Nevada Proposes Ban of Trackingpoint Rifles for Hunting & Other Hunting Regulations

Capture2

In a Memorandum published September 24, the Nevada Department of Wildlife, Law Enforcement Division has published suggested updates to NAC 503.142, which would ban the use of TrackingPoint and similar weapons for hunting in the state. The proposed changes include a number of updates to the regulations including:

  1. Removing the requirement that muzzle-loaders use smokeless powders. Modern muzzle-loader powders such as Blackhorn 209 are technically “smokeless” due to the chemical makeup. Blackhorn, and other powders have become very popular due to their cleaner burning characteristics.
  2. Ban the use of “huge military-type cartridges” such as .50 BMG and .416 Barret. The NDW would redefine acceptable calibers for hunting by imposing a limit to the cartridge length to 3 inches. According to the NDW “Virtually all other commonly used hunting cartridges have a case length less than 3 inches”
  3. Remove restrictions on minimum handgun cartridge length for all centerfire cartridges of .22 diameter or larger and with a barrel of 4 inches or more.

While the above is generally boiler-plate for most states, the most provocative proposed change is the ban of  TrackingPoint and similar firearms through the proposed language of:

“It is unlawful to hunt big game mammal with: (a) any firearm that is equipped with any sighting system using a computer or electronically controlled firing mechanism…”

Capture

Ignoring the intended ban on TrackingPoint, there are numerous weapon systems that are moving to heavy integration of electronics. Various scopes available today use a computer to show recommended hold-overs for wind or auto-adjust turrets to compensate for length. Further, solenoid valves are being used to release trigger mechanisms, which is safer than many of the “hair triggers” available on the market today.

On its face, the regulation seems counter-intuitive. One would think the NDW would want the humane harvesting of game, which TrackingPoint and the other electronic technologies would reduce animal suffering by increasing accuracy. Further, it has the potential to reduce risk to other hunters as the shot must be marked then released, reducing the opportunity for errant projectiles.

Those interested in the changes can see them here.



Nathan S.

One of TFB’s resident Jarheads, Nathan now works within the firearms industry. A consecutive Marine rifle and pistol expert, he enjoys local 3-gun, NFA, gunsmithing, MSR’s, & high-speed gear. Nathan has traveled to over 30 countries working with US DoD & foreign MoDs.

Nathan can be reached at Nathan.S@TheFirearmBlog.com

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


Advertisement

  • Anonymoose

    This is a silly law. No one was going to do any of those things anyway.

    • gusto

      I dunnoabout that

      other states recently made it illegal for people to use drones for hunting…

      tracking point isn’t hunting IMO

      heck I have a problem with long range hunting as it is. hunting should never be about “if you can make the shot or not”

      too many error possibilities for it to be ethical. never shoot over your ability I guess but the thing about hunting should never be about how hard of a shot you made..
      if you need something to brag about, brag about how close you got, how good your dog worked or something.

      if you enjoy long range stuff fine, but don’t use live targets
      it is the same with idiots who release birds to shoot them straight away like alive clays

      • Nocternus

        So if i arbitrarily decide that scopes are cheating at hunting and only iron sights will be allowed hence forth. You would be okay with that? What if I decide that rifles aren’t in the spirit of hunting and only smooth bored muzzle loaders will be allowed going forward.

        • Tom Currie

          How about range finders, ballistic programs on smartphones, BDC reticles, or mildot reticles. Where do you draw the line?

        • iksnilol

          No, since scopes help in hitting clearly. Shooting at 900 meters instead of 600 just so you can brag is unethical. If you can get closer, do so. If not, consider the shot carefully.

          • Nocternus

            I would argue that Trackingpoint Rifles also help in hitting your target. What about the Burris Eliminator III. It has a built in laser range finder and a bullet drop compensator. I would say that the Burris and the Trackingpoint are more ethical as they would lead to far less injured animals.

          • iksnilol

            I am just not a fan of long-range hunting in general due to few projos working properly at that range and due to hunting being (IMO) about killing the animal ethically, not bragging to your buddies how you nailed something at 963.84 meters.

          • Nocternus

            All of the deer I have ever shot in my life time has been under 200 yards. That said I don’t begrudge people that choose to shoot them from farther away. It is mainly laziness on my part. I don’t want to have to drag them 963.84 meters back to the truck. If a shooter is confident in their ability to hit consistently at that range more power to them. Your argument against ethically killing the animal could be applied to so many things. Perhaps we should make Bow Hunting illegal as it leads to injured animals.

          • iksnilol

            Ummm… to be fair, I am not really a fan of bowhunting. I don’t mind it but should be some requirements to prove that you know what you’re doing. Seen even deer here in Norway (where bowhunting is illegal) with arrows sticking out their heads and stuff. Nasty crap.

          • Nocternus

            It is not always possible to get up close and personal here in the US with game species. My sister lives in South Dakota and on the national grassland there is no cover whatsoever. I imagine if you want to take a Pronghorn it is not going to be a 100 yard shot. A weapon that increases the likelihood of that shot hitting the sweet spot seems like a more ethical choice to me.

          • RA

            Someone shooting a deer in the head with a bow is that person’s fault, not the bow. You’re letting PC madness creep into your thinking.
            We were hunting deer with bows long before a gun existed. No one was contemplating if it was “humane” or if the animal was “suffering”. This is just tree hugger mentality applying human emotion to animals. Bambi movie 101.

          • iksnilol

            Nah, I’m not. I just don’t like wannabes taking a bow, pretending to be Rambo then maiming animals left and right. If you can kill cleanly with a bow, then do so. But if you’re a crap shot, practice some more before you go out shooting animals.

            “tree hugger” mentality in your case, basic ethics in my case. Basically every religion (and lack of religion) consider ethics important.

          • RA

            I agree and just like you said, be proficient at whatever weapon you use to do your best to make a clean kill.
            I hunt with a crossbow and so far (knock on wood) none of the deer I’v shot have gone farther than 30rds except for one. That one went almost a hundred yards even with the broadhead cutting the heart. I wish it had expired quiker but I didn’t get depressed or think I made the animal “suffer”. I genuinely care about the animals I hunt. I hunted in Germany in 1978 and followed and respected the traditions of the hunt.

          • American Spartan

            How so? Its my life, money, etc who cares?

          • iksnilol

            Because when you shoot at 900 meters instead of 600 you increase the risk of wounding the animal and prolonging it’s suffering.

            If I have to explain to you why it is unethical to wound animals then you’ve honestly no business hunting.

          • American Spartan

            And you base that on what facts/data? More over why ban the tech that could make such shots a surefire thing?

            If you have to justify limiting the rights/freedoms/actions of others based on “muh feels” you have no business claiming you support the 2nd Amendment.

          • iksnilol

            You’re honestly trying to convince me that a 900 meter shot is just as easy and risk free as a 600 meter one (and that’s failing to account for the fact that most hunting bullets won’t open up at the latter distance).

            So no, I don’t care about Trackingpoint but I do care about ethics when killing stuff. I know, that makes me weird considering I kill most animals by slitting their throat.

          • American Spartan

            If you have the right tools, yes it is.

            Its like saying a 1 mile drive is less risky then a 2 mile drive, if you have a car that is not going to break into flames the risk is largely non existent.

            Ethics? Dude, dead is dead. How it gets that way is a non issue.

            Whether its a flint tipped spear or a bolt fired from a rail gun. The end result is the same.

            How is that “ethical”?

          • iksnilol

            So according to you it is ethical of me to shoot the moose in the knee and then wait for it to bleed out?

            Yeah, you’re dense, nothing worthwhile will come out of talking to you any more.

          • American Spartan

            Was it your intent to shoot the Moose in the knee?

          • iksnilol

            Screw it, why not? I mean, according to you I don’t have to care about ethics, besides, it can’t run away with a blown out knee.

            OFF TO KNEECAP THE MEESE!

          • American Spartan

            Well the meat will be will be awful because it is tainted by the Adrenaline but hey your life, your actions, your choice, your tag, your money, etc.

      • Tom Currie

        Hey, Gusto, do you even know what the Trackingpoint system is and how it works, or are you just spouting off based on reading a few headlines on stupid stories that falsely claim it does the aiming for the shooter. With Trackingpoint, the shooter has to first line up the exact sight picture he wants, including any come-up or windage offsets, he then sets that as the sight picture to use for the shot and activates the trigger so that the gun fires when the sight picture is the same as what the shooter already set. All the trackingpoint system does is to prevent the gun from being fired while it is off the target. All the aspects of “hunting” such as finding/stalking game, CHOOSING the correct sight picture, etc are still the same — trackingpoint is not any more ‘unsporting’ than using a good rest to stead the rifle. So, tell me, Gusto, do you take all your hunting shoots from the standing offhand position or do you rest your rifle on something when you shoot? All the hullabaloo about Trackingpoint is complete nonsense. (Admittedly, a lot of that nonsense is the fault of the company making it because they try to make it sound like it does everything for the shooter.) In point of fact, any iPhone or Android phone with a ballistics program is more unsporting than Trackingpoint. If you want to make hunting more sporting, ban firearms and archery equipment and require hunters to take down game by throwing rocks by hand.

        • gusto

          90% of my hunting is done by foot with a dog so offhand shots for me

          and most of my stand hunting is done in driven type hunts so you gotta have room to move so seeking support may not be ideal.

          rangefinder is fine if combined with binos (which you should always carry)

          I think that if you start calculating with BDC, smartphones, charts, dialing in your scope you have moved away from hunting into target shooting, which should not be done. I get that you trust your gear and skills but every thing you do adds a possible error factor which makes it unethical, fine for punching paper but not taking shots at living things.

          I get that there people out there who have the skills needed to do it, but laws aren’t made for the ones who behave, it is made to punish those that misbehave

          there are tons of vids out there of people walking in shots on real game and that is frekkin horrible ethically.

          this kind odd technology will make people who have no business doing it taking those shots.

          And what is the need to do it?

          Scopes makes a goo shooter better, a bad shot will not have it much easier with a scope

        • tt_ttf

          Tom – I suspect you don’t fully understand what TP does either – your comparison with ballistics calcs is not anywhere near close enough

          the big issue is the ATAD’s side of what TP does and it does a LOT more than you listed

          • Tom Currie

            ATAD? Would that be Autothermal Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion or the Association for Teen-Age Diplomats?

            TrackingPoint’s only unique feature is that it waits to match up the sight picture you selected with the current sight picture before it fires — exactly the same thing that any good shooter does manually (wait until the sights are aligned with the target) except that it does it more reliably.

          • tt_ttf

            ATAD Automatic Target Acquisition Device – it was the original name for the early auto targeting systems used by DOD

            and it COMPLETELY removes any level of skill involved in long range shots – a novice can make 1000+ yard shots and TP is proud to have their receptionist say exactly that.

            That’s NOT hunting

          • Tom Currie

            You are right that ATAD isn’t “hunting” but it also isn’t TrackingPoint. TrackingPoint has ABSOLUTELY NO automatic target acquisition functionality. Stop listening to idiots so you will stop sounding like one. Then stop listening to TrackingPoint’s marketing idiots apparently know as much about the device they are selling as Barbara Boxer knows about 50BMG pistols (and, yes, she did a press conference a few years ago about the evil of 50BMG and shows a 50 caliber revolver as an example of how a 50BMG weapon could be concealed — and neither she nor the reporters noticed that the 50BMG round she showed was way to big to fit in the revolver)

        • Joshua Knott

          lol, do you work for tracking point?

      • Bierstadt54

        This is not about what is hunting and what is not hunting. This is about some people deciding how hunting should be conducted and then imposing those views over others through regulations. Admittedly, that is something that happens normally and needs to happen to protect the game and defend against stupid people. So this is a valid conversation.

        My understanding of ethical hunting is a physical human hunter entering a game animal’s habitat, killing said game animal without unnecessary suffering, and harvesting the meat from any taken game. Hunting is a visceral activity. We may call it a sport for public consumption, but any hunter knows it is more than that. It is taking life. We are humans, and this is part of our place in this world. We can use spears, arrows, firearms, and even traps for hunting and furtaking. I do not consider electronic assistants to a firearm to change the nature of hunting, or to be somehow unfair. They are minor additions, no more so than having a GPS in your car changes the entire nature of a road trip.

        If there is a real issue here it is the ethicality of long-range hunting. That is not just TrackingPoint. I do not begrudge someone using their skills with a computer to achieve what others would with skills in ranging and manual long-range shooting. What matters, what should matter, is whether long-range shooting results in more wounded game (as opposed to clean kills or clean misses) than other forms of hunting. I hunt in woods and seldom shoot over 100 yards or so, and there are still plenty of people who hunt around me and shoot off legs! Plenty of people who think they can shoot just once a year, and that is at a deer! Every year the woods echo with someone working their lever-action as if it was an AR-15 (which are banned for hunting in PA). And you know darn well they did not put the deer down. So if the long-range hunters and TrackingPoint shooters can at least do as well as the broader hunting community, then I say let them. And if they are doing worse, there better be a study out proving it before they get regulated out of hunting.

    • USMC03Vet

      Reality is they want to limit the availability and legitimacy of the tech and this is a means to an end. Sadly we have gun owners agreeing with it.

      • tt_ttf

        no – this is about really hunting, not automated killing of animals with not a small measure of safety of people taking very long shots with zoomed in low resolution images.

        the net casts over any form of automatic target acquisition system.

        This is not anti-2nd in any way

        • Fragile Alliance

          The “Sporting Purpose” clause of the 1989 import ban was also said not to be anti-2nd amemendment and look how that turned out.

          • Bill

            We have a shortage of ARs and AKs now? There are plenty of Euro and Asian cars and bikes I’d like that don’t met US standards, but there are also plenty that do.

        • American Spartan

          You are a Fudd.

          • Joshua Knott

            and you are null and void of actual logic.

          • American Spartan

            You support some moronic ban that has no need or value..

      • M-dasher

        Gee….I can’t hunt with a cross bow in my state…..and I can’t hunt deer with a rifle…and I can’t hunt duck with more than 3 rounds in my gun….yet cross bows and rifles and 8 round shotguns are plentiful and freely avaliable……..

        Not everything is a grand conspiracy to keep arms out of the hands of the people…….put your tinfoil hat back on and go back to your mom’s basement

        • raz-0

          The cross bow thing is increasingly going away because banning them is nonsensical. The ban on rifle usually has to do with playing well with proximity to residential properties. The limitation onf capacity in duck hunting is to limit the pace on can take game amongst other things.

          There is nothing sensical about banning a technology that reduces the chance of novice hunters missing. Bad shots are not good for the humane harvesting of game, nor is it good for safety.

          If you want to argue about sport, well sitting ins a tree stand hunting over where you have been putting out food and vitamins isn’t exactly the sport of the hunt, and hasn’t been regulated out of existence.

          • Bill

            Tracking Point is marketed towards novice hunters? Should tyros learn stuff like range estimation, windage, sight alignment & picture and trigger control? Or should they just buy skill in a box?

          • raz-0

            So by that logic, they should ban laser range finders, probably optical ones too. Perhaps even scopes with reticals that permit any kind of ranging.

            Why shouldn’t new hunters have all the advantage they can? Because you don’t like it? Seriously what actual problem does it cause?

          • iksnilol

            Dude, a rifle with a sales price of 15k isn’t marketed towards novices, becomes a weak argument.

          • Joshua Knott

            There’s no use to arguing with those fools, they quite literally dont have any inkling of logic and ethical hunting practices. now can they understand that simple joe is not going to spend 15k on a computer that will be out dated tomorrow, and a shooters skill will still trump all the weight they lugg around, but alas, these same people buying trackingpoints hunt on high fenced areas, heated blinds, etc. And then you have the so called”internet tough guys” with names like “American Spartan” (spartans …man if he actually knew anything other than their battlefield prowess, he might second think his callsign) Same such said dude eats a big mac a day and cant run a mile but has 20 guns and maybe a few hundred bullets. i mean he wants to attack people so its fair game in my book.

          • iksnilol

            Yeah, when he said that the meat will be ruined from purposely wounding an animal I realized he doesn’t really have ethics in that field.

        • American Spartan

          Just remember when they come for what you own how you did not stop them when you could…Moron.

          • Bill

            insert eye roll here

          • American Spartan

            And that is how ever infringement is passed into law, because of fools like you.

          • Bill

            Check something out, Sparky: compare the level of “infringements” on our gun rights 25 years ago to today. You’re either young, or have a really short memory. Here, I’ll help you out:
            AWB sunset
            Heller Decision
            Near nationwide CCW provisions, including 10 states with no regulation at all
            How much of that was present in the “good old days?” Yeah, yeah, yeah, somebodies out to get us. If that’s true, they aren’t doing a crackerjack job.

            Foolmoron: a word I invented just for you.

          • American Spartan

            Can I own a suppressor cash and carry?

            Can I host an “AR build party”?

            Can I own a newly made full auto?

            Can I import NFA items?

            Nothing has changed, not a single one of the existing infringements on the books have been repealed or even attempted to be repealed?

            Not a single one, the good old days were pre 1934.

          • Bill

            Never mind…

          • American Spartan

            That is right cuck, walk away.

          • supergun

            Good retreat.

          • Bill

            Yeah, I know better than to talk to a wall.

          • supergun

            You only retreat when you are getting your a beat. But everyone has a right to their opinion.

          • Bill

            Sure, right, that’s it.

          • supergun

            You would make a good soldier.

          • American Spartan

            When a wall uses facts against a fool with “muh feels” then yeah I guess the wall has more sense then a fool

          • supergun

            You forgot to ask bill about the illegal executive orders stated to us earlier this year from you know who. You know,,,the ones that gives certain people the opportunity to charge you with breaking gun laws decided by one man other than Congress. They label you a felon which means you can not own a gun. Or the atf’s proposal to reclassify gun powder, making it potentially possible for ammo to go sky high. Or hillary’s bold announcement that she will lead in the banning of the AR 15 gun,,,,like she and bill did years ago. Yeah, bill forgot about that one.

          • RA

            TRUMP 2016!

          • supergun

            UROK RA!

          • Joshua Knott

            they struck down the cordite bill btw…….and congress overwhelmingly vetoed terror watch list restrictions.

          • supergun

            democrats did not want a provision in the bill to allow innocent Americans put on the list on purpose of by mistake, to be able to get off the list.

          • Bill

            That doesn’t even make structural sense. When you use your words they have to be in some kind of order.

          • supergun

            The Republicans would have allowed a no fly list, with the provision that any American put on the list by mistake or on purpose could get off the list in a certain time. The democrats did not want that provision in no fly/no gun list. Just like the democrats have been coaxing hillary in the debates. Boy, the leaks are sure coming out about her. What a loser.

          • Bill

            Please cite the “illegal” executive order, cause I don’t know what you are talking about. While you’re at it, explain which court found it illegal and please cite the case. Please identify these “certain people” and how they can charge you, which implies a criminal procedure. How do they “label you a felon” without a criminal proceeding?

            Please cite exactly where, when and in what context Hillary said that she would lead the banning of the AR15. If she and Bill did the same thing years ago, why isn’t the AR15 banned? It sunset after 10 years, and never banned the AR15, only specific features, which are now currently available.

          • supergun

            Look here everyone. We got a walking dead loose. The AR 15 was banned by hillary and bill. The ban expired after a certain number of years went by. Do your own research. I don’t research for idiots. You would not believe the TRUTH if I provided it for you anyway. And they let you vote?

          • Bill

            No, the AR wasn’t banned. ARs with certain features were banned, and that banned expired, so as bans go, it was a miserable failure. As for research, you made a claim; you back it up. Or not, because I don’t think you can. Idiots make claims they can’t back up. Your mouth typed a check your brain can’t cash.

            Look here everyone, we have an ambulatory moron.

          • supergun

            The idiot speaks again. The AR 15 was banned. All gun enthusiasts know this. The clintons were the main ingredients to the ban, as she will be if she is elected. Like I commented before, I don’t take orders from the walking dead who know no TRUTH. Don’t make comments unless you know the hell what you are talking about.

          • Bill

            You need to start abusing a higher quality of drugs.

          • supergun

            Are you still hanging around? Boy, do you like abuse. I bet your mommy beat you. Sorry that the government meds were slow getting to you this month. I better stop here and keep it civil, but with the walking dead ranting so much, I can’t help it.

        • USMC03Vet

          You’re your own worst enemy. My condolences.

      • Laionidas

        Why? It doesn’t say anything about making TrackingPoint illegal in itself right, just illegal to hunt with? I generally object to extra regulation, but I do think using a TrackingPoint to hunt is unsportsmanslike and makes taking an animal’s life too much of a webstore shopping experience. If you want that, go buy your meat from a butcher or a legit hunter.

        • bekwell

          Hunting is not a sport. It’s exists to put meat on the table. If you want sports — go to the range with a paper target.

          • Joshua Knott

            it has a place on the battlefield, if you “really need the meat” you really dont have 15k to spend on a rifle, i mean thats 14 full head of cattle in my book. and thats alot of meat…..

      • RA

        As long as they don’t stop me from the right to own and buy, I’m not worried if they don’t allow it for hunting. Personally I would rather have this for sniper operations in combat.

  • Rusty S.

    Though counter-intuitive in relation to your last point, such regulations usually fall under the aegis of “fair chase”. Western states generally don’t allow baiting/feed stations for the same reason.

    • Tom Currie

      When will Nevada ban high fence private hunting land?

      Ooops, Never! Because it brings in too much money.

  • Devil_Doc

    If you can’t reliably hit where you’re aiming with just a quality scope, you’re either shooting beyond your ability, or you’re shooting at distances beyond what any ethical hunter I know would still call hunting. These are living animals, not moving targets. Furthest shot I’ve ever made on a game animal was 142 yards, and that required skill and persistence on my part. How is it fair chase if you can sit 1000 yards away and let a computer determine the shot?

    • Joshua

      Lol fair…you want fair? Go kill the deer with your bare hands.

      Nothing fair about guns, also 142 yards isnt that long of a distance.

      • Billy Jack

        BTW – I’d pay you five dollars to watch that.

        • mbrd

          i’ll kick in another five!

      • Southpaw89

        You’ve clearly never hunted.

      • Devil_Doc

        I didn’t say fair, I said fair chase. If you’re not familiar with the expression, you should look it up. 142 yards is NOT a long distance, that’s the point. It took days of being exposed to rain and snow, miles of walking, reading tracks and patterning animals to get that close. Of course there is also pre season scouting, planning, working up loads for your rifle, not to mention the exercise to make sure i’m physically ready. Or.. I can just drive to the edge of a valley, pull out my expensive gun and scope, and start whacking animals from so far away that it bears no real relation to hunting. Do you see the difference?

        • Joshua

          Work smart, not harder comes to mind.

          • Devil_Doc

            Not trying to be snarky, but do you hunt?

    • john huscio

      fair play s the last thing I’m thinking of when I wanna put meat in the freezer.

      • Joseph Goins

        Hunting is a sport. If you want meat, don’t be a miser and go to the store.

        • Joshua

          You herped and derped.

          Plenty of people hunt for food. By doing so we know what our meat has had, do you know where the meat in a supermarket comes from???

          Neither do I.

          • Billy Jack

            A lot of rural families would go hungry if they only ate out of the store.

          • Joseph Goins

            A Tyson hatchery two miles from my house that has been repeated investigated numerous times. I know where it comes from; I don’t know what it eats prior to getting on my dinner table.

          • Joseph Goins

            What is more important: the food or the sport?

          • iksnilol

            I doubt folks who spend 15k on one rifle are hunting for sustenance.

          • Dougscamo

            Like I said….I’ve been gone….but you still sly….

      • Joshua Knott

        That’s not hunting ,you already have an immense advantage over prey if you think otherwise we’ll you’re not thinking too hard .

      • Devil_Doc

        I didn’t say fair play, I said fair chase. If I could feed my family entirely with wild game, I would. There’s nothing wrong with using technology to be a better hunter, but some of this technology takes you further and further away from actually hunting. You wouldn’t shoot a fawn, would you? Would you use explosives? Hunt ducks with a cannon?

        • Bill

          “Hunt ducks with a cannon?”

          Another great example. Market hunters using punt guns, which are essentially cannons, did serious damage to waterfowl populations.

          • American Spartan

            And your point? “So lets ban rifles” Because they are “small cannons”.

          • iksnilol

            His point was more likely “too effective tools (AKA unsustainable methods) can and will lead to damaged population numbers”, at least that was his point before you got your panties bunched up in a twist.

            American Spartan, more like American muh edge.

          • American Spartan

            How is the tracking point in anyway “unsustainable”?

            We have more game now then ever before…

            You mad bro that I have such a awesome name?

          • iksnilol

            Same way net fishing is, it’s too effective.

            Not really mad, just cringing at it. Sounds like something a person with Punisher grips (and patches) would pick.

          • American Spartan

            Well then do not use it….

          • iksnilol

            Well, we got toxic cost cutting measures in food (we don’t have to use) yet y’all still got the FDA.

            Y’all don’t need to cut costs in making guns, yet we still have Remington breathing and basically lobotomizing a beloved brand each month.

          • Devil_Doc

            We have more game than ever before BECAUSE of limitations placed on hunting. Turn of the last century, game numbers for several hunted species (bison, elk, deer, types of waterfowl) were on the edge of collapse. I’m no fan of larger government, but lack of control meant people hunted birds with canon, and shot hundreds of bison a day just for the fur and tongue. Regulation can obviously go too far (steel shot vs lead, lead free bullets), but this isn’t it.

          • American Spartan

            So you admit their is no need for more regulations….Thanks..

          • Bill

            My point is market hunters used firearms tech to absolutely decimate game stocks. Study the history.

          • American Spartan

            And are smart rifles decimating game stocks now? No!

          • Bill

            And apparently they won’t be, either. You’d rather wait until a game species is shot to the brink of extinction, or worse?

          • American Spartan

            So a solution in search of problem…Shocking..

          • Bill

            That makes no sense whatsoever.

          • American Spartan

            No really it makes a great deal of it.

        • American Spartan

          If you want to play “most purist hunter” have fun, I will use what ever tools I want to achieve my goals.

          And use using claymores loaded with flechette for hog hunting…

      • Bill

        Raise a cow, it’s cheaper and more reliable in the long run.

    • R3

      I’m moving the goalpost a bit here, but what about for the handicapped? If you were born without, or otherwise misplaced an arm or two, should they not be allowed to use these?

      • tt_ttf

        then let them make a special case but hunting is not something the average joe should be allowed to do with TP type weapon.

        That’s not hunting, that’s shopping with bullets!

        • Don

          It’s nothing more than a tool to help increase your odds just like compensators, normal scopes, aftermarket triggers, bi-pods, tree stands, decoys, etc.. are. They are all tools to increase your odds as well. No rifle, no matter what you add to it, is 100% accurate. As long as you have human interaction you have a high chance of a miss.

          • Devil_Doc

            Does adding a compensator allow an unskilled person to sit 800 yards away from an animal and shoot it with far greater ease than before it was added? No one objects to technology, my objection lies with reducing the level of skill required to hunt, and reducing a living game animal to little more than a target.

          • marathag

            If you got your DNR tag and license and is in the proper season, it doesn’t matter if you shoot it from 2000 yards away or if you stabbed it in the heart with a wooden stick. It’s still dead, legally.

          • Devil_Doc

            I really do see your point. My objection is that this replaces skill with technology. I think hunting should be difficult, and should require serious effort to be good at. TP scopes mean anyone with money can throw on some Ugg Boots and a puffy jacket, and kill an animal at ludicrous ranges, never getting more than a few feet away from their latte. This is not hunting, to me. It’s garish and ugly. Can you see my point?

          • marathag

            Technology has been replacing skill since the days of Matchlocks. You can’t stop it.

            Unless there is a calling for a real ‘primitive’ season, where no tech made after 1400 is allowed, I don’t see the point. Even the tech on Bows today takes old school ‘skill’ mostly out of the picture, as even a cheap Bear bow is as accurate and near the same range as a shotgun firing slugs today.

            Today’s bowman doesn’t need to practice like the old English Yeoman for similar power and accuracy.

            Yet I see no call for banning fiber optic post sights, releases and compound wheels.

          • American Spartan

            Well only use a flint tipped spear then, until you do, Have a coke, and a smile, and Shut The F—-.

          • American Spartan

            And? That is what all tech does. Why should we limit it because “muh feels”?

            Be glad you live in this age, hell you might see a 2000 Yard smart rifle under 5000$ in your life time.

            You do not want to hunt that way? Who is forcing you? I want a names, lists, proof, etc.

            Now, lets see that proof vs the number of people who want to force their values/views/wants onto us….

          • tt_ttf

            TP removes almost everything to do with skill from the shot.

            It allows a complete novice to make 1000+ yard shots from the first shot. TP is proud to have their receptionist who never shot before say exactly that

            Now some things like wind are not completely removed but just about everything else is.

            That’s not hunting

        • Tom Currie

          Another opinion from someone who has no idea what Trackingpoint actually is or does.

          • tt_ttf

            Tom – I am a LOT more aware than you think I am

            I have worked with TP directly, spoken with their engineering team and I have been part of similar programs for the government – go look up Computational Weapon Optic article on TFB – I was part of that effort.

            go back to trolling

      • Billy Jack

        Lots of places the disabled can hunt using vehicles and even shoot out of windows in vehicles which is a huge nono most places. I don’t see why plenty of amputees or even those with very bad arthritis couldn’t use something like that.

      • Devil_Doc

        I don’t have a problem with disabled/mobility limited people using technology to hunt to the best of their ability. But I also think the vast majority of the tiny number of disabled hunters can’t afford a $12k scope any more than I can. The issue is, and remains whether or not this is fair chase. Is it the human vs the animal, in the animals environment, where the animal has every opportunity to outwit or escape the hunter?

    • USMC03Vet

      They’ll use the same logic for what constitutes legitimate citizen use. You fell right into their trap with this absurd mindset that should allow government to determine what firearm tech citizens should or shouldn’t use or have access too. Give an inch and they’ll take a mile. You’ll never get it back either.

      • tt_ttf

        stop playing the conspiracy card – that’s not what this is about

        • bluecheesedressing

          Wrong.

        • USMC03Vet

          It’s not a conspiracy. This is what these people do. If you give them an inch they’ll take a mile. It’s depressing that many hunters still fall for it.

      • gusto

        who has called for it to be banned?

        not allowed in hunting is not the same thing as banned.

        I don’t think you should be allowed to hunt bear with a 22lr revolver either, doesn’t mean I want 22lr revolver banned

        and it is not even about the hunter/gunowner it is about the bear

        • Bill

          Great example.

        • USMC03Vet

          Once you set the narrative that it isn’t legitimate then the easily part of banning it occurs. They are trying to set precedent and create the narrative. Have you been living under the rock for years? Apparently so.

    • n0truscotsman

      Who cares about ‘fair’? if its a clean, ethical kill and the user has a degree of skill, then that is a good thing.

      • Devil_Doc

        I care about fair, and so should other ethical hunters. I respect the animals that I hunt, which is why I object to reducing them to long range targets.

        • American Spartan

          Define fair?

          I respect success.

  • Bob

    For all six of the millionaires who were going to use the Trackingpoints…

    • Flounder

      Trackingpoint is a utah company. It is actually local to me and the guy who owns it goes to the surrounding states often. I know he has given out “samples” to lots of people here and in nevada. So some very skilled shooters and other industry people have them.

      I think this whole thing is just a silly power grab that has little to do with animals.

      • tt_ttf

        They are based in Austin TX not Utah

        • Flounder

          I thought i had met the owner but it could have been a salesman or he could have just traveled. But when i check their website you are right. I guess all i know for sure is all four of my local gunshops have had their rifles on their shelves. And when i say local i mean within 10 minutes of me.

      • iksnilol

        Kinda silly to give them to skilled shooters.

        • Flounder

          The rifles just do a little math. You still have to do everything yourself, it doesnt steady the rifle, it doesnt pull the trigger, anf if you tag something wrong its gonna give you all the wrong numbers. The trackingpoint system is a range finder and ballistic table so you get your range and drop right and quick. They are not the magic people think they are. Although they are a start and i hope they make improvements on price and pork.

          • iksnilol

            Yeah, but most of their advertisement is based on “even a 10 year oldcan nail targets at one click with this”.

          • Joshua Knott

            uMMMM what? Trackingpoint uses a servo to release the trigger only at the computers desired position, so technically it kinda does all as the individual shooter doesnt have the freedom to chose the actual breaking point. So no again back to the formula 1 reference, would you rather computer be sitting in the drivers seat or an actual human being?

  • Joseph Goins

    Admittedly, I’m not a hunter anymore so I may be opening myself to criticism. (When I went for deer, I found squirrels; and when I went for squirrels, I found deer.) But, hunting is a sport. Having a sight like the Trackingpoint system eliminates the shooting variables without user input and all but guarantees that the hunter will not go home empty-handed should the individual see his quarry. It isn’t very sporting.

    • American Spartan

      I fight to win, I hunt to score, do not like that? Do not care.

      • Devil_Doc

        Do you ever feel disgust at being a troll? Honestly?

        • American Spartan

          Do you ever feel sad and ashamed fro being wrong and fighting to limit the freedoms of others.

  • R3

    I don’t think the ban is about Trackingpoint per say, just that they get caught up in some unfortunate choice of wording. The units are so expensive and rarely used that it makes no sense to ban them. I believe this is probably more intended as a ban on remote control hunting. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/37e3ed781c2fa12189ffa4886dcc8dcbbf4c8993bcac45b7aab7c140e763d4f7.jpg

    • Flounder

      Nevada would ban drone hunting.

  • tt_ttf

    there is a solid statistical reasoning behind this that I think people miss

    If you are hunting, you need to hump it out there and then stalk an animal – that provides for a very good chance the animal will detect you and not get taken

    Use a tracking point weapon and now start reliably taking game out to 1000+ yards depending on the model, and suddenly a WHOLE lot more animals get taken! I met their receptionist who had never shot before and was nailing targets at 1100 yards out first go – that’s not hunting.

    As for costs – let see, an enterprising company buys a couple of these and “loans” them to customers who now bag a LOT more animals……..off sets the costs a LOT with the same result

    Either of those would require a SERIOUS rethink of tag limits

    • Rick

      Exactly. People don’t realize that game biologists calculate success rates for tags, and factor that into how many tags they give out. Baiting animals would result in much higher success rates, just like tracking point would. Hence the law. Drone hunting is seeing similar push back.

      • Billy Jack

        And just like if baiting or weather or increased populations made it easier to hunt they’d adjust the method or rate of harvest. At this point laws are premature. The various wildlife departments around the country aren’t going to allow herds to be wiped out and Trackingpoint will not become ubiquitous overnight. If Trackingpoint hunter numbers and kills rise they will be restricted.
        Drone hunting could be aerial or ground based and wouldn’t require a person be present and I think is considerably different than tracking point.

        I’m in favor of solving problems before they get a chance to hurt things but this is a bit excessive to me. Drones I’m on board with but this ain’t that.

    • Billy Jack

      Howso @ tag limits? Wildlife and forestry services monitor the size of game populations in their jurisdictions. You can’t hunt what’s not there and even the most dimwitted of private land owners understands if he kills all the bucks he won’t be hunting long. You don’t hand out tags if your herd can’t afford the loss. It doesn’t matter if you take an animal with a bow, sling, muzzle loader or 10mm pistol because no matter what it’s still dead. Allowing a tool that increases odds of hitting what you aim at under the right conditions while presenting field mobility issues isn’t a guaranteed game changer to me.
      You have a reliable algorithm that can show you guaranteed kill rates per tags issued?

      • tt_ttf

        right now I will safely bet the various game and fisheries departments have very good data on just how many tags are successful and they model that into the herd numbers and number of tags issued

        You significantly increase the success rate per tag by allowing TP style weapons (not smart scopes but computer controlled targeting and firing) then those departments have NO choice but to reduce the number of tags

        there is a BIG difference between smart scopes and what TP does

        • Billy Jack

          I think we all get the technology’s possibilities. At this limited stage it feels like jumping the gun. I don’t think the modern hunting community is stupid or selfish. Conservation shows that to be true. If a problem arises wildlife departments have the tools to regulate the effects now. If the people want to restrict this type of device or its more efficient offspring due to its reducing our ability to hunt then it will be the right time and place for this discussion. Until then we are prematurely enacting legal restrictions that haven’t proven themselves a problem outside the minds of certain individuals.

          When suggesting and passing preemptive legislation becomes no big deal we endanger our freedom. Just my opinion. You guys aren’t being unreasonable. I understand your position and that of hunting purists.

  • USMC03Vet

    Sounds like anti gun work around to limit and negatively affect new technology industry growth with firearms. Knowing how deplorable anti 2nd’s are this wouldn’t be a stretch in to further their end game goal.

    • Joshua Knott

      Nevada is a far cry from being anti 2nd amendment

      • Billy Jack

        So is Arizona but today they’re monitoring medical marijuana users and tomorrow they’re going to do in-depth medical record evaluations with a HIPAA exclusion.
        Forestry, biological sciences and LE have plenty of anti-2nd folks in their ranks. Better to be on guard then caught exposed. Slopes can get slippery.

        • Rick

          There are also plenty of us biologists who hunt. Members of my PhD cohort have a regular upland game hunting trip every few weekends. The reason we impose restrictions on what you can use for game is simple: When the game biologists do species count and determine how many animals you can hunt per year, they also factor in things like: lots of tags WILL NOT come up with an animal. So if you want widespread use of this tech, you will see more success per tag, and more success per tag means less tags they give out overall.

          • tt_ttf

            YES – EXACTLY what I have been saying – TP means the chance to take an animal goes way up so less tags will get issued

            can’t understand why people just don’t that

          • Billy Jack

            And how many tags were filled in the last ten years via TP?

        • Joshua Knott

          They should never cross reference HIPPA with a firearms purchase. I will agree to that.

      • USMC03Vet

        Think so? The same place that elected Harry Reid….

  • Joshua Knott

    Sorry, tracking point is not hunting , I can see this as “for disabled hunters” but hunting is a skill learned ,not bought ,but by experience, self dicipline,practice and did I mention skill? It’s like formula 1, the more you take the human out of the equation the less racing you have …… not just my two cents ,but an ethical standpoint .

    • marathag

      So why not ban scopes.
      You can learn to use iron sights, after all
      Just practice more.

      • Billy Jack

        Fake eyes and magazines is unnatural!

        I don’t really care if your rifle is duct taped to your Macbook Pro out there hunting. Just don’t leave your trash in the woods, kill more than you’re licensed to and be safe with other people.

      • Joshua Knott

        manual optics are well…manual….good try. but nowhere near relevant. But practice is the more important process to being a successful hunter.

        • marathag

          Should external range finders and drop tables worked into the target turrets also be banned?

          If you are going to be a technophobe, don’t hold back.
          Why if 17th Jaegers could hunt without fancy iron sights, why should the 21st Century Man have them?

          • Joshua Knott

            its Jager* . No i think your missing the point again, I dont have any problem with tracking point being legal, but again let me use a metaphor so that way it gets braided in your head, when you take the man out of a formula 1 car and let a computer run the mill, its not racing, its just a tech demo. Do you see the difference?? Probably not, so unless you are completely incapable of pulling a trigger with your own finger , unless by disability, then you shouldnt be out there. By the way, hunting is not a bragging right of,
            (you)”Brah you see that shot i made on that mule deer at 500 yards”
            (your buddy)”yeah but it was a gut shot because he moved last second”
            (still you)”but brah i got him, you know Im kinda like a sniper now” There is no reason to be shooting at game animals past where you can actually find the blood trail, and certainly make the most lethal shot possible.
            You know why bow hunters dont have to wear orange when they go out?
            Because idiots like you shot at the first thing that rustles the bush instead of being patient and stalking your prey, you know HUNTING.

          • marathag

            Jaeger is proper, since the phone doesn’t do umlauts easily. ‘E’ is added in that case.

            Seems you want hunting to be as close to caveman style as possible. That’s your call.
            Fudd if you want to.

          • Joshua Knott

            Casual gun owner? Nah i fully support the second amendment as it has nothing really to do with hunting. You do want future generation to be able too actually “hunt” right? i mean if you consider hunting in a heated blind with cable, ipad, high speed internet, tall fences and a trackingpoint then count me out cause thats deplorable hunting. Id rather spend the 15k on ammo and training…..

          • American Spartan

            With the endless regulations you are just dying to impose fewer will have the means to hunt. Way to destroy what you claim to value.

    • RSG

      So you’ve defaulted to what is essentially the anti gunners argument of- when the second amendment was written all that was around were muskets (which wasn’t true anyway)- so that’s all you’re entitled to now. Smh.

      • Joshua Knott

        WoW you sir have won the idiot of the day award, that is not at all what i was trying to get at, nor have you actually taken into context the words written in the article, so lets start with a few things.
        1.I never mentioned to make tracking point illegal, that would be nonsense in itself,.
        2. I said that such said tracking point would be awesome for disabled shooters, and hunters.
        3. If you cant hit the broad side of a barn you should practice more
        4. tell me how regular joe is going to spend 15k on a trackingpoint?
        5.Let me answer, hes not going to spend 15k on such said item and probably has more fun actually shooting the gun.
        6SMHHHHHHH

  • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

    Hunting isnt just a sport. The primary reason I hunt is for food. A close second is because I enjoy it, but by hunting I can get meat cheaper and without all the unnatural crap you find in grocery store meat.

    Either we allow everything or nothing while hunting, or someone has to arbitrarily draw the line as to what is “fair” and what isnt and no 2 people agree on where to draw the line.

    • Joshua Knott

      are you the same guy that goes hunting on high fence properties? This has nothing to do with the second amendment as you people would like to make it, its about ethical hunting. they are not banning tracking point….. There is no good damn reason to have a tracking point unless youre a rich pompous Richard that doesnt take the time to practice. When are you equipping your drone for quail? …..

  • Southpaw89

    Not surprised, most hunting laws are built around the concept of fair chase. This also reflects on the recent bans on using RC aircraft to hunt in many states, there is a certain level of effort expected by both fish and game departments and fellow hunters, and such laws will see little resistance. I don’t think this specifically will lead to bans on this technology in general, hunters often have tighter restrictions on their equipment than is the standard in whatever state they’re in. I also think that the argument that these scopes could make for cleaner kills is pretty weak, if your hunting at ranges where this would create an advantage a lot of other variables come into play,one being sudden movements by the animal itself, you get out far enough and an animal could easily take a step in the interval between pulling the trigger and bullet impact. Not to mention out that far it may be hard to find the track of a wounded animal, leading to lost game. Personally would never use one anyways, just seems like cheating.

  • Tom Currie

    Let’s see: “Virtually all other commonly used hunting cartridges have a case length less than 3 inches” so apparently no one hunts with .30-06 in Nevada — or at least they won’t any more.

    “any firearm that is equipped with any sighting system using a computer or electronically controlled firing mechanism” that covers not only Trackingpoint but also the Burris Eliminator line of rifle scopes as well as the handful of assorted target rifles with electronic triggers such as the Remington Model 700 EtronX Centerfire Target Rifle.

    Welcome to the law of Unintended Consequences at work.

    • Alexandru Ianu

      30-06 case length is 63mm so way less than 3″

    • tt_ttf

      What on earth are you talking about?

      The Burris DOES NOT in any way connect to the trigger nor does the Model 700 have a computer attached to the trigger, it just removed the mechanical linkage

      You seriously need to stop claiming to understand TP or this law because you seriously don’t

      • Tom Currie

        Read the law again tt, the banned device doesn’t need to connect to the trigger nor does it need to be a computer. The law bans ANY SIGHTING SYSTEM USING A COMPUTER. And it also bans any ELECTRONICALLY CONTROLLED FIRING MECHANISM. The key word in that paragraph is the simple “OR” — it doesn’t just ban a computer controlling the trigger (such as TrackingPoint), it bans any sight with a computer in it and it also bans any electronic trigger.

        This is the kind of gotcha that slips into legislation because the legislators don’t understand anything about firearms and 99% of the public don’t read the law or don’t understand legal terminology. No one in the Nevada legislature actually wrote that law. I don’t know if that OR slipped in there accidentally because the staffer who wrote the actual bill didn’t know better, or perhaps it was put there by someone who did know exactly what it would mean. Either way, the bill bans a lot more than TrackingPoint.

        • tt_ttf

          Stop over reaching

          This DOES NOT cover the Burris scope which is not a computer

  • Robert Byrns

    The part I see as needing clarification on is “Cartridge length as compared to case length”. There is a difference !!!!!!!!!!!!

  • n0truscotsman

    1.) trackingpoints are extraordinarly expensive. Out of reach for a overwhelming number of hunters with the exception of millionaires and billionaires for obvious reasons.

    2.) If trackingpoint can permit you to make more clean, human kills, then that should be beneficial, not a detriment.

    More regulations, more bans, more restrictions. Never ends.

    • Joshua Allen

      According to the website, Trackingpoint has a 300 yard version for about $6000 along with easy payment plans and 90days good as cash. While certainly expensive, probably too expensive for the average hunter, they are not out of reach to to the same folks who would buy a jet sky, a modest Rolex, or a time share – in other words, the middle class.

  • 11b

    So you’re saying I cant use my Metal Storm 36-barreled stacked projectile volley gun to hunt with because it’s electronically controlled? Absurd.

  • Tyler Norona

    The .50bmg is not all that great for hunting if you like to eat what you shoot. These changes all seam like a fix for a non existent problem. A fine example of a federal agency trying to stay relevant.

    • Devil_Doc

      You think there aren’t people out there hunting with a 50?

  • Mystick

    Nonsense to be expected from the spawning grounds of Harry Reid.

  • Sunshine_Shooter

    I’m fine with TrackingPoint being banned from hunting. Hunting is a sport, a recreation and diversion for most. Having restrictions on a recreation is fine. You can’t use your hands in soccer, you can’t carry a basketball, a tennis ball has to cross the net before bouncing, and you cannot use computer-controlled triggers and “aimbots” when hunting.

    The joy and challenge of hunting lies not with the efficiency with which one can slaughter animals, the joy is in purposefully handicapping oneself of modernity and entering nature as we did in centuries past.

    If the legislatures try banning these rifles from private possession, I’ll be singing a different tune.

  • Lee

    Why would you want to ban a technology that could help disabled veterans and other individuals with physical disabilities hunt and kill their game ethically? Seriously? That makes no sense…

  • Nathan

    The point is to define firearms for sport so “they” can erode the constitutional right to own those firearms for civilian defense. Smokescreen for future gun bans, Nevadans need to stamp this wildfire out.

  • RA

    “One would think the NDW would want the humane harvesting of game, which TrackingPoint and the other electronic technologies would reduce animal suffering by increasing accuracy.”
    IMHO This statement is a perfect example of PC madness.
    Animals die in nature. It is natural for them to die. Actually it is natural for all living things to die. Animals are killed in nature by predators, fighting, disease etc. Suffering is an emotional human term being used out of context for, in this case, game animals.