Christopher
New member
This happened in Penn.
Study: Shotguns not safer for deer hunting
Ballistics tests, prompted by accidental shooting of Valley woman, give surprise results.
By Christian Berg Of The Morning Call
Forcing Lehigh Valley deer hunters to use shotguns instead of rifles wouldn't boost public safety, according to a state-sponsored study released Wednesday.
The study, done in response to the November 2004 accident in which Casey Burns of North Whitehall was hit in the head by a stray rifle bullet, says shotgun slugs are much more prone to ricochets than rifle bullets. And in some cases, the study says, slugs can travel farther than a bullet.
Mobile News | Subscribe Online | Order Reprints
RIFLES VS. SHOTGUNS FINDINGSMyth: Many people, including state hunting regulators, long have assumed shotguns are safer than rifles for deer hunting because shotgun slugs don't travel as far as rifle bullets.
Reality: A study released Wednesday indicates shotgun slugs are much more prone to ricochets than rifle bullets and, because of that, can travel farther than rifle bullets in common hunting scenarios.
What it means: The study's findings make it unlikely the state Game Commission will expand shotgun-only areas to cover the Lehigh Valley.
Related Stories• PDF FILE: Hunting Safety -- Shotguns vs. Rifles
• Hunting stray-bullet lawsuit settled
• Hunters worry the stray-bullet settlement leaves law in 'limbo' Lehigh Valley Local Links
Officials said the surprising results contradict conventional wisdom and make it unlikely the Lehigh Valley will be added to existing shotgun-only areas around Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.
Using rifles for deer hunting has been prohibited since 1964 in parts of counties bordering Philadelphia, since 1979 in Allegheny County and since 1991 in all of Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Philadelphia counties.
''We were just making people feel better, when in fact we weren't making them safer at all,'' Mike Schmitt, deputy executive director of the Pennsylvania Game Commission, said after reviewing the results, unveiled at a meeting of the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee, a joint panel of the Legislature.
Despite the findings, Burns' mother, Allie Dickinson, continues to support the expansion of shotgun-only regulations.
''It can't be safe, and there's no study that can convince me of that,'' said Dickinson, who launched a campaign to expand shotgun-only restrictions after the accident. ''If he would have shot a shotgun that day instead of a rifle, it would not have hit Casey. I truly believe that.''
Dickinson, whose daughter survived the shooting, also said that if shotguns are as dangerous -- or even more dangerous -- than rifles, perhaps both types of firearms should be prohibited in residential areas.
''If that's the case, then maybe we need to look into archery-only areas,'' she said. ''Lehigh County has changed a lot over the last 15-20 years, and they have not adjusted the [hunting] laws. That needs to be fixed.''
The state House authorized the safety study in March 2005 to inject scientific data into the rifle versus shotgun debate. The project was coordinated by the legislative committee, which hired Mountaintop Technologies of Johnstown, Cambria County, at $41,576.
The study's conclusions are based on ballistics analysis of shots fired by deer rifles, shotguns and muzzleloaders. Ballistics data were calculated for Mountaintop by the Army's Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center at Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey.
Many people assume shotguns are safer than rifles because they have a much shorter maximum range. That assumption has been used as the basis for shotgun-only hunting regulations in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. Some states, including New Jersey, Ohio and Delaware, don't allow any rifle use by deer hunters.
However, the study says none of the states contacted by researchers could provide scientific data to back up their assumptions, indicating this may be the first comprehensive look at the rifle versus shotgun issue.
Officials also noted that technological innovations introduced in recent decades -- such as rifled shotgun barrels, sabot slugs and gas-sealed muzzleloader bullets -- probably have eroded whatever safety advantages once existed.
''Technology has changed for the shotgun and muzzleloader, and the difference between them and a [deer] rifle is decreasing from what it was years ago,'' Mountaintop consultant Todd Bacastow said.
The study examined ballistics data on three popular deer-hunting guns: a .30-06 rifle, a 12-gauge shotgun and a .50-caliber muzzleloader. The rifle had the greatest maximum range at 2.64 miles, followed by the shotgun at 1.97 miles and the muzzleloader, which generally uses heavier and slower bullets, at 1.74 miles.
However, Bacastow noted that to achieve maximum range, shots must be fired at a 35-degree angle, which is highly unlikely in a hunting situation. He noted that a bullet fired at a 35-degree angle toward a deer 100 yards away would fly 210 feet above the animal's back.
Most shots fired by hunters are relatively flat, and even a slight aiming error usually results in a shot less than 5 degrees above the horizon. When shots are fired at an elevation of 5 degrees, the total distances traveled, including ricochets, are 1.66 miles for a rifle bullet and 1.3 miles for a shotgun slug.
When shots are fired holding the guns level 3 feet off the ground, the shotgun slug will travel 0.99 of a mile, 16 percent farther than the rifle bullet will travel under the same circumstances.
The reason, Bacastow said, is that slugs tend to hold together better and lose less energy during ricochets than rifle bullets. Therefore, slugs often can travel farther than rifle bullets in common hunting scenarios.
The 67-page report notes the muzzleloader bullet traveled the shortest distance in all test scenarios and therefore is less risky than rifle bullets and slugs. The report recommends investigating the possibility of developing specialized bullets and slugs that would break apart on impact and reduce the number of ricochets.
Sen. Lisa M. Boscola, D-Northampton, a member of the Senate Game and Fisheries Committee, said she was impressed by the study.
''There are a lot of emotions when something like [the Burns accident] happens, but the whole point–was to get scientific evidence to back up anything the Game Commission wants to do,'' Boscola said. In 2005, she helped organize a meeting between Burns and Game Commission officials.
''We are dealing with a perception that shotguns are safer than rifles when hunting deer, but that's not always the case, and this study proves it,'' Boscola said.
She said Burns' family should be pleased that efforts to bolster hunting safety have gotten so much attention. ''They should be proud that there's some good coming out of that tragedy. There's a real concern out there that this does not ever happen again.''
Schmitt, the Game Commission official, said his agency can use the study's findings to decide about firearms restrictions and improve its mandatory hunter education program. ''We can't guarantee there won't be another Casey Burns some day, but we can–reduce the risk.''
Burns, who was 18 and seven months pregnant at the time of the accident, was about a half-mile from the hunter whose shot hit her. Though critically wounded, she delivered a healthy baby girl two months later and has recovered from her injuries.
She filed a civil lawsuit against the hunter and owner of the land where he was hunting. The case ended last month when Burns and landowner Daniel Haas agreed to a financial settlement.
Study: Shotguns not safer for deer hunting
Ballistics tests, prompted by accidental shooting of Valley woman, give surprise results.
By Christian Berg Of The Morning Call
Forcing Lehigh Valley deer hunters to use shotguns instead of rifles wouldn't boost public safety, according to a state-sponsored study released Wednesday.
The study, done in response to the November 2004 accident in which Casey Burns of North Whitehall was hit in the head by a stray rifle bullet, says shotgun slugs are much more prone to ricochets than rifle bullets. And in some cases, the study says, slugs can travel farther than a bullet.
Mobile News | Subscribe Online | Order Reprints
RIFLES VS. SHOTGUNS FINDINGSMyth: Many people, including state hunting regulators, long have assumed shotguns are safer than rifles for deer hunting because shotgun slugs don't travel as far as rifle bullets.
Reality: A study released Wednesday indicates shotgun slugs are much more prone to ricochets than rifle bullets and, because of that, can travel farther than rifle bullets in common hunting scenarios.
What it means: The study's findings make it unlikely the state Game Commission will expand shotgun-only areas to cover the Lehigh Valley.
Related Stories• PDF FILE: Hunting Safety -- Shotguns vs. Rifles
• Hunting stray-bullet lawsuit settled
• Hunters worry the stray-bullet settlement leaves law in 'limbo' Lehigh Valley Local Links
Officials said the surprising results contradict conventional wisdom and make it unlikely the Lehigh Valley will be added to existing shotgun-only areas around Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.
Using rifles for deer hunting has been prohibited since 1964 in parts of counties bordering Philadelphia, since 1979 in Allegheny County and since 1991 in all of Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Philadelphia counties.
''We were just making people feel better, when in fact we weren't making them safer at all,'' Mike Schmitt, deputy executive director of the Pennsylvania Game Commission, said after reviewing the results, unveiled at a meeting of the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee, a joint panel of the Legislature.
Despite the findings, Burns' mother, Allie Dickinson, continues to support the expansion of shotgun-only regulations.
''It can't be safe, and there's no study that can convince me of that,'' said Dickinson, who launched a campaign to expand shotgun-only restrictions after the accident. ''If he would have shot a shotgun that day instead of a rifle, it would not have hit Casey. I truly believe that.''
Dickinson, whose daughter survived the shooting, also said that if shotguns are as dangerous -- or even more dangerous -- than rifles, perhaps both types of firearms should be prohibited in residential areas.
''If that's the case, then maybe we need to look into archery-only areas,'' she said. ''Lehigh County has changed a lot over the last 15-20 years, and they have not adjusted the [hunting] laws. That needs to be fixed.''
The state House authorized the safety study in March 2005 to inject scientific data into the rifle versus shotgun debate. The project was coordinated by the legislative committee, which hired Mountaintop Technologies of Johnstown, Cambria County, at $41,576.
The study's conclusions are based on ballistics analysis of shots fired by deer rifles, shotguns and muzzleloaders. Ballistics data were calculated for Mountaintop by the Army's Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center at Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey.
Many people assume shotguns are safer than rifles because they have a much shorter maximum range. That assumption has been used as the basis for shotgun-only hunting regulations in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. Some states, including New Jersey, Ohio and Delaware, don't allow any rifle use by deer hunters.
However, the study says none of the states contacted by researchers could provide scientific data to back up their assumptions, indicating this may be the first comprehensive look at the rifle versus shotgun issue.
Officials also noted that technological innovations introduced in recent decades -- such as rifled shotgun barrels, sabot slugs and gas-sealed muzzleloader bullets -- probably have eroded whatever safety advantages once existed.
''Technology has changed for the shotgun and muzzleloader, and the difference between them and a [deer] rifle is decreasing from what it was years ago,'' Mountaintop consultant Todd Bacastow said.
The study examined ballistics data on three popular deer-hunting guns: a .30-06 rifle, a 12-gauge shotgun and a .50-caliber muzzleloader. The rifle had the greatest maximum range at 2.64 miles, followed by the shotgun at 1.97 miles and the muzzleloader, which generally uses heavier and slower bullets, at 1.74 miles.
However, Bacastow noted that to achieve maximum range, shots must be fired at a 35-degree angle, which is highly unlikely in a hunting situation. He noted that a bullet fired at a 35-degree angle toward a deer 100 yards away would fly 210 feet above the animal's back.
Most shots fired by hunters are relatively flat, and even a slight aiming error usually results in a shot less than 5 degrees above the horizon. When shots are fired at an elevation of 5 degrees, the total distances traveled, including ricochets, are 1.66 miles for a rifle bullet and 1.3 miles for a shotgun slug.
When shots are fired holding the guns level 3 feet off the ground, the shotgun slug will travel 0.99 of a mile, 16 percent farther than the rifle bullet will travel under the same circumstances.
The reason, Bacastow said, is that slugs tend to hold together better and lose less energy during ricochets than rifle bullets. Therefore, slugs often can travel farther than rifle bullets in common hunting scenarios.
The 67-page report notes the muzzleloader bullet traveled the shortest distance in all test scenarios and therefore is less risky than rifle bullets and slugs. The report recommends investigating the possibility of developing specialized bullets and slugs that would break apart on impact and reduce the number of ricochets.
Sen. Lisa M. Boscola, D-Northampton, a member of the Senate Game and Fisheries Committee, said she was impressed by the study.
''There are a lot of emotions when something like [the Burns accident] happens, but the whole point–was to get scientific evidence to back up anything the Game Commission wants to do,'' Boscola said. In 2005, she helped organize a meeting between Burns and Game Commission officials.
''We are dealing with a perception that shotguns are safer than rifles when hunting deer, but that's not always the case, and this study proves it,'' Boscola said.
She said Burns' family should be pleased that efforts to bolster hunting safety have gotten so much attention. ''They should be proud that there's some good coming out of that tragedy. There's a real concern out there that this does not ever happen again.''
Schmitt, the Game Commission official, said his agency can use the study's findings to decide about firearms restrictions and improve its mandatory hunter education program. ''We can't guarantee there won't be another Casey Burns some day, but we can–reduce the risk.''
Burns, who was 18 and seven months pregnant at the time of the accident, was about a half-mile from the hunter whose shot hit her. Though critically wounded, she delivered a healthy baby girl two months later and has recovered from her injuries.
She filed a civil lawsuit against the hunter and owner of the land where he was hunting. The case ended last month when Burns and landowner Daniel Haas agreed to a financial settlement.
