Doc

I was thinking that too, but the cop had several opportunities to state the reason why he disarmed the guy. He stumbled around never mentioning a real law that had been broken. He was asked over and over and never had a reply other than he felt threatened that the guy possessed a weapon. And by the way, he never described any act or gesture that indicated a threat. I wonder if there will ever be a follow-up story?

I see the lawsuits as being our only realistic defense against this law. We may luck out and maybe Cuomo and his SAFE-act have some how really stepped in it this time. But my money is on the legal challenges. If they don't work, we are probably destined to live with this particular assault on the 2nd Amendment. Plus if the antis are enboldened by that success, we can expect even greater assaults to come. Also, other states can look forward to the same kind of garbage.

I'm not sure exactly how he was "baiting" anyone. I watched the whole 10 minutes, and still don't understand the actions or attitudes of the cops. I will say that if I were accosted by the cops in that way, I might develop a bit of an attitude too.

Yes, I think there is a lot of info that this guy has about some of the terrorist activity and identities. I don't believe for a minute that these guys worked alone. I kind of like the potential for getting all of the rats, or at least as many as this one can uncover. The authorities seem to be quite skillful at extracting info from these creeps. I say it probably is a good thing that they will have the opportunity to try on this one.

The ponds and canals are simply barriers that keep you from traveling a straight line. They are very obvious as the areas around them are lined with the dredgings that were piled up to form banks. There is no way that you could accidentally step into them unless you are trying to travel at night. Also, around these canals and ponds, the muskrats have pretty thoroughly undermined the banks at the waters edge and what may look like solid dry ground, may cave away under your weight. Actually, these dredged out areas are good places to regain your bearings because the banks are elevated and give you a view from above the cattails of surrounding landmarks. What these features do pose is an interuption to maintaining a straight line of travel to maintain. That makes compass use a bit frustrating, because you have to do a lot of twisting and turning to get around these things. Some of those canals are quite long and irregular in shape. Maybe a GPS unit might be more useful. If you plan on going out in an area like this, I would suggest a good detailed aerial map might make planning such a trip a whole lot easier.

That really is the question. Will this impact the whole Cuomo administration, or will just a few carefully chosen scapegoats absorb the bulk of the illegal action? Does Cuomo have what they call "plausible deniability"? I believe that this guy Cuomo is probably the most slippery slime-ball that we have seen in quite some time. I think that when he pulls off some shady stuff, he is an expert at covering his tracks and making sure that there are always an adequate number of fall-guys in place to shield him from any problems. As far as the SAFE-Act, it certainly provides a black eye for it and shows how easily abuses can occur, but I really do not expect it to cause any significant reversals. Yes I hope right along with other gun owners that I am dead-wrong. Nothing would make me happier. But I simply have this pessimistic view that Cuomo has this state locked up and it would take something that is a lot more directly linkable to his own filthy hands to drop him and his policies.

I'm going to interpret this question as asking who was most influential in forming my life in the outdoors and hunting. While this may sound a bit strange, my hunting hero is someone whose name I can't even remember. When I was a youngster (maybe 8 or so), I went through a phase of reading a lot of books. I believe it was one of the Zane Grey books that was about this pioneer type character who was known for his hunting and trapping expertise on the early frontier. That guy in that book set my imagination going into wilderness fantasies and all the activities and woodlore that that kind of lifestyle was all about. Those visions of traveling the early wilderness, caught me up in all activities involving the outdoors from camping to trapping. I learned that for me, it was all about a historical tradition and heritage of independance, self-reliance and freedom. It had very little to with killing animals even though that was part of it. A lot of that may explain why my attitudes about matters of hunting seem to come from a different direction than most. It was my enthusiasm for such things that actually got other people in our family involved in a lot of that stuff, so there was never an actual family member mentor as such. It all came from some fictional character straight out of the imagination of Zane Grey.....lol.

Belo- You of all people should be aware of what kinds of negative things can happen when people are in the minority or refuse to support the organizations and activities that they supposedly feel passionate about. Support means numbers. Numbers mean power. Power means control over how you want your activities conducted, regulated, and maintained When you lose that control, there are plenty of other people waiting on the sidelines to take advantage of weaknesses. You've seen it happen. Of course I don't believe that crossbows will even register a blip on the over-all hunting numbers. They may serve as a conduit that shifts hunters from gun season to bow season, but in terms of adding over-all hunter numbers ..... I doubt it. But I will say that we cannot and should not under-estimate how serious this problem of shrinking hunters is. Don't belittle the problem. We can't afford that kind of apathy. As we continue to lose hunters, we continue to become politically irrelevant. With animal rights people gaining in numbers, resources and influence in government, hunter declines are the dreams of these people and they certainly know what to do with any advantages that we hand them.

Ha-ha ... The one thing that I have noticed is that no matter how desparate the financial situation, the poor always seem to have enough money to pay for the dish TV, the cigarettes, and the gas for the car. But our craving for a crisis always has us grasping at foolish, irresponsible and sometimes dangerous solutions. Look, I am as much in favor of cheap local fuel as anyone, I just argue over what kinds of hazards we should be expected and willing to gamble with to get it. For some gas is God, and consequences be damned. I just like to take a little more cautious approach than that.

Sure ... think about it. They want to turn and get out of there as quick as possible. Well the only way to begin a run is my dropping down to load up their legs for that first bound. The best way to turn is to twist and lean over to push off at an angle to begin the turn. All that puts them in an inital lowered, twisted, and leaned over position. Now .... lol .... try to make your arrow follow that maneuver. The only thing you can hope for is a bad shot that the deer moves into ... ha-ha-ha.

That sounds pretty reasonable. As farmland continues to be chopped up, it gets to a point where gun hunting is no longer an option. And we know that farmland is being chopped up at an alarming rate.

I'm thinking the opposing directions of hunter numbers is just a reflection of the migration of gunhunters into bowhunting. As each equipment change makes the bowseason easier, it all serves as the enabler for this migration. You talk to a lot of bowhunters and you start hearing horror stories about perceptions of safety. I think the other part of this is all the TV shows that bring attention to bowhunting. I remember that bowhunting used to be looked at as an insignificant style of hunting in terms of harvesting any deer, and the odds of getting anything that you might want to actually hang on the wall was never taken too seriously. But today, bowhunters have gotten some deer that has brought on some pretty huge envy from the gun-hunters. In fact it has gotten to the point where we are being accused of thinning out the available bucks before the gun hunters get a chance at them. So it is not surprising if there is a significant migration of gunhunters into bow season. And yes this is another aspect to the crowding of public lands in bowseason. How long it can continue until there is a backlash reaction, I am not sure.

I'm not sure which post you are replying to, but in general your comments are valid. The only problem is that there are a whole lot of people who will never be in a position to buy or lease sufficient acreage at today's prices. And if they can scrape together enough cash to buy real estate, priorities mandate that they keep the old lady happy by buying a residence first. So, it may seem logical to buy hunting land, but it is not that often possible for a lot of people. So a lot of people are relegated to hunting public land. The quality of the hunting experience for these people is certainly far different from what attracts most people to hunting. Many people (most?) don't get into hunting for the carnival atmosphere and the hub-bub that exists in some of these public hunting areas, and I believe that may be one of the many reasons for shrinking hunter numbers. No it's nothing that can be solved, and there are only a limited number of options available for distancing yourself from the crowds. I do wish there was some way to describe how it was when I first began bowhunting. How posted signs were an actual oddity and you could hunt pretty much anywhere, and even public lands seemed deserted in the bow season. And how I went years before I actually saw another bowhunter in the woods. There is no way to explain how all that solitude in my hunting and the feelings of being emersed in a semi-wilderness atmosphere was the actual catalyst that got me involved with bowhunting. I'm not sure that I ever would have been all that interested in bowhunting if I had not had those kinds of quality experiences everytime I went out. So yes, the only thing constant is change, and unfortunately those changes are seldom positive or useful. And in some cases there are no options to "cowboy up" and there are many hunters who are simply leaving our ranks and will never understand what the big deal about bowhunting was ever all about.

Sounds like utopia doesn't it? Cheap fuel ..... damn the consequences.

When somebody speaks of "Big Woods" hunting, I am assuming they are talking about mature forests with no agricultural influences at all. A lot of NYS is starting to move into that habitat phase. What you find is that deer are a lot more widely dispersed and sign can only be found with a lot of walking and close inspection. Trails through the woods are a lot tougher to find because movements are so random and scattered. It's not like the deer always predictably bedding in dense thickets and always heading for the nearest corn field or hay lot with heavy muddy trails in between. The easiest sign to spot is still the fall rut sign. Those rubs and scrapes stick out well in the deep woods and while heavy defined trails may be tough to find in the woods, the rut signs are not. And there are faint deer trails through the woods in certain spots, but you have to look a little harder to see them. The other thing to look for is food sources. Oaks can be a great magnet at the right time of the year. I have seen deer munching on fresh fallen maple leaves (heavy sugar content). Water sources are good spots to look for sign, and any steep areas where deer have established easy ways up or down will occasionally hold a trail. Log roads can sometimes turn into deer highways and are always worth a check. The big woods will test your hunting ability and it is likely that just spending a lot of time out there will teach you the most about what the deer are doing and why.

I carry three arrows in my quiver. That way if I ever get into any trouble, I have enough for that universal distress signal of firing off three shots into the air. No, seriously I do carry three arrows. No particular reason other than I need the extra two in case something strange and wacky occurs that I get more than just the usual 1 shot. More than that just seems like I'm carrying extra weight and bulk for no reason. It's a judgement call.

So, I guess all this hub-bub is more about the content of the tests rather than the idea of testing itself. That makes a whole lot more sense to me now. I have always been a believer in standardized testing of students to ensure that what is being taught is what we think is being taught. And if they want to use that system to check out teachers as well .... why not? After all, student results are a good measure of teacher abilities. But of course the testing has to match the mandated curriculum or it isn't measuring anything. I have to admit that the examples of questions that were given seem like complete nonsense to me. Again, I go back to the system of regents curriculum and tests as what I would consider a good and useful teaching process which includes a yardstick to measure effectiveness of assimilation. I always thought that it should have been expanded to include all students. The info being taught was not just for college-bound students. That may have been the way it was used, but what was being taught was a thorough complement of educational material. And the regents testing was a curriculum based measure of learning achievement. To me that is an excellent process. What this other thing is trying to be, is still a mystery to me.

Yes, another pipe-dream that we have been sold as the salvation of our energy future. You know, if all the costs were to be taken into account including the ripple effects in our food costs, I would not be surprised if the most expensive petro isn't a damned sight cheaper. But all that has been justified also and even crammed down our throats by the government. And let's not forget those giant whirly-gigs that they have plopped all over the hills. Those came with a whole lot of stories and promises also. Results that only come by way of very hefty government subsidies (code for our tax dollars). There's a lot of people getting very wealthy off our gas afflictions. They have all learned how to work the system with various schemes and gimmicks.

And by golly that rhymes too .... lol.

Yes, I did my time with the McCullochs, Poulans, and such. They all turned out to be basically disposable saws. So finally I bit the bullet and bought a Stihl and I haven't looked back. It's hard to believe that anyone could have a love affair with a chainsaw but after decades of trying to slide by with lowest bidder, I finally have a saw that actually starts without pulling tendons in my arm and clutching my chest due to the impending heart attack, and the obligatory trip over to the neighbors to apologize for the language. I always thought that was all just part of cutting trees and firewood. So, I hope I haven't jinxed it all with all this praise, but just this afternoon I had a pretty big tree to hack up, and it was actually a pleasure to work with a piece of equipment that was designed with quality and the consumer in mind. Oh and by the way, I'm quite sure that it was not really all that expensive. certainly less than a couple of those "throw-away saws that I have bought in the past.

People ..... I have to back up a little here because I don't have any kids going to school (haven't for a heck of a long time). So I need a little coaching as to the details of these tests. These are subject related questions ... right? Would it be fair to compare them to the old regents tests that we old-timers used to take in highschool? I remember that we spent a whole lot more than just a month preparing for those Regents tests, basicly the whole year was devoted toward learning the basic material that NYS deemed essential for educating the students so that they mastered the material. And then we were tested to see if we learned it. That always seemed like a reasonable way to handle education and to check back through an unbiased source to see that no students were being short-changed by the system or giving false measures of success. Like I say, I haven't got a clue what these tests are like, but if they are curriculum based, it sounds like the old tried and true system of the past. It's just that now it would appear that it is being tried in grade school now .... again, maybe not really all that bad an idea. It really does sound a whole lot less intense than those regents tests that I used to sweat over. And, I and a whole lot of other folks survived it with only a minor amount of trauma.... lol. And if as a side benefit, the test results are being analyzed to see which teachers are pulling their weight and being effective in the classroom, I say that's a good thing. So anyway, if I have the wrong idea of what these test are, and they have nothing to do with expected scholastic learning, I'd like to be straightened out. I truly am out of the loop. Am I even close?

I would like to see that statement documented. I am sitting here trying to figure out just who is paying people to lie about their experiences and eye-witness observations. It doesn't sound likely. It could be that he is as curious as I am about how anyone can so casually accept the use of toxins in a wide-spread public fashion without trying to drag every bit of the truth out of the situation first. But the even bigger question is exactly who is it that is paying money to keep people from enjoying all these supposed benefits? What does anyone gain if they are not genuinely convinced that this is a catastrophe waiting to happen? Do we have a plot by the oil cartels .... lol. Where is the motive? And yet those enlightened people who support fracking are experts on the subject.....lol. The fact is that neither side has an adequate understanding of what is really being talked about here, or the potential consequences that may be at stake. And that's precisely why both sides have to be listened to .... carefully. So far you have the gas companies feeding all the carefully filtered info on the science involved, and you have a group of people who have heard or experienced some anomolies that seem to run counter to what the gas companies are feeding us. You also have some large quantities of admitted toxic elements involved in the process which should always raise red flags. It sounds to me like what is needed is as much data and info as possible on the subject because being wrong on this issue has the potential for permanent and severe damage to the environment and even people's lives. And yes, anecdotal evidence is just as credible as theoretical calculations and Madison Avenue razzle-dazzle. Perhaps other states may feel that their environment is for sale. They may find financial benefit in rushing headlong into all of this without adequate investigation. Perhaps they will provide the labratory that demonstrates that our prudent path was the right path. I don't know, we obviously have little common ground on this discussion. I am still more willing to err on the side of caution until I am convinced that there is no risk. You are more willing to accept the gas company's hype. And the truth of the issue is probably somewhere between.

We have a swamp just north of Naples that has some very thick cattails that are well over your head. When you get a ways out into it, getting turned around and disoriented is a very real possibility. Then to make matters worse, there are several sets of canals and ponds that were dug by the DEC out in the middle that can force you to detour and switch-back. And then if you really get messed up, there is a river that will stop you cold. I was out there one time and spent a few hours that I really didn't want to. I never did go back out there again.

Yes and those are all good reasons to watch them like a hawk, and not blindly and automatically buy into any encouragements and sweet talk that they and their Madison Avenue associates may slick up and send your way. That is exactly what I meant when I said that I can understand where their motives lie for shading the truth a bit. They need public buy-in and will say or do whatever it takes to get that. It is known as the profit motive, a very positive driver for successful business growth. It is a needed incentive, but requires careful scrutiny by those individuals or societies that are affected by their actions. We understand corporate motives, and while it gets to sound like a broken record, since it hasn't yet been answered, I will once again ask what the suspected motives are for those that are opposed. I know, it is an inconvenient question, but before we call all those people liars, I have to ask about why we suspect that they are lying about what they claim they see, smell, and have experienced. What motive do they have to be dishonest?

Damned fine-looking cake, by golly! Somebody put a lot of work into that. Happy birthday, and welcome to geezer-hood.