is pa the only state where you can't go hunting with a semi auto rifle?

[cybrus]

Good Lord - not again...

As I posted in a previous thread:

I definitely could save up for a "legal" rifle. I could definitely get a second job. Why should I have to do that?

No one has yet to give a valid reason for the semi ban and, as I said before, if they can, I'll still be upset about it, but at least I'll understand it.

Here are the ones I've heard so far, all from the previous thread on this exact same topic:

* "Because you shouldn't need more than one bullet." Absolutely - I'd only have one bullet in the rifle at a time. My Uncle can shoot his lever-action almost as fast as a semi without losing any accuracy - doesn't mean he does it when he hunts...

* "autoloaders = unsafe hunting practices" Again - unsafe hunting practices are a learning/behavior issue and aren't directly related to semi vs single shot. I don't want unsafe hunters out in the woods with a BB gun - I don't see any difference between a lever and a semi when it only takes one bullet to cause an accident.

* "wanting to keep the proverbial city nut with the SKS out of hunting season" Seriously? I AM a city "nut" with a SKS and I would be at least as safe, maybe even safer, than the average bolt/lever gun hunter.

* "it is not 'Fair Chase' to use a semi auto to hunt deer." Only if the person is "spraying and praying" which, as I stated earlier, can be done almost as easily with a lever action (I'm sure a pump rifle would be just as easy but I've never shot one of those before)

* "it doesn't trample on anyone's rights and it helps me maintain a connection to traditions of the past" - and that same vision should be forced, through government regulation, on everyone else?

* "as farmers we enjoyed the fact that the rifle crowd stayed away. One guy hunted with a 20 gauge single shot, I used a double barrel 20 gauge SxS, and my best friend and my dad had joined the 20th century with 16 gauge pumps. If we didn't divide up at least 15 deer by the end of the season, it was a bad year." - This one is at least honest about it: it's not a safety issue or any other "real" issue, it's simply another way to control the number of hunters or keep some "grand vision of the past/tradition" intact.

* "I think you forgot Herd Management. If that regulation is changed the impact on the herd could be tremendous due to the rise in the number of hunters. More hunters = more killed game = herd impact. It can't be ruled out."

So the two arguments boil down to:

1. Tradition: I like the "traditional" way and I'm to allow the government to force that on everyone just for my own satisfaction.

2. Control the number of hunters: Why wouldn't they just cap the number of licenses that are sold if that's the case? They do it elsewhere to control the amount of hunting of other species such as elk. That would be eaiser as well as more exact. (Note - I'm definitely NOT supporting a cap, just noting that it would be a more honest way of controlling the number of hunters)

If anyone has some other argument, I'd love to hear it. I realize that I'm not going to change the minds of 99% of the antis in this thread, but maybe, just maybe..."yeah, and maybe I'm a Chinese jet pilot"

[Buckmark.35]

No one has yet to give a valid reason for the semi ban and, as I said before, if they can, I'll still be upset about it, but at least I'll understand it.

What valid reasons are there not to have it? I've seen many arguing against the regulation, but few arguing for semi-automatics. What arguments are there for allowing semis?

[Kaos]

I think he gave a few in his post. It's a people problem, not a gun problem.

This is part of the division that they've successfully (this thread is evidence) placed between gun owners. Most people shooting with semis in the "wild fashion" that most here seem to think would miss over and over again.

Conservation? Other than maybe 30 rounds of "lead" in trees and earth (lead is on the periodic chart...right?) the only thing they're not conserving is ammo. In comparison though..semi shotguns are allowed and can "spray" much more lead than a rifle could.

Wildlife being harmed...it's hunting...that's the point. Now as long as they're following game laws...I dont see the big deal. a 308 will down a deer from a bolt as much as it would from a FAL.

So by your logic if an AWB comes in then you shouldnt be mad one bit, because "oh well, that wasnt important to me when I could buy them"

[cybrus]

What valid reasons are there not to have it? I've seen many arguing against the regulation, but few arguing for semi-automatics. What arguments are there for allowing semis?

Regulations should have a logical reason that justifies them - not the other way around...if there is no logical reason, then that is justification enough to remove the regulation.

As I said, if someone can show me a logical reason for the ban, then I'll shut up and go sulk. But "tradition" is a horrible reason for more government regulation, and "hunter/herd management" is not a good reason as there are other ways to do that which would be much easier to implement and not as unfair.

[armabill]

For as long as I can remember, a cross bow was not allowed for hunting. Now, it is allowed.

This will be the same with semi-auto rifles but it will take awhile, just like the cross bow.

Also, what about semi-auto handguns? Same type of action but only in a smaller package.

[Buckmark.35]

Regulations should have a logical reason that justifies them - not the other way around...if there is no logical reason, then that is justification enough to remove the regulation.

Well if you can't come up with a logical reason to remove the regulation, then there's no reason to remove it.

Hunting is a privilege. Therefore the PGC makes the rules. They put in a regulation that forbids semi-automatic rifles. The burden of 'proof' that the regulation is illogical rests on those who wish to remove it.

Beacause it's illogical in your opinion isn't reason enough to remove the regulation.

[Buckmark.35]

For as long as I can remember, a cross bow was not allowed for hunting. Now, it is allowed.

This will be the same with semi-auto rifles but it will take awhile, just like the cross bow.

Also, what about semi-auto handguns? Same type of action but only in a smaller package.

You're probably right. In which case I'll bitch and moan.. and then get over it. Until then I'll be opposed.

If you want to see angry, ask an avid archer what he thinks of crossbows. haha.

[shermdo]

Cause alot fo people have ar15s but can't go hunting with them. I had an idea for a bolt that you can just replace to make it not cycle and able to use for hunting.

I know that you did NOT specifically state that the AR15 was in .223/5.56 and you did NOT specifically state deer hunting in your question but I wanted to mention that there are several states that prohibit any large game (deer, elk, bear, hog, etc.) hunting with a .22 caliber round. That would eliminate .223/5.56 regardless of rifle type.

Of course the the AR15 chambered for any of it's larger caliber offerings would make a nice hunting rifle.

[JoeWilliams]

Reason I ask is that in NJ a guy was charged with magazine over 15 rounds but he got out of it because his weapon was not semi auto as the ban applied to - it was full auto. He must be part of the very, very small club of FA owners in NJ.

I was thinking it could be possible that the hunting regs in PA similarly discussed semi auto but did not consider full auto.

IIRC, PA's hunting regs do not address "semi-auto" or "full-auto." They specify "manually operated," which covers both bases.

[JoeWilliams]

I think in PA you can hunt with a semi if your handicapped. Other then that why would you want to. If you can't drop them with a bolt action what makes you think you can drop them with a semi.

Beside you hit it with a semi you may ruin it enough that it's uneatable. Might just as well use a frag grenadine

I'm confused. Why would a .308 from a semi-auto rifle ruin more meat than a .308 from a bolt action rifle?