I guess the NRA has nothing better to do..

SandyCreek · May 9, 2018

the NRA just put the iowa dnr on blast:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...w-on-arbitrarily-restricting-hunting-firearms

this chaps my ass for a few reasons, chiefly that they shouldn't be sticking their noses in our hunting seasons, the DNR wants to restrict deer rifles and shotguns to 6 rounds.. oh no the horror!! if you need that 7th shot you should probably just pack it in and not hunt anymore. The gun lobbies are why Iowa now has straight walled rifles as a legal weapon, so now all these guys are running around with 450 bushmasters and high capacity mags, its ridiculous. Our DNR has enough going on with budget concerns, cwd and cutting employees they don't need the headache from the NRA lobby.. rant over

Doublecluck · May 9, 2018

God forbid the NRA make its members aware of a vote effecting the use of certain firearms while hunting.. lol.. what’s the big deal, if you have a comment send it to said rep, they may or may not take your comment in to consideration when they vote.. happens about a zillion times a year in the policy making process.. and please keep you dumb Iowa gun laws to yourselves...

SandyCreek · May 9, 2018

Just curious what’s so dumb about our laws?

BrentD · May 9, 2018

SandyCreek said:
the NRA just put the iowa dnr on blast:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...w-on-arbitrarily-restricting-hunting-firearms

this chaps my ass for a few reasons,

Mine too! Pick a better fight NRA. As an Iowan, I can't understand why anyone would have a problem with outlawing shoulder stocks on handguns for use in a Handgun-legal season. If you can't shoot a hand gun without a shoulder stock (and I can't) then sit on the sidelines and practice up. I think the Iowa DNR knows exactly what it is doing. The NRA is just making more enemies unnecessarily.

Dinkshooter · May 9, 2018

I've lived in Iowa and therefore understand why they have slammer bucks. It has everything to due with the gun weapon type, restrictions and season dates. The NRA should definitely blow it out their "#hello" on this one.

BluegrassBilly · May 10, 2018

I fear the day that sportsmen and the gun lobby get cross-ways. And I fear it's coming sooner rather than later.

BrentD · May 10, 2018

I think it is pretty much here. Right now.

mplane72 · May 10, 2018

I am in total support of these rule changes. I am NOT happy with the NRA getting involved in this issue. Unfortunately, I doubt the majority of my fellow Iowa Outdoorsman see things the way I do.

Zach · May 10, 2018

Everyone want's folks to voice their opinion when it favors their position, then rants when it doesn't(self indictment as to not be seen as a high horse rider).

So, besides Hunttalk, did you send letters/email to your DNR and the NRAILA?

Ben Lamb · May 10, 2018

Zach said:
Everyone want's folks to voice their opinion when it favors their position, then rants when it doesn't(self indictment as to not be seen as a high horse rider).

So, besides Hunttalk, did you send letters/email to your DNR and the NRAILA?

While I disagree with the NRA's position (I have zero issues with magazine limitations for hunting and believe that a 20 round mag has no place in the hunting culture outside of some damage hunts for geese & other nuisance species like hogs, etc.), I strongly believe in their right to participate in the season setting process. Wildlife is a public trust resource, and every citizen and organization has a right to participate in the processes by which we manage those animals, and our hunting regulations. They were instrumental in helping us kill a bill that would have outlawed hunting of sage grouse in 2015. I applaud them for that effort. They've also been on the wrong side of issues in our state house as well, and I've stood against those efforts.

But I would also hope all of our erstwhile brothers & sisters who want to claim that the NRA isn't a hunting group, and that the second amendment isn't about hunting, remember that the NRA actively engages in the process, and therefore is trying to influence our hunting seasons, etc. That's why so many of us have problems with their continual support of anti-public lands politicians, and their attacking pro-conservation candidates across the spectrum.

BuzzH · May 10, 2018

Hilarious argument:

Another change would limit firearms to having no more than six rounds of ammunition loaded at a time while hunting. Regulations already set the number of game animals that can be harvested in bag limits. This arbitrary limit would not contribute to wildlife conservation or law enforcement efforts.

How long has there been a limit of 3 shells in a shotgun for waterfowl? Long before I started hunting in 1979....

Wonder if the NRA is going to revisit that 3 shell limit for waterfowl?

In over their pointed heads...and burning bridges as per usual.

Zach · May 10, 2018

Ben Lamb said:
While I disagree with the NRA's position (I have zero issues with magazine limitations for hunting and believe that a 20 round mag has no place in the hunting culture outside of some damage hunts for geese & other nuisance species like hogs, etc.), I strongly believe in their right to participate in the season setting process. Wildlife is a public trust resource, and every citizen and organization has a right to participate in the processes by which we manage those animals, and our hunting regulations. They were instrumental in helping us kill a bill that would have outlawed hunting of sage grouse in 2015. I applaud them for that effort. They've also been on the wrong side of issues in our state house as well, and I've stood against those efforts.

But I would also hope all of our erstwhile brothers & sisters who want to claim that the NRA isn't a hunting group, and that the second amendment isn't about hunting, remember that the NRA actively engages in the process, and therefore is trying to influence our hunting seasons, etc. That's why so many of us have problems with their continual support of anti-public lands politicians, and their attacking pro-conservation candidates across the spectrum.

One more reason I am not a member of said organization, or any for that fact(insert blame and accusation here). I'm more of the one time donation type, except my tithes and offerings.

Are they any polls showing influence of the NRA(or any .org for that matter) within sportsmen and DNR decisions? I know how the lines lie in politics.

NoWiser · May 10, 2018

BluegrassBilly said:
I fear the day that sportsmen and the gun lobby get cross-ways. And I fear it's coming sooner rather than later.

Trust me, it's here. This hunter/sportsman will never give a penny to the NRA for various reasons.

BuzzH · May 10, 2018

Ben Lamb said:
While I disagree with the NRA's position (I have zero issues with magazine limitations for hunting and believe that a 20 round mag has no place in the hunting culture outside of some damage hunts for geese & other nuisance species like hogs, etc.), I strongly believe in their right to participate in the season setting process. Wildlife is a public trust resource, and every citizen and organization has a right to participate in the processes by which we manage those animals, and our hunting regulations. They were instrumental in helping us kill a bill that would have outlawed hunting of sage grouse in 2015. I applaud them for that effort. They've also been on the wrong side of issues in our state house as well, and I've stood against those efforts.

But I would also hope all of our erstwhile brothers & sisters who want to claim that the NRA isn't a hunting group, and that the second amendment isn't about hunting, remember that the NRA actively engages in the process, and therefore is trying to influence our hunting seasons, etc. That's why so many of us have problems with their continual support of anti-public lands politicians, and their attacking pro-conservation candidates across the spectrum.

I agree that any group should have the right to lobby and participate in the public process.

It sure would be nice if the NRA wasn't turning a hunting regulation into a second amendment issue though...

Ben Long · May 10, 2018

I'm scratching my head to see the 2nd Amendment issue here. Iowans will still be able to OWN high-capacity magazines, right? Just not hunt deer with them? How is this a Constitutional issue? Slippery slope? Seriously, I'm trying to see the connection.

VikingsGuy · May 10, 2018

BrentD said:
I think it is pretty much here. Right now.

+1. NRA chooses to fight a scorched earth "slippery slope" war far from the needs of typical hunters - not a surprise typical hunters are turning their backs. The NRA has become the mirror image of NARAL and the ATLA. And even though I despise the absolutest approaches these groups bring to their respective issues, its hard to argue with level of influence they have achieved. Frankly, the state of American politics is disheartening.

BrentD · May 10, 2018

Ben Long said:
I'm scratching my head to see the 2nd Amendment issue here. Iowans will still be able to OWN high-capacity magazines, right? Just not hunt deer with them? How is this a Constitutional issue? Slippery slope? Seriously, I'm trying to see the connection.

Certainly, you can, and I do, own them. And you can probably hunt with them from what I'm seeing of this particular regulation - you just can't FILL them. Why is this so hard?

People just want to fight. BTW, the contact at the DNR to complain to is Tyler Harms. He is a former grad student here, and a pretty good guy. Just so you know.

BrentD · May 10, 2018

VikingsGuy said:
+1. NRA chooses to fight a scorched earth "slippery slope" war far from the needs of typical hunters - not a surprise typical hunters are turning their backs. The NRA has become the mirror image of NARAL and the ATLA. And even though I despise the absolutest approaches these groups bring to their respective issues, its hard to argue with level of influence they have achieved. Frankly, the state of American politics is disheartening.

The NRA is paid to fight. So that's that they do. They fight whatever, wherever, whenever. Just fight. Lots of people like this - on both sides of the fence, fighting for the sake of fighting is what it is all about. Should one side win, the winners would not be happy because they would have nothing to fight. Imagine the NRA if the gun issue somehow "went away". What would they do to justify their existence (their big paychecks)? What would many members have to fight about? They would have to find a new battle.

Actually, I AM an NRA member. I just don't much care for some of their issues and STUPID ideas. This is one of them.

Ben Lamb · May 10, 2018

Zach said:
One more reason I am not a member of said organization, or any for that fact(insert blame and accusation here). I'm more of the one time donation type, except my tithes and offerings.

Are they any polls showing influence of the NRA(or any .org for that matter) within sportsmen and DNR decisions? I know how the lines lie in politics.

Not that I am aware of, but I've seen them push either through their local chapters or from the head office. They're not always effective, since they tend to bring in the black helicopter crowd.

I agree that any group should have the right to lobby and participate in the public process.

It sure would be nice if the NRA wasn't turning a hunting regulation into a second amendment issue though...

Agree.

Sytes · May 10, 2018

NRA? Hunting? Whaaa? When did the NRA soil their hands within the hunting community???

https://www.nratv.com/videos/cam-and-company-2015-randy-newberg-a-nation-of-gun-owners

Well, I'll be!

https://www.nraila.org/get-the-facts/hunting-and-conservation/

I guess the NRA has nothing better to do..

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Forum statistics

Share this page