Help Illinois pistol hunters

[Myk]

Illinois recently passed a law allowing pistols during our firearms deer season. The law put a 30 caliber/500 foot pound limit on the legal pistols. Other than under those limits, any pistol type is allowed, only cartriges that don't meet or exceed the caliber and ft/lb limit are not allowed.
But, in comes the ILDNR to limit it to straight walled cases and single shot or revolvers only.  
(Do not confuse this with the special population control pistol hunt that we've had for a while. The new law is to allow pistols during the regular fireams season.)

This is not only an Illinois issue. Non-resident hunters are effected too, so everybody has a right to voice on this. Gun owners on the internet put Dell Computers in their place, now it's time to put the ILDNR in its place.

The new Illinois pistol hunting law, http://www.legis.state.il.us/legislation/publicacts/fulltext.asp?Name=093-0554
The ILDNR's proposal, http://dnr.state.il.us/legal/650-Proposed.htm

The ILDNR's address to let your voice be heard on this. We only have until 10-27-03 before the DNR's proposal becomes what they will enforce. After that it will have to go through the courts. Write/call now, don't put it off.

Jonathan E. Furr
Department of Natural Resources
One Natural Resources Way
Springfield IL
62702-1271
217/782-1809

I am only writing to the first 3 on the list but here is a list of all the sponsors of the bill that made it to law. Senate is not back in session until after the proposal goes into effect. So if you call or write, do so to their district offices.

Representative Brandon W. Phelps (D), author of the house bill.
Springfield Office:
265-S Stratton Office Building
Springfield, IL    
(217) 782-5131
 
District Office:
617 E. Church
Suite 8
Harrisburg, IL  62946  
(618) 253-4189
(618) 253-3136 FAX

Senator Todd Sieben (R), author of a similar senate bill and co-sponsor of the bill made into law.
Springfield Office:
Senator 45th District
307 Capitol Building
Springfield, IL   62706  
(217) 782-0180
 
District Office:
137 South State Street
Geneseo, IL  61254  
(309) 944-5681
(309) 944-3392 FAX

Senator John O. Jones (R), co-sponsor but also a major friend to Illinois hunters
Springfield Office:
Senator 54th District
103D Capitol Building
Springfield, IL   62706  
(217) 782-0471
 
District Office:
2929 Broadway
P.O. Drawer 1787
Mt. Vernon, IL  62864  
(618) 242-9511
(618) 242-9516 FAX

Representative William J. Grunloh (D), co-sponsor
Springfield Office:
258-W Stratton Office Building
Springfield, IL   62706  
(217) 782-2087
(217) 524-0867 FAX
 
District Office:
1901 S. 4th
Suite 15
Effingham, IL  62401  
(217) 342-2353
(217) 347-3305 FAX

Representative Dan Reitz (D), co-sponsor
Springfield Office:
200-9S Stratton Office Building
Springfield, IL   62706  
(217) 782-1018
(217) 782-0945 FAX
 
District Office:
128 A West Main
Sparta, IL  62286  
(618) 443-5757
(618) 443-3800 FAX

Representative Paul D. Froehlich (R), co-sponsor
Springfield Office:
232-N Stratton Building
Springfield, IL   62706  
(217) 782-3725
(217) 782-1336 FAX
 
District Office:
15 W. Weathersfield Way
Schaumburg, IL  60193  
(847) 985-9210
(847) 891-8772 FAX

Representative Gary Forby (D), co-sponsor
Springfield Office:
257-S Stratton Office Building
Springfield, IL   62706  
(217) 782-1051
(217) -217 FAX
 
District Office:
P.O. Box 1000
Benton, IL  62812  
(618) 439-2504
(618) 438-3704 FAX

[Gregory]

If I'm reading the regs correctly they took out the 1.4 max cartridge length for the firearms season.  So that would make my 357 Max legal and my 300 Whisper illegal because it's a bottleneck case.

Why didn't they just adopt the current handgun regs in place for the January handgun season?

[Myk]

That's the way the proposal is worded. I think removing bottlenecks was to beat the rule beater that was invented for the special pistol season, the 30bellm. If people start using 45/70, 444Marlin or .375Win I bet they change the rules to stop those too.

I think they like us paying them to shoot at deer but don't like us actually shooting them.

I'm not giving up. I don't really have a desire to shoot an elephant cartridge out of a handgun. I want to shoot something that is accurate and capable of dropping the deer in their tracks or at least nearby.

Those Congressmen knew exactly what they had in mind when they worded the law, which is why they worded it the way they did, not so the DNR could claim they have the power to overrule laws.

I'll glady carry my .357 or 44mag for extremely close shots or finishing shots but I'm not stopping until we can use something that is accurate and powerful enough to create reliable kills at our normal hunting ranges. Having to blood trail nearly every shot taken in Illinois is not fair to the game. Having every other hunter pumping a vest full of slugs into the air hoping to hit the deer is not fair to the other hunters having to dodge those slugs.

I notified the NRA-ILA today. My letters to everyone else go out tomorrow. If you know of other hunting forums get the word out. Their proposal is not set in stone yet.

[Gregory]

If the current wording of the law sticks, I'd use my 10" TC Contender 357 Max and be confident out to 150 yds with a solid rest.  My other options would limit my shots to 100 yds max.  (14" 44 Mag Contender, Encore 20 ga slug).  My 10" Contender 300 Whisper wouldn't even be legal, even though I bought this barrel just for the Illinois handgun season in January.

Do you think they will still restrict the January season to handguns only or open it up to shotguns and muzzleloaders?

[Myk]

I haven't seen any proposals about the special pistol hunt. It would make sense that they change those caliber limits too but I bet it still remains pistol only. That law as passed only gave them permission to have special population control hunts, the weapons were totally up to the DNR.

Maybe they are waiting to see what they get to pull off with this before bothering with that since they have an extra month for that one. Or maybe since they're the DNR they don't plan on making sense.

I was a big supporter of the ILDNR and how they ran things. But after this stunt I'm convinced they are not on the side of hunters or the game, they are on the side of selling more permits to line their pockets. Keep us using marginal weapons and they keep the population high allowing them the "need" to issue more permits.

By what they are pulling here it says they think they had the power to allow us to use rifles all along. (Which they could've for the special pistol hunt which should prove that they are after money and not population control. Yes, limit it to .357 and .44 in the Quincy ditches, but elsewhere in those counties would be perfectly safe for rifles.) It will be interesting to see if they use the CWD hunt that also passed this year as a money grab too.

I didn't hear anything back from the NRA-ILA and usually I do by now. So hopefully they are getting things researched to put up a major fight.
 
I'm going to try contacting Harry Canterbury next. He should be able to get the word out with his show and have some pull with the DNR.

[GrizzLeeBear]

I'll probably get flamed for this, but whats wrong with limiting handguns to handgun calibers?  Here in Iowa we have the same limit of straight walled cases, except its 357 mag or larger.  If anything it appears to me the regs don't go far enough by leaving it at 30 cal.  Unless I'm reading wrong that would allow a handgun in 30 carbine, 9mm, etc, wich to me isn't enough gun in a rifle, let alone a handgun, even if they can meet the 500 ft/lb requirement.  If you ask most guys that do a lot of handgun hunting for deer (I know quite a few, and am getting the itch myself) I'll bet they don't feel undergunned with a 357 max, 44 mag, 454 Casull, 45-70, 444 marlin, etc out to 100 yds.  As long as they don't do something really stupid, like the 1.4" length limit mentioned, whats the problem.  Sounds to me like you guys won't be happy until you can use your hand held rifles in rifle calibers so you can shoot at them at 200 yards.  I know the sport of handgun silhouettes has really pushed out the envelop on what is a "handgun", but if you want a rifle season, fight for a rifle season.  I would think that in a state like Illinois that is controlled by the liberals in Chicago, that you would be extatic that they are opening the season up to handguns.
As far as not allowing automatics (they do here in Iowa) I can see why they don't want all the "boys in the hood" to be running out to "bust some caps" on deer with their "nines".

[Myk]

No flames but I will explain it.

There was nothing wrong with the ILDNR limiting the calibers to 1.4" for the special pistol hunt. That law was written to only allow a population control hunt, the method and time of that hunt was up to the ILDNR according to the law.

What is wrong is this law clearly states what is and isn't legal for both pistols and calibers. The ILDNR is claiming they have the power to overwrite the laws that are passed by our elected officials. Maybe you don't see the problem with unelected officials being allowed to dictate law and/or overwrite laws that our elected officials passed, but I do. I do not and will not live under a dictatorship where people are allowed to pass laws without being held responsible to the voters those laws effect.

30 carbine or 9mm don't produce the required 500ft/lbs, but if they did, what difference is .002" bullet diameter going to make? (The 500ft/lb requirement itself is stupid because it's not energy that kills but hole size, velocity increases hole size and intertia causes penetration, but right or wrong the 500ft/lbs is what our legislature passed.) You are correct that those calibers are not enough, but neither is a .357mag, at least going by the 500ft/lbs. According to that a .357mag in 110gr is well within the limits, but a 180gr .357mag is not. I think you can see the flaw in that logic if it came to taking a shot through the shoulder, whether or not that was the intended POI.
 
Actually the 1.4" case limit wasn't as stupid as their present proposal. Here is why, that limit with the foot pound limit, did limit the cartridges to normal handgun cartridges. As you point out by mentioning 45-70 and 444marlin, the present law does not. Why would a 444marlin be OK but a .308win not be? The 444marlin is going to carry a lot more inertia to hit a fellow hunter on the other side of the targeted deer. These are rough figures but a 250gr 444marlin zeroed for 3" high@100yds will hit about 3" low at 200yds, it's still going about 1550fps and has over 1300ft/lbs of energy, plus that size of bullet is carrying plenty of inertia. So exactly what was your point about the 200yd shots and why the proposal makes sense? Want me to run a 45-70 and a 375Win through my ballistics program too?

What's the problem with being able to take a marginal shot at 200yds with a rifle caliber out of a pistol? Do you think that 200yds is not able to be just as marginal of a shot out of a muzzleloader or a shotgun during the same season? The difference is that a .308 at pistol velocities won't expand at 200yds, the shotgun which doesn't need to expand will probably miss the heart/lung and the same with the muzzleloader. What you have when taking a shot beyond any weapon's abilities is most likely a wounded animal. Limiting the caliber doesn't change that fact it only makes the likelyhood of woundings worse. Don't forget that pistols have shorter barrels, thus lower velocities. Just because you put a rifle cartridge in a pistol does not mean it is the same as a rifle.

You are correct, I will not rest until I can use rifle calibers, whether in pistols or rifles doesn't matter, this was a stepping stone to get Chicago to lighten up on Illinois hunters. Since I have been watching this and other bills that these Congressmen have brought up I know what they intended, I doubt if you do.
You are incorrect about 200yd shots, I can't even see 150yds for a clear shot where I hunt. But I do want a caliber capable of cleanly taking the deer. In my experienced opinion, shotgun slugs cause more woundings than anything else. Allowing people to use .357mag will also cause woundings. Granted it's usually not the weapon's problem but the shooters problem, but you put those same shooters behind a .308 rifle and they can hit what they are aiming for.

Your "boys in the hood", "bust some caps", "nines" comment is deserving of flame, it shows that you have some very strong anti-gun philosophy engrained into your mind but I'll explain instead. Maybe you don't realize, but since the 10mm auto has been dropped by the FBI it is primariliy a hunting cartridge. You should also check out some Desert Eagles in thier long barreled, scoped hunting configurations. Semi-auto and bolt action shotguns are allowed during that same season so there is no reason that semi-auto and bolt action pistols should also not be allowed. It's not the mechanics, it's the "boyz in da hood" mentality that is not allowing them.

[Dan Chamberlain]

Wow!  Does this mean I can start using my .375Win Contender?

I'm pumped.

Dan C

[Myk]

Yes it does (in fact if it sticks that's what I plan on using). But it also means people can't use their 30bellm, 30-30, .308 and many other calibers capable of cleanly taking deer.
Please don't just think of yourself, the next law they decide they can over rule could be one that you like.

[Dan Chamberlain]

MYK;

Forgive me, but this amendment is a giant leap forward in a state that normally doesn't care about hunters in general and handgunners in particular.  If you have a contender in an appropriate caliber, then what's the problem?  So you can't use .30-30 or .308!  You can't use a 80mm howitzer either!  Be happy for the fact this law came about.  Prior to this, you had to shoot pistol cartridges, now you can use specialty cartridges!  Seems to me to be a half full half empty sort of thing, and you're only seeing it as half empty!  This is a vast improvement!  If it doesn't quite go far enough to suit you, let me put it back on you.  Don't just think of yourself, but of others who are happy with this news and gratified someone took a chance.  Hopefully, if someone realizes that straightwalled cases are not dangerous, perhaps someday we'll be able to shoot our Marlin Guide Guns, or our Sharps rifles!  We live in Illinois for cripes sake!  Baby steps forward are better than giant leaps backward!  

Dan C

[Myk]

OK, imagine next year the state passes rifle season allowing any rifles in calibers 243 or larger.
Are you going to be satisfied that we get that carrot dangled off the stick while the DNR comes along and decides to overwrite that law and limit it straight walled cartridges? (Which from your post, it sounds like you would be.)

The pistol deer hunting law clearly states what is and isn't a legal pistol and a legal cartridge. That law was passed by people we elected. It is not just a suggestion, it IS law.
I cannot believe you are OK with someone who is appointed being allowed to rewrite the law that the people we elected easily passed.

"If it doesn't quite go far enough to suit you"

The law goes exactly far enough to suit me. It's the DNR's proposal that doesn't go far enough. And it's not just that fact but the fact that their proposal to not follow the law is illegal and is not how this country is supposed to be run.

"We live in Illinois for cripes sake! Baby steps forward are better than giant leaps backward!"

Who's asking for a leap backwards? The reason Illinois gets away with this kind of crap is the gun owners and hunters are always sitting back and taking what they get and being thankful for it.
Telling the DNR to follow the law is not going to remove the pistol hunting, it will tell them you expect them to follow the law. You/our voice will never get represented in this state until the hunters get off the couch and start using those voices.

The reason we don't have a helmet law is because motorcyclists keep up on the proposed laws and use their voices. The reason hunters keep getting crapped on is because most of us sit on our butts thinking, "This is Illinois for cripes sake!"
I have yet to run into a fellow Illinois deer hunter who knew this law was being put to a vote in Congress, most don't even know it was passed.

I've told you the law, I've told you how to give your input on the DNR's proposal (input they are requesting). If you continue to sit on your duff allowing this to continue to be "Illinois for cripes sake" that is your choice. I have given them my input. I've done all I can do. I'm a voice of one. My one voice cannot make up for the silence of the IL gun owners and hunters who sit around quivering in fear of Daley and his Chicago minority, grateful for any crumbs dropped from their table.
We gun owners and hunters are the majority but it won't do us any good until we start voting and using our voices. We will remain central Kalifornia by your choice of action (or lack thereof), not mine.

[Dan Chamberlain]

Myk;

I come from Wisconsin.  In most of the state you can hunt with rifles and caliber is restricted only by how small you can go.  There are parts of the state that require shotgun/slug or muzzleloader.  It's been that way for years.  In the grand scheme of things you can't find sense in it, because a shotgun slug leaving the barrel at 1700fps will go just as far as a .45-70 leaving the barrel at 1700!  So why can't they use a .45-70?  It's because people who make the laws rarely understand what they are doing.  I'm not saying you are right or wrong, but I'm saying things like this can happen all at once, or they can take some time.  I've been here 13 years now, and to me, this is a leap forward.  My comment about a leap backward pertained to the fact we have a Demoncrat in the state house who is not particularly gun friendly!  

Yes, it sucks that a law was enacted, and then unelected officials went and modified the language and yes you should be upset and yes I can try and help by making my voice heard, but for now, I see the law as a positive and the rest can be worked on.  It's like a concealed weapons bill.  In Missouri they passed it, and Governor vetoed it, the House overrode the veto and it appears that it's going to become law!  But between now and then, a lot of people will have input as to exactly how the language of the provisions will appear in final form.  It might get watered down to the point where it will be relatively difficult to obtain a license.  Now if we were to think - "Hey, I shouldn't need a license because the 2nd says so" -I would have to agree with you, but the rational side of me says the law is a giant step forward for the people in Missouri!  I'm excited for them.  Perhaps it's not going to be perfect, but by golly it's a step in the right direction!  

Now, I'm trying to be reasonable because the mediator in me likes to behave that way.  But bing a Wisconsin boy at heart, I know now why so many of you Illinoisans came north during our deer season.  And to tell you the truth, we didn't like it one bit!  Having lived in Illinois for a while now, I've approached our state with hopes we could enact a law allowing for ballistically similar rifles to shotgun slugs, and carbines that fire pistol cartridges!  I'd love to take my .44 Mag Rossi into the thick stuff after a deer, or sit on stand with my Sharps .45-70!  Maybe that day is coming.  

There is very little difference between an Encore with a 14 inch barrel firing a .308 and a shoulder fired .308!  You know it and I know it.  The DNR is thinking that a .308 can travel over 3 miles on the right trajectory.  They don't know or at least they don't believe that the .45-70 can do well over 2 miles on an optimum trajectory.  

What doesn't make sense is that deer hunters can't use a .308, but a coyote hunter can!  But then, there aren't half a million coyote hunters hitting the field in a three day period.  

Now Myk, don't make this personal.  I'm excited that there has been a step in the right direction.  It makes me happy.  I refuse to let you get personal with me.  Work the system, but in the mean time, hit the woods this fall with something that beats the holy heck out of a slug firing smoothbore.

Dan C

[Gregory]

I have three barrels for my Contender that I consider "deer chamberings"
14" - 44 Mag
10" -300 Whisper
10" - 357 Maximim

When I moved to IL almost 4 yrs ago, the only one of the above I had was the 357 Max. which is illegal in the Jan handgun season.  So I hunted using 357 Magnums out of that barrel the first season.  Then I added the 44 Mag, knowing its better for deer and then I added the 300 Whisper for "long range" capability (after toying with a 30 Bellm).

Now they propose regulations that would make my 357 Maximum legal and you want me to complian about it?  Sorry, that's the barrel I would have liked to use all along (and would have saved me the cost of two other barrels. well, maybe not  :wink: )
Let's face the reality.  Are they going to have two different criteria for handguns used in the general firearms season and another for the January season?  I don't think so.  I'm not reall happy seeing my 300 Whisper "outlawed" but I would like to use that 357 Max.

I moved to IL from IN and we could use rifle cartidges there as long as they were fired out of a handgun and were > 24 cal.  I bought a 260 Rem barrel for my Encore to take advantage of that law, but I still don't think it makes any sense to allow a 15" 30/06 or 308 but not allow rifles in those same calibers.  

What I'm afraid will happen in IL, if we complain, is they will take the worst language of both (ie straight walled cartigges <1.4") and make both my 300 Whisper and 357 Max illegal.  Guess I'll hang onto that 44 barrel  :? .

[Myk]

What I am saying, Dan, is that we have a chance to make our voices heard. But what I'm hearing from most IL hunters is, "I don't want to rock the boat." I've heard as much anti-gun type rhetoric from farmers and hunters on the issue of rifle calibers than I would expect from Sarah Brady. Even the rancher I hunt coyotes for warns me about my .223 like I'm going to shoot some house 5 miles away, yet he's told me to shoot them with #6 low brass rabbit loads @75yds.

The law was written to only put a minimum caliber reqs like most state's laws are written.
The law is law, it was passed and signed. It's not the politicians putting the limits on it, it's the ILDNR thinking they have a power to rewrite the law.
The DNR's proposal doesn't take effect until 10-27-03, until then we get to have our input. And my input to them does end with telling them if they do actually have the power to overwrite the law, they need to us it to up the lower limit because a 110gr .357mag is not enough for deer yet a 180gr .357mag which doesn't produce the 500ft/lbs is.

I do see this as a step forward somewhat. I can carry a .357mag in case I have a shot that is too close for the shotgun slug to leave the sabot like last year's or to put the finishing shot on a downed deer. I can get an Encore in a 375win and it's going to be almost the same as a .308 for any shot that I would have. But it's spinning our wheels in the mud as far as ever being allowed to use rifles. It's the DNR saying rifles are too dangerous and us hunters agreeing if we don't tell them otherwise.

My main point is that the law says .308's are OK. It's the ILDNR who's supposed to be on the side of hunters who's saying it's not.

The way I understand the MO CCW law is that it is law, the law that was passed doesn't go through some godly entity like the ILDNR who thinks they have the power to overrule the elected lawmakers. And the same applies to the IL CCW laws when they get brought up, once those are passed the language passed is the law.

A 165gr .308 in a 24" barrel is going about 2700fps, same bullet going out of a 15" Encore is 2500fps according to my reloading manual. According to my ballistics program it drops to about 2000fps at around 200yds starting out at 2500fps. According to pistol hunters I know you need around 2000fps to get most .308" bullets to expand. This is just going by my manual, I don't have the pistol to run through my chrono to test, but I know my 30-06 and .223 both end up about 50-100fps slower than what the manual states. When I was working up charts for my wishful future loads, 100fps difference translated into a 40yd range difference to keep above that 2000fps. So according to all that, you lose about 100yds of effective range by shooting a 165gr .308 out of a pistol instead of a rifle, which would move the pistol fired .308 down to muzzleloader/shotgun ranges.

I'm sorry I got so hot under the collar, but this attitude of us gun owners have to walk on egg shells because we are in Illinois really bugs me. The reason we got Blago in is because we tried to out Democrat the Democrats. We couldn't dare vote for O'malley, he was pro-gun, what would Chicago have thought about that? Chicago may run the houses but they don't have a majority of the population. Until we start letting them know that we are going to continue to have Daley trying to take all of our guns like he tried this year.

What's it going to hurt if you tell the DNR to follow the law as the law was written, Gregory? If you convince them to follow the law instead of rewriting it you may just get to take your pick of all three barrels. Or in the least stand a lot better of a chance at selling the two you don't want to another IL handgun hunter. If you make your voice heard that you want more cartridges allowed they're not going to punish you by putting more limits in place. (I'm more worried about getting harassed in the field than them adding limits, which is one reason why I'm also going through the Congressmen.)
One major reason they won't put up a stricter proposal is that it takes them 45 days for a proposal, they don't have 45 days for another proposal unless they don't let this one ride for the full 45 days. The law says it went into effect upon the gov's signature. The way I see it they have the choice of following the law as it was passed or putting their present proposal into effect...but of course this is the ILDNR we are talking about.
You probably should keep the 44, once they figure out there are straight walled cases for rifles they may add the <1.4" length anyway  :-)

[Myk]

Here is a sample of what you could tell the DNR, Gregory.

"I just bought a 300 Whisper barrel to comply with the old regulations on the special pistol hunt. I bought it because I wasn't satisfied with the performance I was getting from the 44mag, the 30Bellm and I wasn't allowed to use my .357max.

I haven't even got a chance to use the 300 Whisper and you are disallowing it.

As I understand, the law that was passed does not rule out any of these cartridges and that it is the ILDNR who is taking it upon themselves to rule them out. Since the new law states what is and isn't an allowable cartridge, why don't you simply enforce the law as our Congressmen passed and our Governor signed into law?"

Bet you didn't know I could be so short winded, neither did I

I don't see how that would put it in their heads that they need to limit it to straight cases and case length. In fact telling them the old way ruled out the .357max should tell them that it was pretty stupid to rule out cases over 1.4". It would tell them that just because a cartridge is a bottleneck (30bellm) does not make it a magic bullet. And it would also tell them that you, an Illinois hunter and tax payer, want to use bottlenecks or at least are not against their use.

[GrizzLeeBear]

Myk, you have definitely given the Illinois hunters here some things to chew on.  I am glad to see that some people are able to vehemently voice there opinions and replies (to my post specifically as well) on this board without getting nasty.  It appears that you took most of my post as it was intended, for topics of discussion rather than trying to flame anyone. :-)   I'm sorry that you seem to have taken my "boys in the hood" comment wrong though.  It was in jest, no insults to anyone intended.  Guess I should have used more smilies.  :grin:
It appears to me the axe you mostly have to grind (not that I am uposed to grinding axes) is that the DNR took it upon themselves to make further restrictions on the guns you can use.  Doesn't the DNR do this all the time with game hunting regulations?  The state legislature doesn't make up every regulation for hunting does it?  For example, does IL have a minumum or maximum shot size for turkey, pheasant, etc. hunting?  Do all the dates for each games season get decided by the legislature?  My point is, they aren't doing something that out of the ordinary, are they?
Also, I think we are seeing that there is a great deal of difference in what people think handgun hunting is.  Many hunters feel a 357 mag is perfectly adequate for deer, IF you take only broadside shots and limit your range to around 50 yards.  With bigger handgun calibers (44 mag and up) you can extend that to 100 yds. (or more if the shooter is up to it).  This puts you on par with the shotguns and muzzleloaders.  What you are asking for is to be allowed to use something that is equal to or exceeds the best inline muzzleloaders (if you believe all the hype around those) in its ballistics.  I'm sure the lawmakers and the DNR are actually envisioning something that is no better or even a slight disadvantage to shotguns and muzzleloaders.  Don't get me wrong though, I have no problem with hunters speaking loud and clear to the DNR and legislature.  Good luck with your efforts.
Also, I think part of my attitude come from being a traditional muzzleloader hunter/shooter.  Kind of like bowhunting, there is a limit to the range and capabilities of the weapon.  I can except that.  I have no desire to try and increase my range with a (yuck) "modern" muzzleloader.  And I definitely am not going to handicap myself with a modern 5-shot shotgun.  Thats why I hunt with a flintlock!

[Dan Chamberlain]

Myk;

Well, I went and read the law, cover to cover and there are a few points you need to acknowledge.

First and foremost, the law does not state what is a legal cartridge, except to establish minimums and you have so stated.  However, as there are no maximums stated, one would think that a .50 caliber machinegun cartridge would be allowable, if it could be fired from a hand held device with a barrel of less than 16 inches.  You and I both know that there are laws, and then there are administrative rules.  

You have passionately stated that the law was written and should be the final word without the DNR entering into the equation at all.  However, the law clearly states on more than one occasion that the DNR will be responsible for drafting, proposing, administrating and enforcing restrictions.  The "Law" is recognized as being vague, and the DNR is tasked with refining the list of allowable equipment.  They are NOT usurping the "law" as it was written, they are following the "mandate" that the law sets forth for their department.  They are acting totally "within" the law as it is written!  The state legislature said to the DNR:  We've given you the law, now you come up with the regulations!  

Further, I cannot find anywhere within the law as written, that allows for the carry of a second weapon.  You mentioned carrying a weapon for dispatching deer shot with a slug and maybe I'm missing something.  Then again, as a hangun would now be legal, maybe there is no restriction on how many legal weapons a person can have on or about their person during a hunt.  That could be my misunderstanding.

Regards;

Dan C

[Myk]

"Doesn't the DNR do this all the time with game hunting regulations? The state legislature doesn't make up every regulation for hunting does it?"

You are correct. And that's what my letter to the DNR says. The shotgun hunting only mentioned shotguns, no caliber or type was mentioned. That was left up to DNR administrative rule. Same thing (especially) with the special population control hunt that the DNR used administrative rule to allow pistols with. But this time pistol type and caliber was decided by the legislature.
And that is what gets my goat.

Hunting dates is a little different. Those are usually put into a time frame that the DNR has to use. They can adjust yearly within those frames but can't extend without legislation. (In fact Ryan vetoed something that was passed to change that for deer hunting, and I sort of agreed. I would've liked the extended time but it would've screwed things up.) I'm trying to find how the DNR extended squirrel season again, the law specifically says they can't extend seasons without legislation. Unless the time frame for squirrel is very wide they may have broken the law. I welcome the extension but not at the expense of the law.

My sidelock muzzleloader (not a flintlock! Ack! ) is able to do 1MOA so 200 yards isn't out of the question for it, if I could see that far. Even 50yd shots don't expand the bullets so it's going to make a .50 caliber hole no matter what. (I'm not using it because my long brass tube scope went bad and I haven't got it set up with a new scope yet. Otherwise I was using that over the shotgun.)
I'm also a bowhunter. The way I have my own limits is one deer a year for meat. If I get one with bow I may use muzzleloader during firearms or I may be a head hunter the rest of the year. So whether or not I'd even use a 30-06 pistol would be up in the air. But if it came down to using shotgun vs 30-06 pistol I'd take the more accurate one that has a better likelyhood of dropping the deer in its tracks. One reason, to more reliably get a deer in the freezer, the other to more quickly put the deer down with an accurate shot.

[Myk]

Dan,

Below are some excerpts from my letter to the DNR. You have to go back in history to see precident for how other hunting laws were passed by the legislature and handled by the DNR. The population control hunt didn't mention any methods at all. The CWD hunt is the same way. Firearms mentions shotguns and muzzleloaders with no specifics other than weapon same with bow. However...

"Notice that the law as written and passed says, "any centerfire handgun of 30 caliber or larger". It does not exclude semi-auto or bolt action handguns, in fact it includes them with the word "any". The ILDNR is over stepping its lawful bounds by taking it upon themselves to exclude them when the law clearly says otherwise.

Notice the law as written and passed says, "The  only  legal ammunition for a centerfire handgun is  a  cartridge  of  .30 caliber  or  larger  with  a  capability of at least 500 foot pounds of energy at the muzzle." It does not exclude bottlenecked cartridges or "wildcats", in fact it includes them with the word "only" as long as they meet the ft/lb criteria and are at least 30 caliber. Again, the ILDNR is over stepping its lawful bounds by taking it upon themselves to exclude them when the law clearly says otherwise.

The law does state that you may make administrative rules concerning management restrictions applicable to the season. It does not state that you can re-write the laws as they are passed by our elected officials.

I do not see where 520 ILCS 5/1.3 allows you to overwrite law. If it does then the new law is conflicting for mentioning methods, thus unconstitutional and needs stricken by our supreme court. If 520 ILCS 5/1.3 does allow only the DNR to dictate all methods of taking game regardless of passed law, then our whole deer hunting law other than the special population control pistol hunt and the new CWD control hunt is in conflict because the shotgun, muzzleloader and bow methods are all prescribed in IL Congressional passed laws. Yet you have not used 520 ILCS 5/1.3 to overrule those laws. If the law hadn’t mentioned firearm type and caliber requirements then 520 ILCS 5/1.3 would apply.

If you want to use 520 ILCS 5/1.3 to overrule the law, the part you should overrule is the foot pound requirement. A 180gr .357 going through a shoulder is more likely to produce a kill rather than a wounding compared to a 125gr .357 going through the same shoulder. Yet the 180gr does not meet the foot pound requirements."

I think the carrying a second weapon is in the ILDNR rules and not a legislature passed law. It is on page 10 of the handbook, "However, more than one firearm may be possessed by a deer hunter provided it is a lawful gun for that particular season."

Look at that as precident. The passed law didn't say anything about carrying more than one arm. Therefore the DNR was allowed to use administrative rule on that.
The passed law did mention shotgun and muzzleloader, the DNR wasn't allowed to over rule that and add in pistols or rifles or rule out muzzleloaders with administrative rule. But since the old firearms law didn't mention caliber they were to use administrative rule on that part.
The new pistol law does state pistol type, "any centerfire handgun" and caliber, both minimum and maximum, "The only  legal ammunition for a centerfire handgun is a cartridge of .30 caliber or larger". Therefore the DNR isn't to overrule that and add their own limits beyond what the law states.

At least that's my story and I'm sticking to it

[TimWieneke]

Hmmm... Not sure what to think about this.  I think it's great I can use my t.c. .44 during the regular firearms season now, but I can understand how some might feel upset that they can't use their January season firearms in the fall season.  

I have to ask, aren't the January and Fall firearms seasons seperate seasons all together?  I know you use the saem tags, but there are already different rules for the Jan. season (antlerless only for example, and some public lands aren't open for Jan. season).  Does it seem so unusual/unreasonable for the ILDNR to PROPOSE (they didn't dictate) different rules for the fall season?  Are there not different rules for the archery season?

On a personal note, with the already limited public land in Illinois, I'd hate to see bucks, especially Pike and Calhoun county bucks, start acting like rifle state bucks during the hunting season.  Those who have hunted public land in rifle states know exactly what I mean.  It seems to me that buck quality in Illinois is going in a great direction.  I'd hate to see that change.

Again, I haven't formed an opinion on this yet as I have just heard about it today.  I just wanted to ask some questions.

Tim

[S.B.]

The new Illinois law and IDNR regulations are probably writtem especially for the friend who complained to Blogajevic about not getting to take a buck with his pistol during the handgun only season in January.  Rumor has it that these are to satisfy this one and only person! If you remember right, before the last election the new governor promised to raise the FOID card to $500 a year. Does this sound like he's doing any sportsmen a favor. Beware of wolves in sheeps clothing.

[Gregory]

I received this letter today from the IL DNR concerning language on what handguns will be legal during the firearms season:

Thank you  for your comments about the proposed rules for the use of handguns during the firearm deer season.  We concur that the 300 Whisper would be a suitable gun for use during the firearm deer season, and it has been allowed previously during the handgun deer season.  We will incorporate new language into the proposed rule that allows the use of bottleneck cartridges of .30 caliber or larger with a case length not exceeding 1.4 inches, so long as they generate >500 ft. lbs. of energy at the muzzle.  This will allow the use of any bottleneck cartridges previously allowed during the handgun season, including the 300 Whisper.

Thanks again for taking the time to comment on the rule.
               
                     Sincerely,
      
                     John Buhnerkempe, Chief
                     Division of Wildlife Resources

[Myk]

Hmm, they didn't respond to my comments. They must not like me

The proposal is up for the special handgun season. It still allows bottlenecks <1.4" and ANY straight walled case.

If that's what they change the pistol hunting during firearms season to I could live with that. It still doesn't follow the law as passed, but at least it doesn't screw over people who have pistols/barrels for the present season.

[Gregory]

Latest press release:

http://dnr.state.il.us/pubaffairs/2003/Nov/Gunopp-Nov13.htm

[S.B.]

IDNR has ammended the rule, changing it so a bottle necked cartridge case can be used. I got a notice yesterday.

[Myk]

As long as the cartridge is under 1.4".

Basically a 300 whisper or a 30bellm. If that's what they stick with I'll get a 375win next year. If I even apply for firearms next year. I may go bow only next year.

[S.B.]

Myk, Well how goes the fight to get your caliber legalized? Where in Illinois do you live, that you think the .44 mag is being under gunned?