Doc

Well, that just highlights the fact that here in NYS, game management is a political activity.

Actually, there have been quite a few times over the years when I have exercised my right to "open carry" my rifle/shotgun when I have taken a short-cut down the road to get back home. I'm glad that we have that ability. Oh and by the way, no one drove off the road in a panic. Oh yes, I too have survived seeing others doing the same. So legal open-carry is not really a bad thing. As for walking into stores or restaurants, I have to agree that that is kind of a weird thing to do, and I'm not exactly sure what the point was that those guys were trying to make. Whatever it was, it did reflect on all of us in a not-too-helpful way. I don't see it as something that should be made illegal, but more like something where some good sense and thoughtfulness of others should be used. There are some places where if I saw that I would be ducking for cover assuming a mass shooting was about to commence ..... lol.

The southern zone and the northern zone really are two different climates and habitat, and do require different management considerations. I wonder if those considerations really are accounted for in the differences in management strategies. The one that really makes me wonder is the fact that in the south back-tags are required but not in the north. Now what kind of climate considerations conjured up that difference? ..... lol. How many other differences are equally arbitrary?

Starting off at 45# - 50# might not be a real good idea. I have no idea what your body structure is like, but I will say that starting off over-bowed is never a good idea. Getting into traditional archery is not something that will happen quickly. It is far more important to start off with a rather inexpensive bow of a weight you can easily handle and build in good shooting form, consistency and control so that you have a decent chance of success. Over-bowed, you will burn out quickly, not to mention the potential for back and shoulder injury. If it were me, I would start with a cheap 35# or even 30# and build into that 45# to 50# deer hunting weight.

OMG ..... I am awful glad that it is not you who is in charge of interpreting the Constitution. My gosh, what a wacked-out, stretched-out and ridiculous set of assumptions and conclusions. The good news .... You will never occupy a position where that kind of warped reasoning will ever determine the fate or execution of any sort of constitutional law. You guys are getting so far afield now with this thread that I can't remember what the original point was. At any moment, I expect to see this thread turn into what the definition of the word "is", is......lol.

Oh that's just plain silly ...... lol. It brings to mind Chuck Adams' commercial about it being like throwing an axe through the animal.

Laws should be passed that forbid the harvest of any buck that still has its teeth. No deer should be harvested before its time. If you can chew it, you probably didn't allow it to grow to its proper potential.

I'm not making or supporting any case. I simply provided a few examples, as asked, where specific hunting opportunities have been eliminated or are in the process of being eliminated. The examples are there if you want to take a couple of minutes to research them. Sorry, but I refuse to do all your research for you.

Eat a few handfuls of them. Sorry, but I really don't know. The magnet suggestion would work well for steel shot.

All they are is a funny-looking semi-auto rifle. If I owned one, I probably would use it. I don't think the deer will care as much about the scary look of them like some people who turn pale and start trembling at the mere mention of them.

Has anyone ever seen state land used for profitable enterprises in direct competition with similar private activities? I'm wondering if there might be some strings of that sort attached to state land holdings.

Trying to set a law dealing with safety is pretty tricky stuff. Let's face it if everyone out there was totally safety conscious, we probably wouldn't even need those kinds of laws. But we know that that is not always the case. Remember, lighting and decisions to take shots sometimes rests in the hands of the "other guy" pointing his gun at you.

You asked for examples. Examples were supplied. If you want a book written on the subject, do your own research.

Wow, talk about a topic heading off into the wild blue yonder.....lol. You guys really know how to destroy a thread. You know, if you want to have a political ideological argument, you might want to start your own thread and take it off to the political area of the forum.

I'm having a hard time understanding where you are going with your arguments. Are you just generally against all guns or some guns or what is all this talk about how much evil that is perpetrated by guns. I think we know that, but what is your point?

I'm wondering if some of these gas companies might start putting some research into finding non-toxic cocktails to inject into the earth with this process. Get rid of the (secret) toxins and instantly the opposition goes away.

It seems there is a report to support just about any position anyone might have on the subject. It's old phrase: "Figures don't lie, but liars figure".

And using a gun is also most efficient implement for self protection to defend yourself, your family and your home. But there are far too many who are more than happy to force you to be helpless and unarmed and completely at the mercy of anyone who wants what you've got. And no, I don't ever want to be in a position of telling others what kind of weapon they should be choosing for their self defense. That's not my business.

I can't even comment on this Fracking thing. It seems that for every piece of scientific evidence one side comes up with, the other side comes up with off-setting scientific evidence. I honestly have not seen a preponderance evidence for one side or the other. Most of the people that have a 100% intransigent position on this issue don't really know any more than I do.

This site is both. Since the link between guns and hunting is obvious, it would seem equally obvious that both are related themes.

Well, when it comes to the link between hunting and gun rights, I think a little dose of fear, reality, and awareness is a good thing. I think they need to become aware that there are those out there that are intent on removing all weapons from this country, and that they are indeed making great strides because of gun owner apathy. If that scares them, then good. It scares me too. If that sounds like the words of a zealot, so be it. Those that want hunting to extend beyond ourselves and into the future for our children and grand-children and beyond should be concerned about such things, and even a bit impassioned because it is obvious to anyone with a pulse, just where all this is heading. And God forbid if they should happen to shoot this gun that they bought for hunting and actually enjoy the shooting part. They have just become hooked on an activity that will eventually get them labeled a zealot, and a "gun-nut". They will soon learn that even target shooting is shunned by the left because it still involves private ownership of that evil implement ..... the dreaded gun. For some reason you threw in that these newcomers are typically politically liberal. I don't know why you made that assumption, but perhaps if that is the case, it needs to be pointed out to them just where all this gun-control nonsense is really coming from. It's not all that difficult to track down. Whether they can be convinced to join the pro-gun side of things is up to their open-mindedness and their willingness to accept what is, and always has been, right there in front of their face. If their political ideals serve as blinders, then they probably had better take up knitting because they never will get it until they find that they can't afford or get ammunition, or any guns to put it in when they decide that they want to go hunting.

It appears that all we really want to do is nit-pick and find fault with the only gun advocacy organization that has the size, infrastructure, track record, and resources to actually make a difference. I hear all kinds of people here who have found one issue after another to justify their reasons for withholding support but I have yet to hear anyone explain just what it is that they individually do to ensure protection of gun owner's rights. One guy wants to let Ducks unlimited handle gun rights issues. We have another who ran into an obnoxious NRA employee so that justifies withholding support of the whole organization. Another guy thinks that just because he has bought guns and uses them that somehow he is doing something to hold back the tide of anti gun legislation. And most gun owners don't even invest the thinking that it takes to conjure up any kind of reason why they don't support the NRA. They just simply jam their head in the sand, cross their fingers and hope for miracles. Or maybe they comfort themselves in the thought that during their lifetime nothing terrible will happen. Who gives a damn about the rights of future gun owners, hunters, enthusiasts of shooting sports and those concerned with personal and home defense. But the truth is that there is only one organization who really is doing something about 2nd Amendment issues, and everyone is conjuring up their own little reasons for turning their backs and throwing themselves on the mercy of the anti-gun and anti-hunting organizations. It is amazing how these same people will register with a particular political party and ignore all the idiots and goofy and even illegal and immoral activities of the politicians who they represent. And yet will use every little pet peeve under the sun to justify letting those who fight for our 2nd Amendment rights swing in the breeze completely unsupported.

Frankly, I am getting a little tired of kowtowing to these bunny-huggers. We are a site that discusses all aspects of hunting, warts and all. The day we have to begin censoring our thoughts and words to satisfy those people is the day they have won. Let's stop arranging our forum discussions around what the antis will or won't do with the things that need discussion. I'm not a big fan of taking our sport into the shadows and cowering before these people just because we have some issues that need discussion and correction.

What? ......... why mess around. Just go into the woods, get your deer, and get home. I know it can be done because I see the real hunters doing it on TV all the time.

There does seem to be some weird code about being a "snitch" that apparently was designed to protect those that do anti-social things. Frankly, I don't think those kinds of people need my protection. Break the law all you want, but it probably is not a real smart idea to let me know about it.