Quote:
Originally Posted by rwm1273
I like a good debate, and I am not automatically assuming. I just know from my experience that getting a hand gun hunting bill before the courts will be harder than trying to get a shared parenting bill before the government. There are all kinds of things that need to be hashed out before it gets to the table, and even with shared parenting that has nearly unanimous agreement from all parties, and most of the population, it is how it is going to be implemented that is the problem. The biggest groups against shared parenting are the Feminists, then the Lawyers. Both groups will lose money with a change in the law. Trying to get a hand gun hunting bill before the government will be even more difficult because there are far less people that it will affect, and too many people think that guns are bad.
By the way, I am not against some guy shooting deer with his 9mm Glock, so long as he is able to make a clean kill. As others have said, hand gun hunting is not as easy as other kinds of hunting. I guess I would like to police some of the idiots out there, but this is a double edged sword that has the potential to limit me too.
I stand firmly behind some kind of testing and certification before you can hunt with a handgun. Perhaps after some time, we will get a range report on how the average guy shoots. Perhaps that will give us some indication of how good of shooters and hand gun handling we have here, as currently there is nothing like that, and I know my RPAL course did not teach me much. (I took it when it was still an FAC) If the reports show that most RPAL holders are competent, and careful, then we can ask for a relaxation of other laws too. With nearly everything I have earned in our courts, I have earned it with baby steps. This could be the same. Prove that the other side's claims are unfounded. (even some of my concerns)
|
I am a strong believer in being competent with what ever weapon you choose to hunt with as well, I would think everyone would agree with that.
Putting competency restrictions on just a handgun to me is not rational, as you are assuming that most people using them would not be accurate with them. Why would you assume this, do you feel the same with bows, crossbows, and blackpowder? I believe that hunters (or the majortity) realize that improved shooting form, on-going practice and limited ranges are all part of hunting with these weapons, or any weapon for that matter. They accept that, and to be competent, put in the extra effort for their own reasons, being it extended seasons, hunting in milder weather, or just the opportunity to hunt with a different weapon. Why do you feel that would be any different with handgunners?
There is no competency (accuracy) test for any other hunting weapon, by suggesting that there would have to be one for hanguns, you could possibly suggest to politicians that hunters are not responsible, and there should be an accuracy test for all weapons. I think that you would agree that a handgun is every bit as accurate as a bow, crossbow, or the older style blackpowder rifles. Although I have not shot a TC Contenter handgun, I have seen them used, and they are very accurate.
I am not suggesting that there should not be standards set, there is for every hunting method, so there would be for hand guns as well.
IMO accuracy and responsibility are still 100% dependent on the hunter, regardless of weapon, and always will be. Suggesting that handgunners would not be as accurate and responsible while hunting is unjustified and unfair IMO.