Discussion in 'Legislative Forum' started by Fishbonker, Mar 25, 2019.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Another take home observation of some people’s mindset:
If the second amendment allows me to purchase a firearm, the state of Iowa should be compelled to offer a hunting season for it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Emails sent again. Pointing out deer management problems, safety issues as this would allow guns used for elephants, admitted long term agenda of the writer of the legislation (rifles in the rut) and this is not a 2nd amendment issue. I am a long time member of the NRA, but like any organization I belong to, I don't fall in line with their every opinion. Sometimes they are just wrong.
And, since we are getting attention, let's keep it clean and reasonably professional. It is too easy for this group to get labeled incorrectly and hurt our cause. Thanks.
Somebody PM me a respectable and responsible mock draft... I barely held C averages in college and and that was with a lot of help. I was recently told "it's a good thing you dont need commas and semi colons to kill deer"
I’ve received a email from one on this list that will vote no but I’ve heard that before!
I’m not going to say which one it was cause I’m sure the Moles are watching this thread!
Does anyone know how exactly the NRA became involved in this matter? Someone had to have contacted them and convinced them to support this I assume?
I wonder if it would make a difference if some of the many NRA members on this sight could attempt pointing out to the NRA that this is not a second amendment issue. I do not think it's in there best interest to start straying into legislation that doesn't pertain to the 2nd amendment. That's a good way to alienate some of there supporters.
I'm not sure the NRA is directly linked to writing the bill (of course they can't write bills, someone else has to) but the person who wrote it is a huge gun/2nd amendment/NRA supporter. Which is fine, but don't let that trump conservation and exploit a resource. Use common sense. Sure they've pin pointed an "issue", hunter numbers are dropping, not just in IA but the entire nation. Now lets find some real reasons and some real fixes... and a lack of a weapon choices is not the answer and rifles are not the solution!
I don't know about you guys but in our area, hunter numbers seem to have jumped up! I'm not saying they actually have but the concentration of them sure has. Hunters realize quality deer ground is harder and harder to come by. The amount of habitat loss in the last 10 years is crazy. It's literally removing opportunities from hunters in minutes and reversing years of mother natures creation making the hunting habitat. Who cares what weapon you allow when there isn't any place to hunt that's worth a darn. The hunters that still remain today are being bottle necked into less and less area each year. Some hunters have gotten fed up with the increase in concentration of hunters, they've lost their old hunting grounds to leases, outfitters, or bulldozers. The numbers will continue to decline as long as access/habitat declines.
Notice that all these hunting proposals always seem to affect deer hunting. Never a change to turkey or small game hunting... the NRA is pushing rifle sales, deer would be the most common species in IA to hunt with a rifle. If they truly cared about hunter numbers vs rifle/gun sales they'd be targeting many other proposals. Mentor programs, youth turkey hunts, conservation efforts, etc.
What is really pissing off these extreme pro-gun republicans is that they are getting push back from other republicans who are more conservation minded. Also the Democrats are eating this up from what I've gathered in some of my responses from Senators. They're loving the support from the opposite party. People are to the point they get one agenda on their mind and will stop at nothing to get it, conservation is almost never the top of anyone's priority regardless of parties. We are the minority when it comes to caring about conservation over other items. Keep sending those emails!
Loesshills, Iowabowhunter, and others I sure hope you guys are able to attend the meetings when it's time. I appreciate your thoughts and input. As Ishi said earlier I'm sure many would help chip in for gas if needed, I know I would.
I did make it a point in my last letter to my state Senator, he has a R behind his name, that I find the continued attacks by some Republicans against the DNR, wildlife, and sound conservation practices troubling. I'm still waiting to hear back.
I have yet to hear a reply from anyone I've contacted. I basically started off my email. "I'm pro 2nd Amendment and am happy for the 2A progress in Iowa the last couple of years, but this is not a 2A issue"
I’ve been sending them for several years and very seldom do get a reply back!
The main thing is that you stood up for what’s right and sent them.
As of 1730 there has not been a date set for a subcommittee meeting.
About who writes the laws, several years a go I was all hot to get a law passed about trespassing for sheds and making it more than trespassing, tying it to theft. My legislator had several drafts and he asked me for input on each draft. So all the gun groups need to do is find a willing legislator, they will supply him with the language, he gives it to the LSA who does the actual writing of the bill, the bill is drafted, sent to the legislator, the legislator approves it after he reviews it with who ever is feeding them the information and it gets a file number and is introduced.
The theft of sheds bill didn't even get a subcommittee assigned. He was a freshman legislator and had zero pull but I was grateful that he listened and tried.
My most recent response from Mr. Windschitl... his first sentence floors me. So since my car says it can go 120mph our speed limit signs in Iowa need to be taken down since they are taking away my freedom to drive my car like I want. What a JOKE!!! And I included that in my response back to him.
You are correct that this is not a 2A issue specifically, but it is a freedom issue as a whole. The Natural Resources Commission/DNR will still have the authority to regulate the hunting seasons and set forth parameters to ensure and promote safety. This does not increase the number of deer tags that will be allowed each year so the argument that I have heard from those in opposition to this bill that it will decimate the deer population is inaccurate at best. As I have shared with you in previous emails the bill does not authorize the traditional “high-power” calibers that some people think that it does. Everything in the bill refers back to the ballistic requirements on the first page of the bill which requires the cartridge that is going to be used in a rifle to be the same type that is used in a pistol or revolver.
As for my lack of a hunting background, I did not just propose this bill out of thin air and think it was a good idea. I have been having conversations with outdoorsmen for years on these types of issue and those conversations with people, who have been hunting all of their lives, is where this bill originated. So while I may not have the actual experience with hunting myself, the folks I have been working with to craft this bill do have that hands on knowledge and experience.
My objective has been and always will be to allow Iowans more freedoms. This is in no way about an inanimate firearm or the sale thereof, but about Iowans making these decisions for themselves not the government.
If the case length limit is gone, it opens up some very high-powered rounds.
Will somebody please email Mr. Windschitl the list Fishbonker posted of allowable cartridges that would be able to be used during the Iowa gun season, if the Bill passes...
The majority of the cartidges on the list Fishbonker posted are literally Dangerous game rounds. (you would expect to use one of the rounds on African Gig game) , OR ultra long range target rounds that can and are used to shoot in target matches over 2 miles.
A 375 RUM, a 416 Barrett and a 460 Weatherby Magnum would be allowed during the Iowa gun season, if this bill is passed with the allowance of bottle necked cartridges .375 to .50" caliber and an unlimited length case.
ONE MORE TIME...CASE LENGTH LIMIT OF 1.8"
I believe the case length question has purposely been left unanswered because it is an intentional oversight.
They didn't think us "old bowhunters" would notice and figure that out.
It would legalize lots of very powerful cartridges and thus give them a door to add the rest of the calibers in a new law next year.
I hope I am wrong but I think they are incrementally working towards all high powers legal in iowa within a year and two and then they will go for guns in the rut next.
Even worse than the original .375 minimum... Theyre already pushing smaller bullets before this bill even goes through
I received an email from a guy that spent his day at the capitol speaking to as many Senators as he could on this bill. It sounds like we are making inroads, but we need to keep up the pressure.
Trust me when I say you have all made a difference. A simple email to your Senator with the title "Please vote NO on HF716" and in the body simply put something like "Please vote no on HF716. I'm sure other sportsman and women have contacted you about this bill with more details on why this is not a good bill for Iowa." Then thank them for their time and their service to their district. Then hit send and bask in the glow that you are making a difference.
Hopefully they take the time to read the entire email I sent. It ended up being way longer than I had planned
Separate names with a comma.