4 year olds with guns

[mtmuley]

It was introduced by an outfitter. Pressure on our resource hasn't been adressed by our wildlife managers. It's amazing to me that certain game populations in our state are struggling, but some legislators just want to throw more opportunity out there. I will bet money young mule deer bucks during the rut will be prime "mentored" targets. Gotta get the kid a kill, and soon before he supposedly will lose interest. And I'll say it again. Some kids and parents in the established hunters education system aren't ready, but at least we have a system in place. At the risk of offending you guys that don't live here, just cause it works there, don't mean it's a good idea here. I agree it's been beat, but I caved for one last post. Out. mtmuley

 

[Gerald Martin]

It was introduced by an outfitter

Them waskally evil villains. How could they?

I will bet money young mule deer bucks during the rut will be prime "mentored" targets

Yep, along with rancher's cows, sheep, horses, slow moving school buses and endangered black -footed ferrets. Gotta get them kids a kill man. Can't let them lose interest.

I wish I'd saved that picture of The Dude and his cow kill. That one was classic.

 

[Devil Diver Down]

I have no dog in this fight, but I'm of the mind that some things are worth waiting for - and tagging a big game animal is certainly one of them. As I see it now, nothing in the current law prevents a kid from hunting big game with his mentor, parent, grandparent or even great-grand - just from shooting an animal on those hunts until they're 12.

While certain 10 or 9 year olds are certainly ready to handle the hunt (kudos to those parents and those individual kids), most are not - whether because they weren't well prepared by their folks or because they're just not equipped mentally yet. I think it's a whole bunch better to have those who are ready sit and wait a while (of course, they don't have to "sit and wait" - they can be out on the hunt) than to have everyone out there armed, ready or not.

My 2¢ and worth every penny you paid for it.

 

[PFUNK]

All in all, I get the sense that those who are against lowering the age of when children can hunt are not approaching it from a management or safety point of view as much as they are from a "that's the way it's always been and we are not going to change it", mentality.

I'd say Gerald nailed it with this one. Everyone opposed seems to think the system isn't broke so why fix it. But a lot of those opposed likely don't have kids of their own who have been hunting with their dads/moms since they could walk, or their kids have already grown up and "earned their stripes". They won't be directly affected by the change so they see it as a waste of precious time, money, and from what I have heard here, just more people putting pressure on resources already stretched thin. Lots of kids could be very capable of hunting before they hit the magic number of 12. Why is an adult more entitled to a license than a capable kid? Why is an adult more entitled to utilize the resource than a capable kid?

I would be opposed to the bill as it currently reads, as I think kids should have to pass a hunters safety course before hunting. If they are going to be in control of a high power rifle for any amount of time, I want to know they have at least shown to know how to operate it safely in a controlled environment. Having said that, I don't see how such a bill would be wreaking of entitlement. If a child has proven he/she is capable, why should I or anyone else be telling them they can't get a license? It isn't driving a car and it isn't drinking alcohol and it isn't voting. That's apples to oranges. It's the safe handling and operation of a firearm, which I know plenty of kids under the age of 12 can figure out real quick with good parents, a little determination, and a lot of desire to go hunting with mom/dad.

Though I would not be opposed to the bill with some amendments, I don't know that it will accomplish its apparent goal of getting youth more involved. I was hooked on hunting long, long before I ever got to pull the trigger on anything other than a BB gun. However, had I been legally allowed to start carrying my own gun a few years earlier I surely would have and it would have been another 3 years of experience. You don't need to kill something to have fun and get hooked, but you certainly don't get the same feeling of accomplishment that your hard work has paid off until you harvest something. Does it hurt to make a kid wait until he is 12 to have that experience? Nope... been that way for a long time. Would it hurt to let that kid have a chance to do it at age 9? I don't think so.

 

[Gerald Martin]

PFunk for Governor! ( unless he's ever shaken hands with an outfitter or a TEA party republican.)

 

[PFUNK]

PFunk for Governor! ( unless he's ever shaken hands with an outfitter or a TEA party republican.)

You must not have heard yet but there are already FAR too many transplants involved with the MT government... one more would most likely drive the state into the ground with ludacris thoughts of "the way it's done back home".

 

[Straight Arrow]

Would it hurt to let that kid have a chance to do it at age 9? I don't think so.

I do understand and respect that opinion, however, as both a parent of a hunter and a grandparent of soon-to-be hunters, who have accompanied me on hunts, I respectfully disagree. I am one of those old fogies who would like to see kids have a chance to be kids. I see this proposal as reflective of a larger attitude to push kids into growing up much too early in age. I don't know if it's that parents want to vicariously enjoy through their children what the parents feel they missed out on or if they just want their children to grow up more quickly and be their "buddies" sooner. But the attitude is manifested by children being given more freedoms, material items, and opportunities before they are really able to understand the ramifications and responsibilities inherent. I can only hope those who are pushing for nine year olds to harvest big game aren't also those who promote tattoos, body piercings, make-up, cell phones, and such for nine year olds hoping they can jump in maturity from nine to sixteen to twenty-five years overnight. 'Just sayin, "Why not let children be children; it's such a brief and fleeting period of life ... why push it prematurely?"

 

[Gerald Martin]

I can only hope those who are pushing for nine year olds to harvest big game aren't also those who promote tattoos, body piercings, make-up, cell phones, and such for nine year olds hoping they can jump in maturity from nine to sixteen to twenty-five years overnight. 'Just sayin, "Why not let children be children; it's such a brief and fleeting period of life ... why push it prematurely?"

Straight Arrow, I've been slinging sarcasm on here with a bunch of my latest posts but I'm going to be serious here. My position on this is motivated by the stark realization that my children are growing up at the speed of life and I would like to be able to spend as much of their childhood with them as possible. Whether this bill passes or not, my kids will be with me in the woods on many of my hunts, even though it restricts me in the areas I can hunt and the success I ultimately have. I'm past the point where I need to kill to have a good hunt.

I see in my son the same burning desire to be a hunter as I had at a young age and would like to be able to see that culminate in the taking of his first big game animal at the appropriate time. Not so different than thousands of other fathers and their sons. It's just that who should determine what the appropriate age is? As it stands the state of Montana has determined that 12 is the appropriate age. I happen to disagree based on the maturity level of my son.

As far as pushing it prematurely... it's called life and it happens. Kid's grow up and want to do things a lot faster than most parents or grandparents are comfortable with. It happens a lot faster than I like too.

 

[PFUNK]

I do understand and respect that opinion, however, as both a parent of a hunter and a grandparent of soon-to-be hunters, who have accompanied me on hunts, I respectfully disagree. I am one of those old fogies who would like to see kids have a chance to be kids. I see this proposal as reflective of a larger attitude to push kids into growing up much too early in age. I don't know if it's that parents want to vicariously enjoy through their children what the parents feel they missed out on or if they just want their children to grow up more quickly and be their "buddies" sooner. But the attitude is manifested by children being given more freedoms, material items, and opportunities before they are really able to understand the ramifications and responsibilities inherent. I can only hope those who are pushing for nine year olds to harvest big game aren't also those who promote tattoos, body piercings, make-up, cell phones, and such for nine year olds hoping they can jump in maturity from nine to sixteen to twenty-five years overnight. 'Just sayin, "Why not let children be children; it's such a brief and fleeting period of life ... why push it prematurely?"

Because that's what some children actually DO want to be doing. I agree some parents likely push things onto kids when they are far too young. But like I said before, if my dad had asked me at 9 years old if I wanted to start deer hunting with him you can bet I'd have been chomping at the bit to do so. It's what I loved to do at that age and it's what I live to do now. If it was legal and he had allowed me to hunt deer as a 9 year old, would you consider that bad parenting? You see the proposal as a push to make kids grow up at a younger age, but many dads who support it probably do so because they see the fire and passion their youngster has for the outdoors and would love the opportunity to get them going as soon as they prove they are up to the task. It isn't right to assume parents who support this legislation are doing so for their own benefit. I think all parents should be able to use their judgement as to when their boy/girl is ready to make that jump. I understand your concern for the direction youth are going these days, which is, for the most part a direct reflection on the job parents are doing. I disagree, however, that your view on how children should progress through youth should be governed by legislation preventing them from obtaining hunting licenses. I also respect your opinion, and can certainly understand why you feel the way you do. I just think it's a lot of opinion about how to raise a child the right way, and doesn't really provide an argument as to why 9 year olds hunting deer would have detrimental effects on safety, the resources, or the sport in general.

 

[Straight Arrow]

PFUNK, fair enough. You have presented a solid argument and valid opinion.

However, when you push to revise driving laws so early maturing children can drive on the interstate at age twelve,

Because that's what some children actually DO want to be doing.

.... don't expect my opposition to be quite as accepting.

There are valid reasons for age limitations. Unfortunately, they don't discriminate between early maturation versus late maturation or between good parenting and poor parentlng, other than by Hunters Safety training requirements and driver's license testing requirements.

 

[PFUNK]

PFUNK, fair enough. You have presented a solid argument and valid opinion.

However, when you push to revise driving laws so early maturing children can drive on the interstate at age twelve, .... don't expect my opposition to be quite as accepting.

There are valid reasons for age limitations. Unfortunately, they don't discriminate between early maturation versus late maturation or between good parenting and poor parentlng, other than by Hunters Safety training requirements and driver's license testing requirements.

Don't worry, I'll wait awhile to bring that proposition forward. In fact, I'll wait until you're an old fart and tack on a proposal that everyone over 80 has to prove they are still competent enough to be on the roadways. Joking aside, your point is well taken and I fully agree and support hunters safety training requirements, and thorough ones at that.

 

[Straight Arrow]

tack on a proposal that everyone over 80 has to prove they are still competent enough to be on the roadways.

... and it would be good to tack on a requirement that we old farts (once over 80) also renew Hunters Safety each season. (Heck, I'm twelve years away from that and now sometimes can't recall where I set my bow or rifle down!)

 

[Topgun 30-06]

... and it would be good to tack on a requirement that we old farts (once over 80) also renew Hunters Safety each season. (Heck, I'm twelve years away from that and now sometimes can't recall where I set my bow or rifle down!)

***There are actually a number of jurisdictions that require older drivers to be tested, especially for vision, on a more frequent basis where younger ones licenses are automatically renewed. I hope you can at least still remember whether you were hunting with a bow or gun when you lose it, LOL!

 

[SFC B]

Some of you may have seen my post in the Ex&Hogs section of my daughter taking her first animal (a hog). While she is plenty accurate with a rifle, understands the reasons for and consequences of hunting and was able to help us with the processing of her animal I would not be in favor of taking someone her age (8 then 9 now) into the field after big game. Shooting a hog out of a box blind as pest control is much different matter than being afield chasing big game animals to me. Even beside the possibility of abuses of tags, to me it becomes a question of physical ability. I think 12 is probably a good general area for the line. To me a hunter in the field really needs to be old enough/big enough/competent enough to care for themselves and their game. Just my opinion.

 

[spook12]

To me a hunter in the field really needs to be old enough/big enough/competent enough to care for themselves and their game. Just my opinion.

So how do you feel about old dudes like my grand dad who would not have been able to hunt last year if I hadn't ''Helped'' him to and from his ground blind.

Should he stop hunting because there is no way he is capable of getting a deer out of the field? While he was as strong as a bull in his youth the days of him field dressing,packing out,loading and processing his own game are long gone.

He's more than ''Competent enough'' just not as capable as he once was.

Do you think it is possible for a young person to be ''Competent enough'' just not physically capable without the help of a mentor?

Would a Antelope hunt over a water tank or a deer hunt under a center pivot have been any harder, physically for your daughter then a hog hunt from a tower or blind?

 

[SFC B]

I posted those concerns that way because I believe that a proper combination of those things is necessary for ethical hunting. As for your Granddad, if he can't care for himself or his game in the field but still has the abiliy otherwse, I would suggest that is where the disabled huntng opportunities come in. I don't know his situation so I won't say what is appropriate for him. There is defnitely a time in my mind when hunting becomes unworkable forsom older folks. Wht would have happened to him if you couldn't have helped him out of the woods or with a deer? Accidents and emergencies happen and that is my concern. I wouldn't take my kids into the woods unless they could care for themselves in emergencies if something happen to me. Again, my opinion.
As for the others, I have no experience with either antelope (ask me next year) or hunting deer that way. But I can say that she was not and still is not ready to be out with me in the big woods or even in a treestand for whitetails back in the Midwest. Again you know what opinions are like....and they ALL stink to some degree

 

[spook12]

Again you know what opinions are like....and they ALL stink to some degree

Not mine..............Smells like roses don't ya know.

 

[tjones]

I guess the question for Montana residents is, are we comfortable letting any parent decide what age a child is ready to hunt OUR public wildlife?

 

[Topgun 30-06]

I guess the question for Montana residents is, are we comfortable letting any parent decide what age a child is ready to hunt OUR public wildlife?

***If that is a major concern, I would suggest you get some folks together and ask that an amendment be added that it is only allowed on private land. .

EDIT: Here is a synopsis of the MI law and I did check on the big game requirement. They can hunt with a bow or crossbow on public land, but can only hunt deer with a firearm on private property or Commercial Forest Land.

Apprentice Hunting License
A person who does not have a hunter safety certificate and is 10 years of age or older may purchase an apprentice hunting license. An apprentice hunter may purchase this license for two license years before he or she must successfully complete a hunter safety course. The apprentice hunting license is available to residents and nonresidents.

When afield, an apprentice hunter must be accompanied by someone 21 or older who possesses a regular current-year hunting license for the same game as the apprentice. For apprentices between ages 10-16, the accompanying hunter must be the apprentice's parent, guardian or someone designated by the parent or guardian. "Accompanied by" requires the accompanying hunter to be able to come to the immediate aid of the apprentice and stay within a distance that permits uninterrupted, unaided visual and verbal contact. A person may accompany no more than two apprentice hunters while hunting.

 

[tjones]

Wildlife on private land is still public wildlife.

MT is not MI.