Idaho Seeks to Limit Scope Turrets and Rangefinders

I think you missed my point. Even at what most would consider to be typical rifle range shots, the value of having a rangefinder and a turret on your scope is high to help reduce the chance of a bad shot.

Honestly, what would you rather have on the mountain chasing elk in ID: a) The WI redneck with his Savage that he shoots 1 time a year to "check his rifle" the day before deer season that goes "looks to be about 400 yards, I'll just aim for the top of the back" or b) the guy that practices at all ranges in all conditions from 200-500 yards with the tools of a rangefinder and a turret scope to help ensure that shot placement?
I would prefer more hunters learning how to get 200 yards or closer before taking a shot.
 
I think you missed my point. Even at what most would consider to be typical rifle range shots, the value of having a rangefinder and a turret on your scope is high to help reduce the chance of a bad shot.

Honestly, what would you rather have on the mountain chasing elk in ID: a) The WI redneck with his Savage that he shoots 1 time a year to "check his rifle" the day before deer season that goes "looks to be about 400 yards, I'll just aim for the top of the back" or b) the guy that practices at all ranges in all conditions from 200-500 yards with the tools of a rangefinder and a turret scope to help ensure that shot placement?
So the guy who shoots once a year is all of a sudden is gonna change because turrets are legal? Doesn't hold water.
 
Hate to say it man - but isnt this sort of the point of tech? To be able to have more capabilities?

Also - i dont think you can self-regulate whats not widely agreed on. No ones proud of a gutshot, for example. There is really no consensus in my opinion on how hunters feel about target turrets/rangefinders.
If you're efficient and deadly at 800 yards, wouldn't it piss you off to be limited to 500 by your rangefinder and turrets?

Long range hunting shouldn't be a fad, it should only be done by people trained or educated and well practiced. Those same people who are trying to shoot long range just because they think they can, are the same people who are going to hold 20 moa over the back of an animal to try and shoot it.

With technology being what it is right now, (ie: OnX being able to basically work as a rangefinder or get you within 50 yards or so) limiting rangefinders wouldn't be very effective. As far as trying to limit turrets, you can take the cap off of most scopes and move the reticle without having a "turret" per say. Then you run in to FFP reticles that have the ability to holdover 40 MOA with markings. I don't see banning turrets as being the solution.
Self regulation on ethics of hunting would be a huge disaster imo.
I'm not saying in general. I'm talking the long range shooting fad that's been happening. People should know and respect their limits.
 
I think you missed my point. Even at what most would consider to be typical rifle range shots, the value of having a rangefinder and a turret on your scope is high to help reduce the chance of a bad shot.

Honestly, what would you rather have on the mountain chasing elk in ID: a) The WI redneck with his Savage that he shoots 1 time a year to "check his rifle" the day before deer season that goes "looks to be about 400 yards, I'll just aim for the top of the back" or b) the guy that practices at all ranges in all conditions from 200-500 yards with the tools of a rangefinder and a turret scope to help ensure that shot placement?
I’ve never seen the first case savage guy here but I’ve seen plenty of local dorks with magnums and turrets that have admittedly walked it in on critters way too far away to be scared and watched another guy dump a full box of shells cross canyon at a mule deer that was far enough away his rangefinder wouldn’t read

We have continually improved our ability to kill critters via technology, wildlife isn’t getting equally better at getting away from us. At some point something has to give. I say that even as I just recently set up my first rifle I intend to spin turrets on. If my ability to use it here gets limited I’ll accept it. Killed plenty of critters without it, most at close range even
 
You can range a critter with a reticle on a scope too...

I wouldn't put it past those people who are taking questionable shots to use that method.

All part of the reason I mentioned the ethics piece.

Hunting multiple states every year keeps you on your toes enough as it is when it comes to keeping up on regulations. Starting to throw scope/rangefinder limits in would only further complicate that!
People should do a lot of things. I'm not holding my breath though.
If we held our breath, we'd all be dead by the time anything prodouctive happens! lol
 
Honestly, what would you rather have on the mountain chasing elk in ID: a) The WI redneck with his Savage that he shoots 1 time a year to "check his rifle" the day before deer season that goes "looks to be about 400 yards, I'll just aim for the top of the back" or b) the guy that practices at all ranges in all conditions from 200-500 yards with the tools of a rangefinder and a turret scope to help ensure that shot placement?
I see way more bad shot hunters who can’t shoot 300 yards than guys with turrets.
 
Aldo Leupold would would support such an intent. Leupold the $ maker is very opposed to such an intent.
$ talks and the future of hunting continues to evolve. Recurve to compound, iron to reticle, patch ball to full auto, on and on.
 
Let me put my tin foil hat on for a second. Could it be that some government types might be more worried about civilians having the tools and ability to be lethal at long range and not so much about concern for "fair chase"?
Long range hunting is not really my personal cup of tea but I always wonder if there is another agenda.
 
Let me put my tin foil hat on for a second. Could it be that some government types might be more worried about civilians having the tools and ability to be lethal at long range and not so much about concern for "fair chase"?
Long range hunting is not really my personal cup of tea but I always wonder if there is another agenda.
I don't think they're cracking down on long range shooting. Just hunting.
 
Let me put my tin foil hat on for a second. Could it be that some government types might be more worried about civilians having the tools and ability to be lethal at long range and not so much about concern for "fair chase"?
Long range hunting is not really my personal cup of tea but I always wonder if there is another agenda.

I always love a good conspiracy theory
 

Forum statistics

Threads
112,926
Messages
2,004,173
Members
35,899
Latest member
jacksoncsalmon
Back
Top