The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: Question: Bigger issue for sportsman

  1. #1
    Senior Member brian breuer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Minot, ND
    Posts
    496

    Default Question: Bigger issue for sportsman

    Which do you see as the bigger issue for sportsman?

    Issues such as from Kevin's thread about "U.S. Representative Henry Waxman (D- CA) toppled Representative John Dingell (D- MI) as Chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee." which raises concerns about 2nd amendment / increased gun control.


    Or do you see it from standpoint of loss / damage to our wild places? Such as this article: http://www.buzzle.com/articles/georg...gislation.html

    I apologize, I first saw it in Newsweek but couldn't find the article back when I had time to post here.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Bob Gutermuth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Transchoptankia, DEMOCRATIC Peoples Republic of Maryland
    Posts
    3,065

    Default

    The threat to my right to keep and bear arms is much more important. I love to hunt, but I have firearms for other reasons as well, mainly personal security. Sad part is that most of the tree huggers are also anti gun.
    Bob Gutermuth
    Canvasback Chesapeakes
    ROLL TIDE!

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Georgetown, MA
    Posts
    926

    Default

    There are very few things more important to me than the 2nd amendment.

  4. #4
    Senior Member JS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    2,452

    Default

    I live in a small metropolitan area; around 100,000 in 3 adjoining cities. Our crime rate is about average for a town our size.

    I have never personally felt the need to carry for personal protection. That's not to pretend that threats don't exist and I do not think more or less of someone in another area who feels otherwise. I feel it is our right.

    That said, I have no problem being required to jump through a few hoops to buy or own a gun. I acknowledge that no gun regulation will keep a gun out of the hands of all criminals nor prevent all violence. I do, however believe that some "crimes of passion" occur that may not have occurred if it were a little more difficult to get your hands on a gun. The red tape required is a little like standing in line to be frisked in an airport ... it won't eliminate all danger but if it helps a little, it's what I need to do.

    I don't believe our right to hunt is in jeopardy. Having been active in politics (serving on platform committees of the Democrat party at the district and state levels) during the later 60's and early 70's ..... the most liberal of times for the party in my memory ..... I know that, even during those times there has NEVER been a critical mass interested in banning hunting. Those few extremists who were, were never taken seriously.

    I think the loss of habitat and available hunting grounds poses a far greater threat to hunting than any possible loss of guns simply because the incentives, financial and otherwise, for business interests to invade the wilderness are far greater than the incentives to take away our guns. And, as we all know, money talks.

    JMO

    JS
    “Don’t wave your phony patriotism in MY face! If you really love America, open your wallet and hire an American kid to build what you buy. Think of all our problems that might solve.” Doug Fraser (paraphrased) 1980

    Real Americans buy American.



    Snowshoe's All American Guy SH, UDX, WCX ... CODY ... at the bridge
    CH. Snowshoe's Girl Crazy MH, UD, WCX, SDHF, OS ... PRESLEY
    ... at the bridge
    Millpond's Baby Boomer MH*** ... BABE
    Snowshoe's Crazy For Lovin You SH ... NELSON

  5. #5
    Senior Member achiro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Enid, OK
    Posts
    2,071

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brian breuer View Post
    Which do you see as the bigger issue for sportsman?

    Issues such as from Kevin's thread about "U.S. Representative Henry Waxman (D- CA) toppled Representative John Dingell (D- MI) as Chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee." which raises concerns about 2nd amendment / increased gun control.


    Or do you see it from standpoint of loss / damage to our wild places? Such as this article: http://www.buzzle.com/articles/georg...gislation.html

    I apologize, I first saw it in Newsweek but couldn't find the article back when I had time to post here.
    I'm confused, what part of that article talks about us losing our "wild places"?

  6. #6
    Senior Member achiro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Enid, OK
    Posts
    2,071

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JS View Post
    I don't believe our right to hunt is in jeopardy. Having been active in politics (serving on platform committees of the Democrat party at the district and state levels) during the later 60's and early 70's ..... the most liberal of times for the party in my memory ..... I know that, even during those times there has NEVER been a critical mass interested in banning hunting. Those few extremists who were, were never taken seriously.
    Groups like the HSUS are MUCH more mainstream now than they have ever been before. If you seriously think that the 70's liberalism is even remotely comparable to todays then you are really ignoring what is going on behind the scenes.

    Quote Originally Posted by JS View Post
    I think the loss of habitat and available hunting grounds poses a far greater threat to hunting than any possible loss of guns simply because the incentives, financial and otherwise, for business interests to invade the wilderness are far greater than the incentives to take away our guns. And, as we all know, money talks.
    JS
    I do agree with this to some extent but at least realize/acknowledge that the anti groups are trying to eliminate hunting opportunities by closing public lands.
    The thing that many folks think is that a single bill will suddenly try to take away guns or hunting all together. Thats not at all how it works they increase prices on ammo and/or guns to the point that they aren't affordable for most people. They close this hunting area then that hunting area. People can't find places to go or afford guns to hunt with and the in 20 years the hunting population is at such low numbers that they don't have the power to prevent the legislation and the rest of the world just doens't really care enough to learn about it and bam, it's all gone.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Hoosier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    864

    Default

    No one aspect of the shooting sports has enough support to stand on it's own. If handgun competitors are taken out of the game, we are playing with a smaller base. Same goes for those who like to shoot military style weapons, or trappers. The more players they can take out on our side the more disproportional their advantage is. Thats how we will be beaten. First will be the assault style, then 50 caliber, then handguns, then different styles of hunting weapons. Finally we wont have enough support to keep our shotguns and hunting rifles.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Georgetown, MA
    Posts
    926

    Default

    Exactly. We will be incrementally disarmed. Divide and conquer still works to this day.

    Hunters don't care about "assault weapons". Rifle shooters don't care about handguns. etc etc, etc,

  9. #9
    Senior Member JS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    2,452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by achiro View Post
    Groups like the HSUS are MUCH more mainstream now than they have ever been before. If you seriously think that the 70's liberalism is even remotely comparable to todays then you are really ignoring what is going on behind the scenes.
    So tell me what you were doing in the 70's that leads you to this conclusion? And what "behind the scenes" intel are you privy to today that the rest of us are not?

    I understand the HSUS and others have an agenda and are well funded, but they are FAR from mainstream.

    I do agree with this to some extent but at least realize/acknowledge that the anti groups are trying to eliminate hunting opportunities by closing public lands.
    Yes, closing public lands is to the liking of the "anti" groups for obvious reasons. But it does not follow that these "anti" groups alone are or can be successful in closing public lands. Or that all closings of public lands is due to their efforts. There are many more reasons public land might be closed. Just like game management may impose lower limits on hunters. Doesn't mean they are against us hunting. Might be good game management.

    And don't forget land development, mining, drilling, land development, farming methods that leave no natural habitat, land develpoment, and on and on. ALL OF THESE ARE IMPORTANT but nevertheless have an impact on hunting.

    The thing that many folks think is that a single bill will suddenly try to take away guns or hunting all together. Thats not at all how it works they increase prices on ammo and/or guns to the point that they aren't affordable for most people. They close this hunting area then that hunting area. People can't find places to go or afford guns to hunt with and the in 20 years the hunting population is at such low numbers that they don't have the power to prevent the legislation and the rest of the world just doens't really care enough to learn about it and bam, it's all gone.
    I understand the slippery slope thinking and it should not be not dismissed out of hand.

    I also understand that HSUS, PETA, et al should not be taken lightly.

    But the question posed was which is the larger issue for us? It doesn't take much to debunk the real motives of these groups and when push comes to shove, in the minds of most rational citizens (even the liberals) they will lose the debate.

    JMO

    JS
    “Don’t wave your phony patriotism in MY face! If you really love America, open your wallet and hire an American kid to build what you buy. Think of all our problems that might solve.” Doug Fraser (paraphrased) 1980

    Real Americans buy American.



    Snowshoe's All American Guy SH, UDX, WCX ... CODY ... at the bridge
    CH. Snowshoe's Girl Crazy MH, UD, WCX, SDHF, OS ... PRESLEY
    ... at the bridge
    Millpond's Baby Boomer MH*** ... BABE
    Snowshoe's Crazy For Lovin You SH ... NELSON

  10. #10
    Senior Member brian breuer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Minot, ND
    Posts
    496

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by achiro View Post
    I'm confused, what part of that article talks about us losing our "wild places"?
    What part of damage didn't you understand in my original statement?

    Never mind Russ. You also stated a while back that oil production has no noticeable impact on wildlife. I can't have a discussion with that mentality.

    Brian

Similar Threads

  1. Gettin bigger!
    By LabsNGoldens in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-03-2008, 09:20 PM
  2. I need a bigger holding blind GDG
    By Illinois Bob in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-20-2007, 07:19 PM
  3. Sportsman Dog stands?
    By Tim Marshall in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-25-2007, 09:43 PM
  4. Bigger news than Guthrie and SRS Paris out of jail (GDG)
    By Steve Amrein in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-08-2007, 04:57 PM
  5. BumperBoy Sportsman
    By Donald Hatfield in forum Product Review
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-12-2005, 08:35 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •