While reading the Providence Urinal this morning, I came across a letter to the editor about the deer culling they plan to do on Block Island. The letter's author is a resident of Block Island and indicates that they plan to use suppressed .223s! Not only are suppressors ILLEGAL in the state of Rhode Island, but most states prohibit the use of .223s for deer hunting as inhumane. Anyone heard of any of this?
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
More Rhode Island Stupid….
- Thread starter Swamp_Yankee
- Start date
Did the words "professional" or "hired" or "trained" also come up?
To be fair, using a silenced .223 is a little retarded when it comes to deer harvesting. If you really want quiet, just use a bow or a crossbow. Any person who lives in the real world will be aware of that.
Btw, you also forgot to point out that all centerfire rifles are banned for deer hunting in RI. Baby steps.
Infinite Jester
Navy Veteran
The sound of gunfire could emotionally cripple the residents and cause all out pandemonium. One of the best parts about moving to New Hampshire has been hearing rifle fire when going about my daily business. Saturday mornings during deer season I would awake to far off shots. I find it oddly comforting.
RI hunting laws have nothing to do with humanely harvesting deer. They have to do with people who get shot in the woods with buckshot while hunting because the shooter doesn't remember "know what's behind your target" and ruins it for everyone else.
Also see the Blackstone Valley firing ban - but that's an example of the Town of Lincoln's raging social elite liberal boner.
http://ripr.org/post/warwick-hunter-killed-buckshot
Anyways I think this letter is a plant to make us look like criminally-minded morons before legislation is passed. Separate the gun owning community into "hunters" and "others."
Lets face it Rhode Island Like Mass allows the use of Buckshot which is probably the most unsafe ammunition you can use . Lets See 9 -30cal balls per shot of buckshot vs 1 bullet in regular rifle . While the rifle has more energy it is still only a single projectile . Add buckshot to a semi auto shotgun and the real fun begins 5x9 = 45 - 30cal balls bouncing around vs 5 for the rifle. Which do you think is safer ? As for .223 use on a deer it is awfully small to take deer humanely even for a so called professional. Sounds like RI is as Effed up as Mass . Good luck with the culling.
with the broad heads nowadays if you hit the dear in the chest it is pretty much dead and not going to far either as they inflict massive bleeding. Larger loads cause more hydrostatic shock and is a little more likely to drop the animal in it's tracks.
True i hit a nice buck with the new grim reaper broadhead and he went 50 feet i was very impressed.
Centerfire rifle is a lot easier than a bow.
I'm talking sound levels, not "harvesting power." If you want to be quiet and un-noticed by people, a bow or crossbow is just better.
Like I said though, I bet this letter is a plant. It's intended to make RI gun owners look like a bunch of criminals who don't know our own laws. There's anti-gun and anti-hunting bills being proposed and the letter is from Block Island, which doesn't even have a defined process for concealed carry apps. The chief on BI also loves to talk about gun control.
http://www.providencejournal.com/br...dify-system-for-concealed-weapons-permits.ece
Read this, it's how deer are "managed" on BI:
http://www.new-shoreham.com/displayboards.cfm?id=35
TOM1960
Banned
A suppressed Ruger 77/44 bolt-action, loaded with heavy, subsonic .44 Special or .44 Magnum loads and equipped with a low-power telescopic sight, would be a much more practical solution for such work. RI authorities could grant exemptions to the centerfire rifle rule for their hired hunters.
First and foremost, hired hunters negotiate what weapon they will use, and are not at all confined by Rhode Island laws. That is in their contract. The coyote hunter in Portsmouth a few years ago used a 22-250.
The state will likely demand, or at the very least grant the use of a suppressor for this application, because the less residents see/hear, the less they have to deal with libtards bitching and complaining about the poor deer being shot. Apparently starving and dying over winter is more humane to them.
As far as a bow, good luck culling a large population quickly and efficiently with an effective range of 40-50 yards. A well placed .223 round has plenty of energy to drop a deer quickly and humanely. If it does exit, it won't have much steam left, which is ideal on Block Island.
You don't want someone using a high power in a location like BI. Put a serious round into a deer and it will exit with enough energy to go a looooong way.
As a hunter, if i was hired to do that job, a suppressed small-bore centerfire would be my ideal weapon, all things considered.
The state will likely demand, or at the very least grant the use of a suppressor for this application, because the less residents see/hear, the less they have to deal with libtards bitching and complaining about the poor deer being shot. Apparently starving and dying over winter is more humane to them.
As far as a bow, good luck culling a large population quickly and efficiently with an effective range of 40-50 yards. A well placed .223 round has plenty of energy to drop a deer quickly and humanely. If it does exit, it won't have much steam left, which is ideal on Block Island.
You don't want someone using a high power in a location like BI. Put a serious round into a deer and it will exit with enough energy to go a looooong way.
As a hunter, if i was hired to do that job, a suppressed small-bore centerfire would be my ideal weapon, all things considered.
Last edited:
How can a local municipality decide state law is not in force for their particular purpose? Pre-emption is pre-emption. The Town of New Shoreham (Block island) cannot tell anyone it's OK to possess and use a silencer/suppressor in their town for a Town approved purpose because the state forbids it.
Now the New Shoreham cops don't have to enforce the law but the state cops are obliged to do so.
The reason I care is because it is BS that silencers are illegal in RI. If I can't have one, neither can they. Especially if they plan on mutilating deer with them….
The rifle/caliber restrictions are state law also. You can't use any rifle for deer anywhere in the state.
I have no idea if the state itself provides a form of exemption for hunters that are hired by the town, but all the terms are renegotiated between the hunter and the town. Many hired hunters are allowed to bait animals, hunt out of season, hunt out of normal hours, use illegal weapons, use suppressors where they aren't allowed, use lights where they're illegal, shoot out of their vehicles, etc.
The town's interest is to remove the necessary quantity of animals as quickly, easily, and cheaply as possible. Assuming the state doesn't exempt the illegal activity in some way, no state police officer or environmental officer is going to enforce laws for illegal things a hired gun's contract says they can do.
As for your comment about mutilating deer, i assume someone from a rural area understands the problems that happen when a deer population reaches its saturation point. It's in the best interest of the animals, as well as the residents to keep the population at a healthy level. It's in the town (and state) interest to do it quietly as not to upset the bleeding heart liberals who have no concept of ecology.
I do not think this is correct. I simply do not. A town cannot break state law because they think it is in the public good. The RIDEM cannot decide to change law. It's the fu@king point of a legislature! They make the laws, not law enforcement. And no town can decided to subvert them. No contract is legal if it breaks the law! No town can make an illegal state act legal! If they chose to do so and not one catches or prosecutes, that does not make it legal. A contract does not constitute legality. That's just dumb.
Any exemption would have to be per statute. I'm going to check that first. Rhode Island has very few laws so it will take 5 minutes to find. I do not think it exists.
And then I know some managers in RIDEM, I'm going to chase this down.
Is there an exception for law enforcement? If so, perhaps the town will deputize the hunters.
I understand your point entirely, but there could be more to the legal aspect than i'm aware of.
I will talk to a few people and see what i can find out as far as the contract stuff goes.
I know when police go after problem animals, traditional hunting laws do not apply, so you might be onto something here.
Maybe I'm ballistically challenged, but I don't really see the difference between hitting a deer in the thorax with an arrow, a ball, a slug, 30-06, 5.56, or any similar round.....at least from the deer's perspective. All will cause lung collapse, internal bleeding, and maybe cardiac laceration, yielding the same result. I understand the wide variance in energy delivered, but this seems to me to only impact clean up time. I would argue that the rifle would be more accurate, thus increasing "humaneness" (by ensuring a more lethal wound). Maybe i should not think forensically about this.
Besides, .223/5.56 is apparently humane enough for NATO to use.
5.56x45 and 5.45x39 are designed to be used with FMJ bullets at full auto or burst fire against humans. Burst firing into a deer would reduce the level of edible-ness, in addition to breaking RI's full auto ban.
1) You are the only one talking about full auto.
2) There are many, many .223 bullets available, including those designed specifically for hunting. http://www.americanhunter.org/blogs/223-for-deer-hunting
.223 is not too light for deer. It will do just fine.
I know I'm the only one talking about full auto. The guy said NATO uses 5.56x45 because it's "humane", and I wanted to point out that what they use 5.56x45 for is different than what the average deer hunter is trying to do. NATO is trying to patch up injured soldiers, and deer hunters are trying to eat what they shoot.
5.56x45 is also, by definition, FMJ ammo. You don't walk into a gun store and find boxes of milsurp soft point and ballistic tip 5.56x45, but you can buy .223 hunting ammo. Yes, I have a rifle in .223 for coyote hunting.
You're not challenged at all. Modern soft point .223 ammo does a great job on mid-large game, and is far more effective than NATO FMJ.
Most hunters use a lot more caliber than necessary. I don't know if it's a perceived masculine thing, or if some just want more of a buffer in the case of a mediocre shot (which i understand).
I prefer the scalpel method over the sledgehammer method.
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
I guess i was just questioning the whole "inhumane" argument against using a (.223) rifle to deer hunt in RI (or "most states"....as stated in the OP). I really see no difference in humaneness, with respect to what is a legal, and what is not a legal, projectile. I'm pretty sure a 12 gauge slug, leaving a large exit wound, would impact, "edibility," as well. But the post was about culling the population, humanely, not dinner at the lodge. Lastly, I was assuming a single, well-placed shot, not burst fire or full auto. (But if the deer start shooting back, go for it.)
