Marksmenship qualification test?

[Deerslayer]

I don't want some dumbass(not you Moosie

) that can't spell out there totin' a gun!

......and let's go one step farther and put an IQ test in there....oh yeah!

........you don't want some total fuggin retard, say like Blowcan, being able to snatch up arms and head to the hills do ya?! They deny folks who don't pay child support, felons, and convicted wildlife offenders in the compact states now, so the Blowcan analogy was probably a moot point, but you get my drift. I think a retard that happens to be able to punch paper is just as dangerous as gramps who has a sound mind, but just gets a little excited when he sees game!

The system we have now ain't a bad one I don't think......the "good hunters" probably wound more game than the goofballs........who never get close enough to game to worry about the mortality stats.

I actually thought that was good brainstorming to add in the bad spellers and retards to the cut list

.....might as well clean the garden good while we're weeding!

........man, can you just imagine how much hunter pressure will go down this year after we eliminate the culls from the group!....gonna be a great season!

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 03-04-2003 14:44: Message edited by: Deerslayer ]</font>

 

[Ten Bears]

Well you may as well include those with gramarical imperfections too.

 

[Bullhound]

Hell DS, i dont no waat yore problum is, spelin aint got nuthun to du with huntin.

To be honest, I'm surprised you have so much heart ache over something like a little test. What gives? What's the big deal? At what point do you feel a person shouldn't be allowed to pack a weapon with the intent of killing something? Should anybody and everybody, no matter if they have any knowledge or skill, or better yet HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO KNOWLEDGE OR SKILL with weapons that can fug stuff up, be out there roaming free and slinging lead or sticks?

I'm kind of scared that you might say "yes".

 

[Moosie]

Bullhound, I've seen DS shoot and Got him on Video.... I'm guessing he'll Plead the 5th on his shooting abilities

DS, I actually think your're right!!! Why test at all, Why take a Hunters Safety course....Why take a driving test.. HELL, just get handed a car and get thrown out on the road... And flying lessons.. HAHA !! What the hell for !!! just give someone a pilots licence too.

I can be as silly as you too with reasoning, OK, MAybe not quiet as silly as you

 

[ElkHntinMD]

DS,
Myself and all the other Marines, Airforce, Army, and Navy hunters qualify to hunt these bases each and every year! Sometimes the quals are the same sometimes not! I'm not saying I agree with Europe or that I would even want to see this enacted. I was merely stating that it's already happening in many places. Most military bases I know of have some type of proficiency test! Shotgun and especially archery! I certainly don't agree with proficiency test at moving targets! When I was a Base Warden I tried to do nothing in a qualification that wouldn't be done in the woods!! I dealt with bow only! I know very few archers that would ever shoot at a moving deer. Most of the places I've hunted have instituted a proficiency test, because so many people would paratice a bit with practice tips, get hitting pretty decent, then come bow season they screwed broadheads in their shafts and went hunting! We had a high wounding rate! Non-hunters in base housing wasn't appreciating it and the deer hunt was almost shut down! After we started the testing I couldn't believe some of the crap I saw! People with crossbows couldn't hit the braodside of a barn!!!!! Proficiency test will make some or almost anyone a better hunter. It forces you to start shooting sooner than you normally would, unless you shoot all year. Which only a small percentage do! I would never want to see any old timer refused the right to hunt!! Unless he was just blind as a bat or had parkinsons desease!!

ElkhntinMD

 

[JB]

"Should anybody and everybody, no matter if they have any knowledge or skill, or better yet HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO KNOWLEDGE OR SKILL with weapons that can fug stuff up, be out there roaming free and slinging lead or sticks?"

YES! ......maybe they shouldnt be hunting but they damned sure should have the right to go out roaming free and slinging lead or sticks!....whats next, we need to pass a test to own a gun?....like what was mentioned earlier "careful what you wish for"!this could comeback to bite you in the ass!

 

[ElkHntinMD]

I hope the qualification never hits here! Just one more thing we have to deal with! I will say though that anyone hunting in a rural area IE.. heavily populated with a bow, should have to take a proficiency test! All of us, I'm sure has gotten a bad shot on a critter, bow or gun! It's not as obvious with a gun but, it's hard to miss with an arrow sticking out of it! In the heavily populated areas it's bow hunting only! Where are most voters? The big cities! We need to keep our image has hunters good, especially in these areas. I live in a big city! I see some of the wingnuts that want to give hunting a try! It's amazing how clueless these people are! Not all!! It's great they want to hunt we need more in our ranks to ensure the tradition continues. But, alot of these people don't have a mentor! That alot of times equates to bad news. Once they pick up a gun or bow, buy a license, regardless of their skill they just became part of the hunting crowd! So anything they do wrong is egg in the faces of us hunters that do right! SO, I feel proficiency has it's place but, not throughout the land! Additionally, for it to be effective it would have to be doe annually!! Could you imagine the lines? And for those that have never qualified, I'll tell you I've been on both sides of the fence!! Gun quals are generally easy, but, qualifying with a bow can be a little nerve racking! Even when I shot year round in competition, I still got nervous during quals!! I don't know why but, I did! I tell ya what though guys, we really weeded out some people that really couldn't shoot! I felt bad sometimes for the guys but, Hell, I had to put the time in to get my trash shooting good and to hone my form, so should they! It really benifited the critters being hunted also! Shootin paper versus the real thing, well when I started out I was pretty good on paper (indoor leagues) But, put the real thing in front of me combined with the adrenaline and it was like I had no anchor point, the bow wasn't comfortable in my hand, the draw felt too long/short a bunch of crap! But, I found the more I shot the better I got and all the bow mechanics and form became natural! I was a much better hunter and shot at the real thing! Now I only have to overcome the adrenaline rush!! I no longer have to worry about form, it's all second nature!

 

[schmalts]

I think its a good thought but a dumb idea.
Just as half the guys who shoot thier buddy took hunter safety, shooting a running target dont mean shit because a lot of guys wouldnt shoot if it was running anyway. It also doesnt mean someone will be ethicle in the field.
How would you like it if your 12 yr old son could blow the bullseye out on a bench but not shoot for shit offhand. You will put him in a hunting stand with sides and tell him not to shoot running deer but he cant go hunting now because he cant pass the test?

 

[MEATHEAD]

That's just what I was thinking YoungRobinHood & Deerchik don't shoot running deer or offhand, young people can do a fine job in the right situation. I myself don't shoot at running game with a rifle.

 

[Washington Hunter]

If there is a shooting test at all, it should only be done at hunters ed. I think once is enough. A new hunter is the only person that would be a risk. It makes no sense to test a guy who's been hunting and shooting for 30 or 40 years. If your shooting proficiency isn't as good as it was when you were a young kid, it just means you are more careful with what shots you take. You may take more time to take the shot, and you may be more inclined to find a good steady rest for your rifle. Or use a bipod. We don't need laws for common sense things. Just require kids to pass a test in their hunters ed. class, and if you don't take hunters ed. then you have to pass the shooting test before you buy your first hunting license. Or, better yet, require that everybody take the hunters ed. course, no matter how old they are. I believe it's already that way in Washington. And as far as the bowhunting goes...I think the biggest problem is with states that allow you to hunt with a bow during bow season and then go with a rifle during rifle season. Or states like Oregon that you have to draw a permit to hunt mule deer with a rifle, and if you don't draw you can just buy a archery tag and hunt the general season with a bow. These types of scenarios get people out there with a bow who aren't serious bow hunters, and don't practice as much as they should (if at all.) Just change these things and I don't think a test for archery would be necessary.

 

[Nut]

I have no doubts with my boys either. I sat and have watched all 3 perform like responsible hunters in regards to their shooting abilitities. My youngest is 11 and I watched him follow a doe with the crossbow he was using waiting for it to stop for his shot. It never stopped so he never took the safety off.

I have the confidence in their ability to pass a shooting test. I just believe that it making it mandatory would just come back to haunt us.

Everybody has a bad day and what happens if you have youre bad day the only day you could test? Then I guess it would stink to be you then?

 

[Deerslayer]

Washington Hunter said....
"If there is a shooting test at all, it should only be done at hunters ed. I think once is enough."

Exactly WH, and that is the current system in place, which means we can continue on with business as usual.....sorry guys, you'll just have to dream about one day culling the masses from the field.....but for now, we'll just stick with the system we have.

Moosie.....You don't EVEN want to go there.
I would put my shooting skills on the line against ANY I saw from the Texas pen hunt.
You better be careful about pushing your dream of testing through.....it could seriously jeopardize how many folks can participate on you next shendig!

.....but your right, the fact that it took a second shot on that ram across that canyon makes....well, it makes that ram ...dead. You can bet I don't make a habit out of a follow up shot. But the second shot at the ram on the move, offhanded, was probably a better shot than the first with him bedded presenting a much smaller target.

 

[Moosie]

LOL DS, You're right, I don't want to go there

And I wouldn't take the time to Drive this Initiative to Congress, but , Point being made, Alot of people shouldn't be in the hills..... And they don't even know it. Alot of people think that shooting a bow at 20 yards and Not being able to hit a 4'x8' plywood is Normal

 

[Bullhound]

That's what I like about you Moosie, right to the point and make it simple.


but that's about all I like about ya!!

 

[schmalts]

I would say if there is any shooting test it should be for archery. There are LOTS of guys who should not be out there. If you cant take the time to practice and at least give the animal a fair shot at a clean kill stay home. But we'll never see that.