Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

HF 210 Straight wall rifle

Do you support HF 210 rifles using straight wall ammunition?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Neutral

Results are only viewable after voting.
m_kat said:
Thanks for the updates Fishbonker, glad to see they pulled it out of the late muzzleloader season.

I did not see anywhere in the passed house bill where it said that semi-autos are not allowed though?

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ba=HF 475&ga=87
Click to expand...

I had a reply above about semi autos that was to a question that I thought Sligh was asking about semi autos in use now, so the answer to that was no, now that I re read his post he was asking about the current bill.

This bill will allow all straight wall cartridges that fall within the parameters of the current pistol rules to be used in a rife, any platform including lever action, semi auto, pump, single shot and maybe even full auto if you have the proper federal licenses/permits.

The full committee met today at 1200 to vote on this bill. I don't know the results yet but it should be posted on the legislative site by tonight.
 
Fishbonker said:
I had a reply above about semi autos that was to a question that I thought Sligh was asking about semi autos in use now, so the answer to that was no, now that I re read his post he was asking about the current bill.

This bill will allow all straight wall cartridges that fall within the parameters of the current pistol rules to be used in a rife, any platform including lever action, semi auto, pump, single shot and maybe even full auto if you have the proper federal licenses/permits.

The full committee met today at 1200 to vote on this bill. I don't know the results yet but it should be posted on the legislative site by tonight.
Click to expand...

SO.... SEMI-AUTO SHORT WALL RIFLES ARE ALLOWED. Interesting. So, this sounds "extreme" but a Beowulf .50 cal AR would be allowed the way I understand this now, just like the ones posted eariler on here. "Sounds extreme" but I'll bet you a nickel guns like that will be bought up like crazy (which is another reason the gun lobby wanted this) & out in the field, no question in my mind. You'll be seeing them at a group Gun deer drive near you, guarantee it.
 
There are already people shooting .50 Beuwolf semi-auto pistols in an AR platform - many are being built and sold and used in the late Muzzleloader season as a an alternative weapon(handgun)
Not happy about that either
 
HF 475 popped up on the Senate debate calendar tonight after the session finally adjourned. The Senate was in a marathon session tonight. They voted (after a 5 plus hour debate) on fireworks and adjourned for the night. Yes, I watched some of the live stream. The fireworks bill passed and was sent to the House.

No idea what date HF 475 will actually be debated/voted on in the Senate.
 
Legislators are telling me they are getting no opposition to this bill which is crazy because I know several people opposing it who are contacting quite a bit.
At the very least - I think we need to push to make sure SEMI_AUTO is not allowable under these new rules - that would stop the custom AR builds and the ElCHeapo HiPoint guns that are sure to be sold by the truckload if this passes.
 
New Governor new politicians they may not be listening to the people of Iowa. They may all be seeing green.
 
gunrunr said:
Legislators are telling me they are getting no opposition to this bill which is crazy because I know several people opposing it who are contacting quite a bit.
At the very least - I think we need to push to make sure SEMI_AUTO is not allowable under these new rules - that would stop the custom AR builds and the ElCHeapo HiPoint guns that are sure to be sold by the truckload if this passes.
Click to expand...

What is wrong with semi-autos??? People use semi auto slug guns and pistols now during the same season. I could agree with magazine capacity restrictions but I honestly dont feel these new weapons will really be any worse than what we already have now. People already use semi autos, extended mags/tubes and already spray bullets and wound deer there really isnt any good way around that its just going to happen plain and simple.
I could be wrong but I think most everyone is more worried about what this law could mean for future laws, meaning coming closer to an actual high power season and yes that worries me as well. But as it stands now just offering a handfull of primarily pistol caliber chambers to be used with a longer barrel, well I just dont see the problem.
Longer barrels equal more power and more accuracy so if theyre used responsibly and within their means then theres absolutely nothing wrong with it. I know of MANY deer and hogs killed with .40, 357, 45LC and some of the other rounds out of a pistol and they were all clean kills, now add in more accuracy and more energy and the odds of a clean kill are even better

Everyone seems to be worried about the what ifs, but thats something that is already happening now with what is already legal and thats not going to change. I would much rather see someone shooting an accurate carbine then out throwing pumpkin slugs out of a bird barrel going who knows where... Idk I understand the fear of this law making it more possible for even more weapons down the road but thats always an option whether this one goes thru or not and in its present form with it only being for shotgun seasons and youth/disabled and only a handfull of already approved pistol rounds then I just dont see what all the fuss is about
I could be wrong but I honestly dont think many people would change what theyre currently gun hunting with now anyways, of course some will but I doubt youre gonna see a big switch to pistol caliber carbines for the average hunter
Ill be the first to admit that if .450 bushmaster or .45 raptor were options then yes Id have an AR in one of those to use but only because I would have better trajectory and accuracy then my current slug gun... It still wouldnt give me 30-06 performance but it would definitely be more efficient than most any slug gun and whats wrong with wanting to be more efficient. It wouldnt be so I could be out spraying the timber with lead it would simply be for accuracy and trajectory and the option to use an optic I wouldnt care if it meant I could only have 3 rounds in it.
 
Last edited:
If it is all about effeciency, then there is no reason to object to the 30-06. Heck, using the 30-06 is more effecient than a bow so we might as well allow it during the bow season too.
 
Rjack said:
If it is all about effeciency, then there is no reason to object to the 30-06. Heck, using the 30-06 is more effecient than a bow so we might as well allow it during the bow season too.
Click to expand...

All Im saying is that these calibers are already available options in pistol form so why not let people use those same calibers in a package better suited for clean kills...
Theres nothing wrong with wanting to put the odds more in your favor or have a higher percentage chance of making a clean kill which is exactly why most all of us use compound bows with sights instead of recurves and wood shafts with a sharp rock on the end or an inline muzzy instead of a flintlock or percussion cap gun. If its going to be a legal means of take why not allow it in the most effective form... .30-06 isnt allowed in pistol form so thats apples to oranges.
I get it, nobody likes change but unfortunately theres no way around it and I dont see people bitching about being able to use pistols so whats the problem with a longer more accurate platform. If youre such a purist then lose the cams and sights on your bow because those arent necessary either... I guess Im of the opinion that if you dont like it or agree with it fine then dont do it, but dont keep someone else from doing it just because you dont think its a good idea.
Like I said in my previous post i understand the fear that this will lead to looser laws in the future but just for arguements sake if it doesnt then why should anyone care if I choose to load my .40 ammo in an 4" barreled pistol or a 16" barreled carbine???
This law probably wont effect me either way because the few calibers/chambers that would interest me arent legal options so chances are it wont change what I carry to the woods. But that doesnt mean I think my neighbor shouldnt be able to use his antique 45/70 or lever action 45lc... Its not a new or separate season or an extra tag... Its just another option to use in an already existing season with a tag you can already get
 
Last edited:
rutnstrut said:
All Im saying is that these calibers are already available options in pistol form so why not let people use those same calibers in a package better suited for clean kills...
Theres nothing wrong with wanting to put the odds more in your favor or have a higher percentage chance of making a clean kill which is exactly why most all of us use compound bows with sights instead of recurves and wood shafts with a sharp rock on the end or an inline muzzy instead of a flintlock or percussion cap gun. If its going to be a legal means of take why not allow it in the most effective form... .30-06 isnt allowed in pistol form so thats apples to oranges.
I get it, nobody likes change but unfortunately theres no way around it and I dont see people bitching about being able to use pistols so whats the problem with a longer more accurate platform. If youre such a purist then lose the cams and sights on your bow because those arent necessary either... I guess Im of the opinion that if you dont like it or agree with it fine then dont do it, but dont keep someone else from doing it just because you dont think its a good idea.
Like I said in my previous post i understand the fear that this will lead to looser laws in the future but just for arguements sake if it doesnt then why should anyone care if I choose to load my .40 ammo in an 4" barreled pistol or a 16" barreled carbine???
This law probably wont effect me either way because the few calibers/chambers that would interest me arent legal options so chances are it wont change what I carry to the woods. But that doesnt mean I think my neighbor shouldnt be able to use his antique 45/70 or lever action 45lc... Its not a new or separate season or an extra tag... Its just another option to use in an already existing season with a tag you can already get
Click to expand...

I can see your point on this, I believe it's about it being a precursor to things to come. I think fighting against crossbows in archery season would be far worse than this bill. I know people talk about that but I wonder if it would cause this much uproar? It should. I don't know about it causing more convenience for truck hunters, I mean what's more convenient in the cab of a truck than a pistol I'm guessing? I am not for it at all, but mag restrictions would be far more important in my mind.
 
Let me bring up some "out of the box" thoughts I'd like anyone to think about.....
"Since "xyz" is already allowed, how is "this any worse?".... A valid question. Let me reverse course on the preface of the question. How would you all feel (mixed im sure) or how many would be surprised (me being happy in all honesty) if we didn't ADD another weapon and regulation but put a bill forward to reduce things.... what would folks in favor or indifference of this say if a bill came out like this, anything like this.... "limit shotgun slugs to single shots". "Pistols single shot". "No pistols". "Allow straight wall cartridges but change iowa to a ONE BUCK RULE"? "3 month timeframe to kill deer in iowa". Any change that's the opposite course of what we always see (liberal regs added) 1) do any of you think anything that reduces killing or possibly protects some more bucks (bucks is example) will ever be proposed? 2) does a regulation proposal like i mentioned ever make any sense and what would it do for iowa's "deer quality" overall???? I would argue it would vastly enhance it at ALL LEVELS. 3) what would a regulation change like that do for ACCESS????????
Speaking of ACCESS.... is this a critical issue in iowa???? Could any of you agree ACCESS is a bigger issue than bringing more weapons to deer hunting?? Let's say we limited to 1 buck in iowa (whatever). Do you all think this would help or hurt access? Access, I think we all can agree, to "good land" is worse every single frigin year..... so why do we continue trying all these new liberal regulations while results continue to be apparent & degraded for most hunters? We have a very apparent & obvious trajectory for 15-20 years now where almost everyone has less access and less opportunity to hunt "good farms". Disagree? And we continue down the same foolish path each year as it's the new acceptable norm.

So u add semi auto straight wall rifles.... likely to be used during gun season by guys doing group gun drives..... let me ask you this.... what has happened to the amount of farms and groups of guys having access to "good land" or any land period in the last 10 years? More access or less??? Are there more or less of these groups out there? Why is that???? I won't answer all of my own questions but folks - THINK. Politicians live in a "non-real world" and they live in the world of "un-intended consequences". As you guys with more guns and more killing ability continue to have less and less places to go - ask yourselves if you think bills like this are helping or hurting you????
 
Last edited:
Sligh1 said:
Let me bring up some "out of the box" thoughts I'd like anyone to think about.....
"Since "xyz" is already allowed, how is "this any worse?".... A valid question. Let me reverse course on the preface of the question. How would you all feel (mixed im sure) or how many would be surprised (me being happy in all honesty) if we didn't ADD another weapon and regulation but put a bill forward to reduce things.... what would folks in favor or indifference of this say if a bill came out like this, anything like this.... "limit shotgun slugs to single shots". "Pistols single shot". "No pistols". "Allow straight wall cartridges but change iowa to a ONE BUCK RULE"? "3 month timeframe to kill deer in iowa". Any change that's the opposite course of what we always see (liberal regs added) 1) do any of you think anything that reduces killing or possibly protects some more bucks (bucks is example) will ever be proposed? 2) does a regulation proposal like i mentioned ever make any sense and what would it do for iowa's "deer quality" overall???? I would argue it would vastly enhance it at ALL LEVELS. 3) what would a regulation change like that do for ACCESS????????
Speaking of ACCESS.... is this a critical issue in iowa???? Could any of you agree ACCESS is a bigger issue than bringing more weapons to deer hunting?? Let's say we limited to 1 buck in iowa (whatever). Do you all think this would help or hurt access? Access, I think we all can agree, to "good land" is worse every single frigin year..... so why do we continue trying all these new liberal regulations while results continue to be apparent & degraded for most hunters? We have a very apparent & obvious trajectory for 15-20 years now where almost everyone has less access and less opportunity to hunt "good farms". Disagree? And we continue down the same foolish path each year as it's the new acceptable norm.

So u add semi auto straight wall rifles.... likely to be used during gun season by guys doing group gun drives..... let me ask you this.... what has happened to the amount of farms and groups of guys having access to "good land" or any land period in the last 10 years? More access or less??? Are there more or less of these groups out there? Why is that???? I won't answer all of my own questions but folks - THINK. Politicians live in a "non-real world" and they live in the world of "un-intended consequences". As you guys with more guns and more killing ability continue to have less and less places to go - ask yourselves if you think bills like this are helping or hurting you????
Click to expand...

Skip dont take this wrong, this isnt a personal attack on you or Boyd I know you both and highly respect you both but what is good for you guys isnt always what is good for the average hunter... You guys hunt in what I can only descride as a fantasy world for the average hunter in Iowa, most of us dont have access to let alone own an abundance of great deer hunting ground or food plots we need every bit of that long drawn out deer season to get it done and a lot of times it still isnt enough. I doubt most average hunters even shoot 1 buck EVERY year let alone the 2 theyre allowed. Most of us need all those hours, days, weekends, months to get a single opportunity at a good deer most of us are hunting one or two small private farms or pieces of public ground and a lot of us have to share those small pieces. We might have to hunt the same 40acre chunk and just hope that the rut or pressure on a neighboring farm pushes something decent our way. Not all of us have several good bucks to pick from evey year, we dont all have a blind or stand to jump in that over looks a food plot thats full of deer every night. Not everyone gets to take a week or two or more to hunt some people have to sneak away one day here or there when they can work it in. So even though there are several months of hunting allowed a lot of people only get to make it out a handfull of times and if the seasons were shorter they might not get out at all. I myself hunt my ass off every chance I get and most years I still dont have enough time. But Im a hunter not a nature watcher although I enjoy every minute i spend in the woods Im there for a certain purpose and thats to shoot a good deer so I use everything I can to put the odds in my favor for when or if that opportunity arises. Say a good buck finally shows up after days and days of hunting or the one day you have to sneak away and hunt and feeds 150-200yds out in a field, yes Id much rather have a scoped 45/70 lever gun than a 870 with a 28" bird barrel throwing pumpkin slugs... Why because Im there to shoot something not just watch it, does that make me any less of a hunter than anyone else or anymore dangerous or any less ethical or anything at all for that matter... No it doesnt, granted id much rather have that same deer feeding in a 1-3acre food plot and have a chip shot at him but thats just not an option for most people. So to ask about making our weapons less effective by taking away certain types of guns or ammo capacity, no I think thats silly why would anyone including you want us to go backwards or lesson someone elses odds at filling their tag. I dont think it would help or benefit the average guy one bit just like I dont think your neighbor or someone in a different county shooting a pistol caliber carbine is going to effect you one bit. Ya there might be people using AR platforms or lever guns shooting pistol caliber in deer drives but unless you outlaw deer drives then what difference does it make what theyre shooting unless of course its an actual high power theyre going to spray bullets and wound deer.
I truly believe that the only way this could be bad is if it turns into the slippery slope scenario where its just a foot in the door or another step closer to high power season. I dont feel any weapons changes other than high powers or crossbows will have any negative effect on hunting or the deer heard itself. Youre always going to have idiots taking shots they shouldnt and wounding deer no matter what season it is or what weapons theyre allowed to use thats just unavoidable.

As far as access goes no I dont think any law that takes away or adds methods of take will effect the average hunters access to ground other than once again high powers and crossbows... Unless of course there were a year or two of doe only hunting that turned people off and made them give up deer hunting in general because even if you had a one buck only law and had to pick your season youre still gonna have to share the available ground with the same people you do now the only change would be maybe if youre lucky the guy you share the ground with picks a different season than you do.

I guess the way I feel is like I said earlier if it isnt your cup of tea then fine dont do it but why take any advantage or opportunity away from the next guy, how does that help you or anyone else out unless of course you would just like to see less people be successful in filling their tags
 
1) I don't take any of this personal!!! I was making my case to the "general public". I respect everything you say and are saying.

2) everyone has "bias". More over, MOTIVES. I know what the MOTIVES behind this bill are and who has positions on this, $ involved, etc. MY MOTIVATION... or bias... in all honesty... this bill will not impact me at all. My bias: it truly comes from a point of CONSERVATION and a love of the resource. Protecting the "average hunter". No hidden motive on my end. Can't say that for the bill here or the politicians. I think of "what's best for our resource, conservation, management, keeping Iowa great, defending the every day guy and protecting a fragile system."

3) my time outdoors is hard to find as well. We all work hard. Many, like me, have kids, huge work loads and miss vast amount of time hunting. It doesn't change the fact that if a person wants to make hunting a priority for time: we can find 6 seasons to do it, 4 months and 5 weapons. There's zero need, imo, to accommodate for folks lacking "time & weapons" with our current liberal season. Year round hunting? What's enough? We crossed that line long ago imo.

4) so, let's say you are the "average JOE" for hunting.... maybe you don't think this bill could somehow result in less access, fine (I'll agree to disagree on that).... has the average joe's access increased or decreased in last 10-15 years? As in, if u drew on a chart- would it have a trajectory up or down for most folks on average in your opinion??? Why do you all think it has this trajectory??

5) let's say you're right that this additional weapon doesn't take away access or opportunity..... or hurt hunting. ok. You rightfully acknowledge that rifles and crossbows would. I absolutely, 100% agree with you!!!!! Now, what if, the unrealized process that's happening here is this.... each season we accept "more and more" to weapons and seasons. Each year folks just accept the new norm is more Liberalizing of it. We pass this, it engrains the fact that we can screw with regs every year (vs staying firm, conserve or reel back). What if this was yet another step forward to "adding weapons that give opportunity and bring more to the sport" and rifles and crossbows are easily brought into season within the next few years as the natural progression???? I will sit here right now and guarantee you this WILL HAPPEN. And this bill gives it more probability for folks to keep pushing us towards stupid crap like rifles and crossbows. Coming to Iowa soon. As bills like this keep coming, count on it. Mark my words: matter of time before one of these politicians throws out rifles and crossbows. This bill will embolden them. We're down a path that's going to attack & exploit our fragile resource yearly and while all of us squabble over "ahhh, this little more doesn't hurt anything"- the reality across Iowa is: every year the access to good land will go down & get worse. More folks will want to protect the land from Liberal regs. The little guy will get squashed in this process. I guarantee you this "small change" will have some guys saving up for their new AR platform short wall cartridge.... some guys saving up to buy land to protect themselves from the madness and secure precious ACCESS. The "regular hunter" will start next season, the next and the next with just a little bit less land to hunt and less opportunity than the previous season until eventually they throw in the towel. Or we trash our own resource like other states have or mess it up (like pheasant hunting) and Iowa won't be a well managed state anymore folks even care to debate about cause it gets ruined. Am I wrong????
 
At face value I no problem with this bill - all alone and by itself i totally agree that it will not affect anything very much.
If you could guarantee me 100% that this would be the end of it - I would not be in opposition.
I am definitively not anti-gun - I stand to make a nice profit on people running out to buy the latest nich gun to deer hunt with - I am just putting the future of deer hunting in front of my own interests

However, I see how the politicians work and am also afraid that every year we will have some "little bill that doesn't change things much" or "special interest - wouldn't it be cool if we could ...................."
Incrementalism kicks in and before you know it we have High powers in gun seasons for everyone, spears, nunchucks and crossbows in archery season for everyone, unlimited non-resident tags, etc. etc. etc.

Then people will say "how did you let this happen?"
Just like the old proverb of throwing a frog in a pot of boiling water and he will jump right out - but if you put him in cold water and set it on a hot stove he will sit there until it boils and he dies.
 
I agree access has gotten harder and harder every year, for me at least. But for me specifically its because more and more of the older farmers arent around anymore either from death or retiring and selling out, or their grandkids growing up and taking over the hunting rights. And theres no law or bill that will fix that.
I do agree that this is only the beginning, but I also believe that is the case regardless of what happens with this bill although I will agree if this one goes through it will probably speed up the inevitable.
I was just simply arguing that this bill and this bill alone as it stands isnt bad.
 
Passed the full Senate today 49-0. An amendment was offered to limit the number of cartridges a hunter could carry to 10. Not magazine size, but the number of cartridges a hunter could actually carry on their person. The amendment failed 33-16.

Looks like there will be a new method of take during shot gun and youth/disabled seasons. Still needs to be signed by the Governor for it to become law, but with the relative ease this passed both chambers it's a slam dunk to happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom