Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Statest16 t1_iuja6dx wrote

Why do you need a sidearm ,a shotgun at close range would kill a charging animal your not hunting ie... boar,bear,moose etc..

You may hun coyote with any rifle'

Bear with with a 243 or better

Deer is shotgun or muzzleloader only

They really should open up deer in the western counties to rifles .243 or better ,I live in the Berkshires and it's as safe as Vermont in most places to fire a rifle but the lawmakers all live east so MA will never get rifle zones.

​

Who the hell hunts deer with .22lr anyway ?????

We also need a moose lotto in for the North Quabbin and East Berkshire regions with .25 cal muzzle dia minimum but that will never happen.

2

Wishful_Thinking826 OP t1_iujemkm wrote

The idea for the side arm as it was explained to me is 2 fold.

1.) when you're in the middle of being attacked (meaning your already on the ground or within touching distance) the side arm is far more maneuverable and the long gun has probably been dropped. I'm not a big fan of this idea but its not entirely without merit. I'm sure you can find some vid of a guys gun jamming while a boar is charging and him getting it with a pistol but I think this is the exception not the rule.

2.) And this one I do support. Is on long multi day hunts you have a high likelihood of running into stuff around your camp. It's a lot easier and faster to have a pistol on your hip while carrying fire wood or going to the bathroom, or cooking than a long gun on your back. Its also more of something to make a lot of noise and scare it off.

I never carried one in Texas but for elk I carried a 45. Not sure if id do it again though. maybe a Glock but that 45 got HEAVY by day 5 lol

2