Air Gun Home :: View topic

broommaster2000 · Moderator

It was not to step on another forum member. If the afore mentioned forum member feels personally offended by this, then he might need to find another forum because I'm not out to personally offend someone. I am out to do the right and correct thing in name of this forum.

I know this forums' crew and admin is behind me on the original intention of this topic, but it seems like it turned out to be a discussion on who's side we are supposed to choose.

Andy, may I point out that as a moderator I have the "power" to do things as I see fit (to at least a certain limit). If I wanted, I could have simply deleted your post and those of afore mentioned forum member. That would make me a prick and a mis-user of power and I'm not such a person.

I tried to explain how I think of things, and clearly stated that I gave my opinion. So, if you think my opinion is enforced to you or any other forum member, then I apologise for not explaining clearly. If you think I want to drag people trough slime, then you have no idea who you are talking to.

I'm willing to forget about my ego, as I have serving function.

I have asked Eric if I should place a post like this and he agreed. Because people are interested in different countries laws and ethics.

And before you say "difference between Europeans and North Americans": Why am I backed up by American forum members? (And one British Mr. Green

)

I don't really feel personally offended for the fact that someone is doing whatever on whoevers land. In other words, I'm carrying out this forums policy.

If everyone would act to their own believes, then that would be anarchy. Forgive me for trying to take authority.

Rogerflat · Silver Status Member

I'm going to let all the drama go that has been building up. I know that in Arizona it is specifically stated that you can use airguns to hunt squirrels during hunting season. I don't know of any others that you can hunt though, with the exception of rabbits, which I believe can be hunted year round.

I'm not sure what the regulations are on property owners shooting animals on their own land. I know that certain species, like migratory birds, are protected, even from land owners. I'm pretty sure that you can hunt most animals on your land without a license as long as they aren't protected and its during season.

I'm not sure what the rules are for species that are deemed pests, in which case you can kill them at any time. From my experience, it is difficult to find all of the information pertaining to regulations on hunting all species of animals, with airguns, in a certain location. This would be a great resource if anyone knows where to look exactly. Even state natural resources websites are limited in the information they provide. Don't know about other countries though.

23ib0d0n · Moderator

thepaladin · Senior Member

I began learning “gun safety” and “shooting” from my father and grandfather when I was 4 years old, and couldn’t even support the .22 that I was taught with. My grandad had to help hold it. I live in TN and have checked the laws here on hunting. I believe some of them are silly (as I have mentioned elsewhere an example is that by law here turkey can only be hunted with a shotgun. There are high powered air rifles that would easily take turkey and when I was young a .22 was the preferred method) still, I am obliged to obey that law. It is illegal to hunt any “migratory game bird” with an airgun. This includes doves of all types. Pigeons on the other hand are legal to hunt with an airgun. They are essentially the same bird, but I have to abide by the law. I can hunt any “small game” with an airgun, and any varment. Still, I must obey the law as to seasons. One reason I like airguns for hunting is that I can legally hunt inside the city limits of Nashville where a firearm would be illegal. There is a wooded lot near my home with almost any small game animal you’d like and squirrels are thick.

I can campaign to change any law I don’t like (and do). We have lately seen a lot of gun and hunting laws passed. Some are blatantly “aimed” at decreasing the individual’s rights to hunt and shoot (note the attempts to outlaw lead ammo). On the other hand there have been a few victories in loosening up game laws and such. We must operate within the laws or we blacken our own eyes (and reputations) and hurt our own cause. On the other hand we need to be vocal and scream like mad when our rights are threatened so we don’t lose any more rights.

In America we can still influence law makers (though I think less than we once could) and we still have more gun, shooting, and hunting rights than our friends in the UK do (regrettably). It will in the next few years be largely up to us if we keep those rights. As for say the Dutch hunting laws, well that would be a reason I’d not plan to move there, and it is up to the Dutch people if they wish to push to have those laws changed. I don’t like the idea of any government agency have final say over who may or may not own a gun (air or powder) or who may or may not hunt. That is the point of the second amendment of the US Constitution. (Despite what the naysayers claim. At the time the amendment was written there was no question that a “militia” was a civilian organization, such as the well known “Minute Men”. The whole point in the amendment was to keep final control out of government control) So, we need to vote, and stay in contact with our legislators.

Hope this was helpful and not too preachy.

Slavia · Moderator

I'm also sensitive to the fact that while it might take months (or years) to convert a non-shooter into an ally, it could only take one negative event (or post) to make them an opponent.

A moderator would then have to balance free expression against public image. Promoting compliance with the law is probably the least intrusive course.

Personally, I would like to see regulations, ethics, and safety have a dedicated topic area, but this is good to start.

Rogerflat · Silver Status Member

Yeah, I agree with the thing about the turkey hunting. I also think that you should be able to hunt migratory birds with airguns too (not on the fly of course). But for some unknown reason they have either not considered that, or have ruled against it. Although I can't imagine why, as airguns are very effective weapons on birds of all types....and they put out a lot less lead into the environment than do shotguns.

I'd like to champion the cause and change the legislation, but I've decided that I'd rather spend my time living my life rather than changing laws that A) should not be that way to begin with, and B) should be changed by someone else in a better position to do so.

My situation almost forces me to do what I do. I love to hunt, but with rising gas prices, I can't spend $50 to drive to the country for one excursion. I live in the city and there is only one or two types of game animals to hunt here, so I hunt them. It's not like I'm poor, but I save about $3 for every bird I eat for dinner as opposed to my own food or eating out. This is much better for my budget as opposed to paying for all that expensive gas and heading into wilderness with all the other yahoos who blast away indiscriminently with their powder burners.

Just my opinion.

broommaster2000 · Moderator

I might add that if Hunting in the Netherlands would be legal, that would also mean that probably every last little animal would be extinct from this country because:

A: The Country is small
B: Airguns are allowed from 18 years old.
C: This country is full of undereducated douchebags who don't know anything about hunting.

The Dutch laws on hunting were made because of several things that happened in the past, like the temporal extinction of certain animals in this country.

Hunting in my country is connected to population control of the little wildlife we have left. That's why I'm not necessarily against hunting.

I'm glad we have tight regulations here, and I guess it's incomparable to the US. But I guess we can all agree that the law isn't there for nothing.

Another thing that sucks here is firearm control. There are so many little rules that sometimes even Police-officers don't have a clue.

Rogerflat · Silver Status Member

Yes, Europe extirpated most of their indigenous species hundreds of years ago, so you guys better protect what you have left. America is so vast that most species can recover even if hit hard in one region or another. Then we have quite a few species that actually flourish on agricultrual/urban development. That's why our laws are pre-emptive...to prevent species from becoming threatened. Whereas Europes laws are a last ditch effort to protect what they have left.

thepaladin · Senior Member

I don't know if you realize this but (in the US) hunters are a primary cause that some species are NOT extinct. At the turn of the 19th to the 20th century the white tail deer was almost gone. The loss of the Carrier pigon and a the disappearnce of a lot of wild land energized the movement. Outdoorsmen were the prime movers behind saving countless species. The Bison is back now as are wolves, certain birds of prey, and almost all "gane species (sheep, deer, prong horn etc.) are plentiful.One of the main worries now among outdoor management types is that as hunting licence sales and other outdoor fees drop, that is the money that goes for outdoor management.

Hunters usually aren't the reason for extention with licenses, lotteries, bag limits etc. the numbers of most game animals are going up not down. (by the way, poachers aren't hunters).

billandbeaufort · Senior Member

Rogerflat · Silver Status Member

Urban sprawl is the biggest threat to species, eventhough it actually increases certain populations of some. Anyone who kills an animal is decreasing its numbers, therefore hunters "could" cause a decline in the animal population. But it is true that the hunting regulations are structured for the purpose of conservation. But that is why there is no hunting in Holland or wherever. Because despite the money generated by licenses there is still no way to offset the fact that the few animals remaining are being killed.

broommaster2000 · Moderator

Well, you guys can say what you want, but this thread turned into a darn popular one. Mr. Green

I know a few guys who are hunters, and they told me that when they make a kill they are allowed to sell it to a butcher, or keep it for themselves after confirming it.

Also, I know for a fact that the Dutch hunting law was professionally crafted, with help of several hunters, and makes a good example on how a law can come to it's right.

4950cycle · Member

Rogerflat, It sounds like you are in Florida or a state with same type rules. On the Florida game & fresh water fish commission's website a fella asked if it was legal to hunt (in season) with an air gun. The reply from the game warden monitoring the site answered with an emphatic "NO". Well this being a concern of mine I promptly checked the current game laws in my new for 08 rule book and found that it said, You can only hunt with a Bow,muzzle loader,Rifle and so on. But what is most important here is what it did NOT say.It did NOT state what type of rifle. An airgun (rifle) is by deffinition a rifle. In fact it is perffectly correct for everyone to call them air rif les. In fact almost all airguns even have rifled barrels. This being said it would really be easy to take the ticket to court here in FL. with a very strong argument. We have a bad problem hear in FL. with law enforcment legislating from the police car.With no clear law backing what they are trying to impose sometimes.

Rogerflat · Silver Status Member

No, I'm not in florida, but I know what you mean. It is very ambiguous in some cases. However, the doves that I hunt can only legally be taken with a certain gauge of shotgun that only holds a certain number of shells, or a bow, or a falcon (because SOOOO many people hunt with frickin' falcons, right?).

If my gun is not one of those things listed then I am technically in violation. I'm sure in some states they didn't even consider air rifles and didn't think to add a caveat to include or disclude them from the acceptable weapons list.

However, I was suprised to see that some species can be hunted with "pneumatic weapons". This tells me that the lawmakers actually know that people hunt with air guns and have allowed for that.

But a red ryder 300 fps bb gun is a pneumatic gun and by law you could hunt squirrels with that, and it would be completely inneffective and cruel to do so. So it seems as though airgun hunting laws are just not specific enough.

thepaladin · Senior Member

Yes, but I would hope that on the whole airgun users would be responsible enough not to go after some happless animal with a bb gun. The last thing I want is a long list of dos and don'ts from the government with a bunch of burocrats trying to tell us what guns can be used for what purpose. That would be a mess. In TN the law simply states that animals designated as "small game" and most "varments" can be hunted with airguns. I'm happy with that. We need to be sure we as airgunners use enough gun.

By the way, I wasn't commenting on the situation in Holland earlier only that hunters tend to be by nature concerned with conservation. The Dutch live in a country where large swaths are reclaimed from the sea and it is largely urban. There is very little comparsion with our situation. I don't know how difficult it would be for the Dutch to provide wider hunting opertunites. That would be up to the people of that country.