.270 Winchester Illegal?

I thought it was a joke when I read the OP. WTF is wrong with these people? I can understand minimum calibers or power levels but to exclude for no good reason any number of suitable rounds is beyond stupid. I suspect they will have to rethink that when they get deluged with phone calls and emails telling them how stupid they are.

It's because the 270 Win is so good it ought to be illegal

Buckdog said:

OK you guys I own a farm in Indiana and here is some of the story as I know it. 1st last year on the table was a proposal to make all 243 and bigger legal it went thru public comment etc and DNR said ok all good we will legalize rifles then they got some back door political pressure I think from the anti's and they vetoed it at the last minute just before the new regs went out in august. A pro gun state senators then came up with this weird law of only 243 and 308 caliber bullets tacked it onto another bill and passed it behind DNR's back and choked rifles down the DNR's throat this spring and forced dnr to allow rifles. as the law is written it is ONLY ON PRIVATE LAND and only for 3 years as a test. So hurray for the state senator my 300 win and 300wby mags are gonna smoke some deer big time!!! KInda scary though as the red neck boys in indy aren't used to rifles and think if they see it they can just blaze away like they already do with shotguns I think a few people may be hurt before its through! The bigger issue now is TB has been found in the deer in indy.

Click to expand...

This is mostly correct, but not the whole story. Until the mid 2000s shotguns and muzzleloaders had been the only longarms legal for deer hunting in Indiana (in handguns, .243 and up had been legal for awhile) but after a couple of tries and a bitter fight Pistol Caliber Rifles with a minimum of .357 caliber and a max case length of 1.6" were legalized statewide. A year later the maximum case length was increased to 1.8". Then last year, after several safe successful years with the PCRs, the DNR considered a proposal to legalize all rifles .243 and up but it was killed based on lies and misinformation in a backroom deal. To overcome a coalition of anti-s, "local" bowhunting groups, and the state deer hunting association, two versions of the basic proposal was introduced in the state Senate and House. The resulting law, was a compromise to quiet critics and ensure passage. As messed up as it is, it is still an improvement for us Hoosiers and does not include some of the even sillier/more onerous ideas that were considered and ultimately rejected. The thinking was that the two calibers would be approved for a 5 season trial period to ensure chaos would not ensue and would provide both an option for the recoil sensitive and cover the most popular caliber. Though the law originally specified 5 calibers/cartridges (4 of which were redundant), DNR later interpreted the law to include all cartridges in .243 and .308 calibers. Nothing about it is ideal but I expect the trial period to go well and all calibers .243 and up approved once more Indiana hunters gain experience with rifles.

I plan on using my .300 WSM this fall, not because it is necessary but because it will be my primary rifle for South Africa in 2018 and I want to get as much hunting experience with it before then as possible.

Hank2211 said:

According to Safari Times, Indiana has just passed a new law legalizing certain rifles for deer hunting (I had no idea any rifles were illegal!).

This law has legalized only the 243 Winchester and the .308. All other calibers are illegal.

I can sort of get why you want a lower limit - you need enough power to ensure a humane kill. That doesn't answer, though, why you need an upper limit.

Still less do I understand why anything in between is illegal. What is special about the .270 Winchester, for example, that makes it illegal for deer hunting, while calibers on either side of it are perfectly fine?

Can anyone from Indiana (or anywhere?) help with this?

Click to expand...

I have never heard of an upper limit.

I have head of minimums though. Seems very strange. Who comes up with these ideas anyway???

Hank2211 said:

but not a .270

Click to expand...

Communist bastards!

Baby steps. We at least finally have the right to use a Rifle. It is already beginning to get worked out. Indiana is a pro gun state and intelligent people will make it happen. When handguns were first allowed there were also some quirks and kinks in the rules that were relaxed eventually.

@DFC4545 just trying to take a humorous shot and take up for my pet caliber. Glad you are getting to use rifles and moving toward more. I bet a guy could get a good deal on a good slug gun in Indiana in a few years.

Actually you can now!

The funny thing is most of the shots are 100 yards or less. I still just use my .45 long colt lever Rifle.

Yes slug guns are going at bargain prices.

My first “big” gun was a Rossi saddle rifle in 357mag my dad got me for my 10th birthday. Probably killed as many deer with it as I have my 270.

Iron sights, points like my finger, great Oklahoma brush gun.

That is what my brother and his son and daughter use. They blame me. I let them shoot mine, they saw the success I was having, and all went out and bought their own.

When I pass mine to my son I think I’ll have to pick up one of those Uberti replicas of a Henry in 45. I’ve wanted a Henry rifle since my first John Wayne movie.

45-70 is off limits? why cant you kill a deer with a 300-400 grain bullet?

Sounds like the first step in Gun Control.

At first the case was listed as too long so not allowed. Many people just shortened the case to be a rule beater. Questionable as to legal but effective.

Not hard to understand really. Many politicians and bureaucrats are clueless about such things. Stupid can't be fixed- just avoided. But, they keep getting voted in...

I was just reading through some threads and happened across this one. It is truly sad how people in power cast a subjective vote on an issue that they are completely ignorant of. Funny how in America, the Electoral College was created to prevent this, yet now it comes from the educated professional politician instead of the layman.

The rational behind shotguns with slugs and muzzleloader is to limit range of an errand bullet in more highly populated areas. It is a percieved public safety issue.

Seems a very rational move when they allowed certain handgun type calibers to be allowed as well as they would have similar limited range. And then you end up with all the case sizes, etc. to try and accommodate calibers that meet minimum power for a clean kill and yet limit overall range.

Of course this latest is ridiculous but as mentioned, it is a step forward in gun and landowner rights.

Now most importantly.... I just hope this loosens up the demand for Ruger 44 carbines, so I can find a deal on one to add to my Ruger collection

Hank2211 said:

According to Safari Times, Indiana has just passed a new law legalizing certain rifles for deer hunting (I had no idea any rifles were illegal!).

This law has legalized only the 243 Winchester and the .308. All other calibers are illegal.

I can sort of get why you want a lower limit - you need enough power to ensure a humane kill. That doesn't answer, though, why you need an upper limit.

Still less do I understand why anything in between is illegal. What is special about the .270 Winchester, for example, that makes it illegal for deer hunting, while calibers on either side of it are perfectly fine?

Can anyone from Indiana (or anywhere?) help with this?

Click to expand...

In Australia the 270 Winchester with a 130 bullet is minimum for Sambar deer.
But having only two calibers seems ludicrous.