No1_49er wrote:Bureaucratic f^kwits.
The Scandinavian folk must wonder at our humane dispatch requirements.
Odd that they still use the venerable 6.5 Swede to shoot moose. Somewhat bigger than any game you'll find in Vic.
And what's this about "no bead sights" on a smooth-bore?
Where do they find the cretins who write this s**t to impose on us?
Blr243 wrote:It would be nice to see legislation insisting on a level of muzzle energy , and outlawing Fmj
Blr243 wrote:Fmj to me is military ammo designed to wound soldiers effectively taking out three men because it takes two of his mates to carry him out of there. ...bullets punching straight thru deliver most of their energy to the big ironbark tree standing behind the deer instead of the deer
Blr243 wrote:Fmj to me is military ammo designed to wound soldiers effectively taking out three men because it takes two of his mates to carry him out of there. ...bullets punching straight thru deliver most of their energy to the big ironbark tree standing behind the deer instead of the deer
Blr243 wrote:Fmj to me is military ammo designed to wound soldiers effectively taking out three men because it takes two of his mates to carry him out of there. ...bullets punching straight thru deliver most of their energy to the big ironbark tree standing behind the deer instead of the deer
No1_49er wrote:Bureaucratic f^kwits.
The Scandinavian folk must wonder at our humane dispatch requirements.
Odd that they still use the venerable 6.5 Swede to shoot moose. Somewhat bigger than any game you'll find in Vic.
And what's this about "no bead sights" on a smooth-bore?
Where do they find the cretins who write this s**t to impose on us?
No1_49er wrote:Bureaucratic f^kwits.
The Scandinavian folk must wonder at our humane dispatch requirements.
Odd that they still use the venerable 6.5 Swede to shoot moose. Somewhat bigger than any game you'll find in Vic.
And what's this about "no bead sights" on a smooth-bore?
Where do they find the cretins who write this s**t to impose on us?
Ziege wrote:If I see another deer when I am down south of here, I am going to shoot it with my 22lr just to spite victoria lol.
mchughcb wrote:I wrote it with 2 other guys. So guess I'm a cretin according to you.
I could try and explain why its actually more relaxed than it was before but it won't make sny difference.
What contribution did you have to the game regulations?
bladeracer wrote:No1_49er wrote:Bureaucratic f^kwits.
The Scandinavian folk must wonder at our humane dispatch requirements.
Odd that they still use the venerable 6.5 Swede to shoot moose. Somewhat bigger than any game you'll find in Vic.
And what's this about "no bead sights" on a smooth-bore?
Where do they find the cretins who write this s**t to impose on us?
Yes, that's why I find it incredible that it has been allowed to stand for so long that even NSW has now adopted it as their recommendation.
Do we assume that rifled shotguns are legal despite being entirely ignored?
bladeracer wrote:mchughcb wrote:I wrote it with 2 other guys. So guess I'm a cretin according to you.
I could try and explain why its actually more relaxed than it was before but it won't make sny difference.
What contribution did you have to the game regulations?
Three of you got together and came up with this mess?
Why? Were you asked to by an organisation?
I would not say it's relaxed as much as abstract and pointless. It restricts us from using some very capable cartridges (22/250, .224 Weatherby Mag, .223WSSM, etc, and .243 Weatherby Mag, .257 Roberts, .25-06, and a plethora of very potent 6.5mm cartridges), while allowing us to use some even weaker cartridges (25-20, .38 Special, 9mm Para, etc).
Didn't the previous requirement at least mention case length? Was it law back then or just recommendation?
I'd appreciate your responses to the points I made originally, if you don't mind.
As an original author you may have some additional credibility in having this effort fixed.
mchughcb wrote:bladeracer wrote:No1_49er wrote:Bureaucratic f^kwits.
The Scandinavian folk must wonder at our humane dispatch requirements.
Odd that they still use the venerable 6.5 Swede to shoot moose. Somewhat bigger than any game you'll find in Vic.
And what's this about "no bead sights" on a smooth-bore?
Where do they find the cretins who write this s**t to impose on us?
Yes, that's why I find it incredible that it has been allowed to stand for so long that even NSW has now adopted it as their recommendation.
Do we assume that rifled shotguns are legal despite being entirely ignored?
How many years hunting deer before 2002 and 2012 did you do which were the 10 year sunsets on the game regulations?
mchughcb wrote:The 2012 RIS was put out around 2010 for public comment. Anybody could submit anything. There was about 450 submissions from individuals and hunting organizations and non hunting organizations such as the Coalition against duck shooting. I read every single one of them, I attended several meetings with combined organizations such as the ADA, FGA, VHH, SSAA, Muzzle loaders etc. to discuss things such as exclusion zones for duck hunters with protestors so they could be prosecuted.
In private capacity I also arranged appoints to see Simon Toop and Zach Powell to given a white paper on why certain things should be included such as additional dog categories such as companion dogs including JRT.
What did you actually do before I have to defend any hunting regulation that you have an issue about, that was gazetted by the government?
animalpest wrote:Me thinks you need sensible minimums for shooting animals. This covers the newbies with little or no experience.
Sure, you can kill deer with head (or neck) shots with .222 etc, but the below average shooter (ie 50% of hunters) may not be that good.
I agree that minimum energy levels should be included and while 80gr bullets in a .223 are superior to 55gr you need to write it for the mugs.
bladeracer wrote:
None, why? Is there some relevance to myself that explains why this regulation has been allowed to remain so long?
bladeracer wrote:No argument from me there, but these regs only offer minimum requirements of bullet diameter and weight, which have very little to do with the terminal effect on the animal. Even doubling both requirements (say a .486" diameter of 160gn) does not necessarily make an effective shot if fired at low velocity. A quick Google seems to say that .45ACP is marginal even on small deer in the US.animalpest wrote:Me thinks you need sensible minimums for shooting animals. This covers the newbies with little or no experience.
Sure, you can kill deer with head (or neck) shots with .222 etc, but the below average shooter (ie 50% of hunters) may not be that good.
I agree that minimum energy levels should be included and while 80gr bullets in a .223 are superior to 55gr you need to write it for the mugs.
mchughcb wrote:Seriously dude, rather than whinging anonymously on a forum, pick up the phone, call Simon Toop and ask him this. See how far you actually get with a government bureaucrat and report back here what answer you got and what impact you will have on the 2022 Game Regulations.
mchughcb wrote:bladeracer wrote:
None, why? Is there some relevance to myself that explains why this regulation has been allowed to remain so long?
I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt so rather than complain about what somebody else did when you did nothing, in less than 2 years the current regulations are up for renewal. Make sure you have your list of things that you'd like changed. Take the time to work yourself up to the executive level in any hunting organization where you have some influence, spend countless hours listening to the people who drafted the previous 20 years, take unpaid leave off work and arrange to see the policy makers, senior bureaucrats and politicians about what you would like changed. Be prepared for a barrage of criticism from anti hunters as your name goes public and hunters so motivated signing their name takes a lot of effort.
And go for it. You have just under 2 years, plenty of time.
mchughcb wrote:Yeah I do. I have his mobile and I am not giving to an internet nobody. You call his department tomorrow and they will take your call.