Doc

They have to be working on a tiny margin, which makes them pretty fragile everytime inflation takes the inevitable step upward. That calls for some pretty exotic management. It's not the kind of business I would get into.

LOL .... So what on earth brought on this idiotic comment out of the blue? Anybody have any idea what this freak is talking about? Every so often he slips off his meds and these crazy things come blurting out. It's kind of like some weird form of terret's syndrome.....lol. Pretty strange stuff.

See .... It's not always about deer. I actually like these pictures better that the deer pictures. I think I have "burned out" on the repetition of all the deer pictures I've seen over the years. By-the-way, super quality pics!

I don't have a lot of bad things to say about teachers. Frankly, you couldn't pay me enough to spend all those hours with those little monsters ..... lol. But I will say that compared to the days when I was in school there certainly has become a glut of administrative personel. It also seems that there is an abundance in teacher headcount compared to what it took to educate us even though the number of students have not risen significantly. I will also say that the results really are not all that impressive. having attended the same school district that I am now a taxpayer in, and having put two children through that same school, and having watched two grandchildren attending the same school as well as countless other children and aquaintances, gives me a unique perspective on how the growth of teachers and administrators and facilities has far outpaced the miniscule population growth in that school over the years. Every year the inflation adjusted costs go up, and every year the quality of student education erodes. Something is very, very wrong in our educational institutions

The reason I am so picky on the trigger speed is based on what the camera will be used for. It is primarily for pictures of small critters taken at kind of close range, and in a creekside/swamp setting. The pictures will be taken at ground level which means that these critters will be scooting through openings in the swamp grass, Or I will be trying to catch them in specific spots such as on logs, etc. It's not like trying to get deer where there is a big area to catch them in. If you have ever watched a mink working a shoreline with that fast nervous gait that they have, you can imagine where they might wind up in 4 seconds. And then there are pictures trying to catch beavers or muskrats swimming down the creek. About the only critter in that environment that might give me a chance at 4 seconds would be something like a possum or coon. A lot of those kinds of animals can make it through an opening in the grass too fast for any significant trigger delay. I have three IR cameras for deer and will continue using those for herd and pattern documentation. But this camera has a whole different mission.

Who the heck can explain why they like liver. It looks disgusting. It's part of the guts. It has a very strong flavor that you either like or hate. But I can sit down and eat liver and onions until I'm so full I could bust. I just simply love it. And yet when I was a kid, you couldn't get me to eat the stuff.

Well, I am between a rock and a hard place on these because of my requirement for "white-flash". So many people are going to IR now (because they are into deer photos only) that the selection of white flash trailcams of any quality at all is very limited. I had my eye on the stealthcam Rogue or Sniper until I found out about the 4 second trigger time. That's simply unacceptable. So then when you take the Moultrie out of the equation, that only leaves one other manufacturer that does the job that I want it to. That would be Cuddeback. So, what the heck, even though the pricetag is nasty, I went with the Cuddeback Attack white-flash. The price ..... $188.99. So now I've got my fingers crossed, and we'll see how that all turns out. The Cuddeback Capture was only slightly cheaper, so I figured I would just go for the top end and see how that comes out.

Now compare that situation with the experience I had with Moultrie cameras. I found out that the camera was malfunctioning, so I sent it back to Hayneedle.com, no questions asked I got a replacement (free shipping). I had the same problem with that one, and again sent it back (free shipping) for a total refund. The whole fiasco didn't cost me a cent. By the way, that company charges no tax or shipping on their cameras and had a darn good price to start with. Now, there is one thing that I should mention. If I had waited for more than 30 days to try these cameras out and then discovered a problem then just like everyone else, I would have been unhappily dealing with Moultrie. Hayneedle's refund policy only lasts for 30 days. But at least its far far better than a lot of store policies where their response is that you have to handle quality problems through the manufacturer.

I don't care what brand of commercial trail cam you consider, there are always some people that have had some kind of legitimate horror story with each of them. If you let these kinds of stories cross off manufacturers from your list, you will wind up with a pretty blank looking list ..... lol. Trail cams appear to be notorious for having quality problems coming off their lines. However, there are some things to be learned from how you might consider buying trail cams. I was pleasantly surprised to find a couple of internet outfits that are willing to take back cameras in a no-questions-asked fashion, with no costs of shipping or re-stock (Hayneedle.com/binoculars.com and opticsplanet.com are two of them). You have to look specifically for those features, but there are internet sellers that have those features to their return policies. This gives you a period of time to determine whether you have a dud or not or if the quality was a bit over-sold by the producer. This kind of a hassle-free return policy is better than the manufacturers themselves are willing to give. I just made a purchase of a camera that people have reported having difficulties with. If it turns out that those reports are true of all of their cameras, I will know within a day or two and it will be shipped back for free for a full refund. Let's face it, if every camera that these guys shipped out had problems, they wouldn't be in business very long. So from now on I will be going on the assumption that occasionally you will get a lemon, but there are ways of encountering a lemon and getting out from under it without any loss.

Well, I'm no legal scholar .... lol.... but my interpretation of discharging a gun relates to the pulling of the trigger and causing the physical explosion inside the gun regardless of where the projectile winds up. As far as how the actual legal interpretation of all that goes, I suppose you would have to consult a warden or other judicial administrator. Short answer ...... I don't know. Look I hope you are right and everything is just wonderful with this proposed legal change. But there certainly are enough questions about it so that there is no way any of it gets any of my support.

I guess if one legal arrangement is a bit faulty, we should strive to make all legal arrangements faulty. I guess I don't really follow that kind of logic .... lol. At any rate, you needn't be too concerned with my opinion. I have no intentions of starting up letter-writing campaigns or trying to influence the issue one way or the other. I do feel the safety aspect of this change is totally being lost on you in favor of what you have convinced yourself that you need. That's ok, everyone is entitled to have an opinion.

I really have no gripe about the sales and delivery and returns policy of the outfit I was dealing with (Hayneedle.com/Binoculars.com). They have a "no questions asked" complete free refund or exchange policy which includes all shipping charges for initial delivery and return shipping. By the way, they also had a heck of a price, and no sales taxes. Needless to say, I was quite impressed and wouldn't hesitate to do business with them again. While the cameras were quite frustrating, the sales and service of the distributer were top-notch and the whole fiasco didn't cost me one cent.

Grouse- Here is all I could find in terms of actual wording: From the Environmental Conservation Law of New York Volume 1 Page 11-89, section11-0931 section 4.a.(2) 4. a. No person shall: (2) discharge a firearm or long bow within five hundred feet from a dwelling house, farm building or farm structure actually occupied or used, school building, school playground or occupied factory or church. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ There may be more somewhere else, but I couldn't find anything. There was no mention of direction of the shot in the passage that I found. Further down the page they have a rather lengthy description written in legalese of who is exempt from the law (Owners, family members, employees, and others with permission). The little blurb that they have included on the DEC web site also has similar wording: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ It is illegal to discharge a firearm or bow: · within 500 feet of any school, playground, or an occupied factory or church, · within 500 feet of a dwelling, farm building or structure in occupation or use unless you own it, lease it, are an immediate member of the family, an employee, or have the owner's consent.

Wait a minute there fella. Where are you getting that from. Are you kind of making up quotes as you go along? I don't mind people paraphrasing what I have said as long as there is something recognizable regarding what I really said. First of all, I was of the impression that we were discussing lowering the legal shooting distance for shooting bows. And I am simply stating my opinion that cutting that distance down to 50 yards is a safety concern that should be obvious to anyone who has ever stood in the yard of any typical suburban residence. I'm not really sure just how many times I have to repeat that. Not to encourage "topic creep", but since you asked, I will say that I do have concerns about any proximity law that doesn't take into consideration directions of shots and what is in the immediate visual sight behind that shot. And that pertains to any weapon at any distance. And of course that has absolutely no relationship to this topic unless you can talk the authors of this proposed change into adding such language (which I'm sure you can't). However, I have tried to stay within the confines of the topic and only address the piece of legislation that is actually being proposed.

That does help as long as every shot goes where you intend it to. But at a mere 50 yards, there is no calling back a bad shot or an accidental release. I guess I have never seen any specific wording that talks about the direction of shooting. Are you sure that is actually included?

Great pictures!! I'm cracking up over that last one. He seems to be intrigued by the camera. All I can think of is Daffy Duck (with colors).

Of course it's real hunting. It's a partnership between the guide and the hunter for the purpose of harvesting an animal. It is not my thing, because I like to take 100% of the credit or blame for what happens on any of my hunts. But there is a point of practicality when you are traveling a thousand or so miles and have only a week to pull off the one hunt of a lifetime. And then there are the trips to some foriegn countries where they won't even let you hunt without the services of a guide. And then there are some hunts where it is simply downright stupid to head out on your own. But for my preferences, my hunting is a one-on-one activity. I don't like having other people do my scouting for me or my stand selection. But then I don't get to go on a lot of these western dream hunts that others do either.

Ok then apparently that is just another name for the law we are discussing changing for archery equipment.

Lol .... I don't have any theories. I'm simply saying that 50 yards is too close from a safety standpoint to be shooting arrows at or near neighboring buildings and I would also add neighboring yards as well. The proposed law is for modifying archery proximity only and I simply believe for all the reasons stated already that that is simply not safe and the law should not change. It really is nothing any complicated than that simple fact.

I'm not familiar with the "safety zone" law, but I agree that a landowner can grant whatever permissions he wants to anyone he chooses.

I don't mind considering those shows "entertainment" but it's hard to watch those things without the feeling that someone is actually believing that I am gullible enough to believe all that BS. And then there is the fact that they are all constructed like blatant infomercials. That's why they have to duplicate a bunch of the previous segment. So much advertisement time has gone by that you forget what the heck they were doing before the commercials .... lol.

I don't know that my opinion is based on the fact that I am not directly affected by this proposed change although I will say that I am glad that I am not. I only know that I have driven through housing developments, and there is nobody that will ever convince me that 50 yards is an adequate distance for people to be shooting bows in hunting or target situations. And I'm not just talking about distances to buildings, but even distances to people's occupied yards. Those people have the right to enjoy their property without worrying about arrows flying through their yard. I think anyone who has ever stood in the back yard of a typical suburban lot can not disagree with that assessment and still maintain a straight face. I am not saying that clever people would be unable to add qualifiers to that law that might make it acceptable, but simply chopping the distance as is currently being proposed without any other restrictions is definitely not something that will ever get my support.

I don't want to rely on laws that only kick in when there are bodys laying on the ground. The idea of the current law is it serves a deterrent from creating an unsafe situation rather than waiting until someone is hurt or property damaged and then trying to figure out what laws to apply. I can't see revising a perfectly useful law just to legally put people in harms way. As far as trying to legislate the use of common sense, there is no doubt that law cannot rely on individual common sense. And so, that is the purpose of such laws ...... So that we don't have to rely on our neighbors having things like common sense and responsible attitudes. That kind of goes along with the thought that if all people were honest, and always did the right thing, we wouldn't need any laws. But, we all know better than that, don't we?

I guess I have a pretty bad feeling toward them now, and it may not even be fair. On the 3 cameras that I had, I did note thatthe serial numbers were very close .... in fact two were actually consecutive. So all three could have been some goofy assembler or component that were bad on one particular day. However, after three cameras, I think I gave them a good enough try. It's time for something else. By the way .... lol ... Last year I did have to return a Primos. I don't know if you remember or not, but I was getting a whole bunch of black pictures. It was kind of like the IR couldn't always figure out when to come on. The good news .... the replacement works fine. I'm actually quite happy with it. So, pink pictures eh? I've never heard of that one. did they offer any theories? I am really surprised (and disappointed) at all the quality problems that people have with these things. No moving parts ...... what's the problem ..... lol. There sure are a whole lot of other much more complex electronic appliances and gadgets that seem to be flawless and run forever, but something about these trail cams seems to really pose a challenge regardless of who the manufacturer.

Now that would be impressive! Robin hoods would have a lot more meaning if you could do it on demand. Predict it ....then do it. Byron Ferguson could maybe be able to do that. I once watched Stacy Groscup shooting aspirins out of the air. That has got to be pretty close to being able to shoot a robin hood on demand.