Doc

Frankly I have problems with letting bogus statements, insults, and comments that I think are harmful to the activities that we hold dear here, stand unopposed. In fact I generally won't do it. I don't see cowering before other more aggressive people as being "the bigger man". I do try to keep my conversations as civil as possible and that is not to say that I have never been drawn into responding in the same manner that I am being talked to. But I am pretty successful at avoiding the name calling directed at other members or anyone that I am conversing with here. I can't say the same for declared enemies outside of this site like animal rights organizations, or anti firearms people and organizations. Those I generally use fairly descriptive terms.

I have been hearing a lot of sportsmen and gun users playing into the hands of the anti-gun element by expressing a willingness to sacrifice the AK style of semi automatic rifles. What bothers me is the willingness to outlaw the other guy's rifle. I don't own one, and what the heck they cost so much that I'm not likely to ever buy one. And if they were outlawed, I would never miss it. All very true statements for me and my particular wants and desires and conditions. Seems like a good piece of meat to throw the antis to keep them off my back. But if you think that this will not simply embolden the gun banners I have to ask what makes you think that? Apparently very few of us understand that there is no functional difference between those kinds of guns vs your everyday semi-automatic hunting rifle or shotgun ....none! The only difference between them all is the "appearance". Appearance ... is that how we want the legality of our firearms to be decided? Wouldn't you want to base it on something that promises a difference? As far as pacifism, I will tell you that there is no placating these people and they will come for your semi-auto next. It is a simple concept .... If they can't have immediate total disarmament of the US citizens, they will content themselves with precedent setting incrementalism. One make and model at a time. And we seem to be all too willing to begin that process based soley on the "appearance" of a certain style of gun. Don't be fooled. You voluntarily give away the next guy's weapon, you are accelerating the process that eventually will have them coming for your favorite gun. That's not just fanaticism talking. That is simple logic.

For future reference, it is a good idea to have all that stuff hashed out in advance. In other words well before the season head around the hunting area requesting retrieval permission. Had you done this, you may have gotten a preview of his unfriendly condition, and been able to relocate to avoid hunting that close to the line, or perhaps even go to an entirely different place to hunt.

Lol .... I am going to exercise my "tolerance" that I spoke of in the previous reply and not sideline this thread into "off topic land" with a reply to the assault rifle comment ..... Besides, it has been responded to a jillion times already on various other threads.

Yeah, you've got to realize that some of the debates on here are quite incendiary with a whole lot of passion behind them. As in my example of going into an animal rights forum and talking about the joys of trapping. How long do you think that would remain civil? When you are dealing with emotional subjects that members feel very strong about, it really doesn't take too long before they degenerate into all kinds of combat. It's human nature. Yes there are people who can simply allow people to walk all over their beliefs and never say a peep. I don't know whether they are extremely tolerant or just timid. But when you are dealing with subjects of tradition such as firearms and hunting you are dealing with things that people have grown up with and that were taught to them by family members. You start messing with those things and tempers are going to flair pretty quickly.

Probably requires a 2nd job to feed that big-boy .... lol

Lol .... From what I saw laying on the table after the last Rochester gun buy-back, they would have been better off to give that collection to some of the gang-bangers so they could blow themselves up trying to use them. What a pile of junk.

My guess is that if I wanted to start some intense flaming, I would probably go on a hunting sight and start peddling my best anti-gun lines. There are some elements of common sense that need to be exercised if you want "everybody to just get along". How about if I went on an animal rights forum and started talking about the joys of trapping. How would that go over .... lol. But seriously, as long as we are an open forum that allows all opinions, there is always going to be some serious stepping on toes that will not always be gracefully tolerated. Such is the danger of expressing opinions.

We have had a whole bunch of threads moved, and I never saw anyone getting all bent over it. What the heck is the big deal?

That's a real good point. We have no idea what is being passed off as fact in our schools. I have heard about teaches that go out of their way to make anti-hunting, anti-gun, and politically motivated comments in class. It sure would be nice if they didn't. On the other hand like I said above, teachers are people too, and have certain agendas and built-in biases that they might be tempted to push. Also for some of them the power to influence impressionable children may occur to them as a way to indoctrinate. Since there is no one there to monitor classes for such things, I wouldn't be surprised if such things might be happening quite often. I have no idea how that can be stopped.

Robinson my man ..... where have you been? Good to hear from you again. Ok, first of all there are three things you never want to argue with a teacher over. That would be politics, religion and firearms ... lol. These are all things that you will always lose in one way or another. Understand that your teacher is not your buddy or your friend, but rather a person of authority that has your future in your hands. It's kind of like having those kinds of arguments with your boss. You lose before you even begin. Was this by any chance your English teacher? As far as your stance on the subject, there's nothing there that I would argue with. But you need to know who to pick your arguments with. Understand that teachers are people too, and as such may be impaired with certain trained-in, political orientations. You just know, or at least by now you have found out, that there is no way that you are ever going to change your teacher's mind. So learn to pick your battles and try to argue only over things that lack emotionality. Also, never do battle with people who can hurt you. Also, try to see teachers as a resource, and not an adversary. They are there to help you educationally and are experts in doing that. Take advantage of what they have to offer and try to ignore the rest.

Oh man, now I can't get that old George Jefferson theme out of my mind ...... "Movin' on up". Sweet looking ride there grow. In answer to your question, my deer all come to the house via ATV or hand dragging. I just hunt my own hill. On the few occasions that I did any travel for hunting or other transport of deer, we simply strapped the critters onto cargo racks on the roof and then headed to the car-wash afterward. i have been known to push, shove, bend and cram them into the trunk with a plastic tarp to protect the interior. But that practice was ended when I found my first tick in there......Yuck!

What the heck is this guys problem???? I must have missed something here because that kind of response makes absolutely no sense.....lol.

And again, there you are lying about my replies, and you know it. There is nothing in my reply that talks about anyone on this site. What is the matter with you that you are trying to keep saying that. You know that it is untrue and yet you keep purposely lying about that. Have you no integrity? I hope the problem is that you are not (or cannot) really reading my replies. That at least would make up a reasonable excuse for what otherwise can only be interpretted as simple lying. Look, I guess you win on this one. I cannot carry on a conversation with someone who makes up untrue quotes. At the very least, I can only debate with someone who has some bit of integrity. I have to admit that your dishonest style of debate is something that I have never encountered and apparently is quite effective at shutting down conversation. So congratulations .... I guess. You have finally proven yourself to not even deserve a response.

Please stop lying about my words. I even went to the trouble of re-quoting what I said and yet you still insist on saying that it was about people on this site. I will repeat that I did not include any words about people on this site. The first time you misquoted that it may have been a mistake. The second time it is a lie. The connection with someone on this site was first made by you when you became so indignant and began to defend these people. You put yourself in that bucket .... I didn't. As far as this thread never ending, I will say that I am only reacting to each of your posts. You seemed to have made a career out of attacking me and my opinion about the people that exploit these kinds of tragedies for their own agenda. That is your choice not mine. As far as your contention that I have alienated some people, imagine what people must think of you to be defending those that thrive on exploiting tragedy for their own ends. If I alienate those that believe that such callous exploitation is proper conduct, then I guess that probably is no big loss. I am even more sorry that there are people that believe that defending these people is the right thing to do. I find no possible defense for those that would exploit tragedies of any kind just to further their political causes. And I don't apologize for that nor do I find any common ground with those that do.

Is that a real dog, or a stuffed one?...lol. I love the expression on the face of the boy in front. I can imagine him thinking, "hit the damned button already".

Ha-ha-ha .... you will find that Bubba can go on and on with this kind of nonsense. In fact it will eventually get to the point where he starts to stalk your every post.... a lot like his comment on this thread. Just out of the blue he comes up with these crazy zingers, for no apparent sane reason. I've said it before and it's still true today..... There is something wrong with that boy .... lol.

Frankly I know that the people noted are rabid fanatical gun control advocates that have spent decades doing whatever they can to eliminate guns. It is their life's ambition and they hope it to become a part of their legacy. Yes, I believe that they are perfectly willing and happy to exploit this tragedy for their own agenda. And as a matter of fact they have begun already. I am sure that they feel sorry for the lives lost, but will not hesitate for even a minute to exploit the situation for their own benefit and the furtherance of their ambitions and agenda. And the proof is in their immediate enthusiastic reactions. They are not wasting a minute of this opportunity and most likely had a response already prepared and a plan in place for this event even before it happened.

Great job! Is this still a work in progress or have you already submitted it to the teacher?

The sheriff's advice was spot-on. Stay away from this guy. We don't need to be reading about another tragic event caused by some irrational and out-of-control wacky neighbor going over the edge. STAY ... AWAY .... FROM .... HIM! Find another place to hunt. Seriously, you may have stepped onto a ticking time-bomb.

I made a comment about those who exploit the deaths of innocent children and others as opportunities to further their anti-gun agenda. And for some reason, you have identified yourself with them and taken offense at that statement. What does that say about you? Will you kindly just take just a second and answer that one question? What exactly is your point in defending these people? What is the connection between you and them? I frankly find that activity repulsive. Apparently you feel a need to defend that kind of thing. Why? Look, if you feel some need (for pages and pages) to defend those that look forward to seizing the opportunity to exploit tragedy, and even if you see yourself as one of them ..... knock your socks off. You have a right to that opinion. I didn't realize that any members here would align themselves with that despicable activity. I was apparently wrong. It is now clear that we do have some that think that exploiting dead children for advancement of a personal anti-gun agenda is a proper activity. Hey .... it takes all kinds. But, don't expect me to quietly condone such activity. Personally I find it disgusting.

It is nothing that I want to do. People are asking for suggestions and that is one thing that occurred to me. Simply put a barrier between them and crazies. If you think that security at schools is a bad idea, I simply have to disagree with you. If you have a better way to obtain a secure atmosphere for kids to learn in, I am listening. As far as your comparison to prisons, the chain link fencing is not to keep the kids in. That's a huge difference. It is to keep evil-doers with bombs, guns, etc from access to the walls of the schools or the people inside. The only freedom lost is the ability of someone to simply walk into a school and blow the place up or start spraying the classrooms with bullets or any other means of mayhem that they might have in mind. No, it's not a cure-all, nor is it any kind of impediment to those that have legitimate business inside school walls. And it is another layer of security that is not being taken advantage of anywhere but the toughest inner-city schools.

Unfortunately Wooley is probably right. By the time they get done fiddling with reporting rates and such, I doubt that that individual report will even make any difference in the final rounded off take numbers. I'm not sure about tagging it. I do like seeing that you are even considering it. It helps restore my faith in our hunter integrity. But I'll be honest, I am not sure what the actual legal requirement really is. You killed the animal, but you did not reduce it to your possession. So that is a legal detail that I have never gotten involved with, and I really don't know the answer.

Is this another one of those who consider themselves to be someone that I was talking about. What does that say about you? And don't be telling me to take a break. Just because you can't handle the truth or even any reasonable conversation, don't expect people to accomodate your shortcomings. Now, I assume you didn't even read the quote that you attached to your reply since it had absolutely nothing to do with what you responded to. If you are one of those people that I was talking about, don't be putting the blame for that off on me. That's simply your own self-made problem. If it appalls you that you are identifying with the kind of exploitive people that I was speaking of, maybe you had better take on a little self introspection and figure out why you believe I was talking about you. Think about that.

Seriously, as hunters and gun owners this reply is right on target. Once again we are about to come under serious mindless assault, and the only organization that stands between us and the antis is the NRA. That's how it's been for years. Warts and all, this organization has the clout to keep the irrational 2nd amendment enemies at bay. A task that none of us can do individually. They need our support. Yes it's time to put that small amount of money where our mouth is. Invest in what you believe in, or lose it.