I read back through the posts on this issue and it seems to me the VAST majority of people here are against banning an instrument for hunting. Read the posts, most people who are being called antis haven't said anything about banning anything, they do think there is a problem though. If you think there isn't a problem there are 5 pages of posts that say different. An article in a national magazine does not define everyone who uses a 50BMG for hunting, it will however be used against hunters and gun owners to try to ban hunting with a 50cal. and then to ban more and more weapons. For those who think it can't happen look to New Jersey's bear season, British Columbia's bear season or the wolf issue in the lower 48, sound science, and level heads, don't always win.
I believe most people who have been labeled antis, me included, see this type of hunting as a blemish against ourselves and other hunters. As has been said before, a guy who takes a 400 yard shot with his iron sighted 30-30 is just as wrong, and for the same reason, as the guy who takes a 1000 yard shot with a 50BMG. Maybe he makes the shot at the range sometimes, just like the guy with the 50BMG. I'm not convinced the EQUIPMENT is up to making the shot under field conditions consistantly. As hunters we must know our limits and the limits of our equipment, to make clean humane kills. It is perfectly legal to gut shoot your next animal, or blow its legs off or shoot it in the @$$. If you think this is ethical you are not a hunter, if you say ethics has nothing to do with this then we as hunters are lost. And I agree with what most have said it isn't the gun its the jackass behind the trigger.
Call me an anti if you wish, I'm not, but I could care less if you feel that way. No we can't regulate morals or values, not for lack of trying, but it's obvious to me this country is going downhill steadly in both counts, but if WE don't police our own ranks, every one else will. I've never said the 50 should be banned, not from ownership, but restricted from use in hunting. I'd REALLY like to see a 700-750gr FRANGIBLE bullet.
Our freedoms are steadily being eroded because we lack the self control necessary to preserve them. We say we are pro gun ownership, pro hunting, but how much have we gotten involved in preserving them. I have written countless letters to elected offocials in support of our rights, and have been met with support and fierce opposition. I was against the ban of the 50 BMG here in CA, still am, and am glad to see the Barrett company come up with the 416.
I do not feel sorry for those that lose priviledges because they abuse them. I do feel sorry when everyone loses them because a few cannot contain their activities to legal and ethical uses. Yes I have an opinion on what is ethical and it IS my opinion, and it carries as much weight as any here. Contrary to what you guys say, I do believe there can and HAS to be a middle ground in the gun ban issue. Not accepting losing any gun as OK but rather considering it maybe a battle lost, but working towards winning the war itself.
I mentioned no one made any follow up attempts, because none were mentioned, but they had zero issues with telling us how difficult it is to shoot at that distance, by telling how many times they missed. If they did follow up, I do believe they'd have said so. they DID go to lengths to say how SURE they were of the area around the animal. I have my doubts on that one too. Like was mentioned, we can NEVER be 100% sure of whats in the background when hunting with a rifle.
One could easily be hunting here in the west, making a 200yd shot at a deer or coyote, and not see someone hiding in the bushes hunting something entirely different, 50-100yds away. It has happened and, sadly, most likely will again.
As I said, many rifles CAN kill from that distance and should they be banned, no! But what I did say, was the 50's reputation and undeniable power advantage, would make many believe it's OK to do so and easier to do so. Anyone that doesn't lose a bit of themselves when a game animal is lwounded and lost, has no place in the field. I've wounded and lost deer before, but only after hours of searching to the best of my abilities to locate them. It still turns my stomach to do so. I have a great deal of respect for the animals I hunt, and I believe God placed us here to be good stewards of them, not to wantonly slaughter them or consider them as targets. They are live animals, that live breathe and bleed and hurt when we shoot them. If we lose sight of that, we've become less than human. What those guys were doing is not hunting, it's long range target practice, on live targets. And I stand by MY conviction to that effect.
I've witnessed long range shooting and hunting. I have one hunting partner that is an unbelievable shot, in the field and the bench. He hunts everything with his 300 WM and uses only one load, and knows it VERY well. I've watched him hit rocks that were over 500yds away, in the field, from a sitting position, not a bench rest. I also saw him turn down a shot on a mule deer here with an absotuletly HUGE rack. Why, the buck was walking on a windy ridgetop, about 400-500yds away. He held up for two reasons, he didn't know what was behing the ridge top and it was too windy.
HE is an ethical hunter. Just the year before, he, while hunting antelope, had to follow up on one he wounded from about 300yds. It moved as he shot and was not motally wounded. He followed it for miles, finally making the killing shot, in front of several witnesses, at 615yds. The hillside was behind the antelope, and the wind was calm, and he had a good rest. the shot took out both lungs, dropping the lope in his tracks. by the way, he was born in S. korea, and came here as a teenager.
You guys can debate this till the cows come home, but I'm through. I've said my feelings and make no appologies for them. I stand by my convictions. If you fell less of me because of that, then so be it. Those who stand for nothing, will fall for anything. I stand for responsible and ethical hunting, and YES it can and WILL be regulated, if we don't regulate ourselves.
The homing pigeon and bison are two good examples of that. One was wastefully hunted to extenction, the other nearly was so. Just for the record, movies guys make of showing prarrie dogs turning to red vapor are no smarter than the clowns in the article.
You guys don't like my opinions, ban me, I'd care less.
