Author Topic: Legal Cartridge size is now .220 (Read 2540 times)

Two Bears · « **on:** August 12, 2008, 04:40:18 AM »

Well now that Minnesota changed the "legal" cartridge size for taking big game with a rifle OR pistol....What do you guys think?

It just has to be a centerfire at least .220 in size so does this make a .25 auto pistol legal? I looked everywhere for the old pistol size restrictions about calibure and length but it is not in the new regs this year (unless I missed it) I read that regularion book a few times looking for the size restriction on pistols but did not see it.

Did the DNR screw up?

billy_56081 · « **Reply #1 on:** September 14, 2008, 05:33:38 AM »

I Just came in here to start a threadjust like this one. From what the regs now say there is no minimum case length, and bullet diameter only needs to be .220 or larger. I have no problem with the 22 centerfires in general being used on deer. But the case length deal will allow as u\you stated .25 ACP to be used. I may use my .38 special conversion revolver to take a deer, just cuz i can.

blackhawk45 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 14, 2008, 09:11:38 AM »

38 SPL. , I hope you're kidding !

rifleman · « **Reply #3 on:** September 20, 2008, 03:55:23 PM »

I agree with these concerns. I believe that the DNR was a little too lenient with this version of simplifying the regulations. I know that a 22 caliber rifle with the right bullet put in the right place will dispatch a deer. I'm not sure that a 22 caliber is right for eveyone and anyone.

Another head scratcher is the baiting "simplification" wording. The part about bird feeders being more than 6' off the ground - looks to me like you could fill a bird feeder plumb full of corn and wait for the birds to spill it and you have an instant "legal" deer feeder. I've been meaning to call the local game warden and see how he likes the enforcement predicament that presents him.

I also noticed that the 2008 regs have the identical number of pages as the 2007 regs. So much for making the book thinner!

Dave

Swampman · « **Reply #4 on:** September 20, 2008, 04:06:09 PM »

I don't think the .22 centerfires should be legal on deer sized game.

billy_56081 · « **Reply #5 on:** September 21, 2008, 06:10:16 AM »

Without putting a minimum Ftlbs regulation on firearms, the old laws and the new laws basically don't do much. Before you could legally take deer with a 25-20 which I did many times. Now which would be a better deer cartidge, a 223 or a 25-20? I'll tell you what its where ya hit em, not what you hit them with.

yooper77 · « **Reply #6 on:** September 21, 2008, 09:08:33 AM »

Minnesota has finally been strong armed into making 22 caliber center fire cartridge legal for deer hunting.

I personally do not recommend the use of any 22 caliber centerfire cartridges for the taking of any big game, unless they start sporting coyote fur and pointed teeth.

22 Varminter (aka 22-250 Remington).

yooper77

targshooter · « **Reply #7 on:** September 29, 2008, 04:14:53 PM »

Perhaps I am tired or missed one of the electronic pages in the MN DNR 2008 Hunting Regulations book? I cannot find the 6 shot restriction mentioned. I am envisioning AR15s in the woods this year! Guess this is 21st Century.

Empty Quiver · « **Reply #8 on:** September 30, 2008, 07:01:05 AM »

Isn't there a minimum case length for handguns. Otherwise a .40 S&W, 9mm .45auto would already be legal. The 10mm is given a special pass so it is legal. I wouldn't try any goofy calibres without a DNR signoff. I think some where in that booklet it says that it's a booklet and not the law, printing and proofreading errors do occur.

I will agree that .223 is marginally light. I sure hope that anyone using it really understands the cartridge and its limitations as well as the anatomy of a deer.

yooper77 · « **Reply #9 on:** September 30, 2008, 07:17:51 AM »

I would like to feel most big game hunters use a adequate cartridge for hunting.

There are still some misguided people that grab a box of ammo loaded with varmint bullets which are intended for varmint hunting only in a cartridge designed for varmint hunting only and attempt to shoot deer with them.

yooper77

Mike Britton · « **Reply #10 on:** September 30, 2008, 12:29:40 PM »

Help me understand here fellas. The .223 drops a human like lightning, is a Deer that much thicker skinned?
It seems in my fuzzy logic that there is enough hydraulic shock in the .223 hunting loads to blow up deer insides just fine. Am I being naive?

yooper77 · « **Reply #11 on:** September 30, 2008, 01:08:04 PM »

223 Remington drops what humans like lightning? The military uses full metal jacket (FMJ) bullets and takes a person out of the fighting, not necessarily killing them, more like taking them out of the fight along with two other to carry off the wounded. One shot taking three persons out of the fighting even for a few minutes. The Geneva Convention doesn’t allow hollow point bullets, only FMJ, so they don’t always kill.

There is a huge assortment of better cartridges to choose from when I come to deer hunting, I personally believe 22 caliber center fire cartridges are not the wisest choice.

yooper77

billy_56081 · « **Reply #12 on:** September 30, 2008, 01:43:55 PM »

Quote from: Empty Quiver on September 30, 2008, 07:01:05 AM

Isn't there a minimum case length for handguns. Otherwise a .40 S&W, 9mm .45auto would already be legal. The 10mm is given a special pass so it is legal. I wouldn't try any goofy calibres without a DNR signoff. I think some where in that booklet it says that it's a booklet and not the law, printing and proofreading errors do occur.

I will agree that .223 is marginally light. I sure hope that anyone using it really understands the cartridge and its limitations as well as the anatomy of a deer.

No the minimum case length is gone.

Mike Britton · « **Reply #13 on:** October 01, 2008, 03:13:51 AM »

So, am I getting this right here? Here in Texas the .22-250 is used a lot for deer. Does that mean that it's not so much the diameter of the .22 cf's that's in question as the velocity?
I'm old school enough to think that .308, or '06 is what you go hunting with, but a lot of folks here use much smaller cartridges for whitetail here.

yooper77 · « **Reply #14 on:** October 01, 2008, 03:55:27 AM »

Its fine if a hunter chooses to use a 22 caliber centerfire cartridge for big game hunting.

Me personally, I wouldn't use any 22 caliber centerfire cartridge for the taking of any big game animal, period.

I can always agree to disagree.

yooper77

Mike Britton · « **Reply #15 on:** October 01, 2008, 11:26:03 AM »

I agree Yooper. I want something that will help take up the slack from my inadequacies as a hunter.
Punching paper is one thing. It's no fun to chase a wounded animal.

HuntingGuy · « **Reply #16 on:** November 08, 2008, 12:37:47 AM »

I'll echo the majority here. Splurge a bit and buy an adequate deer hunting rifle. There is just no need to begin utilizing .22s for taking 200+ lb animals. My $.02

deadrabbit · « **Reply #17 on:** November 14, 2008, 04:19:19 PM »

Over 20 years ago, they made 22 magnums illegal for small game during the open deer seasons because of poaching. ( I live in the southern zone) Those are underpowered for deer too, even for poaching. Maybe I'll get my 22 hornet ready for a trophy buck up north.... None of it makes sense. Welcome to the MN DNR

deadrabbit · « **Reply #18 on:** November 14, 2008, 04:23:13 PM »

Oh, can I still use a 30.06 in a pistol in the southern zone but I can't use a rifle in that caliber? Not that I want either one flying around down here but its all kind of senseless.

Syncerus · « **Reply #19 on:** November 14, 2008, 05:24:48 PM »

The best intent can be subverted by idiots.

Or, just because something is legal, doesn't mean that it's right. It may be legal to hunt big game with a .25 ACP, but no decent person would do it.

It sounds like they wrote the rules for humans rather than lawyers.

sbhg · « **Reply #20 on:** November 15, 2008, 08:31:18 AM »

mn. dnr doesnt use science for anything anymore, its all politics. they did have a minimum for rifle/shotgun @ (correct me if im wrong) 1000ft/lb. of energy @ the muzzle.
i think things started changing for the worst w/ the ventura administration.

Friar_Tuck · « **Reply #21 on:** November 16, 2008, 04:13:19 PM »

A part of me had to cringe when I seen that law change, but then I started to think different.
I really do not like more restrictive laws, or the DNR doing my thinking for me.
In some ways this allows people to use their own judgement, and yes that does scare me a bit, rather than being told by the man, what they must do.
Just a different way to look at it I guess.
Jim

Uncle Howie · « **Reply #22 on:** November 18, 2008, 06:05:27 AM »

Lots of good info in this thread, maybe also a couple of mistakes or misunderstandings.

For starters, here's a link to the statute defining caliber restrictions:
http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=97B.031

Keep in mind, being a statute, this law was made by the legislature. This may or may not be what the DNR advocated. Some would say the legislature has made a mistake or two over the years.

The caliber restriction change was intended to simplify things. Legislators kept pushing through exceptions to the old caliber restriction for their constituents. This led to the law being overly complex. Exceptions passed in recent years included the .30 Carbine and .56 Spencer cartridges. Ironically, believe the .56 Spencer is now illegal (it's a rimfire, IIRC).

Miscellaneous thoughts (I'm repeating some info from above posters):
-minimum case length requirements are gone
-the .25 ACP is now a legal big game cartridge, however ill-advised
-a .270 Winchester "pistol" such as a T/C Encore is legal in the shotgun zone, but a .30/30 lever action rifle is still prohibited...

-the .22 centerfires, while not ideal, can do OK with an appropriate bullet and shot placement
-I don't ever recall a 6-round limit on firearms for big game(?)
-1,000 ft-lbs of energy is a common benchmark for big game calibers, but I don't remember MN ever having that requirement(?)

In the end, it's up to the hunters to make good choices regarding caliber, bullet selection, and shot placement. Most of us will do so. Unfortunately, there are always the few making poor or uneducated choices...

Thanks for the great discussion, guys!

billy_56081 · « **Reply #23 on:** November 18, 2008, 12:45:18 PM »

Uncle Howie I have to agree with ya, I am 99.9% sure that there never has been a magazine limit or energy minimum here in MN. When I lived out west I remember some regulaions on the order of both of them but not here. The new regulations are not a big deal. As I said before, a 25-20 winchester was alwats legal under the old laws and I have killed a few deer with grandpa's old 92 win. Now can anyone here say that a 223 with a partition, or barnes TSX would not have been better than that? And heck grampas old 25-20 probably killed alot more deer than most peoples rifles. It's all where ya hit em.