Rifles - end around play

HB1231 includes language the Natural Resources Commission denied last year for inclusion of high power rifles. Senator Arnold or one of his friends apparently wants to use some HPR but this allows for everything from .243 on up with no limits on actions or magazine capacities. The bill will be heard in the House Natural Resources Committee next Monday.


iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/house/1231#document-ec736648


Jack

It also authorizes the following:

Authorizes the use of purple marks to post real property against trespassers.

To be clear I am not against HPRs but I do want restrictions on autoloaders as far as magazine capacity. It already sounds like a firefight on opening day. Seems to me the 60 day comment period and study by the DNR should overrule some legislator whose presenting this proposal.

Try hunting on one of the Fish and Wildlife areas opening day/weekend of gun...it is a war zone...heck, there are even some dopes that try drives...talking about stupidity.... I have been adamant about the use of centerfires.... I dont want them for deer in this state...period !!

I'll just keep using my single shot. It's already a 200+ yard centerfire without holdover. A trimmed 35 remington, 357 max or the various 358 wildcats are already doing it very well. I don't even have 4 large in my build counting Nikon scope and a trip to the smith.

Without going all Zumbo on you guys, I personally don't care for ARs in the field but that's just me. Stopped last year and had an interesting discussion on public land with a fellow bearing a 458 socom or some other big bore ar build. He was not happy that me and my sil were walking back to "his" spot. Kind of got a weird feeling the way this dude was acting so we split. It can get a little wild out there on opening weekend, I do agree.

It's just like the Sunday beer sales it never going to stop being brought up untill it passes ... Good or Bad

I just cant see guys with 30/06's, and 7mm mags on places like Willow Slough and Jasper Pulaski, and at Kingsbury its just stupid, "blood Alley" will be just that ....heck, Winimac is only 4800 acres ..... stupid, stupid, stupid ...if they want to use the dam things, keep 'em down south of Indy in the huge Nat. Forest lands or bigger state lands... for use in this county(Porter), Lake and others with high densities it is an accident waiting to happen..... we get reports of slugs going thru barns and houses every year up here...hate to see it with these big guns... and THAT IS A FACT !!

There already using the equivalent to the that now in the wildcat rounds all over the state....and up there also

I don't see this passing....

In my experience in Kentucky, where any legal centerfire is allowed, they do not allow them on their wma's, except for short duration quota hunts that are draws. The Daniel Boone NF is ok to use them and it dwarfs the Hoosier. When I talk public I am usually referring to the Hoosier NF not fwa's. I get the concern.

I don't want my Amish neighbors lined up on the property line with HPR oh and their 10 kids

Throbak I bout laughed iced tea out my nose. I hear ya.

Follow up post, Throbak I got on here this morning and reread. I thought your post was about 10 Amish hunters lining a fence row all with hpr's. The visual cracked me up. Kind of like the electric Amish on Q95. My apologies if it hit you wrong as I understand your point. I have fished lakes and observed habits on crappie and I travel in Amish country. They can be tough on fish and game. Although the visual cracked me up I understand it's your reality and it's not a laughing matter. No offense intended.

None taken lol

Studies have proven rifles are safer than slugs. A HPR bullet fragments on contact...a slug bounces thru the woods like a cannon ball.


Means Nada to me, I'll stick to my bows and black powder

That study wasn't done with modern ammo also....

As expected the rifle proposal passed 11-0.

I see the comment "they already use them" a lot when this topic comes up.

The big difference is current cost to legally hunt with a HPR cartridge. You either go custom hoosier build or an expensive pistol.

However, if this passes people are going to be buying $200-$300 cheap single shot .308s or $500 AR's like it is the apocolypse. Most sloppy Joe hunters won't take the time or money it takes currently to hunt with HPR....now though he can just grab is old AK or AR and BOOOM till his or her's heart content.

Bird hunters have round limits....if passed I'd support at least that being restricted.

Unless someone amends it, there will be no magazine restrictions.

Which in my personal opinion shows the lack of understanding and is asinine. (my opinion personally of course)

Ty....you need to do a fact finding/search on what folks are using now in wildcat rounds. Many wildcat rounds equate to HPR now and are just a simple brass trim and reload no custom gun needed. They are used now over the entire state on public and private land by many it seems.

The part I don't understand with this bill is your be able to hunt private land with HPR but not public...no matter what the private acreage size is.

This thing is a long way from becoming law....

I bow hunt nearly 100% of the time but am around guns a lot at the shop...however I do claim ignorance on the topic of wildcat rounds. I understand the brass trimming but you can't just grab a .358 Hoosier for cheap that I know of?

Or perhaps that isn't the round you are meaning, please explain as I do admit firearm hunting to me is of little interest and my .44 Blackhawk or Muzzeloader do just fine when the rare time I do gun hunt happens.

There are several that are trimming .35 Remington, .45-70, and some other rounds to the required length and using those rounds in standard production rifles.

Still, though average Joe blow doesn't put in that effort. These are not the ones I'm concerned with. The ease at which one can acquire if passed an HPR is incredibly easy.

Those that wish to already have HPR equivalents, I just don't see the need personally. But if passed, I would strongly think common sense says limit capacity like waterfowlers.

I though high power rifles were already legal??

Just the long (and growing) list wildcats and handguns.....for now.

Basically they are

Ty.... So your ok with HPR as long as the average Joe is priced out from using them??

No. I personally, my own personal opinion don't see the need for them nor the necessity of fighting for their inclusion.

I also personally don't care enough to fight against though in the sense of banging down doors, writing legislators or forming collective minds in an effort. I simply would vote no if asked and carry on.

As some have stated if the ability to shoot a HPR cartridge floats your boat the chance is already out there. Even a modern inline ML can make a 200 yard shot, if practiced, all day long without issue. Shoot I know guys accurately and lethally shooting their bolt slug guns that far.

My only real contention is if passed that there is no capacity maximum. It is a logical safety precaution to not allow scattering tens or more rounds at a target. To me 5 is a good solid number....me personally I believe 1 shot only but that is my personal flavor

Hopefully that cleared the mud to a little clearer

Are they needed for deer management in this state....no, they are not ... will they increase the kill, yes, they will ..... will there be more accidents with them...... time will tell...... if they keep 'em off the state lands like the F&W area's and preserves out of the Park Hunts that would be a good thing..... esp. the way they pack the guys into the state parks... it is scary as it is ....

If it's not good for their land why in the world would it be OK for mine that I don't understand??

I don't think it will bump harvest totals any higher than it would do anyways IMO.

tynimiller My only real contention is if passed that there is no capacity maximum. It is a logical safety precaution to not allow scattering tens or more rounds at a target. To me 5 is a good solid number....me personally I believe 1 shot only but that is my personal flavor


I think there is going to be a problem with limiting capacity to 5 IF (and that's a big IF) this passes, as there are legal lever action rifles that hold more than 5 rounds now.

Things like this are part of the reason I think this thing will die off once the real debate starts.

Most shotguns hold more than the waterfowlers are allowed....but maybe the deer hunters aren't as smart lol!

Wont be any debate, no one shows up to conference meetings and "our" legislators have no idea what they are discussing.

What really happened here is a few people who wanted the HPR in administrative rule and did not get it.......They went to their legislators. GOOD MOVE! Our IDNR CAN NOT speak..... If you want it ...... Legislate it.

I realize the "I want it now generation", I and others are relics.......

IF this thing passes with varying capacity limits, it could end up pretty confusing.....

Rifles in approved calibers that hold up to 10 rounds in a tubular magazine - legal.

No limit on rounds that shotguns hold - legal.

Semi-auto rifles in approved calibers that hold more than 5 rounds in a removable magazine - Legal/not legal?

Bolt action rifles that hold more than 5 rounds in a removable magazine - Legal/Not legal?

What a mess....

Not sure how limiting capacity would be a "mess"!!

Just because your gun holds a certain amount of rounds doesn't mean you need to fill it up to the MAX capacity... :rolleyes:

If there is a limit, then one would expect there to be ways for the DNR to make sure hunters adhere to that limit, such as a plug in a shotgun. I don't know how you would limit a lever action to say 5 rounds. Can you plug it? Should you have to?

The point being....if this passes, they need to make hard/fast rules as to what is allowed/not allowed to alleviate any confusion and be done with it.

No semi auto's maybe the better way to go.... I belive some states have that now for Deer vs a round cap. Max

You know...the more I think on this that would be a much cleaner and easier to understand and implement than a capacity limitation. Great way to go about it in my opinion.

right. I just need the one shot!

So are you suggesting that no semi-autos be allowed period or just no hpr semi-autos?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 76chevy:
[QB] right. I just need the one shot!

That would never happen but it sure would be nice to have single shot limit. I think there would be a lot less pop shots and spray and pray type volleys. Knowing you only have one quick shot leads to patience for those who need patience.

Under the current bill this would be legal for deer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfeDusmoRXk

Me personally I would vote yes for this, but that is my personal opinion and I know it would never pass. It would minimize the multiple shot running/moving shots you hear neighbors taking across fields every year (yes it happens every year atleast for us on the one place). Eliminating semi's would in effect accomplish this to a point....ain't happening though.

Just HPR that seems to be where the fear maybe for some.
No need to invent the wheel again.

tynimiller Me personally I would vote yes for this, but that is my personal opinion and I know it would never pass. It would minimize the multiple shot running/moving shots you hear neighbors taking across fields every year (yes it happens every year atleast for us on the one place). Eliminating semi's would in effect accomplish this to a point....ain't happening though.

Brew Just HPR that seems to be where the fear maybe for some.
No need to invent the wheel again.


If you say all, then you get into the whole "well I've been hunting with a Remington 1100 for 30 years. Now you're telling me I can't hunt with it?"....

If you say only hpr centerfires, then you get into ..."I purchased an AR chambered in .450 bushmaster because I was told it's legal, now you're telling me I can't hunt deer with it?"


These are the type of things that need to addressed before any law passes so as to let people know exactly where they stand without confusion.

BTW, for the sake of transparency I gun hunt with a single shot .44 mag rifle.

One last point...unless amended, I believe this bill would apply only to private land.

Interesting ....

I agree jjas, as it currently is written it is far to non-specific in my opinion and as it is written I hope personally it doesn't pass. However, if it does my personal hunting won't be affected...however I know a few neighbors that are gonna be having a hayday with this if passed.

If I set my personal habits aside and just look at it as removed as I can be....

One of the biggest takeaways is okay the state is saying what is good to use on a 4 acre chunk of private property isn't good to use on a multi-thousand acre public property?

Also I still think logically it makes little sense to restrict bird hunters but not gun hunters with ammunition restrictions loaded in the firearm.

the AK is legal in kentucky, Missouri, and Wisconsin to deer hunt with right? Who actually hunts with one??

thank God we have the NRA to protect our rights to own stuff like this

First, I need to say no matter how this goes, it won't affect my personal hunting style. I've hunted deer with the same firearm for most of my life. It kills them just fine.
However, I want to caution everyone on opening the can of worms to do an "end run" around the IDNR and it's public input style of management using legislative action. Many times laws can be enacted by a loud minority, such as may be happening with this bill, I don't know. But what if it was a group wanting to allow 4 bucks killed per year, or run firearm season from Oct. 1st to the first Sunday in January? It can just as easily work against you, then for you.
It is my understanding that during the public opinion phase of the HPR rule, it was pretty much an even split for/against. Unless there is overwhelming support for a change, the IDNR usually will not implement it. As flawed as some people feel IDNR's approach to management is, it is better to leave the management of wildlife to the biologists that get paid very little and base their proposals on science than to a bunch of legislators who may only be trying to garner some votes.
Sorry for my long winded post, I will try to keep them shorter if I post in the future.

The bump-fire stock is available for the AR platform, as well...so it can already be used for the 458 SOCOM, 450 Bushmaster, 50 Beowolf...etc. All of these are already legal, but yet, you don't see people out there with them. Why would this rule all of sudden change that?

Remember the AK, just like an AR, is simply a platform. I am not advocating anything by saying that, just remember not to get caught up in the "evil" looks mindset because they don't fit what a traditional hunting rifle looks like.

In actuality, the 7.62x39 round (typical of an AK 47) is not a bad deer hunting round. It is similar to a 30-30 in terms of ballistics. You would want to pick a good bullet and not a surplus round, but it would make a good deer hunting round if one were to go about it properly. There are a lot of guys that deer hunt with the SKS rifle in states where the round is legal. If you were to work within the accuracy limits of an AK and chose the right bullet, then it would be no worse than many other rifles out there for deer hunting. And no one says you have to put a 30 round mag in one either, or even load that mag up completely.

I'm not a rifle hunter. But I own many rifles in both traditional rifle looks as well as probably way too many that look "evil" including AK's. We need to be careful when we say that a rifle of a certain look shouldn't be allowed for hunting. If we do that then we are no better than those who want gun rights restrictions based on the looks of a gun.

I have no dog in the fight when it comes to rifle hunting. I have my opinions but they are irrelevant anymore and honestly would just promote further fighting among us as hunters. But I do want to remind us to be careful if we try to attack the rifle being hunted with because it doesn't fit what we perceive to be a true hunting rifle. We can go after calibers and magazine limits with good science as we move forward in whatever direction this goes.

The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. It was put in the constitution to protect the people against the tyranny of government. If there is tyranny I want my gun to look evil.

Of course all my guns were lost in a tragic boating accident years ago. I just hunt with my bare hands now.

Your first line is kinda what I am getting at as well...the discussion of the NRA/2nd Amendment or any relation to gun discussions for hunting are separate in my opinion than discussing right to own and bear arms.

For hunting I personally don't see the need to have a ton of rounds loaded and would support a logical thought process of limiting capacity or action style similar to what they do now for waterfowl hunters. It doesn't hurt anyone that wants to use an HPR that currently isn't allowed (many HPRs can be used legally already here on different platforms).

People have hunted through the years with sporterized military rifles chambered in military calibers or re chambered to suit their needs 22 hornet to whatever they needed.

My generation hot rodded Camaros, Mustangs, Chevelles, etc. Now I see faster cars that I must admit don't trip my trigger but have seen turbo 4 cylinder Japanese or German cars that scream point a to point b and kids hot rod what they can get.

I'm too old to tell everyone how to hunt. I know how I like it, but a 12 ga, flintlock or wildcat? All dandy choices but right now with a Nov 22 opener next year, give me the Max and I can load in Lee 38 special dies. Nothing special. One of the best bang for buck IN setups imo. But, I got an old 7 mag remington 700 with gold ringer 3x9 that would some day be a hoot to shoot one long range with. I grew up reading about Jack O'Connor and the vaunted 270. Know people in other states that hunt with "normal" hpr's and they seem ok.

Correction.......Nov 12th opening day for next year and gun opening weekend should rock, Lord willing and some good weather.

passed House floor 94-0

So, now that DNR/NRC has someone looking over their shoulder maybe they will just let them bring all rules changes to the legislature? Be careful what you wish for because you just might get it.

Haven't kept up with all this conversation but by the sound of the house vote this is gonna pass isn't it?

Sounds like it, I hope not.... Dosnt the DNR have any say in this at all ? They said no last year, leave it at that, why the heck get some dam politician involved ... sore losers I guess ...

And this could be the first slip down a very very slippery slope of having legislatures controlling what the DNR should be.

This isn't the first time that Indiana lawmakers have passed hunting bills, nor will it be the last, I assume.

This one feels different to me though...just last year the DNR/NRC said no...now this. You are not incorrect though, it will not be the last.

As long as conservation is a after Thot behind a money driven agenda expect it

There are some rules/laws that are in statute (the sound suppressor bill comes to mind). Those must go to the legislature to be changed. Some rule-making authority has been granted to the NRC. Approving weapons for deer hunting was one of those powers. This bill overrules the Governor-appointed NRC and makes a LAW which can only be changed by making another LAW. Slippery slope indeed.

I don't know much about the process but a democracy vote from the state congress seems less corrupt than an appointed rule-making authority but again I'm not vested in the process so that could be entirely inaccurate.

The NRC is "supposed" to be more in touch and understand things of this nature though, as that was their designed purpose.

Congress/Legislatures have proven time and time again to know very little about things, yet then proceed to make laws on them. Gun bans is the first obvious ones...different states or areas yes but same concept.

If you form a committee tasked with the responsibility of making decisions like this (NRC) yet then make a law in essence making them useless...all you did was waste time, money and thought process on forming the NRC.

Where does the Natural Resources Committee that passed this bill 11-0 get its input?

This thing passed 94-0. That shocks me.

Haven't been follow this topic, are we saying it will be legal in Indiana to hunt with HPR this fall?

Depends on if it passes in the Senate unchanged and is then signed into law by the Governor...

Had a you got to be kidding me moment on this last night Had the chance to talk to a house Rep last evening. I asked how in the world did this HPR bill pass 94 to 0 he informed me he was led to believe it was for a special MZL season not 243 and up inclusion HPR WTF

This thing has a long way to go before it's a law...

As it's written, hprs could only be used on private property (and please, someone correct me if I'm wrong), there isn't a specific season assigned for their use as it's written now.

In other words....I wouldn't run out and buy one based on what's going on....

If this representative can't take the time to read a short, one paragraph bill that plainly states ".243", then he needs to be voted out of office. Who knows what else he has voted to pass without reading?

Most legislators (both parties) just vote as their floor leaders tell them to vote. Why waste time reading a bill and trying to understand it when you are obligated to a party that will work to defeat you if you don't vote the correct way? Most bills that get defeated get defeated before ever going to committee or in committee. If you can get a bill out of committee, you're 90% home free. At least in Indiana.

HJ

http://kpcnews.com/columnists/don_m...-0e3d554fa466.html#.VrOi09-HDBw.facebook

That man's columns are always sour grapes. Lol! He definitely doesn't speak for half the state's hunters who want rifles.

He pretty much hit the nail on the head . I thought

The majority of hunters don't want rifles? I thought it was pretty much evenly split for and against.

That's what I thought, as well.

For those worried about safety, the NSSF did a great study on how safe hunting is overall.

http://www.nssf.org/pdf/research/iir_injurystatistics2013.pdf

According to the study, we should be 14x more worried about getting injured playing volleyball than while hunting.

I get that. But a unanimous vote on anything still shocks me. You would think that at least one of them would accidentally hit "No".

I agree with Don ....... the DNR said no, and that is the way it should be .... However, I do think down deep, the dnr wants even more deer killed, and if this does go thru, they will get their wish....

I don't look at it as the DNR saying "no", but rather that they simply pulled the proposal until a time in the future when it could be modified and reintroduced.

Unless/until this passes and we actually see what form it takes if it passes, this is all pure speculation....

Jeff, if the DNR wants to decimate, eradicate or basically make deer non-existent what would the reasoning behind that be?

They must have a healthy, but not over-abundance herd sustained to ensure deer hunters across the state keep buying licenses...their #1 funding source. Would make no sense for them to wipe them out, at times reduce sure, other times grow...it's been a process for years now. No?

I doubt that the DNR wants to add any additional statewide firearms hunting days, so if it passes, it'll probably be set to run concurrently with firearms season.

Yeah, the bill doesn't create a rifle season it merely adds them as acceptable firearm choices during the existing Firearm Season.

Actually, through this bill, the DNR could create a "special season" for rifles.

Quoted from the bill: "to establish a deer hunting season during which hunters may use rifles on privately owned land subject to the following:"

It doesn't say when it has to be, or how long it has to be, just that it has to be.

I completely stand corrected. Stupidity in motion if that is the case. We already have a plenty long enough firearm season.

How many ways do we need to kill a deer? This is getting stupid.

A Rifle season could be many things including a 2 day weekend in January or a simple addition to existing gun season ..... No length or time frame has been noted.

Brew A Rifle season could be many things including a 2 day weekend in January or a simple addition to existing gun season ..... No length or time frame has been noted.


Good point....it could be something like that, or
it could be as simple as the DNR allowing hprs to be used only during the late antlerless season and only on private property.

Doing that would give the DNR more control over when/where they could be used as opposed to adding them to the general firearms season.

I doubt it would be during the special antlerless season, as certain counties would be excluded.

Does it say a state wide season?

No, but it sure wouldn't be fair to allow rifles, then exclude everyone from counties with quotas of 3 or less. LOL! Not that it would affect me, as my county is an 8 and we are swamped with deer.

What wouldn't be fair Is sending all the HPR South Make it State wide or forget it , which I would prefer but that's just me !

HB 1231, which passed the House, had First Reading in the Senate today. It has been assigned to the Senate Committee on Natural Resources. No date given yet for when the committee will hear the bill.

http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/committees/natural_resources

The above link also lists all committee members -- in case you want to contact them.


According to the online Senate calendar, in a few weeks we will know whether or not the bill goes to the Governor:

Deadline for Senate committee reports on HBs in Senate is February 25.
Deadline for 3rd reading of HBs in Senate is March 2.
Conference committees begin March 3.
Deadline to adjourn 2016 General Assembly Session is March 14.

http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/committees/natural_resources

HB 1231 will be heard by the Senate Natural Resources Committee on Monday, February 22, at 9:00 AM in Room 130.

I hunt coyotes from Oct 15th to March 15th on Public Lands using a 5.56 AR15 with no restrictions on the size of the magazine that I can use. I avoid going hunting when there are people hunting deer at the same time. I would fear for my life if I went out into the fields during dear gun season.

I guess there are just too many deer hunters as compared to coyote hunters.

But if we can hunt for coyotes using a center fire rifle why can't others hunt deer with a center fire rifle too?

I'm not saying that I want this to happen. But I'm curious as to the IDNR's thinking on this one. I can only think that is has to do with the number of deer hunters out there during deer season. Deer gun season is pretty short compared to the long coyote hunting season.

Or maybe it has to do with the type of game being managed. The IDNR treats coyotes as vermin and deer as a protected asset. They make it easier to shoot coyotes and harder to shoot lots of deer. I guess that fits in with the deer management strategy.

they have no logical explanation for this. Data shows shotgun slugs to be more dangerous than centerfire rifles.

Centerfire calibers are legal in handguns now and for coyote hunting as you rightly point out.

I can hunt with a .243 handgun or a coyote rifle in .243 all night but not for deer season?

I'll bet in this state, there are no more than a few thousand guys hunting coyotes on any day at any given time and than may even be more than there really is on any given day, maybe only in the hundreds...you cant say that about deer season., where there is tens of thousands........

which is why it would make sense for deer hunters to be armed with the firearm with the lower incidence or richochet.

This study found the incidence of richochet to be much higher with the shotgun slug compared to the centerfire rifle.

http://www.ihea.com/_assets/documents/AFWA_Presentation_9-18-07.pdf

Don't believe that study was not done with modern ammo also...

If you want to make deer hunting safer outlaw deer stands.

these are not modern?

Passed senate committee, I think. Video feed kind of cut out, but I think I heard it passed.

Passed committee with two amendments. Restricts HPR use to the southern half of the state and requires the hunter to be elevated at least 10ft.

Do you know if the private property only restriction remained in the bill?

Yes it did.

Thanks.

Any idea the north/south boundary identified?

They listed some roads, a few I couldn't hear but I did hear 40.

seems reasonable.

So does it just await governor signature and it's a done deal?

Pathetic....

No, since there were amendments, if it passes the Senate, I believe it has to go back to the house and re-voted on there. I could be wrong on the order of the house and senate votes, though.

OMG.....how many of you actually think that someone is gonna unload their rifle and not shoot at a deer from the ground?? Idiots win again...

If I am reading that right…..that is the most ridiculous crap I've ever heard! Now who in the **** is going to NOT take a shot a deer with a HPR once they get get on the ground??? NOBODY….thats who. But yet a guy carrying a rifle that is currently legal can….Hahahahaha

I agree a stupid amendment. Not really fair to guys not physically able to hunt from a stand either... Should they choose to use a HPR.

It's a stupid........never mind. Dew predicted this. Have at it, fellas. :rolleyes:

Shoulda just left it alone years ago.... We are whats the word, oh yeah f..... so now when know when someone w enough power wants a law changed they can do so. Glad the standard has been set... Awesome.

....'and more of my predictions will come true also. The ones who wanted those HPR's just got a line drawn across this state. Have at it "Joe Six Pack".... LOL!!!

More Dew predictions coming true in the very near future.....

Go pat a few NRC members on the back for making messes like this possible...... THEY started this "path"..... Boyz, this is what happens when a website leader shows the world how to "get your way" when wanting to "add weapons" and use the NRC to undercut what the IDNR actually wants in the first place.

You just get more and more and more of the same. Isn't KARMA and Pandora's Box just lovely in full bloom... LOL!!

The way I understand it goes to Full Senate (twice) and then back to a conference committee made up of members of both Houses with agreement by the author. Then to Gov and AG for approval then on to the DNR/NRC to establish a season which could be as simple as one day season or more.

This is the crap that happens when politicians try to do the job of the DNR....pathetic ...... all because a few "shooters" were butthurt over last years ruling.... simply pathetic ...

Yep, the DNR should have "manned up" last year and passed it since the support and opposition were split fairly evenly. It would have been a "cleaner", less convoluted version. Instead, they chose to pull it until a later date.

And,yes, I know you oppose it.

Thank Gawd. Otherwise people on here wouldn't have something to bitch n whine about all spring and summer. ( or thump their concave chest while spouting "i told you so" ) Lol

Thanks for the info.

So private land, 10'off the ground, deer have to be within 20 yards, a one day hunt between the hours of 12p - 2p,yellow caution tape must be around property with signs saying HPR in use, and only the southern part of state where the guy that wanted it lives. LOL Just kidding and making fun of this whole thing. Archery season is going to get crowded.

Another consideration……what about the guy that wants to hunt with a HPR, and and is handicapped or cannot climb to meet the 10' rule??? These people just don't think!!! :rolleyes:

If it doesn't concern them...no...they don't think.

Im mentally challenged....does that count...? h.h.

Me too!!! Guess thats why I don't "get it"!!!

That makes 3 of us.... :rolleyes:

I predicted there would be 3 of you...... LOL!!!!

Just havin' fun.... j/k......

Lol

That was funny. Have to be able to laugh at yourself from time to time.

Yep....That WAS funny....

I see NO humor in it at all…..making fun of us "slow guys"!!!!!

The predicted part is what I was laughing at from the earlier discussions.

HB 1231 update:

Here is the link to HB 1231 as amended in the House and sent to the Senate.
http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/house/1231#document-b2971fae

HB 1231 is scheduled for Second Reading on the Senate floor sometime after 1:30 PM tomorrow, Feb 25.
http://iga.in.gov/documents/6cd52364

Looks like the Senate has a pretty full agenda for the afternoon.

The clock is ticking (updated):

Deadline for Senate committee reports on HBs in Senate is February 25.
Deadline for 2nd reading of HBs in Senate is February 29.
Deadline for 3rd reading of HBs in Senate is March 1.
Conference committees begin March 2.
Deadline to adjourn 2016 General Assembly Session is March 10.

whats the story with the purple paint marking property??

Is this new??

No.... That wording has been in the bill since day one..... Has nothing to do with HPR.... Many other states are already using it!

http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/house/1231#document-8ef24949

This takes out the north/south debate on rifles.

OK I did not notice it before. thanks

HB 1231 Second Reading in the Senate has been postponed until Monday, Feb 29. That date is the deadline for Second Reading of House bills in the Senate.

thanks for the update, I am sure Dew already predicted this would happen

Just tell me the rules, so I know how to play the game.

What a mess. They amended the bill and removed the 10' elevated stand but left the north-south dividing line. They also put in a 10 round magazine limit and only allows rifles on state owned ground. Sunsets in 5 years.

It's a mess right now.

ROFLMAO !!! dam politicians ....

This is awesome! Our government at its finest. LOL

That's methed up.

Only on over crowded state land lol

Is this seriously what this is going to??? Comical isnt even a good description, scary is closer to it..

ONLY on state ground! OMG!

Guess I'll have to arm up.

Me thinks that change was made to ensure this DOESNT pass.

Dave we can only hope !

Here is the link to all of the actual language in HB 1231, as amended by the Senate on February 29. This printing is dated today, March 1, which is the date that the bill goes to Third Reading in the Senate. The Senate proceedings should start around 10:30 AM with several bills to be considered besides HB 1231. If HB 1231 fails today it is dead. If it passes it goes to a conference committee of selected Senators and Representatives.

http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/house/1231#document-92de30fb

You should be able to watch the live Senate Chamber webcast today. It may be a while until HB 1231 is called up.

http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/senate

Nothing in the Hoosier Nat. ?? lol..... I pity those who hunt the F&W areas down there, esp. the smaller properties... So the Rambo's will be able to hit the State forest lands to 'eh .... all I can do is SMH .....

Bill just passed 26-24.

Smh

Can this possibly get any worse?? Not talking about the ballistics of the whole thing, but the process is just a joke.

What a train wreck ... LOL.

Why even have the DNR ???

Let me get this straight, high powered rifles will be legal on state owned (public) land, but illegal on private property?

As written, yes. But it still has to go to conference committee, and you can just about guarantee that the bill's author will want private ground re-added.

Wow, gotta love politics... thanks M4

Yeah id say this isnt even close to being finished. They'll change it again a few times im sure.

They have one chance to correct this in conference committee.

Actually they have 2 chances if the author agrees to the amendments.

when will this be final one way or another??

The NBA has weighed in and they support this legislation. I got this from them......


House Bill 1231, which passed the Indiana House of Representatives by a resounding 91-0 vote and the Senate by a 26-24 vote, will soon be heading to conference committee.

View Related Articles

HB 1231 would greatly expand deer hunting opportunities in Indiana by directing the Indiana Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to establish a rifle season for deer hunting.  Under the current bill, DNR may not authorize more than four annual rifle seasons for deer hunting in order to assess the impact of these additional hunting seasons.  The addition of a rifle season would make hunting more accessible and enhance hunter retention and recruitment efforts in the state.

Your NRA supports allowing Hoosiers to join the millions of hunters who safely hunt with rifles every year across the country, contributing to wildlife conservation while feeding their families and preserving America’s proud outdoor heritage.

NRA, sorry autocorrect got me.

Why not, the NRA supported crossbows....wonder if they support that new fangled air powered harpoon gun .... I got this yesterday in my NRA alerts...

House conferees listed:

http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/committees/conference_committee_for_hb_1231#document-92de30fb

Conference committee meets today at 9am

Well, that was mostly unexpected.

They have opened it back up to state wide, no height requirement, 243,30-30, 300,30-06, 308 caliber's only, private ground. Ten rounds of ammo in gun.

So what happens now Jack? Does it go back to the House for a vote and then Senate for a vote?

It is in a Conference Committee... I believe if it gets hashed out, then it goes to the Governor...

Next step now that they have conferred I think it goes back to the House of origin for another vote.

Wonder why those specific calibers now? Initially wasn't it 243 and larger?

Yes, it was.

NOW they are picking specific calibers.... ?? This is almost better than last nights debate ...what a bunch of dolts, I'm tellin ya...Look, I'm not overly fond of rifles in this state, but this is beyond stupid... I mean, IF they are going to ok this, there are so many great deer calibers out there for those that want to use rifles.... so, would this mean, that those that have the specialized wildcat calibers in their flat tops, now wont be able to use 'em ??.... what about the Ruger M77's chambered in .44 mags ? ...All the lever actions out there in .44's and .357 mags ??....These guys can screw up a wet...well you know....stupid, stupid stupid !!

It is too bad the people who are making this law either dont understand or know rifle calibers....legalize the .243 and .308 yet leave out the .260 Remington and 7mm08 which use the same case as the .243 and .308 but use different sized bullets. h.h.

Exactly, they ok the 300 win, but not these ^^ ?? stupid, stupid, stupid !! .....as I said, what about the other calibers already used ?? stupid, stupid, stupid !!

Closer we get to March 14th the more likely this dies and goes to summer study.

Anybody have a clue why they dropped the purple paint clause? That was about the only thing in here that made sense.

Jack

Summer study ?...that is where this belongs !!

Compromises and "stepping stones". Look how many times IDNR has used that approach regarding hunting tools for deer hunting and how much controversy has been generated among deer hunters. Look at how many stepping stones have been used in bows, crossbows, muzzle loading firearms, shotguns, centerfire handguns, and centerfire rifles.

They felt that if you didn't have the purple paint up it would give the impression it was ok to trespass.

The .300 may be .300 AAC Blackout. Until the actual bill is printed, we can only speculate.

My guess is .300 Win Mag.

My guess is that it will be anything 30 caliber

So, what is the reasoning that they are leaving out some fantastic whitetail calibers ... so, its ok to use a .300 win, but not a .270 win and it is ok to use a .243 and not a .260 rem ... talking about some dam idiots ... SMH

They're winning again.....

The conference committee vieo is about 11 minutes long:


http://iga.in.gov/information/archives/2016/video/committee_conference_committee_for_hb_1231/

They will still be legal. This bill does not repeal 312 IAC 9-3-3 subsection (d)(4).

That logic would imply that if my property does not have a "No Trespassing" sign then I'm OK with it.

I agree. I liked the purple paint option. A **** of a lot easier and cheaper than posting signs everywhere.

Conference Committee report: https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/house/1231#document-92de30fb

That point was brought up in the committee hearing also, I think they felt the Senate didn't like it so the author took it out.

https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/house/1231#document-08d343ce

*CC123103*
CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT
DIGEST FOR EHB 1231
Citations Affected:
IC 14-22-2.
Synopsis:
Deer hunting. Provides that certain rifles may be used to hunt deer on privately
owned land during the firearms seasons beginning after June 30, 2016, and ending before January 1, 2020. Requires the department of natural resources (DNR) to report on the impact of the use of rifles to hunt deer. Authorizes the use of a handgun that fires a commercially available bullet of 10 millimeters in diameter to hunt deer.
(This conference committee report does the
following: (1) Authorizes the use of rifles during the firearms season for hunting deer
rather than requiring the director of the DNR to adopt rules to establish a rifle season. (2)
Deletes provisions restricting the rifle season to southern Indiana. (3) Provides that the use
of a rifle is permitted on privately owned land rather than on state owned hunting areas.
(4) Requires the rifle to be chambered for certain cartridges. (5) Changes the restriction
on magazine size to a restriction on the number of cartridges that a hunter using a rifle
may possess while hunting deer. (6) Deletes provisions authorizing the use of purple marks
to post real property against trespassers.)

What is the next step then? Another vote now or is this final?

Direct from Senate and House conference committee reports:

So, we're back to private land only, but it's state-wide.

No more 10ft rule.

No more purple paint.

10mm handguns allowed.

A wide variety of .300 rifles allowed, and a few specific calibers.

No FMJ's.

I think this is a fairly decent start to widening the rifle offerings in the state.

Has to go back to House and Senate for a full vote.

If they are allowing 10mm handguns then why not the .40 SW...or .45 ACP....both of them are capable of doing the job at the range a 10mm does. To me this is nothing more than idiots making laws to satisfy wealthy campaign donors......but isn't that politics as usual..??h.h.

HB1231 conference committee report passed the house 84-5

Looks like HB 1231 is up for vote in the Senate sometime tomorrow afternoon. Session starts at 1:30 PM. Scroll down the page a little at the following link:

web page

243 is OK but not various other 257, 260, 6.5, 270,280 7mm, etc. How do you allow 243 and then jump over all these excellent calibers to 30 cal? Weird and arbitrary list to me. No big bores either like 45-70, seems like that caliber was named last year, guess it lost it's luster.

lots of great deer rounds NOT on the list. makes no sense....

I agree, but let's not look a gift horse in the mouth. The rest can come later...

A CO going have fun when it comes to checking someone with a legal rifle for Deer Hunting.... Espicaly if the claim there coyote hunting also..... lol ... SMH

No different than how it is now though.

Right now all a CO needs to do is measure/check the case length and bullet diameter to see if your rifle is legal...... are you saying that's all they will need to do if this HPR bill passes?

I think he is saying all they have to do now is say they are coyote hunting if they are breaking a deer hunting law.

Ok...that wasn't my point

If the bill passes there will be more info needed then just measuring the case and bullet as they do now!

Agreed, plus hunters are allowed more than ten cartridges if they are not using the newly added guns.

So what is the real issue with this proposed change?

I'm not a proponent necessarily of the HPRs but keeping a list of 5 legal cartridges seems a heck of a lot easier than dealing with all the PCR wildcat verbage that is already in existence.

With the current legal rifles now a CO can make two measurements a know if your legal... They Don't have to count amount of ammo you have also... All that may soon change!

BTW....all the current rifles in use will still be legal with the add on of the New HPR rounds and there restrictions!

Yeah it all seems silly to me. If I were king my rule would be single shots .243 and larger to include shotguns. Carry as much ammo as you want... still wouldn't be spraying and praying with a single shot but I'm sure that wouldn't sit well with most.

Well I missed the Senate vote, but it says the bill was adopted by the Senate, so I'm assuming that means it passed.

Passed the Senate. On to the governors desk now.

And the precedent has now been set for how Indiana's hunting laws will be established. No point in even having a NRC from here forward.

The precedent was set before this bill.

Any link to final wording? Still state wide, private only and only certain calibers?

Yes. Go to the bill's page and look at the committee report for the final version,

link??

found it

https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/house/1231#document-08d343ce

) This section applies to a hunting
5
season beginning after June 30, 2016, and ending before January
6
1, 2020.
7
(b) A hunter may use a rifle during the firearms season to hunt
8
deer subject to the following:
9
(1) The use of a rifle is permitted only on privately owned
10
land.
11
(2) The rifle must have a barrel length of at least sixteen (16)
12
inches.
13
(3) The rifle must be chambered for one (1) of the following
14
cartridges:
15
(A) .243.
16
(B) .30-30.
17
(C) .300.
18
(D) .30-06.
19
(E) .308.
CC123103/DI 92 2016
2
1
(4) A hunter may not possess more than ten (10) cartridges for
2
the rifle while hunting deer under this section.
3
(5) The rifle must meet any other requirements established by
4
the department.
5
(c) The use of a full metal jacketed bullet to hunt deer is
6
unlawful.
7
(d) The department shall report on the impact of the use of rifles
8
to hunt deer under this section to the governor and, in an electronic
9
format under IC 5-14-6, the general assembly before February 15,
10
2020.
11
(e) This section expires June 30, 2020.

That makes no sense at all.... :rolleyes: Once again, Indiana to be a laughing stock of deer regulations.

AR10 it is then...with a low cap mag of course.

.300 huh? Is that Win mag, Weatherby or H&H, or maybe a .300 Savage? Seems like lots of states can allow a baseline cartridge and go up from there without enumeration of individually acceptable cartridges. This is reminiscent of California's approved gun list and it's unintentionally vague, I'm sure. Kentucky has verbiage of any centerfire cartridge......stop it at 243, whatever. Well at least 10 mm handguns made the approval list, reckon a higher up has one just itching to go all Razor Dobbs with it? I mean who was pushing for that one......

Maybe they meant 300 whisper.....I think there's an underpowered round that goes by that. Or maybe a 300 blackout? Some of you younger guys help us decipher this mess. What is a legal 300?

That maybe true......But the IDNR was not involved!!

Got a example of what your saying?

Anything hunting related in the IC was done by the Legislature. What the DNR/NRC does is IAC.

The latest example of legislative involvement in a DNR issue would be sound suppressors.

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/incode/14/22

They just release the Senate roll call:
34 Yea
12 Nay

Technically there's only two named cartridges listed, the .30-30 and the 30-06. The rest are calibers.I would think anyone could challenge this law with this interpretation and win...IMO

I never said they were.... :rolleyes:

That's fine.....I just wanted to get that info out before the "ANTI" IDNR group started there campaign.... :rolleyes:


Stay tuned they will show up soon...

Oo that's true, it may just be a vague .308 caliber. Maybe I'd just need a 300 blackout upper. Right on.

Matt - no need for low capacity. Just carry 10 rounds in the gun or in your pocket.

According to a conversation today with an unnamed “inside” source, House Bill 1231 (as passed by both the House and Senate this week) will likely undergo at least one technical correction per proper Indiana General Assembly rules. That technical correction will “nail down” the meaning of the 5 cartridges noted in the bill (.243, .30-30, .300, .30-06, and .308). It is my understanding that the correction will be:

.243 Winchester
.30-30 Winchester
.300 Winchester Magnum
.30-06 Springfield
.308 Winchester

This technical correction would make the resulting bill (and law, if the Governor signs it) much more easily understood by all concerned, whether they like the bill or not. I do not know if there are any more technical corrections being considered.

The way I read it is you can carry no more than ten rounds or you will be in violation. No matter if it is in the gun, pocket or truck. Is this right??

Not sure they can control what you have in the TRUCK....your pocket and gun is a different story!

You cant hunt from in the Truck......

This is no different than on some State areas that control the number of shell's you can carry for waterfowl, or areas that are non-toxic shot only, even for dove and small game... only this is being done on private.....Heck, if you need more than 10 rounds to kill deer, you best get your azz out of the woods...

If I'm not mistaken, the 3 shot limit is a federal regulation that all states have to abide by because the waterfowl stamp is issued through the federal government and not through the states...

Could be, but what you talk about is the plug in the gun. I always leave my plug in, for rabbit, Pheasant, squirrel, etc. Even when I put the slug barrel on...If I cant drop it with 3 shots, it wins. I only carry 6 slugs when deer hunting....never needed more than 2. ... some state areas dont allow more than 10 shells with each hunter in the waterfowl blind ... dont think that is a fed reg... could be.... I know at Kankakee F&W area non-toxic loads are required for all shotguns and game, even Turkey or coyotes.... I use Heavy Shot non-Toxic Turkey loads if I hunt the place for Turkey ...

Yes. Might be time to take up golf if someone needs more than 10 rounds with them while deer hunting.

unless your hunting a county with a 8 bonus antlerless quota....just saying

There no way you need 10 rounds for 1 Deer though.

HEA 1231 is on the governor's desk. Deadline for him to act on it (sign or veto) is 3/24. If he signs or does nothing, it becomes law.

Brew, I ran a check station for some years... There were some deer that came in that looked like they were hit with 10 rounds, all type of shot up !!

I got an idea. Let's make it one round. You get one shot at one deer per season regardless of equipment. You miss, the deer wins.

That is usually all I need is just one ....

some guys might need to spend more time at the range and less time watching outdoor channel.

I would be good with one.

If a guy takes 5 shots a one deer then most likely rounds 3-5 are hail marys. Some guys need more rounds to make up for a poor shot selection or lack of range time. h.h.

Just go to Walmart the night before gun season opens... :rolleyes:

Ive seen the dopes in my days...had one guy come in to the store, bought a slug gun wanted a scope mounted and bore sighted, bought slugs, all the night before opening day, said he was hunting in the morning with a buddy, I asked him when is he sighting it in? .. He said some time late am, after the morning hunt, I said it is only bore sighted which will only get you on paper, he well if I can hit paper, its good enough for now he said....cant fix stupid !!

Should have put it way OFF paper for him

Those guys got the mysterious delay from me if itbwerent too late. They usually werent happy.

The Governor signed hb1231 today.

.243 and larger right?
Was catching wind on FB that the "specific" calibers were dropped?

No, there are 5 "calibers" listed, but will need some technical clarifications.

.243
.30-30
.300
.30-06
.308

It is done ... the Gov signed it today.

http://www.ai.org/gov/2016billwatch.htm

OH BOY! Bring on the crazies! Might get me a bullet proof vest?

Don't forget the tin-foil hat :p

So all the calibers legal before are still legal? What is .300? Is that 300 blackout?

Yes, all calibers legal before will still be legal. As for which .300 it is, to be honest, the bill's author is probably the only one who knows the answer to that question at this point. The legislature will meet one day soon to clarify exactly which cartridges are now legal, and clean up the bill. I guess stuff like this happens all the time if they actually schedule a day annually to fix bills.

Kind of scarey, really!

They should have allowed it on state and federal ground as well since they passed it. With todays muzzleloaders its like having a HPR anyway. My buddy has one that uses rifle powder. If your going to pass a law like this anyway, you might as well make it for everyone. As far as how many rounds you have in a mag, doesn't matter either cause with todays guns, it only takes a sec to change a mag. Guys will carry several mags on them anyway. DNR will have there hands full cause you know as well as I do, people that own private property next to state or federal land will cross the property line with there rifles.

I just love how people read this law and put it into words that are not written? I'm on a couple other sites on the FB and if the rifle season will be anything like some of the dumb questions on there, I may sit this year out! This whole thing is starting to get really scary! :rolleyes: Some people need to not produce offspring.

I will only add that during the Senate hearing that Senator Steele pointed out that he owned a .300 Win Mag he would like to use.

Jack

Do you think he's using enough gun?? :rolleyes:

I'm with ya there, brother.

Only the ballistics of a few ML's may be like those of a few rifles, but it is still a single shot...a ML, dosnt have the multi shot rapid fire capabilities like some of these rifle calibers will have .....

He hunts other places besides Indiana. We had a discussion on the .358 Hoosier which is what he uses back home.

Jack

So...that justifies....nevermind... :rolleyes:

Here is the bottom line on this........... The legislature has now written a statute(law) it can only be changed by the legislature(during session). We now have taken IDNR out of the mix and ANY emergency that should arise(think EHD) they CAN NOT effect a "rifle season".

I have worked on legislative issues as well as IDNR administrative rules for almost 30 years. I have always tried to keep IDNR in charge of hunting rules, Pandora's box is now open and we will see many more requests taken up by the legislature. Sad times for Indiana.

Three quick points before the flaming begins.....

1. I was openly PRO center fire rifles for everyone and everywhere when it was proposed as administrative rule.

2. This has absolutely NOTHING to do with a second amendment right, this is a few people who didn't like the rule process result and "took care of themselves".

3. Tjis is our government today, they schedule meetings during the work week when no one with a 40 hour week can attend, emails are useless and we have a Republican dictatorship presently in Indiana. I vote Republican and I am sick of what is happening in this state and on a national level today.

Now I can be flamed...........LOL.

Just wait, the pro baiting jackwagons will be next with some asinine idea ... politics wise, I am a conservative, forced to vote republican.... Ive never voted for a dam democrat, and I never will... If there is someone who dosnt have my values, I just wont vote for them .... CRUZ 2016 !!

Sure wish ol boy would have wanted a 7 mag to hunt with. Dang the luck.

Why vote for somebody that you are just going to complain about then?

Where I live, I will NOT vote for a Republican and I don't care if you were my best friend either and I will tell you that...

I get shafted on three ends... My State Rep. is Sean Eberhart (yeah the same jackbutt who is control of the Natural Resource Committee at the Statehouse) I DON'T vote for him either because of his votes on that committee...

My Fed Rep. Luke Messer and he is a weasel IMO... I think the guy is shady as all get out... So I don't have any decent Republicans to vote for... So I vote for the person and not the party because that is why this state and country is in the shape it is in...

Our idiot Governor is absolutely the worst one I have ever seen... I made the mistake of voting for him once... Luckily for me, it is a mistake I will NOT make again...


And Ted Cruz is the worst of them all... First off, the guy is a freaking CANADIAN and shouldn't even be running in the first place and secondly, he is nothing more than an absolute NUT case just like most liberals are...

so you have no convictions and sway in the wind...OK then ...

Thanks for your opion and insight....

John Gregg is looking better and better...

No flame here...I happen to agree with much of what you've written.

Oh I have convictions, they just differ from yours... I just believe that no one has the right to interfere in someone else's life or business...

I agree... Just too bad that first time he spent his time telling everyone how bad Pence was instead of telling everyone what he was going to do for Indiana...

They're all a bunch of crooks.

Remember that next time we go to the legislature...

Yup!!

If you hunt your land the way you want and is with in the law why do you care what others do ?
My point is the more new guns in the hunt the cheaper my gun is so I can have more guns .

I could care less about legal means used to harvest a free ranging deer. What toasts my butt is the high fence issue with the diseases that they will bring to our wild herd, and the underhanded way that this was accomplished.

http://www.in.gov/activecalendar_dn...ation_id=18905&type=&syndicate=syndicate

Here we go.....

Wow, quite different than what most of us were thinking...

Event Description:
The Department of Natural Resources has received numerous questions regarding recent legislation that legalizes certain rifles for deer hunting beginning later this year. Most questions have to do with calibers and cartridges allowed under the new law.

House Enrolled Act 1231 that was passed earlier this year by the Indiana General Assembly allows some additional rifle cartridges to be used only on private land during the firearms season.

The new legal cartridges include, but are not limited to, the .243 Winchester, .30-30 Winchester, .300 AAC Blackout, and .30-06 Springfield. Additional requirements are:

• The rifle must have a barrel length of at least 16 inches
• The rifle cartridges must have a cartridge case length of least 1.16 inches
• The rifle cartridge must fire a bullet with a diameter that is
o .243 inches (or 6 mm); or
o .308 inches (or 7.62 mm)
• No cartridges with a bullet diameter between .243 and .308 are legal (such as the .270 Winchester)
• A hunter may not possess more than 10 such cartridges while in the field

Rifles with pistol cartridges that have been allowed in previous years may still be used to hunt deer on both private and public land.

Additional cartridges that are legal under HEA 1231 include, but are not limited to, the following:

• 6mm-06
• 6mm BR Remington
• 6mm PPC
• 6mm Remington
• .240 Weatherby
• .243 Winchester
• .243 Winchester Super Short Magnum
• .30 Carbine
• .30 Herrett
• .30 Remington AR
• .30-06 Springfield
• .30-30 Winchester
• .30-40 Krag
• .300 AAC Blackout (.300 Whisper)
• .300 H&H Magnum
• .300 Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum
• .300 Savage
• .300 Weatherby Magnum
• .300 Winchester Magnum
• .300 Winchester Short Magnum
• .300 Remington Ultra Magnum
• .308 Marlin
• .308 Winchester
• 7.62x39mm
• 7.62x54mmR

There are other cartridges that meet the law’s specifications, and there are others that do not. A partial list of cartridges that are not allowed under HEA 1231 includes the .270 Winchester, .38-55 Winchester, .444 Marlin, and .45-70 Government.

HEA 1231 is scheduled to expire after the 2020 deer season, at which time the DNR will submit an impact report to the Governor and the General Assembly.

Did not see all that coming

Still got no dog in that fight. A real mixed bag right there......

Sks will now be legal.....

Can't wait to see the wildcats that form from this.

This pretty sums up their interpretation. If it falls within these guidelines, it's legal.


• The rifle must have a barrel length of at least 16 inches
• The rifle cartridges must have a cartridge case length of least 1.16 inches
• The rifle cartridge must fire a bullet with a diameter that is
o .243 inches (or 6 mm); or
o .308 inches (or 7.62 mm)
• No cartridges with a bullet diameter between .243 and .308 are legal (such as the .270 Winchester)
• A hunter may not possess more than 10 such cartridges while in the field

270 no AK and SKS yes makes sense to me

Event Description:
The Department of Natural Resources has received numerous questions regarding recent legislation that legalizes certain rifles for deer hunting beginning later this year. Most questions have to do with calibers and cartridges allowed under the new law.

House Enrolled Act 1231 that was passed earlier this year by the Indiana General Assembly allows some additional rifle cartridges to be used only on private land during the firearms season.

The new legal cartridges include, but are not limited to, the .243 Winchester, .30-30 Winchester, .300 AAC Blackout, and .30-06 Springfield. Additional requirements are:

• The rifle must have a barrel length of at least 16 inches
• The rifle cartridges must have a cartridge case length of least 1.16 inches
• The rifle cartridge must fire a bullet with a diameter that is
o .243 inches (or 6 mm); or
o .308 inches (or 7.62 mm)
• No cartridges with a bullet diameter between .243 and .308 are legal (such as the .270 Winchester)
• A hunter may not possess more than 10 such cartridges while in the field

Rifles with pistol cartridges that have been allowed in previous years may still be used to hunt deer on both private and public land.

Additional cartridges that are legal under HEA 1231 include, but are not limited to, the following:

• 6mm-06
• 6mm BR Remington
• 6mm PPC
• 6mm Remington
• .240 Weatherby
• .243 Winchester
• .243 Winchester Super Short Magnum
• .30 Carbine
• .30 Herrett
• .30 Remington AR
• .30-06 Springfield
• .30-30 Winchester
• .30-40 Krag
• .300 AAC Blackout (.300 Whisper)
• .300 H&H Magnum
• .300 Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum
• .300 Savage
• .300 Weatherby Magnum
• .300 Winchester Magnum
• .300 Winchester Short Magnum
• .300 Remington Ultra Magnum
• .308 Marlin
• .308 Winchester
• 7.62x39mm
• 7.62x54mmR

There are other cartridges that meet the law’s specifications, and there are others that do not. A partial list of cartridges that are not allowed under HEA 1231 includes the .270 Winchester, .38-55 Winchester, .444 Marlin, and .45-70 Government.

HEA 1231 is scheduled to expire after the 2020 deer season, at which time the DNR will submit an impact report to the Governor and the General Assembly.
Contact Information:
Name: Phil Bloom
Phone: (317) 232-4003
Email: PBloom@dnr.IN.gov

As stated you "cant fix stupid" when it come to this... just what the heck is the reasoning that the "mid" calibers were left out... for those that use firearms, some of the best deer calibers are in the middle.... AK's and Sks" come on now and a .30 Carbine ?...heck, even our military hated those in WWII as being under powered, even for humans, and humans are relatively easy to kill....

The DNR is just following the letter of the law, as it is written. The law's wording is what is driving the exclusion of those in-between calibers.

Like I said...."Ya cant fix stupid" ..........

Deer are easy to kill. Only need a rock

Or a 30 carbine......or a 300 Remington Ultra Mag. Is a rock a legal weapon? Subject to weight and/or diameter rules of course.

Rocks are illegal....go get ya a .243

Are not

Dont know of anyone ever using a rock, illegal as it is ....even a 30/30 is considered at the low end of ballistics when it comes to rifles for deer, no matter how many it has killed in its history...a .35 rem is much better, but cant be used....cant fix stupid..... no matter what... I'll STILL kill my deer with my archery gear ....

Got me there! I bet it's not sighted in for 300 yards though...

That's a good picture Dave!