Hunting with a pistol

[Bandwidth]

Yes. Just like I've heard of people using a 9mm (and .22wmr and .22lr etc..) I hear a lot of stupid stuff.

So I suppose we should make a law to prevent people from doing stupid things eh?

 

[GeauxLSU]

So I suppose we should make a law to prevent people from doing stupid things eh?

You can't prevent people from doing stupid things. You can use the law in specific instances to educate a few beyond their intelligence however.
For example, I have no problem with a law not allowing people to drive 150 mph on public roads. Does it stop all of them from doing it or trying? Nope. But I'm positive we'd have more trying if it wasn't illegal. Same with shooting deer with a .25 acp. I would have no problem with a minimum energy requirement for deer hunting in Georgia. Would it be exact? No. And I don't think it's actually a 'problem' big enough that needs fixing so wouldn't exert any energy trying to get it enacted. But in this case, the 'fix' has no downsides IMO.

 

[tas6691]

Exactly. When I bought my first pistol, with the intention of shooting a deer, it was a .357 magnum, and the only ammo that met the 500 foot pounds of energy was the CCI Lawman. I used that for a while until I upgraded to a .44 magnum, and then a 30-30 Contender. So, without clarification in the regs, someone could use the .25acp. My idiot neighbor was at it again this past weekend, shooting at an 8 pointer with a Glock 9mm at 75 yards. With approximately 350 foot pounds of energy at the muzzle, I figure it would have about enough power to penetrate the skin, and wound him. We found no hair or blood, which may be a good thing.

I still have a box of Speer 357 lawman with 14 rounds fired. 4 were to ensure the sights were on over the years. That stuff hit like a freight train!! One shot was all you ever needed at moderate ranges. When I bought it I was 20ish and could hit a pie plate at 40 yards all day with irons on a Ruger Blackhawk. Now its more like 30 if the light is right due to old eyes syndrome!

 

[Bandwidth]

You can't prevent people from doing stupid things. You can use the law in specific instances to educate a few beyond their intelligence however.
For example, I have no problem with a law not allowing people to drive 150 mph on public roads. Does it stop all of them from doing it or trying? Nope. But I'm positive we'd have more trying if it wasn't illegal. Same with shooting deer with a .25 acp. I would have no problem with a minimum energy requirement for deer hunting in Georgia. Would it be exact? No. And I don't think it's actually a 'problem' big enough that needs fixing so wouldn't exert any energy trying to get it enacted. But in this case, the 'fix' has no downsides IMO.

Do you really believe that people using 25 ACP is statistically a big problem in Georgia? Big enough that the law would need to be amended to attempt to manipulate citizen's behavior?

 

[imawoodsman]

I know, but I am stuck with him. He owns property on three sides of my farm.

Look on the bright side.
You only have 1 BAD neighbor! Not 3.

 

[GeauxLSU]

Do you really believe that people using 25 ACP is statistically a big problem in Georgia? Big enough that the law would need to be amended to attempt to manipulate citizen's behavior?

I'll put it in bold and in big letters and a different color.

You can't prevent people from doing stupid things. You can use the law in specific instances to educate a few beyond their intelligence however.
For example, I have no problem with a law not allowing people to drive 150 mph on public roads. Does it stop all of them from doing it or trying? Nope. But I'm positive we'd have more trying if it wasn't illegal. Same with shooting deer with a .25 acp. I would have no problem with a minimum energy requirement for deer hunting in Georgia. Would it be exact? No. And I don't think it's actually a 'problem' big enough that needs fixing so wouldn't exert any energy trying to get it enacted. But in this case, the 'fix' has no downsides IMO.

Don't be so quick to argue. I get it. You think there are too many laws. I agree. But in general I have no problem with most game laws as has been proven time and time again, 'hunters' are very rarely making stewardship type decisions.

 

[kc30121]

I use a ruger redhawk 44mag with red dot. I’m comfortable to 75yrd. Thinking about switching to a scope next year.

 

[GeauxLSU]

Look on the bright side.
You only have 1 BAD neighbor! Not 3.

lol. Glass half full (or in this case 3/4). I like it.

View attachment 2945468 I use a ruger redhawk 44mag with red dot. I’m comfortable to 75yrd. Thinking about switching to a scope next year.

I have both on different guns (TC .30 Herret and a Ruger SBH in .44). The red dot is infinitely better IMO in close quarters woods hunting (which is the only time I use a handgun). I'll eventually get ride of the scope and get another red dot as the holding position is far too critical for a scope (compared to a red dot) when you are trying to limit movement as much as possible in a 'close encounters' scenario.

 

[Bandwidth]

I'll put it in bold and in big letters and a different color.
Don't be so quick to argue. I get it. You think there are too many laws. I agree. But in general I have no problem with most game laws as has been proven time and time again, 'hunters' are very rarely making stewardship type decisions.

I believe most hunters want to make good decisions and an ethical kill.

 

[GeauxLSU]

I believe most hunters want to make good decisions and an ethical kill.

Well "most" is 51%. I used to believe the vast majority did before coming to Georgia. But I was young and naïve. I've seen it all in my 30 plus years here which eventually prompted me to buy my own place and pretend the woods aren't filled with incompetent sphincters.
But hey, we can blast 'em over a pile of corn now so at least we got that going for us now!