The Down Range Forum

Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: sksmedic on June 20, 2012, 02:21:28 PM

Title: Is this legal?
Post by: sksmedic on June 20, 2012, 02:21:28 PM
Due to increased fire danger, there have been fire bans instituted by multiple levels of local and federal government. I understand and appreciate the need for some of these restrictions, but an all out shooting ban is just wrong. You can't discharge any firearm, air rifle, or "gas gun".  Given my paranoid mindset, I see this as a way to permanently restrict firearms use in the name of preventing forest fires.

http://www.regionalinfo-alert.org/index.php/2012/06/12/prescott-national-forest-enters-stage-ii-fire-restrictions-june-8th-800-a-m/

Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 20, 2012, 02:28:32 PM
I don't know if it is legal, if it is federal land it probably is.
Remember, there is a difference between what's legal and what may be sensible or right.
The ban including air rifles may be because they fear the projectile generating a spark.
This is not an informed opinion, just applying common sense and giving them the benifit of the doubt.
I'm probably wrong.
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: Solus on June 20, 2012, 07:17:35 PM
I don't think lead pellets can generate a spark.

And there are no hot gasses at ignition....

Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 20, 2012, 07:39:57 PM
I don't think lead pellets can generate a spark.

And there are no hot gasses at ignition....



True, but some are plated and not just with copper.
As for heat, you would be surprised at the amount of heat generated by compressed air.
That is, after all, exactly how a diesel engine ignites its fuel.
Back in the 60's Daisy manufactured a rifle that used a primerless, caseless propellant charge attached to the base of the pellet.
It was ignited by the air pressure.
 I forget the model designation but M25 has one.
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: jnevis on June 20, 2012, 08:40:15 PM
I do know that where my grandparents used to live, pine sap and needles could be started VERY easily if it was dry enough and a BB off a rock could spark. 
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: Majer on June 20, 2012, 08:48:39 PM
Back in the 60's Daisy manufactured a rifle that used a primerless, caseless propellant charge attached to the base of the pellet.
It was ignited by the air pressure.
 I forget the model designation but M25 has one.


The Daisy VL
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 20, 2012, 09:37:53 PM
Back in the 60's Daisy manufactured a rifle that used a primerless, caseless propellant charge attached to the base of the pellet.
It was ignited by the air pressure.
 I forget the model designation but M25 has one.


The Daisy VL

Thanks Majer ! 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daisy_V/L
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: kmitch200 on June 20, 2012, 10:34:37 PM
I understand and appreciate the need for some of these restrictions, but an all out shooting ban is just wrong.

I feel your pain. Tonto Nat. Forest has the shooting ban too.
For out of staters, TNF is a gigantic swath North and East of the greater Phx area that has a LOT of land and 6 lakes.
There's only 4 million people in the valley so it probably won't affect anyone ::)
This sucks!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonto_National_Forest
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 20, 2012, 10:43:42 PM
Can't really blame them for being paranoid.
I heard a report on the news the other day that besides the big fire there have been over 200 others across the west .
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: MikeBjerum on June 20, 2012, 11:03:41 PM
Due to increased fire danger, there have been fire bans instituted by multiple levels of local and federal government. I understand and appreciate the need for some of these restrictions, but an all out shooting ban is just wrong. You can't discharge any firearm, air rifle, or "gas gun".  Given my paranoid mindset, I see this as a way to permanently restrict firearms use in the name of preventing forest fires.

http://www.regionalinfo-alert.org/index.php/2012/06/12/prescott-national-forest-enters-stage-ii-fire-restrictions-june-8th-800-a-m/



Not wrong.  Just common sense preventative measure to assure safety.  Just like all fire bans, this too shall pass.  I have survived several of them in my lifetime, and I'm sure I'll put up with more.
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: kmitch200 on June 20, 2012, 11:22:29 PM
Has anyone here ever started a fire by target shooting? (UN-intentional)

In 50 yrs of shooting I have never started a fire that was an oops nor have I seen it done.
I have heard of one at Ben Avery on the hillside/backstop of the main range but I wasn't there to see it.
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: santahog on June 21, 2012, 02:27:02 AM
Out in Kansas at the range on Ft. Riley, it wasn't unusual to get a pretty big brush fire that we had to go stomp out before it took off across the prairie.. I got to the point that I looked for them so we could get at em before it took so long..
I've set off a few in the yard target shooting over the years, too.. I always managed to get to them and stomp them out, but it sure can happen..
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: JC5123 on June 21, 2012, 10:48:28 AM
The Nat. Guard at Camp Gurnsey are starting grass fires all the time with tracers.

A couple weeks ago I was kayaking the Poudre River the morning after the huge fire outside Ft. Collins started. Was only a small fire that morning. By mid afternoon when we pulled off the river it was like being in a blizzard with all the ash that was falling on us.
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: jnevis on June 21, 2012, 11:18:45 AM
While not in the same league as an air rifle or private firearm, we did set part of the range at Camp Pendelton off with a M2, then put it out with a Mk19. :)
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: sksmedic on June 21, 2012, 12:15:51 PM
Sucks
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 23, 2012, 07:56:35 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/thousands-evacuate-shooting-sparks-utah-fire-104306462.html

Thousands evacuate after shooting sparks Utah fire

SARATOGA SPRINGS, Utah (AP) — Thousands of residents whose homes were in danger of being threatened by a Utah wildfire have had to find shelter elsewhere as strong winds fueled a blaze that officials believe was started by target shooters.

Residents of at least 2,300 homes in northern Utah were evacuated Friday, a day after the more than 6-square-mile fire started near the Saratoga Springs landfill, about 40 miles south of Salt Lake City. High winds then helped fan the flames onto tinder-dry grasslands.

Authorities were initially worried as flames moved toward property owned by an explosives company, but the focus turned to saving homes as winds kicked up and the fire moved toward Saratoga Springs.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>MORE AT LINK<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: TAB on June 24, 2012, 01:20:39 AM
I have seen fires started by  tracers and black powder. 
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: kmitch200 on June 24, 2012, 03:08:46 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/thousands-evacuate-shooting-sparks-utah-fire-104306462.html

Thousands evacuate after shooting sparks Utah fire

SARATOGA SPRINGS, Utah (AP) — Thousands of residents whose homes were in danger of being threatened by a Utah wildfire have had to find shelter elsewhere as strong winds fueled a blaze that officials believe was started by target shooters.

This is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about.

From the link: BLM officials say they believe the blaze was caused when a bullet hit a rock and sparked the fire. This is the 20th target-shooting related fire this year in Utah, they said.

We only have BLM's opinion (who hates shooters on public land) that this was caused by gunfire.  

A fire in the southeast part of the greater Phx area started in an area where people frequently target shoot so shooting was blamed.
No eye witnesses, no "I started it", no "We caught the guy", just BLM opinion. BLM didn't say that maybe someone was smoking and an improperly disposed of cigarette caused it. They just go ahead and blame shooting because according to BLM, shooting is bad.

I know that my 700 rounds of 5.56 tracer could/would start a fire - and so far the posts reflect that.
We collectively have many thousands of hours of shooting between all of us, yet nobody has posted that they have they ever seen a fire start from target practice. Other than full auto fire on a military bases and shooting tracers or black powder not one post saying "I did it or saw it once." 

BLM? I call bullshit. 

 
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: TAB on June 25, 2012, 04:09:25 AM
Lawn mowers start fires all the time when they hit rock.  I see no reason why a bullet could not start a fire after hitting a rock.  Granted very unlikly, I still can see it happening. 
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: Pathfinder on June 25, 2012, 06:04:44 AM
Lawn mowers start fires all the time when they hit rock.  I see no reason why a bullet could not start a fire after hitting a rock.  Granted very unlikly, I still can see it happening. 

Copper used in copper jacketed bullets do not spark. Neither do lead bullets. Neither is physically possible to spark. The only candidate, other than a smoker tossing a butt carelessly (very likely), or a tracer, is a very remote possibility of a steel core bullet striking a rock in just exactly the right way as to strip away the bullet from the core, and then having the core hit the rock in just the right way as to cause a spark.

As Tom said, the BLM, in fact the whole Dept. of Ag., is virulently anti-gun, so these statements from BLM are blame, not a proven cause.
Title: Re: Is this legal?
Post by: 1Buckshot on June 25, 2012, 08:27:55 AM
We had a fire at the range next door to me. The shooter was using steel core ammo and was shooting at one of our steel targets.  (Not Smart) The bad part is the guy was either so embarrassed or scared, he took off and did not help out with putting the fire out or help direct the fire trucks were to go.