coues7

That a woodpecker....if they are on your house you'd better check for termites and if you are outside of city limits blast them with the ol' shotgun....of course not while they are your house

Get a 7mm WSM!!! WHEN IT COMES TO BULLET SELECTION WITH HIGHER BALLISTIC COEFFICIENTS the 7mm will smoke the .270

I've had a number of McMillan stocks and you won't find any better!!! I believe they just introduced a new Safari series rifle as well. They have some of the best tactical training in the US. Welcome aboard guys!

Whatcha planning to do with all the money from selling these rifles? Another rifle build or camera equipment?

I recommend that your friends, EACH, send a letter to their representatives and senators!!!! Personal experiences always seem to be the ones that hit home for these disconnected folks.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus has something to say to gun owners: "Own a gun; lose your coverage!" Baucus' socialized health care bill comes up for a Finance Committee vote on Tuesday. We have waited and waited and waited for the shifty Baucus to release legislative language. But he has refused to release anything but a summary -- and we will never have a Congressional Budget Office cost assessment based on actual legislation. Even the summary was kept secret for a long time. But, on the basis of the summary, the Baucus bill (which is still unnumbered) tells us virtually nothing about what kind of policy Americans will be required to purchase under penalty of law -- nor the consequences. It simply says: * "all U.S. citizens and legal residents would be required to purchase coverage through (1) the individual market..."; * "individuals would be required to report on their federal income tax return the months for which they maintain the required minimum health coverage..."; * in addition to an extensive list of statutorily mandated coverage, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius would be empowered to "define and update the categories of treatments, items, and services..." within an insurance plan which would be covered in a policy constituting "required minimum health coverage." ObamaCare and gun control It is nearly certain that coverage prescribed by the administration will, to control costs, exclude coverage for what it regards as excessively dangerous activities. And, given Sebelius' well-established antipathy to the Second Amendment -- she vetoed concealed carry legislation as governor of Kansas -- we presume she will define these dangerous activities to include hunting and self-defense using a firearm. It is even possible that the Obama-prescribed policy could preclude reimbursement of any kind in a household which keeps a loaded firearm for self-defense. The ObamaCare bill already contains language that will punish Americans who engage in unhealthy behavior by allowing insurers to charge them higher insurance premiums. (What constitutes an unhealthy lifestyle is, of course, to be defined by legislators.) Don't be surprised if an anti-gun nut like Sebelius uses this line of thinking to impose ObamaCare policies which result in a back-door gun ban on any American who owns "dangerous" firearms. After all, insurers already (and routinely) drop homeowners from their policies for owning certain types of guns or for refusing to use trigger locks (that is, for keeping their guns ready for self-defense!). While not all insurers practice this anti-gun behavior, Gun Owners of America has documented that some do -- Prudential and State Farm being two of the most well-known. The good news is that because homeowner insurance is private (and is still subject to the free market) you can go to another company if one drops you. But what are you going to do under nationalized ObamaCare when the regulations written by Secretary Sebelius suspend the applicability of your government-mandated policy because of your gun ownership? All of this is in addition to something that GOA has been warning you about for several months ... the certainty that minimum acceptable policies will dump your gun information into a federal database ... a certainty that is reinforced by language in the summary providing for a study to "encourage increased meaningful use of electronic health records." Remember, the federal government has already denied more than 150,000 military veterans the right to own guns, without their being convicted of a crime or receiving any due process of law. They were denied because of medical information (such as PTSD) that the FBI later determined disqualified these veterans to own guns. Is this what we need on a national level being applied to every gun owner in America? Incidentally, failure to comply would subject the average family to $1,500 in fines -- and possibly more for a household with older teens. And, although a Schumer amendment purports to exempt Americans from prison sentences for non-purchase of an ObamaPolicy -- something which was never at issue -- it doesn't prohibit them from being sent to prison for a year and fined an additional $25,000 under the Internal Revenue Code for non-payment of the initial fines. ACTION: Contact your two U.S. Senators. Ask him or her, in the strongest terms, to vote against the phony Baucus bill. You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your senators the pre-written e-mail message below. ----- Pre-written letter ----- Dear Senator: You already know that the phony Baucus bill: * Is predicated on $283 billion in phony "cuts" which have never, never ever been realized since a similar commitment to cut Medicare costs in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 -- and will never, never ever be realized under the Baucus bill; * Requires massive numbers of Americans to have government-approved insurance which the CBO predicts will be more expensive than current policies; * Refuses to provide a cost for these policies, making it almost certain that more and more Americans will find insurance beyond their reach; * Has no legislative language and nothing but a CBO "guesstimate" of the cost and benefits, based on a summary. On the basis of the summary, the Baucus bill tells us virtually nothing about what kind of policy Americans will be required to purchase under penalty of law -- nor the consequences. It does say that the "Secretary of HHS [Kathleen Sebelius] would be required to define and update the categories of treatments, items, and services..." within an insurance plan which would be covered in a policy constituting "required minimum health coverage." This could spell trouble for gun owners. It is nearly certain that coverage prescribed by the administration will, to control costs, exclude coverage for what it regards as excessively dangerous activities. And, given Sebelius' well-established antipathy to the Second Amendment -- she vetoed concealed carry legislation as governor of Kansas -- I presume she will define these dangerous activities to include hunting and self-defense using a firearm. It is even possible that the Obama-prescribed policy could preclude reimbursement of any kind in a household which keeps a loaded firearm for self-defense. This is, of course, in addition to the certainty that minimum acceptable policies will dump my gun information into a federal database -- a certainty that is reinforced by language in the summary providing for a study to "encourage increased meaningful use of electronic health records." Incidentally, failure to comply would subject the average family to $1,500 in fines -- and possibly more for a household with older teens. And, although a Schumer amendment purports to exempt Americans from prison sentences for non-purchase of an ObamaPolicy -- something which was never at issue -- it doesn't prohibit them from being sent to prison for a year and fined an additional $25,000 under the Internal Revenue Code for non-payment of the initial fines. Please oppose the Baucus bill. Sincerely, PLEASE SEE THE PINNED TOPIC AT THE TOP OF THE POLITICAL FORUM FOR LINKS TO CONTACT YOUR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES

Is G3 already broken on the right side? Thats a great buck. I'm with Bowsniper on this one.....only for a good friend.

Something is wrong with your rifle It's missing pieces. Nice buck.

That's a good one!

You'll regret selling it.....unless you are EXTREMELY tight on funds I'd reconsider.

How long is years? What generation Glock is it?

Congrats Scotty.

It has been brought to my attention that I was insinuating that you should brake the law to retrieve the antlers.....Sorry it came across like that. When fully decomposed and NOT against the law to retreive I would go and get the antlers. You can always talk to the WM for the unit and get a feel about whether or not he'd be willing to let you get the rack.....I would think he/she would want to investigate. No harm no foul GH.

I'm posting this for a friend. Brand new (been in the field around 3 times). Comes with padded case. I don't believe it comes with the boxes. Asking $1650. He's in a bind and needs the money. Scott

Well put sundevil.....if it were me I'd go get it

I already asked.....she said NO!!!! I orignally told here that he was selling it for $300 and I just couldn't pass it up. She was ok with that but my consence got the best of me.

I don't think he has the paper work.....he's not the most organized person I know and it comes with a Cabelas Snug Fit case.

I'm in the market for a new spotter. I'm trying to decide between the Swarovski 80mm and the Zeiss 85mm. I've have the Swarovski 80mm before and the only draw back I found that it had was the lack of a micro focus. I've noticed that the Zeiss does have both a macro and micro focus. Does anyone have any personal experience they can lend to my decision? Scott

I guess other than the arguing this is really a great thread. Thus far the concensus seems to be scouting and patience with a touch of luck

Thanks for all the input. I think Brian is correct about definition of "monster". I would classify a monster as anything going 110"+. We have a family friend that used to guide bighorn sheep hunts. I believe he has guided more world record sheep hunts then anyone in the country. He literally spent every weekend and spare moment in the field and the rams he and his clients harvested showed that. He knew each ram according to markings and horn layout. A good friend of mine consistently harvests 105"+ buck every years.....he spends a lot of time in the field (as part of his job) but he also has a innate instinct as to where they will be and how they will react. He's killed bucks in different units in southern arizona. I'd say the one bit of information I get from him is to be patient......"you'll never kill a monster if you shoot a dink". Patience and waiting for the big one is a MUST. He also goes further and hunts harder than anyone I personally know. Scott

Thanks for the update. This is a really sad deal. Let's hope we can get Larry back home SAFE. Has anyone asked any of the news stations in the Socorro or Holbrook areas to get involved. In driving through those areas the radio sucks but the TV may be the ticket. Any way we can get the word out would be great.

For any of you guys that have connections with anyone with a plane it sure would be nice if maybe they could volunteer their time and plane to fly up around that area. I'd be willing to donate money immediately to help pay for fuel if someone would be willing to fly. Find the person and tell me where to pay and I'll be first in line. I don't know Larry but we need to find him ASAP!!!!!

This is a really sad and scary deal. I hope they find him alive and well. If he was 2 hours from Soccorro, that's nearly in the middle of nowhere to begin with and then if they saw his truck in Holbrook thats just plain crazy (means he had to come back through Hatch and a few other small towns). I just hope and pray all is well with him. The jeep should be easy to spot. My prayers are for a safe and happy recovery!!

AZOnecam, Thanks for the input.....VERY well put. I glass with Swarovski 10x50 SLC's. These are the bino's I carry around my neck day in and day out. I've had the 15x56's and they were just too much to carry around the neck. I glass off of a Bogen/Manfrotto 3031 tripod with the RC2 head. I'm half way convinced not to get a spotter although I've definitely found situations where having a spotter (especially a big one) gave me the extra maginification I needed to assess a buck. The rifle I carry is a 12.5 lb tack driver and FEELS VERY heavy in the heat and hiking of AZ even during the fall hunts. I really need to just think it through and access whether I really want to pack a 55 ounce spotter throught the hills.

My shooting buddy has one and it actually trumps the Swarovski (in my opinion) when it comes to spotting bullet holes at 200+ yards. I'm pretty sure I'm going to get either the Zeiss or Swarovski but I'm trying to decide between the 65mm vs. the 80mm. Leica is way out of my range. Scott