Bipartisan Bills Would Ban Exploding Targets..BILL PASSED WILL BECOME LAW

[Elkaholic daWg]

 Soon there should be one (Bill) to ban your orchard help from wiring in your new irrigation pump......Colockum/Tarps

[ICEMAN]

Thanks Bigtex. I hear you a bit on not trying to label it an "anti-gun" bill based upon those that are sponsoring it.....but as you know, quid pro quo will cause many legislators to be talked into signing legislation, so that it appears to be bi-partisan, when in reality, those pushing the legislation are from a distinct camp.

A few fires caused by an exploding target should not equate to new legislation in my opinion. This new law will in no way preclude more fires from the same cause.

I would rather study the issue a bit better, learn how the fires are actually being started. Then using the metrics, go after these fire starters. Maybe more education in these areas, not spending all this time to affect only a few.

[blackdog]

For the record it is not clear that tannerite if used properly is even included in this definition. If used properly the company says its not flammable.

[blackdog]

I understand your angst Iceman but if we don't offer our pro-gun solutions they'll impose their anti-gun solutions. Headed for the 2nd amendment rally in Oly.

[PolarBear]

Coastal Farm and Ranch had a smokin deal on exploding target kits acoupe of weeks ago.  I probaly should have picked up a couple.

[netcoyote]

So, I'm confused. Isn't it already illegal to cause a fire that burns public property?

Once again the lawmakers are blindly focusing on the "thing", i.e. explosive targets, rather than the deed done by a stupid human. The act of causing the fire is the crime and the person setting it should be the one held responsible.

Personally, I have no interest in tannerite or any of these incendiary targets and generally think they are a bad idea. I think that is a different discussion than proposing yet another law that is going to be difficult to enforce and further reinforce the notion that "things" cause crime rather than bad people.

[PolarBear]

I don't personally use them when I shoot but it is a great way to get kids interested in shooting.

[j_h_nimrod]

I'm saying the landowner wants some control on his property over the use of these products.

The land owner already has that control. As far as I know the land owner can place whatever restrictions on their land they want. They can completely restrict access for that matter.

I keep an eye on inciweb and other such sites and so far have not seen fire that would have been prevented by this bill. If you look a DNR you will see that during fire season you are restricted from doing just about anything on state land that could even remotely cause a fire, I am sure there are already prohibitions in place without the need for more.

[bearpaw]

Maybe there is something I am missing, I think the legislators have good intentions, but I am really tired of seeing so many new laws passed.   

[Greenhorn]

I think for every new law these guys come up with they should have to take another one off the books.   Way too many laws.  All these guys do is sit there day in and day out thinking about what new laws they can come up with.

Sent from my SCH-R970 using Tapatalk

[Special T]

Maybe there is something I am missing, I think the legislators have good intentions, but I am really tired of seeing so many new laws passed.   

The Road to Hell is paved with GOOD intentions. 

[lokidog]

I would definitely be concerned more with those crazy floating lanterns than exploding targets.  Those things can burn for a long time and if it is windy could easily tip and crash.

[bearpaw]

Maybe there is something I am missing, I think the legislators have good intentions, but I am really tired of seeing so many new laws passed.   

The Road to Hell is paved with GOOD intentions. 

I had a conversation with Representative Blake and this was a topic we discussed. The primary purpose seems to be to protect private land owners from fire dangers. This may help encourage private landowners to keep their lands open to public use. With that in mind I'm in favor of this bill and have changed my vote to yes.

[bigtex]

The senate bill has a hearing on January 28th in the Senate Committee on Natural Resources & Parks at 1:30 PM

The house bill had a hearing today.

[bigtex]

The house bill had it's hearing on the 28th. Lots of supportive testimony by both public land management agencies and private landowners. No person signed up in opposition to the bill.