I probably should stay away from controversial topic such as this - as I know some of you are kinda thin skinned - but what the hell. I read through some of the post and some things that stand out, at least to me. One was the AR portrays a bad image, what does that mean? Does it mean that since it is a miltary weapon it's a bad image, guess what some of our snipers are using -Win 70's and Rem 700's should we say that is also a bad image, how about camouflage clothing - bad image??? Some say predators and varmints only I just don't understand that, why not all huntable critters. Others say there will be more wounded game, how did they come to this conclusion, a round from a bolt rifle will also wound a animal. Some of you sound like the anti-gun crowd, blame the weapon and not the person behind the weapon.
ArmAlite .223 has killed many coyotes and not one person, I blame that on the shooter and not the rifle.
DPMS .223, killed another coyote but has yet to kill a person, again it's the shooter who is at fault and not the weapon.
Another DPMS LR-308 this poor weapon has not killed any coyotes or people but has been responsible for the death of more than one deer.
Another one of them bad image weapons, ArmAlite .223, this gun needs to be locked up as it has killed an untold number of coyotes but again not one single person - bad gun.
How about that 10/22 you have sitting in the safe - same action as any AR should we not hunt with them? This monster has not killed any people but was responsible in the death of this chicken killer.
Out here we trust our gun owners - no restriction on any type of action, no magazine limits except as established by the feds. When I was hunting on the border I carried my AR with a 30 round magazine inserted plus two in my pack along with my Sig 1911, 45ACP with three 15 round magazines.
I no longer have any of my AR's as my hunting days are all but over but I didn't sell any of them - my grandsons now have them and know how to use them.