I've made up my mind

[timshufflin]

I knew my post would ruffle your feathers

Im not ruffled, I'm trying to challenge my beliefs and yours.

[Orlando]

I understand where you are coming from but to me its safety of the public. Kinda like the reason they have 20 MPH speed limits laws in school zones etc.

[redheep]

I'm not sure what part of Ohio you're from, but where I grew up was a little less than what I'd call "populated." The majority of the large municipalities (Toledo, Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, Cincinatti) give way rather quickly to farmland once you're outside of the suburbs.

I'm stationed now in NC, where they just passed a huge reform to their firearms laws, including hunting with supressors. The deer season down here is open for 4 months, all of it rifle, because of the deer population. It's every bit of populated with people here in eastern NC that it is in Ohio and they've been using rifle cartridges since the beginning of the firearm. It's not about whether or not you need to use it, it's having the constitutional right to put it in your shoulder and pull the trigger if you want to.

[cuppednlocked]

Red,

Don't forget to add early bow and muzzleloader seasons to that 4 month time frame.

MD does not allow rifles in most of the state. If you really look at the "safety" factor between a centerfire rifle and a good slug gun or modern muzzleloader there is not much difference. When you can make a 200 yard shot with either I'd say you're on equal ground.

Of course I base my perspective on not hunting out west.

[jbkf1003]

They allow rifles for deer in some counties in NYS, if they allow it in this bastion of communism I don't see why it shouldn't be legal in all states. If your wreckless and shoot someone well then you'll goto jail. Simple as that.

[timshufflin]

I understand where you are coming from but to me its safety of the public. Kinda like the reason they have 20 MPH speed limits laws in school zones etc.

If safety of the public can be used for firearms arguments, we're doomed. Safety of the public, we need magazine limits, registration, background checks, FFL's, evil configurations done away with... Automotive speed limits are not covered in the Bill of Rights and thus left to the States and to the People. What states and municipalities do is say that hunting is not a right but a privilege thus you can only kill said animal with the firearm the government chooses. Slippery slope this one.

What does history tell us? Look at populated areas that "allow" people to kill game with high power rifles, is the sky falling? Are people dying at a rate that's different from other areas when it comes to hunting accidents and errant shots? If the answer is no, how is the argument that this is a safety issue valid? If the answer is yes, the argument can be made that other means of killing animals is safer but we still have an argument about if it's just/right.

Safety has been made the number one goal by government agencies everywhere to justify every sort of law and expenditure. I say hell no! I could give two craps about safety and care much more about individual freedom. If having everything safe is the goal, I guess we can't heat our homes with natural gas, propane, wood. Look at the numbers for these accidents! We can't, don't dare, drive a car, go skiing, ice fish, ride a bike. Everything can always be made safer but at the cost of freedom? I'll do without safety thank you.

[Orlando]

Then hunt crazy wabbits with bazookas in the city? We can atleast agree to disagree

[timshufflin]

Then hunt crazy wabbits with bazookas in the city? We can atleast agree to disagree

As long as I have a good backstop, none of my debris hits the neighbors yards, I'm good with hunting rabbits with bazookas.

[centurion20000]

If safety of the public can be used for firearms arguments, we're doomed. Safety of the public, we need magazine limits, registration, background checks, FFL's, evil configurations done away with... Automotive speed limits are not covered in the Bill of Rights and thus left to the States and to the People. What states and municipalities do is say that hunting is not a right but a privilege thus you can only kill said animal with the firearm the government chooses. Slippery slope this one.

You can be safe or free. Pick one. Far too many choose to be safe.

[redheep]

I agree that there are things that need to be legislated. I don't want someone driving drunk into my family or handing out meth in candy bags to my kids at school.

But I'm also a little bit of a fatalist. If it's my turn to take the golden bb, then my time is up. I am smart enough (although not that smart) to keep most dangerous things at bay. The idea that the government will protect you through legislating your freedoms is very Soviet Union. That's not what the castoffs of the British Empire intended.