Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Why do some state's insist on shotguns for hunting?

About half of NY was traditionally shotgun only. I guess around 10 years ago NY started transitioning from shotgun to rifle. Despite some who thought it would be a disaster, it hasn't resulted in an uptick in accidents.

Back when the shotgun seasons were instsituted most deer hunters either still hunted or did deer drives. This lead to lots of shooting and not all of it was that accurate. These days more and more folks are hunting from stands and blinds and many more shots are more deliberate.

Most of the area that has transitioned from shotgun to rifle looks pretty similar to Ohio and perhaps some there will use NY's record to make similar changes there

On public land its shotgun and slugs only for deer hunting here is CT. On Private Land well 6mm or better for a center fire. They say its a safety issue, its a load of crap, but myths are hard to disprove. These days shotgun and slugs can be very effective and very accurate compared to what the deal was 40 years ago.

Excellent way to spend tax dollars.

The real reason is ignorance.

Really and truly, that is at the heart of it. I am an Ohio resident that does most of his hunting across the river in Kentucky. Back when I made my switch:

1) Ohio did not allow Sunday hunting. Kentucky did.
2) Ohio required a shotgun, muzzleloader, or a few select pistol cartridges. Kentucky? Any centerfire rifle.
3) Ohio's Modern Weapons season did not start until after Thanksgiving. Kentucky's started at the peak of the rut in mid-November.
4) Ohio allowed only one buck per season. Kentucky allowed 2 per season.
5) Ohio's Opener was on a Monday. Kentucky's was on a Saturday.

Since then Ohio has updated its rules a little. You can hunt Sunday now. Meanwhile, Kentucky's herd grew to the point where they decided to start managing for bigger bucks. You can take only 1 buck per season now, but in some areas, you can take as many doe as you want. By that time, I'd already bought land in Kentucky, and I doubt I will ever move back.

Shotgun? This is one of those issues where the anti-hunting pressures and general ignorance combine to thwart good sense. The anti-hunters don't want to give an inch and fight any attempt to modernize the hunting rules. The common wisdom is that shotguns are safer, because the slugs do not carry as far. However, the morbidity statistics between KY and OH say otherwise. The number of deaths and injuries are equal between the two states. Go figure.

There is also a considerable amount of inertia in this in the way of tradition. A lot of Buckeye hunters just don't want to give up their shotguns. Sure, they'll spend $200 a season on ammo trying to get an extra 25 yards out of their shotguns. However, they won't spend the same money to support even a baby step forward like Indiana did with their move to pistol-caliber rifles.

Then it starts getting weird. I've seen folks say the reason Ohio and Iowa have more big bucks than KY is because of the shotgun-only laws. It's true. Iowa and Ohio do produce more B&C bucks than Kentucky, but is it really the shotguns that do it? I have yet to hear a cogent argument to support this.

I will say this: there are some counties in Ohio that have harvest numbers that are over twice that of my county in Kentucky. There are a lot of deer in those counties, and a bunch more hunters. I can see why there might be some concern. I've been out in Ohio on public land. Yikes! Standing on a side of a ridge on Opening Day, it was like thousands of orange fireflies flitting amongst the trees with all the hunters abroad. However, I cannot see Coshocton County turning into a massive circular firing squad if hunters suddenly switched to 'Ought-Sixes and Thurdy-Thurdies.

Frankly, I am happy to pay the non-resident fees every year and leave the madness behind.

So far in Tn, we are still rifle. Except federal and military installations.

Also, in our heavily urbanized areas there were some challenges to "hunting in city limits" for some situations involving suburbanized deer populations.

For example Davidson County population about 700k (Metro-Nashville) has claim to the whole county as technically being "city". So, some were claiming that illegal discharge of a firearm BS. The TnWildlife Resources Agency rules that state hunting laws over ride city ordinances. So we rifle hunt near heavily populated areas for now. Although most guys I know of tend to discretely use archery tackle so as not to alert the mass bunny-hugger rebellion.

It's illeagal to hunt DEER with a rifle in Ohio.
And un- needed.

It's not Wyoming. Ohio farmlands are flat. Except for the SE 1/3 of the state.
In the NW the highest elevation you'll find is a freeway ramp!

Shoot a 30-06 there and you'll hit a house in Indiana.

Even before gun makers decided to help. Our shotguns were plenty for deer.
I put a mid barrel bead on my favorite J. C. Higgins pump and could hold slugs on a paper plate all day at 75 yards.

Now? we''ve got scopes and rifled tubes.. 150 yards ? no problem.

No grizzels or tigers unless some nut decides to let them loose!

So you're sayin' a shotgun slug can't travel more than 100 yards???

We have the same BS here in the part of TAX HELL WISCONSIN.. And it's exactly what I called it - BS!!!! Think of it - I can use a .44 magnum handgun (or .357, or .45LC etc) , but I can't use a lever-action rifle chambered in THOSE VERY SAME CARTRIDGES...

It's utter stupidity..

Of course Florida is as flat as Iowa and has 7 TIMES the population density of Iowa. And we even use rifles for turkey and our Deer rifle season is 6 TIMES longer than your shotgun season.

I know you don't make the law, but the safety excuse for shotgun only is pure retard logic.

There ain't no reason to not use rifles along the river in Illinois, Indiana and Ohio. Ohio has more mountainous counties than Illinois too. Illinois manages deer hunting by county. No reason Ohio can't too.

Here in Wi most the shotgun only zones have been done away with and the sky hasn't fallen yet. No dead cows,no bullets flying into school yards, and no
Old lady's taking some lead while they read the Sunday paper.

A lot of people including hunters around here are against rifles.

Why would you hit a house with an 06? Unless you AIMED at a house? One of my MZ is capable of 300 yards really easily... Shotguns pretty much to 200 these days....

Virginia is divided{east of and west of the Blue Ridge mtns} Luckily I am west of and can use rifles.

Sorry, but that is pure stupidity. Flat land is no more dangerous than hunting hills. Florida has 25% more population density than Ohio and we don't have any issue. Our rifle season is also MUCH longer than your shotgun season.

I hunt Florida and Tennessee, one flat as a pancake and the other mountainous and hilly. I have to be cognizant of my shot background much more in Tennessee than Florida, as you're much more likely to have a shot that rises in elevation to the target or where you cannot see what lies behind the target.

On flat land, you can see your backdrop and unless you're sitting in a hole and the deer is taking a nap in your tree stand, only a retard is going to have a shot that travels beyond the line of sight.

Not a bad description of many a deer hunter.

That's true, but theoretically the dumbass factor should be roughly equivalant state to state.

Actually that helped save us from going slugs only around here IIRC.
Years ago dad wouldn't let us kids use rifles as he thought they were too dangerous compared to rifles.
After a rather hair raising experience which taught him how far slugs go after they ricochet and how often they do so, he started easing up and we havent used slugs on our farm in 10 years.

Bottom line, if you dont practice safe shooting habits, line of fire, know whats beyond the target, etc, a shotgun and slugs won't be much safer.

In fact, my experience is, when folks switch to shotguns, they think they can shoot every which way "because they don't go very far".

Why not copper slugs? Barnes makes them.

Frankly, I don't believe there is much of any lead sheared off slugs. I've recovered very few but those I have were intact.

In Iowa we can also use handguns, just no bottleneck cases, and muzzleloaders, including the smokeless Savage's. I don't feel hampered by the requirements, but for those who do, just stay home.

(not pointed at anyone in particular)

I think it is kind of ridiculous to argue the need for shotguns based on the assumption that the bulk of hunters are slobs, or that a large number of hunters are going to make the heinous error of shooting blindly into the air and causing a bullet to carry miles.

I hunt in SW Bracken County, KY. Opening day has between 1-3 shot strings per minute during the first 4 hours of the Rifle Opener. I've been hunting this location for 10 years. Any centerfire rifle is legal, but you may have no more than a 10-round magazine. Despite the incredible volume of fire and the extremely high density of hunters and deer. . .

a) No windows have ever been broken
b) No siding has ever received a bullet hole
c) No leaks have ever shown up in the roof attributable to a bullet
c) We have had no damage to any property whatsoever

Furthermore, I resided the house in 2002. At the time, the house had been standing since 1902. After 100 years standing, I found no evidence in the siding, studs, or other structures of the house to indicate bullet damage.

I have had exactly one incident in 10 years. In November 2001, I was walking across the yard between the house and the sheds and I did hear one bullet come tumbling overhead. It was probably a ricochet from a long way off. However, in the next decade, out in the worst of it, I have yet to hear a bullet in the trees while I'm in my stand.

To my knowledge, Ohio and Kentucky have similar morbidity due to hunting. Most incidents are due to a rookie hunter shooting someone at close range in a mistaken-for-game accident. That is something no limit on firearms is going to fix. I remember one episode in KY back in 2004 where a round went into a car door while the vehicle was going down the expressway, but that's about it. Most farmers I've met with over the years (on both sides of the Ohio) are more worried about squirrel hunters using 22 LR and coon hunters than they are about centerfire rifle.

At a 0� firing angle and taking ricochets into account, some widely used shotgun-ammunition combinations are riskier than centerfire rifles. The relative risk of shot-guns versus rifles depends on the ammunition and angle at which the shot is fired. At ele-vated angles (35, 10 and 5 degrees), modern high velocity saboted shotgun slugs1 travel shorter distances and therefore are less risky than many common centerfire rifle-ammunition combinations. However, when fired at approximately 0� (i.e., a hunter firing at a deer on level ground), the same 12 gauge shotgun-ammunition combinations were found to be more risky than .30-06 rifles be-cause the modern shotgun slugs tend to travel further after ricocheting than rifle bullets. This is because, after hitting the ground at shallow angles of impact, rifle bullet ricochets tend to tumble in flight, creating a high drag, whereas shotgun slugs maintain more of their energy and aerodynamic properties and there-fore travel further. In all cases, muzzleloaders were less risky than both rifles and shotguns.