collapse

Author Topic: Should 209 primers be legal?  (Read 8666 times)

Offline Fl0und3rz

  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Legend
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2010
  • Posts: 20272
  • Location: W. WA
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #50 on: October 05, 2017, 05:01:27 AM »
I also think its incredibly ridiculous to think that the modern hunters are going to come running over to muzzy once 209 primers are allowed.

I would give it a go on a TC encore platform, if 209 primers were legal, because it is an economical platform to try, but I also prefer hunting by myself.


I suspect some resistance to the 209 primers from the primative objectors is that they would prefer to limit the hunters afield during their time. 

Nobody likes a pumpkin patch.

Offline trophyhunt

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Old Salt
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 9502
  • Location: Wetside
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #51 on: October 05, 2017, 06:16:23 AM »
Big no here. What would be primitive about it if you take away exposed to the elements. Might as well be able to use a crossbow during archery seasons.  :twocents:
I'd rather shoot a compound than my dads crossbow to be honest, its not consistent at all and pulling that string back is no joke.  Plus if you get your finger or thumb in the way of that string at all, it's gone. 
ďIn common withĒ..... not so much!!

Offline floatinghat

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 635
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #52 on: October 05, 2017, 06:51:11 AM »

I voted no, I would be open to a primative season, caplock or flintlock (exposed) no sabot.   Ball or full lead conical etc.  I guess I have never had an issue with making sure thinks are right and tight.  I've had successful ignition after3-4 days of Western WA down pours.  I believe add to the success and the opportunity will be reduced.

Offline C-Money

  • V10 Advocate
  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Old Salt
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Posts: 8463
  • Location: Grant County
  • IceFire
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #53 on: October 05, 2017, 07:24:26 AM »
Pennsylvania still makes hunters use flint most of the time and they have always  stacked up the deer like cord wood. I say probably not on the 209s, takes away from the challenge of a muzzleloader hunt. A Good musket cap is plenty for ignition.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2017, 07:10:22 AM by C-Money »
I felt like a one legged cat trying to bury a terd on a frozen pond!

Online JimmyHoffa

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Old Salt
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2010
  • Posts: 9830
  • Location: 150 Years Too Late
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #54 on: October 05, 2017, 07:48:45 AM »
Maybe WDFW could make a few test GMUs that allow 209.  Pick units scattered around the state and evaluate later whether pressure and harvest picked up.  Could even dial back the tech allowed for a few others and do the same.

Offline boneaddict

  • Site Sponsor
  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 42088
  • Location: Selah, Washington
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #55 on: October 05, 2017, 07:51:46 AM »
I voted no.  It gets to a point where it's modern.

Offline JDHasty

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Old Salt
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Posts: 6777
  • Location: Tacoma
  • Groups: NRA Benefactor Member, GOA Life Member, Father of 3 NRA Life Members
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #56 on: October 05, 2017, 08:15:21 AM »
Definitely NO. You get better seasons than modern rifle because the odds are less that you will kill something while being provided a less crowded field at a better time. If you continue the process of improving the weapon then you deserve less time in the field and at a time when it is harder to hunt. For example the muzzie season for elk is right on the edge of the elk rut. Years ago they took this favorable time for hunting away from the bow hunters who obviously were using a weapon that provides much less of an opportunity for a kill than a muzzleloader. Suck it up and enjoy what you have already been given.

That is where I came down on this

Offline dominknows

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Pilgrim
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2013
  • Posts: 8
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #57 on: October 05, 2017, 08:17:22 AM »
How about some more early season oppurtunity ie, one more day or more gmu's opened.

Offline CP

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2008
  • Posts: 4459
  • Location: Everett
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #58 on: October 05, 2017, 08:19:45 AM »
Bump stocks on muzzies should be banned.

Offline fishsticks

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Pilgrim
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2017
  • Posts: 39
  • Location: Vancouver, WA
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #59 on: October 05, 2017, 08:26:01 AM »
I voted yes, improved ignition potential would be a good thing.  Keep the rest of the limitations.  In my opinion open ignition and iron sights keeps it primitive enough.  I don't think 209 primers will impact participation or success rates enough to matter.  For me personally I enjoy muzzleloaders and will continue either way.

Online Bob33

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 16770
  • Groups: SCI, RMEF, NRA
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #60 on: October 05, 2017, 08:37:14 AM »
I hunt modern, so I donít have a strong personal interest but it seems to me that if primers donít improve ignition thereís no need to make them legal.

If they do improve ignition, then itís logical they should improve overall harvest.

If they improve overall harvest, then ultimately the seasons will be altered.
Nature. It's cheaper than therapy.

Offline Rainier10

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Old Salt
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2010
  • Posts: 6557
  • Location: Over the edge
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #61 on: October 05, 2017, 08:37:41 AM »
I voted neutral on it.  There are valid points on both sides.  There wasn't any information on what the next step would be as far as how it would affect seasons.  In my opinion they can do whatever they want and then adjust seasons as needed.  Based on what they decide I will then make my decision on which method of hunting to participate in.

I would say that if I was leaning one way or the other it would be towards allowing 209 primers just because there are more options for purchasing a muzzleloader with 209 primers.  If that does happen I would definitely want them to keep a close eye on harvest data and adjust seasons if needed.

My guess is if they allow 209 primers you may see more people transition from modern to muzzy.
Pain is temporary, achieving the goal is worth it.

I didn't say it would be easy, I said it would be worth it.

Every father should remember that one day his children will follow his example instead of his advice.


The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of HuntWa or the site owner.

Offline baker5150

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2012
  • Posts: 1417
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #62 on: October 05, 2017, 08:56:25 AM »
So, for all you smoke pole guys, how often do you have a filed ignition, one that a 209 primer would have prevented, and while attempting a shot at an animal?  And how often did it cause you to not get a shot off ie: weren't able to re- cap in time for a second chance? (I'm not a muzzy guy so please bare with me on the lingo)
Are mis-fires a real issue for you?
Maybe a poll of our own is necessary.  I'm just curious if adding these primers will actually cause an increase in the amount of game taken, or if it's just a luxury that would make things easier and more reliable.


Offline Stein

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 2828
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #63 on: October 05, 2017, 09:00:03 AM »
It's difficult to say that a failed ignition would have been prevented by a 209 primer.  From my research, the #11 is pretty good at preventing weather from getting in.

Offline CP

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2008
  • Posts: 4459
  • Location: Everett
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #64 on: October 05, 2017, 09:01:42 AM »
So, for all you smoke pole guys, how often do you have a filed ignition, one that a 209 primer would have prevented, and while attempting a shot at an animal?  And how often did it cause you to not get a shot off ie: weren't able to re- cap in time for a second chance? (I'm not a muzzy guy so please bare with me on the lingo)
Are mis-fires a real issue for you?
Maybe a poll of our own is necessary.  I'm just curious if adding these primers will actually cause an increase in the amount of game taken, or if it's just a luxury that would make things easier and more reliable.

Iíve had a hang fire, which resulted in a clean miss.  I can postulate that it could have resulted in a bad hit and a lost animal.  Anything that reduces the possibility of a bad hit and a lost animal should be legal, especially if there is no compelling reason to ban them.


Offline Duckslayer89

  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Frontiersman
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2014
  • Posts: 2709
  • Location: Orting
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #65 on: October 05, 2017, 09:03:02 AM »
Bump stocks on muzzies should be banned.

 :chuckle:  :chuckle:

Offline cohochemist

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Pilgrim
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2017
  • Posts: 18
  • Location: Seattle
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #66 on: October 05, 2017, 09:04:50 AM »
What date in history defines the cut-off between primitive vs modern weaponry???  The percussion caps were introduced in the 1820's while rudimentary center-fire cartridges were introduced in 1808, with even earlier examples dating back further to the French in the 1500's.  My point, calling something primitive vs calling something modern is subjective, and can be argued all the way back to the first hominoids.  Hey, if flinging rocks and spears is your thing, let me know, I can put you in contact with a few people back in Nebraska, where you can atlatl and spear throw for whitetails! 

Why I vote yes for 209 primers, is because a modern muzzle-loader with a 209 primer is a safer, more reliable weapon.  That is the only advantage to caps.  You don't get the gain in FPS or range or knockdown power compared to caps, its just safer and more reliable.  The first time I used a cap here in Washington, I had a misfire at the range.  How long do you point your muzzle down range before clearing the barrel? That crap is dangerous, when I load a weapon, I want to be able to unload it without risking my face/life. Yes, using a 209 primer reduces the number of mis-fires, but, you still need to subscribe to the 1 shot - 1 kill mentality.  This is still very different than a center-fire rifle hunting, where you load up 5-6 shots, or have back up mags ready and can play Rambo in the field.  This difference, how the weapons are re-loaded, will keep most modern people away.  Coupled with an earlier comment that center-fire users travel in packs...  I worry the bigger draw for people getting into muzzle-loading will be reading the harvest reports and seeing there are fewer people, more kills leading to higher success %. 

 
« Last Edit: October 05, 2017, 09:08:14 AM by Russ McDonald »

Offline Sabotloader

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2011
  • Posts: 1827
  • Location: Idaho, Northern
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #67 on: October 05, 2017, 09:20:19 AM »
I hunt modern, so I donít have a strong personal interest but it seems to me that if primers donít improve ignition thereís no need to make them legal.

If they do improve ignition, then itís logical they should improve overall harvest.

I must admit when I first started hunting with a cap lock - I did experience - hang fires and no fire situations both at the range and while hunting.  Today and with experience and education it does not happen at all, with the inline I currently use, or even one of my cap locks. If I have prepared it for wet weather (legally) I would have not problem putting it a creek. After retrieving it I am 99% sure that it will fire.

209 primers can improve reliability of ignition over cap ignition only IF you do not protect and understand your cap ignition.  There are several things you can do to protect the integrity of the cap and the breech plug from moisture.  Even the way you pore the powder in can often make a difference in ignition especially in sidelock. 209 ignition does not guarantee ignition. I believe it helps ignition for the most part but it does not insure ignition. 209 Ignition can also be susceptible to moisture getting into the breech if the 209 system is not water tight and in most cases from the factory they are not.

Quote
If they improve overall harvest, then ultimately the seasons will be altered.

The first question for me would be - are you meeting or even exceeding the States current achievement numbers.  I would suggest that in most cases that is not happening and it is managed that way.

If you are meeting or exceeding as is then things would have to stay the same or altered as you have suggested.


Keep shooting muzzleloaders - They are a blast!!

Offline pianoman9701

  • Mushroom Man
  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Legend
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 26115
  • Location: Vancouver USA
  • NRA Life, MH, WFW, CCRKBA, NAGR, RMEF, WSB
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #68 on: October 05, 2017, 09:24:58 AM »
So, for all you smoke pole guys, how often do you have a filed ignition, one that a 209 primer would have prevented, and while attempting a shot at an animal?  And how often did it cause you to not get a shot off ie: weren't able to re- cap in time for a second chance? (I'm not a muzzy guy so please bare with me on the lingo)
Are mis-fires a real issue for you?
Maybe a poll of our own is necessary.  I'm just curious if adding these primers will actually cause an increase in the amount of game taken, or if it's just a luxury that would make things easier and more reliable.

Iíve had a hang fire, which resulted in a clean miss.  I can postulate that it could have resulted in a bad hit and a lost animal.  Anything that reduces the possibility of a bad hit and a lost animal should be legal, especially if there is no compelling reason to ban them.

Although I voted for the primer, I respectfully disagree with your statement as it is. With your reasoning, we all should only be allowed to hunt with a rifle. Maybe when you said "anything", you didn't mean it the way I took it. There are many advances in each category/implement of hunting which aren't allowed, and many, for good reason. Cohochemist also makes a valid point: who decides which advancements make the tool no longer a primitive hunting tool? We've had this discussion many times in different threads. There are ML hunters who would like to see only the most basic and primitive firearms allowed. Some archers feel that compound bows with 85% let-off are too advanced to be called primitive (and truly, they are far from primitive). Lighted nocks, mechanical broadheads, fiber optics on MLs - it goes on and on.  The point is, in the end it's the state that gets to decide which advancements get to be used and which, not. It seems rather arbitrary to me.  :dunno:
"Restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens based on the actions of criminals and madmen will have no positive effect on the future acts of criminals and madmen. It will only serve to reduce individual rights and the very security of our republic." - Pianoman

Offline Sabotloader

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2011
  • Posts: 1827
  • Location: Idaho, Northern
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #69 on: October 05, 2017, 09:26:10 AM »
So, for all you smoke pole guys, how often do you have a filed ignition, one that a 209 primer would have prevented, and while attempting a shot at an animal?  And how often did it cause you to not get a shot off ie: weren't able to re- cap in time for a second chance? (I'm not a muzzy guy so please bare with me on the lingo)
Are mis-fires a real issue for you?
Maybe a poll of our own is necessary.  I'm just curious if adding these primers will actually cause an increase in the amount of game taken, or if it's just a luxury that would make things easier and more reliable.

Iíve had a hang fire, which resulted in a clean miss.  I can postulate that it could have resulted in a bad hit and a lost animal.  Anything that reduces the possibility of a bad hit and a lost animal should be legal, especially if there is no compelling reason to ban them.

And if the truth were to be known - You can get a HANGFIRE with a 209 also... it happens
Keep shooting muzzleloaders - They are a blast!!

Offline ctwiggs1

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 2012
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #70 on: October 05, 2017, 09:27:24 AM »
While I'm not the most experienced muzzleloader hunter..... In my limited experience all of my problems that 209 primers supposedly would fix went away when i switched to using loose powder.  It ignites faster and burns hotter than those pellets.  I really liked the pellets at first, but after I got over the intimidation factor with the loose powder, it's the only way I'll go.  You can still fill up a speed loader, you just get a higher quality shot.

With loose powder, I don't know that I see a benefit to 209 primers.

The one regulation I'd like to see fixed is a clarifying statement on the nipple being exposed to the weather. 

Quote
Quote from: wapiti hunter2 on Yesterday at 09:38:40 PM
If you voted no and use a modern muzzle loader like a Knight, you are a hypocrite. You are already using modern technology. The 209 primer doesn't change a thing. If you want it to be "primitive", go back to flint lock and an open pan only.

I agree. I was having an argument on Facebook and someone was trying to say that using musket caps are 'traditional'  :roll eyes:

Look guys, I'd get it if we were voting to allow inlines with cap ignition and modern projectiles... that would be a huge jump in effectiveness over an older flintlock style with pan ignition and more primitive projectiles. Hell, I'd understand if it were a vote on optics(which I am 100% against). The inlines are hardly 'primitive', the projectiles used today are hardly 'primitive'.

I also think its incredibly ridiculous to think that the modern hunters are going to come running over to muzzy once 209 primers are allowed. I could see an influx of people if you were to allow optics, however. I realize the effective range of muzzleloaders nowadays is 150-200 yards, and I've even heard of 300 yard shots being made with optics. Your average guy who hunts modern probably hunts with a group of people, they're not going to jump ship unless a majority of the group does. The road hunter types? Well, I guess you could road hunt with a muzzleloader... wouldn't be too hard really, even in their current state. You'd certainly keep your powder and cap dry!

I guess you would have to help me understand what you consider to be modern.  Honestly I think that  could be the next hunt-wa blowup debate.  I still say house cat.

Offline Sabotloader

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2011
  • Posts: 1827
  • Location: Idaho, Northern
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #71 on: October 05, 2017, 09:33:34 AM »
While I'm not the most experienced muzzleloader hunter..... In my limited experience all of my problems that 209 primers supposedly would fix went away when i switched to using loose powder.  It ignites faster and burns hotter than those pellets.  I really liked the pellets at first, but after I got over the intimidation factor with the loose powder, it's the only way I'll go.  You can still fill up a speed loader, you just get a higher quality shot.

With loose powder, I don't know that I see a benefit to 209 primers.

The one regulation I'd like to see fixed is a clarifying statement on the nipple being exposed to the weather. 

Quote
Quote from: wapiti hunter2 on Yesterday at 09:38:40 PM
If you voted no and use a modern muzzle loader like a Knight, you are a hypocrite. You are already using modern technology. The 209 primer doesn't change a thing. If you want it to be "primitive", go back to flint lock and an open pan only.

I agree. I was having an argument on Facebook and someone was trying to say that using musket caps are 'traditional'  :roll eyes:

Look guys, I'd get it if we were voting to allow inlines with cap ignition and modern projectiles... that would be a huge jump in effectiveness over an older flintlock style with pan ignition and more primitive projectiles. Hell, I'd understand if it were a vote on optics(which I am 100% against). The inlines are hardly 'primitive', the projectiles used today are hardly 'primitive'.

I also think its incredibly ridiculous to think that the modern hunters are going to come running over to muzzy once 209 primers are allowed. I could see an influx of people if you were to allow optics, however. I realize the effective range of muzzleloaders nowadays is 150-200 yards, and I've even heard of 300 yard shots being made with optics. Your average guy who hunts modern probably hunts with a group of people, they're not going to jump ship unless a majority of the group does. The road hunter types? Well, I guess you could road hunt with a muzzleloader... wouldn't be too hard really, even in their current state. You'd certainly keep your powder and cap dry!

I guess you would have to help me understand what you consider to be modern.  Honestly I think that  could be the next hunt-wa blowup debate.  I still say house cat.

I know it was not you that made the comment - but if you want to go primitive why stop at going back to the flint lock - go all the way back to the  wheel lock or even the match lock





Keep shooting muzzleloaders - They are a blast!!

Offline CP

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2008
  • Posts: 4459
  • Location: Everett
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #72 on: October 05, 2017, 09:33:45 AM »
So, for all you smoke pole guys, how often do you have a filed ignition, one that a 209 primer would have prevented, and while attempting a shot at an animal?  And how often did it cause you to not get a shot off ie: weren't able to re- cap in time for a second chance? (I'm not a muzzy guy so please bare with me on the lingo)
Are mis-fires a real issue for you?
Maybe a poll of our own is necessary.  I'm just curious if adding these primers will actually cause an increase in the amount of game taken, or if it's just a luxury that would make things easier and more reliable.

Iíve had a hang fire, which resulted in a clean miss.  I can postulate that it could have resulted in a bad hit and a lost animal.  Anything that reduces the possibility of a bad hit and a lost animal should be legal, especially if there is no compelling reason to ban them.

Although I voted for the primer, I respectfully disagree with your statement as it is. With your reasoning, we all should only be allowed to hunt with a rifle. Maybe when you said "anything", you didn't mean it the way I took it. There are many advances in each category/implement of hunting which aren't allowed, and many, for good reason. Cohochemist also makes a valid point: who decides which advancements make the tool no longer a primitive hunting tool? We've had this discussion many times in different threads. There are ML hunters who would like to see only the most basic and primitive firearms allowed. Some archers feel that compound bows with 85% let-off are too advanced to be called primitive (and truly, they are far from primitive). Lighted nocks, mechanical broadheads, fiber optics on MLs - it goes on and on.  The point is, in the end it's the state that gets to decide which advancements get to be used and which, not. It seems rather arbitrary to me.  :dunno:

Youíve disregarded my subordinate clause.  But point taken, ďanythingĒ may be too far reaching.


Offline ctwiggs1

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 2012
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #73 on: October 05, 2017, 09:37:34 AM »
@sabotloader

Mike - I'm not as well versed as others but the term "modern" seems to be used pretty loosely here.  I mean the Henry rifle was produced 160 years ago and it would be considered a modern firearm.

Curtis

Offline pianoman9701

  • Mushroom Man
  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Legend
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 26115
  • Location: Vancouver USA
  • NRA Life, MH, WFW, CCRKBA, NAGR, RMEF, WSB
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #74 on: October 05, 2017, 09:39:37 AM »
So, for all you smoke pole guys, how often do you have a filed ignition, one that a 209 primer would have prevented, and while attempting a shot at an animal?  And how often did it cause you to not get a shot off ie: weren't able to re- cap in time for a second chance? (I'm not a muzzy guy so please bare with me on the lingo)
Are mis-fires a real issue for you?
Maybe a poll of our own is necessary.  I'm just curious if adding these primers will actually cause an increase in the amount of game taken, or if it's just a luxury that would make things easier and more reliable.

Iíve had a hang fire, which resulted in a clean miss.  I can postulate that it could have resulted in a bad hit and a lost animal.  Anything that reduces the possibility of a bad hit and a lost animal should be legal, especially if there is no compelling reason to ban them.

Although I voted for the primer, I respectfully disagree with your statement as it is. With your reasoning, we all should only be allowed to hunt with a rifle. Maybe when you said "anything", you didn't mean it the way I took it. There are many advances in each category/implement of hunting which aren't allowed, and many, for good reason. Cohochemist also makes a valid point: who decides which advancements make the tool no longer a primitive hunting tool? We've had this discussion many times in different threads. There are ML hunters who would like to see only the most basic and primitive firearms allowed. Some archers feel that compound bows with 85% let-off are too advanced to be called primitive (and truly, they are far from primitive). Lighted nocks, mechanical broadheads, fiber optics on MLs - it goes on and on.  The point is, in the end it's the state that gets to decide which advancements get to be used and which, not. It seems rather arbitrary to me.  :dunno:

Youíve disregarded my subordinate clause.  But point taken, ďanythingĒ may be too far reaching.


I did, that.  :chuckle:
"Restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens based on the actions of criminals and madmen will have no positive effect on the future acts of criminals and madmen. It will only serve to reduce individual rights and the very security of our republic." - Pianoman

 

* Recent Topics

WTB Swarovski spotter by huntandjeep
[Today at 06:20:41 PM]


Icebreaker, Arc'Teryx, Columbia, Truck Gun Rack by swanny
[Today at 06:19:57 PM]


Otter by Cultusman
[Today at 06:15:15 PM]


Glass bedding question by Magnum_Willys
[Today at 06:09:27 PM]


300 WSM vs 300 Win mag by lewy
[Today at 06:07:36 PM]


starkey experimental forest by trophyelk6x6
[Today at 06:02:08 PM]


2017/18 Trappers Scoreboard by Turner89
[Today at 05:58:41 PM]


For Sale: KUIU Icon Pro 5200 by buglebrush
[Today at 05:48:54 PM]


For Sale- KUIU ICON PRO 5200/1850 PACK by buglebrush
[Today at 05:47:57 PM]


For Sale- Kuiu Icon Pro 1850 and 5200 bags and frame $350 by buglebrush
[Today at 05:45:22 PM]


Blacktail food plot by lokidog
[Today at 05:44:46 PM]


Score? by meatwhack
[Today at 05:40:27 PM]


Idaho elk unit 6 by elkinrutdrivemenuts
[Today at 05:39:06 PM]


Machias Trapping by Machias
[Today at 05:38:38 PM]


New Dodge 2017 3500 BigHorn Opinion? by jackelope
[Today at 05:38:33 PM]


Question for those using SIG KILO Rangefinders by Bob33
[Today at 05:33:44 PM]


WTS 2015 TW200 by tgray
[Today at 05:18:58 PM]


Elk deer by Old Man Yager
[Today at 05:18:33 PM]


Donald Trump Jr. Stone Sheep Hunt by TVHunts
[Today at 05:12:07 PM]


22lr Rifle/Pistol Package by Northwestwenz
[Today at 05:10:39 PM]