Shooters Forum banner

Even zanier rifle regs for Indiana

8K views 68 replies 23 participants last post by  cugeno 
#1 · (Edited)
For those of you who have followed the craziness of PCR (pistol-chambered rifle) regulations in Indiana, first with 1.625" case length and then 1.800" case length limitations, I bring you the latest absurdities from our legislature!

It is expected that our governor will sign into law a new "season", to run concurrently with the existing firearms season(s), wherein you will be allowed to use the following rifle cartridges for hunting deer:

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

No other rifle cartridges, aside from those legal under the 1.800" 35-caliber PCR regs, will be legal.

You can NOT make this kind of crap up, folks. :D

(Stay tuned, as I'm fairly certain this is not the last of the wackiness we'll see, maybe even this year!)
 
#8 ·
Yeah, I can't imagine Remington likes these regulations very much! :)

What? No .300 Nevada Desert Magnum? No .358 Sierra Stomper? I'm crushed. My life is henceforth without merit or value. Oh, woe is me...
The current wording actually just says "300", not 300 Win Mag, so your NDM is in...until they fix it.

Well, I have four of the five, having sold my 300 WinMag. But, I think I'll stay where I'm at.

What about Ackley Improved?....(grin)

I suspect that listing is probably just a "foot in the door".
I have the same four you do, Vic, having sold a 300 Win Mag just a few years ago. This is definitely just a foot in the door, and we'll take it.

I really dont know what to make of that, Jason. It seems to ignore the common sense requirements of minimum bullet diameter, or ft lbs.

So what are you gonna hunt with?
This is what happens when politicians who don't hunt make up rules...common sense is not part of the process. I'll hunt with a 30/30 or 308, while my daughter hunts with a 243 and my wife will use her 30-'06.

That is crazier than the UK !!!!!!!!!!!! Here we just have a limit of 358 .... 375 and above, not being accepted for some crazy reason. Everything in between is perfectly OK.
Up until this "improvement" in regulations, the smallest bullet diameter we could use was .358", but the case could not be longer than 1.800". So, these regs are actually better, as absurd as they are. :)
 
#3 ·
What? What???

What? No .300 Nevada Desert Magnum? No .358 Sierra Stomper? I'm crushed. My life is henceforth without merit or value. Oh, woe is me...
 
  • Like
Reactions: kdub
#9 ·
Up until this "improvement" in regulations, the smallest bullet diameter we could use was .358", but the case could not be longer than 1.800". So, these regs are actually better, as absurd as they are.
The cartridges listed offer a great improvement in effective range. I think that once next year's season goes by without mass casualties 14.7 miles from where a shot was taken, more cartridges will make the list. Kinda like *reverse* gun control.

As long as they don't allow tight twists and VLD bullets...(grin)

I don't know about Indiana, but in Virginia it seems the most accidental shootings take place in Turkey season.....with shotguns.
 
#10 ·
Hah! Did not read into it deep enough.... still darn wacky to say the least. 243 ...308 ...why not 257 and all diameter bullets up to 30 calibre at least. As you say when your dealing with 'politicians' particularly those who do not shoot/hunt your going to get these problems.
 
#12 ·
It looks like 4 of the most popular "deer" cartridges plus the most popular "magnum" today to me. Kind of a buffet of the best when it comes specifically to deer hunting.

I've got to figure that the list came from some type of survey of ammo sales or hunter preferences.I wonder how the .270 feels about being left out. :rolleyes:
 
#13 ·
300 Win Mag, but not 300 WSM

30-'06, but not 270 Win

30-30, but not (full-length) 35 Remington

308 Winchester, but not 300 Savage

243, but not 6mm Remington, 260 Remington, 7-08, etc, etc.

I'm trying not to complain because this really is better than it was before, as hard as that is to fathom. :)
 
#14 ·
They simply took the more popular deer cartridges as a "test bed".
 
#17 ·
The laws are almost as stupid here in Colorado, albeit more complex.
Check out the Wyoming hunting regs sometime, you buy a license to kill an animal, you start out with the primitive weapons in the early seasons and end with the rifle season or until your successful, one license.
 
#18 ·
All of the above is why I don't hunt. That, and I'm in no shape to drag the carcass of an animal out of the woods...
 
#30 · (Edited)
When I hunted deer in Indiana back in 2010 I was lucky enough to get a very nice, mature Indiana buck with the .44 Carbine I used. The fella I was hunting with was hunting with a handgun and his choice of cartridge was the .350 Rem Mag; yes that .350 Rem Mag.
 
  • Like
Reactions: broom_jm
#31 ·
I live in central Indiana and just can't see the point in high powered rifles in this area. Been using a slug gun and my Dad uses a 44 mag carbine with great results.
I am a bit worried about folks touching off a high powered rifle and not realizing the distance it will travel if the target is missed.
 
#32 · (Edited)
This is a common misconception for folks who grew up in shotgun only zones. The simple truth of the matter is that guns are only as safe as the person shooting them, irrespective of the conditions.

Also, if you ricochet a shotgun slug off a piece of sheet steel and do the same with a rifle bullet, the slug will carry a lot farther. It's greater mass allows it to be deflected whereas the rifle bullet loses gyroscopic stability and falls to earth sooner. That doesn't seem to make sense, on the surface, but studies conducted in PA quite a few years ago proved it's true.

While some can't see the point in high-powered rifles for some areas, the truth behind why Indiana started out using slug guns and muzzle-loaders had nothing to do with safety. They were originally allowed to keep the harvest down by limiting effective range. Since there are now plenty of deer in Indiana, and safety is not a legitimate concern, there is no reason to continue restricting their use.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top