WW2 would make those carrying them Patton wannbees?

 

I've never looked, but I don't recall there being mag limits in the southern states except with waterfowl. If you don't need more than the 3 or 5 rounds in your semi; what again is the appeal of the AR?

Edited March 27, 2015 by Belo

[Five Seasons]

 

 

Wow. Are you guys serious, or are you kidding?

I bought a bow for hunting. Mine is black. I simply liked the way it looked better than that camo version. Does that make me a kook in the woods? Get it in black and you want to be rambo, but get it in camo and you are a "normal" responsible hunter?

Talk about stereotyping and division within the gun community.

This is the kind of absurd thinking that gets "black" rifles classified as AWs which only "nutjob preppers" want to own.

Guess what... after they collect all those "scary black rifles" from the crazy "rambo" guys, they are coming for your "bambi murdering" camo rifles, "wild west shootout" wood stocks and "lightweight/easy to transport to crime scene" synthetic stocks.

A divided gun community is a problem. "No one needs xxx to kill a deer" is the mentality the gun-grabbers use to divide us. Guess what... you don't NEED to kill a deer at all. When all that's left is what a small group believes is "appropriate" for hunting, all they need to do is eliminate hunting and they have an excuse to take away everything else.

 

nobody in this whole thread has stated they shouldn't be allowed or that they wouldn't kill a deer. Not once. The question has always been why? Does it really HELP the image of the hunter (enough anti's as it is) could you imagine the propaganda from this?

 

Let alone the fighting we must do against anti-gun.

 

Is this really that much different than those demonstrating their open carry rights in Target by walking around with ARs on their backs? Just because it's legal does not mean you're not hurting the cause.

 

let alone in NY where it's worst state in the union to own a scary black gun, we have someone from out of state wanting to come and use his? Don't think about your own person views, think about what societies reaction would be.

 

[jjb4900]

I say to each their own as long as it's legal and you can take game in a manner which is humane. What you look like makes no difference. I mean, look at some of the flintlock guys and the way they dress....buck skins, coon hats, squirrel pouches...haha

I guess it helps them get into the role of doing things the way they were done back in the day..............much like the guys you see at the range dressed in Combat / Military clothing with the AR's, many of them have never been in the military or law enforcement, but they like to pretend. 

[Five Seasons]

I say to each their own as long as it's legal and you can take game in a manner which is humane. What you look like makes no difference. I mean, look at some of the flintlock guys and the way they dress....buck skins, coon hats, squirrel pouches...haha

 

The problem when "to each his own" ends up impacting all of us. And now, because "it was legal" or because there was poor eduction or insufficient safety controls involved, a kid from NJ made it illegal to buy an AR in NY.

 

So sometimes, as hunters and gun owners trying to self regulate and promote our image is the best thing we can do to stop others from taking our rights away.

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I've never looked, but I don't recall their being mag limits in the southern states except with waterfowl. If you don't need more than the 3 or 5 rounds in your semi; what again is the appeal of the AR?

Strip one down and then do the same with a BAR. Change a barrel or caliber on one and then do it with a 7400. Take a 40 to 50 year old Winchester model 100 and find mags or spare parts and then look at spare parts on a mil spec AR. Do those three things and then report back on what you think the draw is. That is outside their dependability accuracy and ability to customize.

[Slaynbux]

Belo what do u got crs go back and start at the beginning read it again

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Belo what do u got crs go back and start at the beginning read it again

They are blind and don't understand there is NO difference between the AR and any other semi auto mag fed platform in function. They think that if these just went away that the antis would be appeased. They talk about an AR bing used in CT. We should count our lucky stars that shotguns with buckshot wasn't used in these mass shooting. The body count would have been staggering. Look at the recent attempt at the 5.56 ammo. It so t going to got away or stop no matter what we give in to. Edited March 27, 2015 by Culvercreek hunt club

[Single_shot]

I guess it helps them get into the role of doing things the way they were done back in the day..............much like the guys you see at the range dressed in Combat / Military clothing with the AR's, many of them have never been in the military or law enforcement, but they like to pretend. 

 

 

The statement was jokingly made about flintlockers.....I don't see many guys that are wannabees at the range....the guys I see either are,was or will be OR are not in military clothing but are wearing camo hunting clothes. I live out in the sticks and the local range is out even farther in the sticks so you see quite a bit of every walk there but certainly no wannabes. I see guys every day at work that wear camo pants for work,they do fit and wear well compared to bluejeans.

[jrm]

nobody in this whole thread has stated they shouldn't be allowed or that they wouldn't kill a deer. Not once. The question has always been why? Does it really HELP the image of the hunter (enough anti's as it is) could you imagine the propaganda from this?

hsq0r9.jpgindex.jpg

 

Let alone the fighting we must do against anti-gun.

 

Is this really that much different than those demonstrating their open carry rights in Target by walking around with ARs on their backs? Just because it's legal does not mean you're not hurting the cause.

 

let alone in NY where it's worst state in the union to own a scary black gun, we have someone from out of state wanting to come and use his? Don't think about your own person views, think about what societies reaction would be.

I kind of see where you are coming from, but do not agree.

The type/color/style of a gun that a hunter uses is a non-factor in the "image" campaign. Anti-hunting groups attack the activity - I don't see any active campaigns to attack specific tools within that activity.

One could easily argue the exact opposite. Those who claim "you don't need xxx to kill a deer" would no longer be able to use that argument if it was demonstrated that a large number of hunters actually use these type of guns. I believe the gun-grabber arguments are _enhanced_ and strengthened by actual hunters who tell these politicians "you don't need that gun for hunting - real hunters don't use those - only rambo types use them.

Using your logic for concerned about society's reaction, there are better things we can do...

- stop wearing camo in public. All you "crazy deer killers" scare me.

- take those NRA bumper stickers off your car. I'm afraid you are on your way to a mass-shooting

- take those hunting related stickers off your truck. I'm afraid you have a loaded machine gun in the back seat and a dead animal in the truck bed. My kid is traumatized by your "Bone Collector" sticker.

- stop wearing those scary shirts with "Browning" logos and "redneck" caps with Remington logos.

- eliminate hunting departments from Wal-Mart - only rednecks and white-trash shop there, so it makes hunters look bad

I'm being facetious on the above points. However, every one of those has a MUCH higher public visibility factor than they type of gun someone is using in the field.

I'll agree that driving the Thruway with a bloody deer strapped to the hood is not good public relations. But hunting with a pistol grip rifle, or black rifle isn't an issue to me. Those that take exception to the photo will find more fault with the bloody hole in the side of the dead bambi, the smile on the hunter's face and the "military camo outfit" than they will with the color of the gun.

(edited for typos)

Edited March 27, 2015 by jrm

[Steuben Jerry]

There should be no argument amongst gun owners for using a legal gun in a legal and ethical manner regardless of the gun's appearance.

 

This is exactly what the antis want, to turn us against one another. We need to band together and support one another. I don't duck hunt, but would support a duck hunter's choice of method or implement if it was legal and ethical. Maybe if there was more banding together of gun owners we'd be reading about Governor Astorino now in the news and possibly buying ammo on line again.

 

So what if it's black, machine-like in it's appearance and shoots without manually operating a bolt to chamber a second round?

 

If it's what you want to use, I certainly support it, and I shouldn't judge your gun on appearance. I was taught not to judge people that way either.

[Five Seasons]

I kind of see where you are coming from, but do not agree.

The type/color/style of a gun that a hunter uses is a non-factor in the "image" campaign. Anti-hunting groups attack the activity - I don't see any active campaigns to attack specific tools within that activity.

One could easily argue the exact opposite. Those who claim "you don't need xxx to kill a deer" would no longer be able to use that argument if it was demonstrated that a large number of hunters actually use these type of guns. I believe the gun-grabber arguments are _enhanced_ and strengthened by actual hunters who tell these politicians "you don't need that gun for hunting - real hunters don't use those - only rambo types use them.

Using your logic for concerned about society's reaction, there are better things we can do...

- stop wearing camo in public. All you "crazy deer killers" scare me.

- take those NRA bumper stickers off your car. I'm afraid you are on your way to a mass-shooting

- take those hunting related stickers off your truck. I'm afraid you have a loaded machine gun in the back seat and a dead animal in the truck bed. My kid is traumatized by your "Bone Collector" sticker.

- stop wearing those scary shirts with "Browning" logos and "redneck" caps with Remington logos.

- eliminate hunting departments from Wal-Mart - only rednecks and white-trash shop there, so it makes hunters look bad

I'm being facetious on the above points. However, every one of those has a MUCH higher public visibility factor than they type of gun someone is using in the field.

I'll agree that driving the Thruway with a bloody deer strapped to the hood is not good public relations. But hunting with a pistol grip rifle, or black rifle isn't an issue to me. Those that take exception to the photo will find more fault with the bloody hole in the side of the dead bambi, the smile on the hunter's face and the "military camo outfit" than they will with the color of the gun.

(edited for typos)

 

I will continue to repeat that I am not against the AR. I just don't think it's doing us any favors in the deer woods. It's the one sacred ground the anti-gun group has had trouble with and know they can't make strides into.

 

In the south there are more people wearing camo than hunters. Nobody views a guy in camo as anything but normal.

 

And no, you do not need 10 rounds in an AR mag or any hunting gun (or is it 7 now?) to kill a deer. So yes culver, they are functionally different. But absolutely whole heartily i enjoy every one of my 13 rounds I have in my glock23. Don't tell me I need less.

 

Self defense and hunting are not the same.

 

Edited March 27, 2015 by Belo

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I will continue to repeat that I am not against the AR. I just don't think it's doing us any favors in the deer woods. It's the one sacred ground the anti-gun group has had trouble with and know they can't make strides into.

 

In the south there are more people wearing camo than hunters. Nobody views a guy in camo as anything but normal.

 

And no, you do not need 10 rounds in an AR mag or any hunting gun (or is it 7 now?) to kill a deer. So yes culver, they are functionally different. But absolutely whole heartily i enjoy every one of my 13 rounds I have in my glock23. Don't tell me I need less.

 

Self defense and hunting are not the same.

 

Please explain how they are functionally different?

[Culvercreek hunt club]

So I suppose these two are functionally different?

 

 

[Five Seasons]

Please explain how they are functionally different?

 

work wont let me get on gun websites so i can't verify specs. But it comes down to mag size. what's the mag size of an autoloader marketed to hunters?

 

and yes the image of the pistol grip, forearm grip and butt stock all change what is traditionally viewed as a hunting rifle. It's not really the color. The color of new synthetic bolt actions are black. It's that why am I using the same gun a marine uses to kill bad guys with?

 

What are the advantages I asked. You guys gave them and I conceded. Then you went on to label me as an anti and uneducated etc. Clearly missing what I was getting at.  If we can't have civil discussions with each other; how do we educate the second amendment fence sitters?

Edited March 27, 2015 by Belo