Annual debate

[excess650]

Inlines have their place...in shotgun and MLer only zones! :applause:

I would be in favor of Pa's flintlock season running concurrent with archery season.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

I think the idea of allowing flintlocks in the woods for deer hunting in a time when archers have the woods to themselves (they think) is a good way of driving a wedge between flintlock shooters and archers. Sure, small game hunters are out there with the archers, as I wrote the idea will torque the archers off....

LD

 

[Davemuzz]

Davemuzz. I asked what you would call a person who wants to take part in the FLINT SEASON and none the less buys an in-line. A person in "Allegory" county isn't taking part in the flint season. Don't change the question by talking about other seasons.

I'd say he was perhaps mislead, or made a mistake, or misunderstood. Maybe the place where he purchased the rifle hoodwinked him and told him this was the correct firearm. You don't know the circumstances behind the purchase. And being an attorney, you should know enough to inquire the "why" before you just call someone a "dummy."

Does that help you out?

Dave

 

[scottm2012]

Hence, why I bought my first ever flintlock and the fact that any gender deer will work during that season with the standard license.

TBH, I really enjoy the mechanics of the flintlock and the special care it needs to function properly and efficiently. As a newly retired vet (with lots of time on his hands) I'm considering building my own but that is a few years away.

Here in PA, we need to work with the legislators about keeping the late Flintlock just that. We've seen what happened when they allowed crossbows; and in-lines are on the verge of doing the same thing.

 

[scottm2012]

I'd say he was perhaps mislead, or made a mistake, or misunderstood. Maybe the place where he purchased the rifle hoodwinked him and told him this was the correct firearm.
Dave

I wouldn't believe that. If a place was really trying to hoodwink the customer why would he sell a cheaper muzzleloader? Most flintlocks, even the cheapest are more expensive and require a lot more accessories.

Now if the customer was pushing for the in-line and not listening to reason the shop is going to want to make money and not let the customer leave. "Here you go, in-line is what you want, in-line is what you'll get."

Scott

 

[excess650]

I think the idea of allowing flintlocks in the woods for deer hunting in a time when archers have the woods to themselves (they think) is a good way of driving a wedge between flintlock shooters and archers. Sure, small game hunters are out there with the archers, as I wrote the idea will torque the archers off....

LD

If "archers" was only recurve and longbow shooters, I might agree. Now that they have allowed crossbows for other than disability, I don't.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Exactly BigEm, It has been referred to as the flint season for 40 years. A person, wants to join in the fun of the flint season and doesn't know the difference from an in-line,,,,, should not be in the woods alone.

 

[Davemuzz]

You ask me for some possible reasons. I tossed out some guess's off the top of my head. My point is you don't know the facts any more than I know the facts.

However, you are pretty quick to judge someone without knowing ANY of the facts.

That says a lot about the type of individual you are. I've read some of your post on this and other forums. I have a complete understanding of who you are.

'nuff said.

Dave

 

[zimmerstutzen]

The question is what person wanting to hunt in the FLINT SEASON would buy an inline.

You did a classic debate diversion when confronted with a tough question, You answered a different question. I suppose some where across the state some guy's girlfriend bought him an in-line instead of a flintlock. But if a hunter even has a clue what a flint lock is, he would not purchase a 209 ignition non-qualifying gun with the intent to hunt the flint season.

 

[XXX]

I think the idea of allowing flintlocks in the woods for deer hunting in a time when archers have the woods to themselves (they think) is a good way of driving a wedge between flintlock shooters and archers. Sure, small game hunters are out there with the archers, as I wrote the idea will torque the archers off....

LD

If "archers" was only recurve and longbow shooters, I might agree. Now that they have allowed crossbows for other than disability, I don't.

I agree. The long bow seasons were put in place in the 1930's, 40's, and 50's when everyone hunted archery with a stickbow. The technology explosion in so-called archery equipment ( I remember an add for a compound that bragged about "taking the arch out of archery"), since 1970 combined with highly evolved process (treestand hunting), has done wonders for the success rate for most bow season hunters. If they want to take advantage of every technological gizmo that comes along, then the long seasons should be reconsidered if they no longer make sense.

I like the way they do it in New Hampshire. They have a 3 month archery season for any deer that runs Sep 15 to Dec 15 and overlaps the gun seasons. The "muzzleloaders" are next up with a 2 week season that usually starts around 1 NOV. The "Rifle" season starts after that when the rut is in progress and they get 2 weeks or so too. This system progresses from the most handicapped weapon to the most advantageous (in theory), as it goes along and everyone gets a crack at antlerless deer. Both gun seasons have at least a couple of "Any Deer" days at the start of the season depending upon the management zone you are in.

I also like the system the use for the Pioneer Weapons Area in Kentucky's Daniel Boone National Forest. The primitive only rule keeps the hunting pressure low. If such a system were used in all National Forests, in designated "Wilderness" areas for example, I think it would give many of us a place where we can be primitive without modern intrusion and the modern guys can still do it their way everyplace else.

 

[Claude Mathis]

You ask me for some possible reasons. I tossed out some guess's off the top of my head. My point is you don't know the facts any more than I know the facts.

However, you are pretty quick to judge someone without knowing ANY of the facts.

That says a lot about the type of individual you are. I've read some of your post on this and other forums. I have a complete understanding of who you are.

'nuff said.

Dave

You guys need to stop talking about each other and stick to the topic. Please take your personal issues offline.

 

[excess650]

Virginia's early MLer season (2 weeks)starts late October or early November and runs for 2 weeks. The first week, turkey is still in. Starting the 2nd Saturday, bear comes in. Its either sex for deer, 2 per day, with a six deer season total and no more than (3) bucks. They allow anything that can be loaded from the muzzle. I've hunted my own property there (5 seasons) and pulled the trigger twice. Both were mature 8 point bucks, and both with flintlocks. Luckily, the property around mine is all private and not hunted, so no pressure on the deer. Yes, I do have percussion guns and one unmentionable, but prefer the flintlock except for bad weather.

If Pa would have a flintlock only season early to mid November, it would put a lot of hunters in the woods.

 

[Otter Trapper 100]

I like the no hunters left behind guns comment, that's funny. I would add that we have a No Hunters Left Behind season here in Mo now. Where we dumb down the process and cheapen the experience to accommodate those who are unwilling to apply themselves enough to do it the right way!

 

[talkingamoeba]

:hatsoff:

 

[BrownBear]

I've been following the general debate about "what is a muzzleloader" in lots of states, and I see a disturbing trend.

In almost every case traditionalists are being whispered as "liberals" trying to take away gun rights and freedom in general. It scares me because of the large numbers of folks who aren't traditional, but also because of the huge buxx behind it from manufacturers and conservative lobby groups. Our voices are going to get pretty small if we allow the NRA and anyone else to jump onto the inline bandwagon, as they did in Colorado when CVA tried to wedge their electronic ignition into muzzleloading regs. Aside from the fact that the CVA gun was NRA's gun of the year that year and CVA one of their biggest advertizers, the NRA painted the whole debate as one of "gun freedom." Scared me senseless, I can tell you.

I'm rambling, but what's going to happen to the PA regs when big money gets behind it and traditional hunters have a liberal stripe painted down their backs?

 

[zimmerstutzen]

When they considered permitting in-line muzzleloaders for any hunting at all, IIRC, even Mr. White was in the state capitol to testify.

Part of the problem arose when the legislature re-wrote the game laws back in the 1980's. Prior to that any firearm propelling a lead or expanding ball or bullet was permitted for large game, except 25 cal and under rim fire. There was no attempt to micro-manage the type of firearm. When the law was re-written, the legislature limited the permissible hunting firearms to center fire, rim fire, muzzle loader and shotgun. No other firearms are now permitted. So the current law, leaves out breech loading Ferguson flintlocks, breech loading Sharps percussion guns, breech loading wheel locks, etc. I was living out of state then or I would have lobbied to keep the old language.

The limited few at our Game Commission who make the calls about firearms technologies have flip flopped several times in the past decade. Two years ago, cap and ball revolvers were considered muzzleloaders, then that was reversed and they were considered illegal for most game and just recently, they were approved as being "like center fire" and are now considered center fire. (They are and always have been center fire)

For forty years, flint locks were required to have open sights, then in 2009, they removed the open sight requirement to permit peep sights. In 2011 they put the open sight requirement back in the rules and said open sights now includes peep sights. (That is still a head shaker)

 

[Davemuzz]

I don't know what happen to my post with the picture of the 1800's in-line flintlock, (a rifle that perhaps would be considered acceptable in today's regulations) but that type of build would seem to me to help the small builders, or perhaps the big guys if they made the factory assemblies. It doesn't seem like much of a tooling issue to build this.

OTOH, Brownbear has hit the proverbial nail on the head. Big money pushed the in-lines into Pa., and the NRA will scream "Gun Grab" any chance it can in order to attempt to tap into any gun owners wallet. Especially hunters...a lot of who do not belong to the NRA.

BTW, the NRA has about 400,000 Pa. members and 950,000 licensed hunters. The NRA has a long way to go to reach out and touch the Pennsylvania hunter's wallet.

Dave

 

[Rifleman1776]

I had to look at the title of this thread so I don't go too far ff as I can with issues like this.
What is often overlooked is the way regulations and laws are created. Common sense seldom is a deciding factor. Organized pressure is what will sway the votes.
Standing up at a meeting to state your position only looks good in a Norman Rockwell painting. Too many boards and commissions do not hear a word that is said.
In Arkansas, and I'm sure elsewhere, archers seem to be well organized and are capable at lobbying. For example: We have a number of wildlife management areas that are restriced to bow hunters only. No reason those should be closed to muzzle loaders, or even modern guns for that matter, but the archers pressed their case and now have nearly private, and very choice, hunting grounds others are denied access to. :cursing:
Logic will not win the day. Heavy lobbying can do the job.

 

[XXX]

The problem with lobbying is that it requires participatory numbers that are at least approaching parity with whomever you are lobbying against. You are always lobbying "against" some party as well as "for" your cause since someone will always see you as a threat to their interests. We are pretty much a small minority within a minority, so we have little chance of turning out more bodies than those who oppose us when an issue comes to a head. The reason we are always outnumbered is because we are always opposed to newer and better technology and most hunters have the opposite view of how things should be.

I think the bowhunting organizations are well organized and they have been for generations, but, I think their grip is slipping for a couple of reasons. Many if not most bowhunters are also gun hunters of some sort, So they have mixed loyalty when a gun vs bow issue comes into question. I would bet that only archers who exclusively hunt with a bow would turn out to oppose expansion of muzzleloaders into their season. As it is now, the hard core of the archery world is having little success keeping crossbows out of the archery season because more than a few "bowhunters" would prefer to have as much technical advantage as they can possibly get legalized and care nothing about the alleged bowhunting ideal of self imposed limitations for the sake of sport. In a few years, crossbows will evolve into true "arrow guns" with no external "bow" arms worthy of the name and magazines feeding bolts into modern looking upper receivers. The general public will look upon these as "guns", and who would then be able to argue that someone should not be allowed to hunt in the same season with a high powered air rifle? Bowhunters did this to themselves by embracing EVERY technological advance that has ever been turned out by a gadgeteer to make a buck. I imagine the game departments will eventually just resort to a "anything goes" policy to minimize the squabbling.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Yep, I gave up archery when PA permitted bows with training wheels

Around here, there are four or five times the archery hunters as hunters out in flint season.