Author Topic: Scoped Primitive Weapons now legal in Alabama (Read 1646 times)

Dutch/AL · « **on:** May 23, 2004, 07:13:08 AM »

.....................

lostid · « **Reply #1 on:** May 23, 2004, 09:12:24 AM »

WOW!
Thats a sad day indeed!!

We here in Minn. allow crossbow for Deer under special permit only. The shooter has to be Handicapped or in some way unable to draw and hold a bow proper,,it's tough to get the permit!

I could almost see, a special permit for scopes also,,,,almost. If a guy was half blind and needs optics to see properly! Lord knows our eyes fail as we age! But for every clown in town!! :evil: :evil:

But they just opened a flood gate!!

I wonder how long it will take Wallymart to come out with a scope mounted sidelock everything included "bubblepack" called the "Bama Bambi Hunter" with a "Season Special" mark down from $139.99 to $119.99!!! :cry: :cry: :twisted:

Oh Man! Dutch,,,I hope you vote!!

Ramrod · « **Reply #2 on:** May 23, 2004, 01:43:19 PM »

Well, I don't think the sky is falling guys! This crap is going on all over the country. I think some of us worry too much about these bozos getting an unfair advantage, or that they will get the big deer first, or something like that. From what I have seen in my own state, most of the clowns that take advantage of these types of laws (inline hunters especially) are such lousy hunters and miserable shots that I don't see why anyone would care what they use, 90 percent will never get a deer anyway.

Dutch/AL · « **Reply #3 on:** May 23, 2004, 03:42:38 PM »

................

Good time Charlie · « **Reply #4 on:** May 24, 2004, 12:34:47 AM »

What this tells you is that inline shooters are spending more money than us traditional guys. I live in Alabama,but I will not be adding a scope to my smoke pole.
Charlie

Shorty · « **Reply #5 on:** May 24, 2004, 03:07:49 PM »

Isn't "scoped, primitive" an oxymoron? :roll:
Scoped, muzzleloaders are legal here since a few years ago, but we have so damn many deer and so few places for the average working slob to hunt, that they have to kill as many as they can, any way they can. :?

Ramrod · « **Reply #6 on:** May 24, 2004, 04:34:34 PM »

Quote from: Shorty

Isn't "scoped, primitive" an oxymoron? :roll:
Scoped, muzzleloaders are legal here since a few years ago, but we have so damn many deer and so few places for the average working slob to hunt, that they have to kill as many as they can, any way they can. :?

You hit the nail on the head, the guys with the bucks to throw away on the newest plastic pieces of crap each year can afford to lease all the good land too. Limited access is the reason for the large deer populations.
I don't know about oxymorons, but I do know that certain morons can't measure their own powder so they buy pressed turds already measured for about $40 a pound.

MOGorilla · « **Reply #7 on:** May 25, 2004, 02:05:36 AM »

First I have to say I am not a hunter, just a target shooter, but I have not been a fan of the inline concept since its inception and the concept of a scope on a muzzleloader seems ridiculous. I remember when the muzzleloading season was not an excuse to get another deer tag, but a way to allow traditionalists to hunt the way they wanted without interference. My family are all inline hunters and they refrain from talking about them at family gatherings for the reason I am big and loud in my opinions. I hate the way this country no longer stands for the people but the special interest groups and businesses.
That all said, I am a crossbow shooter and I have always felt we got the bums rush. I don't see what the problem with hunting with a crossbow vs bow. At best, in my opinion, a crossbow effective hunting range is maybe 30 yards more than a regular bow, with more stopping power. I can't even find a range in Missouri that allows target shooting of Crossbows. I am a medieval histroy buff, so I like the cross bow. Still a sad state of affairs we have here. And decoys on turkeys? I live near an interstate and less than 17 miles from downtown Kansas City and I see 20 hens every morning, and at least 5 jakes. These things are everywhere? If you put out decoys, some citified hunter is going to shoot them and you will be out $$$$

crow_feather · « **Reply #8 on:** May 25, 2004, 05:25:13 AM »

Sort of an interesting concept. Not allowing a weapon that was used widely by many countries centuries ago. It's sort of like banning the matchlock for hunting.

C F

Ramrod · « **Reply #9 on:** May 25, 2004, 04:08:17 PM »

As far as crossbows go, I think they should be legal in all 50 states, just not during any special early season. I feel the same way about inlines. I think the idea behind the EARLY seasons was to give the hunters who willingly handicapped themselves with primative short range weapons first crack at non-spooked game.

MOGorilla · « **Reply #10 on:** May 26, 2004, 07:04:28 AM »

I agree on the crossbow, but I think a primative season should include all traditional muzzleloaders, revurve and long bows, no compound, and regular crossbows, no compound bows there either. Crossbows predate any firearm and that says primative to me. I think any modern improvements would disqualify it from a primative hunt. Those ugly inlines or bows with pulleys extra cables and bells and whistles.

filmokentucky · « **Reply #11 on:** May 26, 2004, 07:19:29 AM »

MO-Couldn't have said it better myself. Bravo!

Dutch/AL · « **Reply #12 on:** May 26, 2004, 08:23:31 AM »

..................

MOGorilla · « **Reply #13 on:** May 27, 2004, 02:12:58 AM »

The Republic is not about the people any more. All political movers and shakers know they get their money from Special Interests and businesses. We have seen more and more where money dictates over the common good. A prime example is a few years ago, the FDA was going to come out and tell the world what we all know that we eat too much sugar and it appears in way too many foods. A sugar lobby found out "talked" to Congress and the FDA had to redo their guidelines ommitting the sugar statement. We elect them and they don't care one bit about us. As I said, I don't hunt, but I do care about the environment and conservation and my family all hunt. I have never met a good hunter (note I said good as in concerned) that was not more concerned about being able to enjoy the sport 20 years from now than getting a trophy this year. These are the people who should be asked to appear on these boards. My wife's family have as a group put together nearly 900 acres of land that has been reclaimed as wetlands, praire grass and woodland. It is a hunter's paradise. Since they did it as a group, the price didn't do anyone in, especially since someone is smart enough in the gov. to help out landowners who want to reclaim the land as it once was. Sorry to hear the chislers have made it into Alabama politics and are messing up muzzleloading.

New Hampshire · « **Reply #14 on:** May 27, 2004, 12:04:06 PM »

I dont want to start any kind of trouble at all, but I just want to point out that, yes now manufacturers are gonna be making more money, but some of that money goes back into protecting and restoring wildlife habitat. Is that too bad a thing? And if it gives just one more person a reason to get out into the wild? Not really trying to make excuses, but like Ramrod said....well he said it best. I can see how an older guy with failing vision (Im 24 and got horrible vision myself,) could make good use of this law. But the bigger, badder, most expensive and modern piece of equipment does not guarentee you will see mor or bigger game. Thats up to the individual.
Brian M.

willysjeep134 · « **Reply #15 on:** May 31, 2004, 03:42:15 PM »

Crossbows can be used with special permits for the handicapped during bow season in Michigan, and I don't mind that. They can also be used by anybody during the regular rifle season, as long as you obey all regular rifle season rules, which I think is fine.

Some people see traditional seasons as a chance to play mountain man, others see it as a way to fill the freezer a little more. I tend to side with the traditionalists, because everybody can hunt with pretty much what ever they want during the regular rifle season and fill their kill tag.

On the other hand, mabey they should extend the regular rifle season or make more traditional and special seasons earlier yet in Michigan to help reduce the gross overpopulation. I wouldn't mind seeing less deer, because less deer would mean bigger deer. It would all be a lot better with a lower population.

AndyHass · « **Reply #16 on:** June 01, 2004, 06:48:28 AM »

In states like Michigan that have a HUGE overpopulation problem, it makes little sense to restrict the special seasons more. The need to reduce the population further by getting more hunters in the field is far more important that the need for the few flinters and sidelocks around to not have competition. If there were to be such a very restrictive season, they would need to lengthen the regular season to make up for the lost kills. I get 4-5 deer a year in 2 days of hunting!! Muzzleloader only too.
I used to hunt all seasons with an open-sighted sidelock. However once I was pushed into hunting open fields, I no longer could tolerate the range limitations. Each rifle has its place, and the sidelock still takes a deer in the woods once in awhile.

big6x6 · « **Reply #17 on:** June 26, 2004, 02:13:35 AM »

Seems like that is a smart move by the Alabama F&G, I APPLAUD them! :grin:

Less wounded game, better game management, and the possibility of fewer hunting accidents are all beneficial. The law doesn't INSIST you use a scope but it does give hunters that option.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #18 on:** June 26, 2004, 03:42:54 AM »

As I recall, the snipers in the civil war used scopes on there side locks. So it is not such a weird thing. Like big6X6 wrote it is optional.

TScottW99 · « **Reply #19 on:** June 28, 2004, 11:47:54 PM »

Quote

, but I have not been a fan of the inline concept since its inception

WoW! Your Old!! The inline concept pre-dates the precussion and the flintlock :? No wonder your against compound bows :lol:

Roger_Dailey · « **Reply #20 on:** June 29, 2004, 12:59:31 AM »

Quote from: big6x6

Seems like that is a smart move by the Alabama F&G, I APPLAUD them! :grin:

Less wounded game, better game management, and the possibility of fewer hunting accidents are all beneficial. The law doesn't INSIST you use a scope but it does give hunters that option.

With all those benefits, it sounds like the responsible thing would be to REQUIRE scopes.