A can of worms?

[Jaabaa]

I read it all Scriv and with comments have to say Regulation and Tarrifs
And Chief made a good point
It all could change in weeks

 

[Billm]

I hope that everything turns out well for you in that regard.

It did so far, thanks. I had the day part, drinking and posting in the waiting room.

 

[Billm]

Me too!

It did thanks.

 

[Billm]

They haven't had any problem with other primitive weapons like bows, crossbows or sidelock muzzleloaders, so I don't see any problem for hunting. In fact, Georga has a special primitive weapons season that you can use any of them including airguns in. I wish Florida would do the same rather than just during the gun season. In line muzzleloaders can be an issue in some locations. In my view a can of worms could open up with all of the power increases if they exceeded sidelock muzzleloaders and or the high-powered semi auto models. Sidelock black powder muzzleloaders, 45 & 50 cal. with 120 grains of BP can shoot a round ball at 2000-2200FPS, basically twice as fast as any airgun, so as long as they stay well within the primitive weapons realm. I would not lose too much sleep over it. I think it is more likely that they will strongly encourage everyone to use primitive weapons someday down the line, but I don't think I will be around long enough to see it.

Good luck Billm

Thanks. I would like to see a day or two of airgun only or an airgun youth only day in Florida. I was a fanatical bow hunter back in the day. Florida provides a lot of bow hunting days, it wouldn’t hurt to give one or two days to the airgunners. Airgunning would be a great way to introduce kids to both airguns and hunting. It would grow more young airgunners and young hunters, a win-win.

 

[Chief_Pellet_Officer]

Thank you for your thoughtful post and for encouraging rational discussion—it's what makes HAM great. While the concern regarding regulation is understandable, it’s important to recognize that high-power airguns are not a modern "discovery" that might suddenly alarm legislators. Big-bore airguns have existed for centuries, and even the airguns of our youth possessed enough energy to require serious responsibility. The "power" isn’t new; what is new is the successful effort to have that power recognized as an ethical tool for conservation. We now have 18 years of data starting with Missouri in 2009, proving that big-bore hunting can be integrated safely and positively into state regulations.

The growth of the Airgun Sporting Association (ASA) from 12 states in 2018 to 29 states by the 2025–2026 season shows that advocacy is working. This momentum isn't just about expansion; it’s about legitimacy. When hunters like Ken Cox advocate at the state house, they move airguns out of a legal "gray area" and into a codified hunting category. This recognition often acts as a safeguard; it is much harder for a legislator to arbitrarily reclassify an airgun as a firearm when it is already a vital, established part of the state’s wildlife management and hunting culture.

Ultimately, the airgun community has always had a segment dedicated to hunting, and their efforts have yielded nearly two decades of successful, legal big-game seasons without the "sky falling" in terms of restrictive licensing. By being proactive and proving we are a responsible, effective user group, we ensure a seat at the table. Rather than drawing negative attention, this transition into mainstream hunting allows us to define ourselves as ethical sportsmen before someone else tries to define us through unnecessary regulation.

 

[Scriv]

@Chief_Pellet_Officer This recognition often acts as a safeguard; it is much harder for a legislator to arbitrarily reclassify an airgun as a firearm when it is already a vital, established part of the state’s wildlife management and hunting culture.

I particularly appreciate you addressing this concern. Most legislators are unable to properly identify operating characteristics of most firearms, which leads to the concern of arbitrary reclassification of airguns in my opinion. It is of some comfort that your organization is aware going forward so that you may "head them off at the pass" so to speak.

 

[FL22]

Is the goal to blanket all Airguns regardless of caliber/FPE with this or just big bore?

 

[Pumacarl]

I have always wanted the term "airgun" to mean only guns shooting below the power level of the least powerful publicly available and widely used firearm cartridge, namely the .22LR HV round, of which billions are made every year. So basically sub-110fpe. It doesn't matter what caliber or weight, just stay below the firearm threshold. Once you go past that you are shooting in firearm territory and the rest of the population will see air powered as a distinction without a difference. Regulation, and being lumped in, follows, and yeah, it's a can of worms.

Most, around here, seem to really like worms. lol

 

[Grunt64]

There has been an introduction written for ASA that has prompted some thought on things for some, and that I have thought about for quite some time. I'd like to just flat out say what I've been thinking purely for your consideration. It is incumbent on all of us to handle these thoughts in a constructive, rational manner to maintain the high standards we all enjoy here on HAM. It has been stated that a primary focus of the ASA is to promote hunting with airguns in more states. Let me state that I am not opposed to this, but it will come at a price, as all things do. We've already discussed the possibility of excise taxes being applied in the remarks section of that article. I think that is a real possibility. What really has me concerned is that when one makes the argument for expanding hunting with an air gun, one is going to refer to their ability to cleanly dispatch game. It will not take many of these conversations before some legislators realize that they can be as efficient as firearms, and should be classified as such. One thing that legislators love is to write laws. It is not much of a stretch to think that they could write something along the power level licensing that our UK members currently enjoy, or carte blanche apply the same requirements that are applied to firearms. Think about buying a firearm from an out of state dealer, as compared to ordering an airgun, and what that entails. I should probably just stop right there, so you can let that marinate for a bit. I'm sure that many of you have already thought about it. I'm also sure that many are thinking "that will never happen". Anyway, give it some thought, see what you think, and if you decide to share, please be responsible, respectful, and considerate in your response. Thanks for the read.

​

I’ve been thinking about this from another angle, and I’ll share it here in the same constructive spirit as the original post. I’m not convinced that opening every state to airgun deer hunting is automatically a good thing. In some places, hunter density is already high, public land is limited, and deer numbers aren’t as robust as they look on paper. If airguns suddenly doubled the number of people in the woods during deer season, I’m not sure that would benefit the resource or the reputation of airgun hunting in the long run.

On the equipment side, I also feel strongly that if a state does allow airguns for deer, the minimum should be a true big‑bore — .45 caliber and up, producing at least 400 foot‑pounds. Smaller calibers can certainly take a deer under perfect conditions, but they don’t offer the same margin for real‑world variables like bone, angle, wind, or less‑than‑ideal shot placement. A .45 with adequate energy gives the hunter and the animal the best chance at a clean, ethical outcome.

I’m not against expanding opportunities, but I think it needs to be done carefully. If we grow too fast or with too low a standard, we risk more wounded deer, more conflicts in the field, and ultimately more scrutiny from the same lawmakers we’re trying to avoid. Responsible growth protects both the sport and the resource, and I’d rather see a few states do it right than all states do it poorly.

 

[Billm]

​

I’ve been thinking about this from another angle, and I’ll share it here in the same constructive spirit as the original post. I’m not convinced that opening every state to airgun deer hunting is automatically a good thing. In some places, hunter density is already high, public land is limited, and deer numbers aren’t as robust as they look on paper. If airguns suddenly doubled the number of people in the woods during deer season, I’m not sure that would benefit the resource or the reputation of airgun hunting in the long run.

On the equipment side, I also feel strongly that if a state does allow airguns for deer, the minimum should be a true big‑bore — .45 caliber and up, producing at least 400 foot‑pounds. Smaller calibers can certainly take a deer under perfect conditions, but they don’t offer the same margin for real‑world variables like bone, angle, wind, or less‑than‑ideal shot placement. A .45 with adequate energy gives the hunter and the animal the best chance at a clean, ethical outcome.

I’m not against expanding opportunities, but I think it needs to be done carefully. If we grow too fast or with too low a standard, we risk more wounded deer, more conflicts in the field, and ultimately more scrutiny from the same lawmakers we’re trying to avoid. Responsible growth protects both the sport and the resource, and I’d rather see a few states do it right than all states do it poorly.

I agree with a lot of what you’re saying. Floridas min airgun criteria for deer is PCP . 30 or greater or arrow (airbow). I’m going out tomorrow with my Sonoran and some 45gr slugs, hoping to get a nice buck. I’m joking, but perfectly legal. I’m assuming they chose .30 single projectile, as that was the minimum for muzzleloaders. I

 

[cosmic]

What have they done for Illinois ?? NOTHING !!! This will doom all states !!!

 

[Chief_Pellet_Officer]

Good morning everyone,

I am thrilled by the level of enthusiasm here; it’s exactly what drew me to this community.

Regarding the minimums: The ASA currently recommends .35 caliber and 200 fpe as the baseline for big game. While I agree that a .45 often provides a better margin for success in the field, hunting is rarely one-size-fits-all. Ultimately, it comes down to the hunter knowing their limitations and their specific environment.

One of the primary reasons we focus on the .35 caliber mark is because it represents a critical "crossroads" for the future of the industry—specifically regarding where the Federal Excise Tax (FET) might eventually land. That limit is not yet set in stone, and establishing where that line is drawn is one of the key points we are working on.

I also want to respectfully address the idea that the ASA only cares about the "industry side" of things. To be honest, that couldn’t be further from the truth. If it feels like hunting has been the priority, it’s simply because that’s where the most activity is. The airgun hunters on Hard Air are an incredibly vocal and active group, and we are responding to that energy. However, we represent the entire community.

FET is a complex topic, and I don't want to get too bogged down in the details today. I plan on sharing a more detailed clarification of our positions in the future.

In the meantime, I am here to listen. I encourage you to join the ASA to help us steer this ship ASA Membership.
If you want to help shape the path forward for airguns, we need your input.

Thanks for the honest discussion, everyone.

 

[hameditor]

Good morning everyone,

I am thrilled by the level of enthusiasm here; it’s exactly what drew me to this community.

Regarding the minimums: The ASA currently recommends .35 caliber and 200 fpe as the baseline for big game. While I agree that a .45 often provides a better margin for success in the field, hunting is rarely one-size-fits-all. Ultimately, it comes down to the hunter knowing their limitations and their specific environment.

One of the primary reasons we focus on the .35 caliber mark is because it represents a critical "crossroads" for the future of the industry—specifically regarding where the Federal Excise Tax (FET) might eventually land. That limit is not yet set in stone, and establishing where that line is drawn is one of the key points we are working on.

I also want to respectfully address the idea that the ASA only cares about the "industry side" of things. To be honest, that couldn’t be further from the truth. If it feels like hunting has been the priority, it’s simply because that’s where the most activity is. The airgun hunters on Hard Air are an incredibly vocal and active group, and we are responding to that energy. However, we represent the entire community.

FET is a complex topic, and I don't want to get too bogged down in the details today. I plan on sharing a more detailed clarification of our positions in the future.

In the meantime, I am here to listen. I encourage you to join the ASA to help us steer this ship ASA Membership.
If you want to help shape the path forward for airguns, we need your input.

Thanks for the honest discussion, everyone.

Ed thanks for your message. It is much appreciated !

Your participation like this shows a positive new direction for the ASA in engaging with us everyday airgunners. I hope to facilitate this as much as possible for the benefit of all

 

[Billm]

Good morning everyone,

I am thrilled by the level of enthusiasm here; it’s exactly what drew me to this community.

Regarding the minimums: The ASA currently recommends .35 caliber and 200 fpe as the baseline for big game. While I agree that a .45 often provides a better margin for success in the field, hunting is rarely one-size-fits-all. Ultimately, it comes down to the hunter knowing their limitations and their specific environment.

One of the primary reasons we focus on the .35 caliber mark is because it represents a critical "crossroads" for the future of the industry—specifically regarding where the Federal Excise Tax (FET) might eventually land. That limit is not yet set in stone, and establishing where that line is drawn is one of the key points we are working on.

I also want to respectfully address the idea that the ASA only cares about the "industry side" of things. To be honest, that couldn’t be further from the truth. If it feels like hunting has been the priority, it’s simply because that’s where the most activity is. The airgun hunters on Hard Air are an incredibly vocal and active group, and we are responding to that energy. However, we represent the entire community.

FET is a complex topic, and I don't want to get too bogged down in the details today. I plan on sharing a more detailed clarification of our positions in the future.

In the meantime, I am here to listen. I encourage you to join the ASA to help us steer this ship ASA Membership.
If you want to help shape the path forward for airguns, we need your input.

Thanks for the honest discussion, everyone.

I am really glad you responded in the way that you did and hope you continue to respond and convey more of what you/ASA are doing. If you plan on encouraging discussion, it might be a good idea for @hameditor to maybe provide you with your own category in an effort to keep the discussion ongoing and contained in one area. I also agree with your .35 min limit for deer etc., if there were more options in .338 that would probably be my choice. I’ll read between the lines and guess that the state Fish & Game association are pushing for FET on airguns .35 caliber and above. I really hope to see continued discussion. I have several thoughts on joining, but I don’t want to pollute this thread. Again, I applaud your effort.

 

[cosmic]

Well, they don't miss much. There will always be some do gooder finding a better way to spend your money for you. It is the way. Be glad they don't tax our farts.

That is just our applauds !!!!!

 

[Farmplinker2]

I like those ideas. A better way to apply a pay to play sort of fee. I can't tell you the number if times I've stood on a skeet field, and someone mentions that they don't hunt. They paid taxes to benefit others just to shoot skeet. I think that we all would like things to be applied fairly, but one thing I've learned about life is that it's not fair.

Pittman-Robertson also goes to public shooting ranges. I think most here would agree we need more of those.

 

[Scriv]

Pittman-Robertson also goes to public shooting ranges. I think most here would agree we need more of those.

That's a fair point. In over fifty years of shooting I've only been to one public range. Thank you for reminding me of my oversight.

 

[Billm]

Pittman-Robertson also goes to public shooting ranges. I think most here would agree we need more of those.

That all depends on where you live. In my part of the country they provide almost none.

Funded Target Shooting Ranges – Partner with a Payer

Funded Target Shooting Ranges Wildlife Restoration funds (manufacturer’s excise taxes) generated from the sale of firearms, ammunition, and archery equipment, s

partnerwithapayer.org