Doc

Well, on the one that is attacking the cow & calf, you are on pretty firm legal ground if you "handle" it. The case of the deer being chased can present a bit of a more difficult "legal" bind if it's in a place where there is even a remote chance of being witnessed and reported. Periodically you read articles about people that wind up in some pretty ugly hot water trying to do the "right thing".

Today is supposed to be just like yesterday ..... BUT....Tomorrow's high is supposed to be 50 degrees, with upper 40's for the rest of the week. Also, the guy on YNN is claiming that the below normal temps are going to be not seen again this season. Now don't ask me how he can make that kind of statement when they can't even get the next day's forcast right. But as a tiny piece of semi-encouragement, that is what I have heard so far.

That's a good deal if you recognize the dogs and assuming that they ever come home where the authorities can apprehend them. And then, I am sure you would encounter the old your word against the owner. But, all of the dogs that I have ever seen chasing deer, I had never seen before or after. The problem is that a dog that's after deer can run a heck of a long ways, and usually are not from the area that you see them in. Also, most of the dogs that I have seen are not the kinds of critters that you want to try to apprehend. Also, whenever I see them it is not really a very handy time to stop whatever you are doing to try to round them up and take them to the authorities. So for the most part, all you can do is curse and watch the action. Plus, has anyone ever tried to call off a strange dog that is intent on chasing a deer? ..... It pretty much cannot be done. That usually gets them running a little faster. So basically, the way the law is set up, they get a free pass as does the dog owner.

So yesterday afternoon as I was sitting watching a movie, I caught a movement out of the corner of my eye. I glanced out the window and saw 7 deer running like crazy out of the front thicket, across my driveway and into the side thicket. That kind of caught my attention so I watched and sure enough I saw a brown and white dog chasing after them. I had to laugh, because he wacked into the old goat fence and bounced back about 5 feet. And then he kept trying to get through. After about 5 tries, he finally realized that if he went about 5' to his left, the fence ended. So after he figured that out he was on his way after the deer. Next came a second dog who proceeded to repeat the same fiasco as the first, bouncing off the fence and then after a half dozen tries finally figured out the fence ended just a short ways away. And so he went on his way. I really had no chance to react and stop what was going on. Back during last hunting season, I had 4 dogs (not the same ones) charging up the hill right toward me just having a great ol' time. They were friendly enough, but I'm sure they were lost (probably from chasing deer). All of this stuff has me wondering just how much of this goes on that I don't get to see. I'm beginning to wonder how many dogs are running around chasing deer and maybe taking down more than any of us realize. I do remember years ago putting an end to an attack on a deer in my front yard (I won't be saying how I put an end to it). The deer was hacked up pretty bad, and I doubt that it made it. The next morning, I checked out the scene and there was blood everywhere in the snow. That one involved two dogs that undoubtedly had run this deer for quite a ways taking a bite out of it every so often. I know we all worry about coyotes taking down deer, but I am wondering if man's best friend may actually be having more of an impact. It sure does irritate the hell out of me when people get these dogs and then don't have enough responsibility to control them.

Generally speaking, what you are saying is true, but party affiliation is not the yardstick to use when placing your vote. The votes on anti-gun legislation are public record. Use those records to guide your vote. If your legislator votes in a way that is contrary to your wishes, That's the one and only reason to vote them out. Not party affilliation, or the fact that they are incumbants or any other reasons of that sort. Make it plain that you are punishing those that ignore your wishes, with a vote for their opponent. And then, follow that up with an e-mail explaining why you voted against them so they know just who it was that defeated them and why.

For those that are planning on coming up with an "enemies list", here is a good start. This is the way your state Senators and Assemblymen voted on the so-called "SAFE Act". Let's hope the formatting holds up. NYS Senate vote: Y=a "yes" vote N=a "no" vote Adams Y Hannon Y Perkins Y Addabbo Y Hassell-Thomps Y Ranzenhofer N Avella Y Hoylman Y Ritchie N Ball N Kennedy Y Rivera Y Bonacic N Klein Y Robach N Boyle Y Krueger Y Sampson Y Breslin Y Lanza Y Sanders Y Carlucci Y Larkin N Savino Y DeFrancisco N Latimer Y Serrano Y Diaz Y LaValle Y Seward N Dilan Y Libous N Skelos Y Espaillat Y Little N Smith Y Farley N Marcellino Y Squadron Y Felder Y Marchione N Stavisky Y Flanagan Y Martins Y Stewart-Cousin Y Fuschillo Y Maziarz N Valesky Y Gallivan N Montgomery Y Young N Gianaris Y Nozzolio N Zeldin EXC Gipson Y O'Brien Y Golden Y O'Mara N Griffo N Parker Y Grisanti Y Peralta Y Assembly vote: BILL:S02230 DATE:01/15/2013 MOTION: YEA/NAY:104/43 Abbate Y Clark Y Gantt Y Kavanag Y McKevit Y Raia N Solages Y Abinant Y Colton Y Garbari N Kearns N McLaugh N Ramos Y Stec N Arroyo Y Cook Y Gibson Y Kellner Y Miller Y Reilich N Steck Y Aubry Y Corwin N Giglio N Kim Y Millman Y Rivera ER Stevens Y Barclay N Crespo ER Gjonaj Y Kolb N Montesa N Roberts Y Stirpe Y Barrett Y Crouch N Glick Y Lalor N Morelle Y Robinso Y Sweeney Y Barron Y Curran Y Goldfed Y Lavine Y Mosley Y Rodrigu Y Tedisco N Benedet Y Cusick Y Goodell N Lentol Y Moya Y Rosa Y Tenney N Blanken N Cymbrow Y Gottfri Y Lifton Y Nojay N Rosenth Y Thiele Y Borelli N DenDekk Y Graf N Lope PD N Nolan Y Rozic Y Titone Y Boyland Y Dinowit Y Gunther N Lope VJ Y Oaks N Russell Y Titus Y Braunst Y DiPietr N Hawley N Losquad Y O'Donne Y Ryan Y Walter N Brennan Y Duprey N Heastie Y Lupardo N Ortiz Y Saladin N Weinste Y Brindis N Englebr Y Henness Y Lupinac Y Otis Y Santaba Y Weisenb Y Bronson Y Espinal Y Hevesi Y Magee N Palmesa N Scarbor Y Weprin Y Brook K Y Fahy Y Hikind Y Magnare Y Paulin Y Schimel Y Wright Y Buchwal Y Farrell Y Hooper Y Maisel Y Peoples Y Schimmi N Zebrows Y Butler N Finch N Jacobs Y Malliot Y Perry Y Sepulve Y Mr Spkr Y Cahill Y Fitzpat ER Jaffee Y Markey Y Pretlow Y Simanow Y Camara Y Friend N Johns N Mayer Y Quart Y Simotas Y Castro Y Gabrysz N Jordan N McDonal Y Ra Y Skartad Y Ceretto N Galef Y Katz N McDonou Y Rabbitt N Skoufis N

I already have the list on who voted which way on the "SAFE ACT". I don't care who the opposition is or what their idealogy is, or anything about them ..... All those that voted FOR the bill need to learn that their votes have consequences, and good bad or indifferent, their opposition gets my vote. It's time to make these guys accountable.

Only way to judge it is to watch it. That little ad didn't show much.

It's getting to the point where it might be useful to set up a spread-sheet or some kind of document to keep track of the creeps that we have to vote out in the next election. But whatever it takes, we have to remember who must go ..... besides Andrew "Crazy-eyes" Cuomo.

Aren't you glad that they don't realize that they could do the same thing to a human? They are really swatting each other! Sugar-Ray Bamby .... lol.

See how often we are expected to have opinions on things that no one seems to know a whole lot about? ..... lol. Trying to get a little background on some of these things is like pulling teeth. No wonder so much BS is slipped into law without anybody knowing it. It's is like a dozen full-time jobs just trying to stay half-ways informed. It really is frustrating, and an impossible task.

There is no "one word" that identifies "what is wrong with this country". There are a whole network of problems that have evolved over time to create where we are today. We are always looking for the easy answers, but they are never easy.

When going after those critters, there should be no fooling around. I think my .270 would be my chosen weapon.

Ha-ha .... and the final screw-job is the fact that the "insufficient funds that they credited me with are in the form of Winchester certificates, good only for Winchester ammunition. Now where do you suppose I will find some of that ..... lol. There is an expiration date of 1 year on the certificates. It wouldn't surprise me if this ammunition shortage doesn't last well beyond that. In that case Winchester will have successfully skated completely away from any reimbursement at all. Way to go Winchester!

What an interesting method to obtain the ultimate gun control. They have us doing it to ourselves.

You know, if you just simply read the wording, it's not all that hard to figure out which side of the gun control issue these people are on. This is a good example of phrasing poll questions so that they come out with a pre-determined outcome. You can learn a lot about poll manipulation just from this one here. It also tells you plenty about the idealogical bent of these people. The phrasing of the question, and the little editorial touch on the answers says so much about this outfit. These are not people that I want to associate my name with in any way shape or fashion.

Excellent idea. But I have to ask, what accountability do we have with the current system. But I do like the idea of asking questions. Perhaps I will take that approach. Before I do that though, I would like to have a more thorough understanding of the purposes of the database. Who uses it and for what purposes. That may help frame my questions in a direction ... lol.

That's why I don't want them framing my responses to my legislators for me. I have already taken care of that in my own words.

I understand all the potentials, and I understand all the problems with the NYS Safe Act. Right now I am concerned with the new database ..... only. My investigation is for the composition of letters to legislators, and I am only interested in current facts about the database. When I write to a legislator, I do not like to engage in "might happens", or "Could lead tos". These guys don't want their time wasted with imaginings, or theorizing or other kinds of fortune-telling. I want my letters to get right to the point with documented complaints. I am not saying that all these things that you all are thinking might happen, or the government motives aren't exactly as evil as you all describe them. But I have found that legislators stop paying attention when you come off with the doom and gloom predictions no matter how truthful we feel they are. That is why I have tried to keep focused on only those things that we know are documented and quantifiable. It's the one approach that sets us apart from the emotional rantings of the anti-gun people, and I believe it is the one thing that keeps credibility on our side. So when I ask for downsides to the centralized location of registration data, I am talking about things that are known and proveable. An example is the exhorbitant cost of this database. That is published fact that I can point to and argue about in a letter to those that have positions of power to help do something about it. I have already launched into the litany of reasons for my opposition to the NYS Safe Act in other letters. Now I want to pass on my objections to the centralized database without going through all that other stuff again. And I want to do it with facts not theories and opinions. So far I haven't been getting the info I was hoping for, and I am beginning to believe that it is not really known to the public.

Question: Is this problem only in NYS or is it nationwide?

Ok, so apparently there really isn't a whole lot of info (known to the public) about anything that may go along with the creation of this database, or really any known problems to us that we don't already have with existing registration databases. So, unless some insider comes along I guess we know about as much as anybody. So let's try another question about something that does have a bit of a public track record. Other than proving that a background check has been performed and that you have a legal right to possess your pistol, what other purposes does registration databases perform. In other words, who accesses them and why? That might help me understand the value of these databases and whether it is worth $28 million to improve the data storage system. Are there other purposes, perhaps as an aid to law enforcement in some way? How do proponents of the registration system try to justify the cost of maintaining these databases?

I don't think that is by accident or oversight. I think you are dealing with an anti-gun minded entity who has carefully crafted the poll to make it a no-win situation for any pro-gun respondants. The way they worded that response is exactly the wording that will be sent to legislators in our name. I did not participate because I don't want to be handing them my e-mail address and when I send a message to my legislators, I don't want to word it so that I sound like a buffoon indicating that I oppose common sense approaches to anything.

Well, see this is another one of the details that I was hoping would come out of this discussion. I have not heard one word about whether anything other than the location of the database will be changing. All I have heard so far is that relocation is the only change. I haven't heard about any other changes as to the administration of the permitting system. See, if they are uprooting the whole registration system, they are keeping that pretty quiet. As far as I know the local sheriffs and judges will still be involved in their duties, and the results will simply be inputted to Albany's computer, probably much like we handle car licensing. Without any other facts, I have to assume that the activity is simply moving data from local locations to Albany. If there are other planned parts to it, I am hoping that will be brought out by those that have a more complete understanding than I do.

If it can be imagined, somebody will build it. Actually, I found a couple more versions of U-Tube strange things that they are doing with crossbows ... there seems to be no limit. It may be an old historic weapon, but it just now has received the financial momentum to get some R&D attention. What you are seeing on U-Tube are simply prototypes for a long line of future innovations. It is a wonderful platform to build off of. Just from mechanical curiosity, I would love to see how these things work. It's kind of ingenious.

You know this nonsense is starting to look more and more like a permanent situation. The antis are getting their way, and it appears to be at our own hands. You really can find a better way to get rid of gun usage than getting rid of the ammo to shoot out of them. Really, anybody see any end to all this. It's been quite a few months and no sign of the availability getting any better. What the heck is wrong with these ammo manufacturers. Why aren't they putting on extra shifts and pulling in all the extra cash. If I had a product that I couldn't keep on the shelf, I would raise the price a little and start adding production and "get rich quick".