Sogaard

Maybe you can revitalize this thread, I'm a bow/gun/mz hunter from Brooklyn, but live in SI now.

Wow...are we now in the Twilight Zone?? http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/08/30/paul-ryans-speech-in-three-words/ That is a FOXNEWS article. I had to check the link twice to make sure it wasn't fake.

This thread should be in Region 2, btw...Reg 1 is Long Island.

They can try, but the deer population is beyond control unless they decide to kill them. I see groups of 10-12 moving through the woods now, and if you go to Clay Pit or Mount Loretto, the groups can be even larger. I've seen some amazing bucks in some places too. If you go down to the driving range / paintball places near the old oil towers, you can see deer grazing on the far side of the range every morning. Twenty people launching balls at them and they barely flinch. I bust the chops of community board 3 every now and then to tell them to start a archery-only lottery to cull the herd. Instead of having to pay thousands to deal with the problem, they can make money. =D

I honestly believe this isn't true. The next president has a likely chance of appointing two, if not three supreme court justices. Roe v Wade will be in serious trouble if Romney is president when Justices are retiring.

Dinsdale, never let facts get in the way of good 'ole fashioned fear mongering. Its the Republican way.

Hah, the Bronx doesn't have anything on Staten Island. The damn things cause traffic jams here because they have no fear. http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-11-09/news/30375399_1_turkeys-south-beach-psychiatric-center-tree-lined-residential-streets

Haha, I'm actually (by this sites standards at least) one of the super-liberals. I doubt we would agree on much.

How does one specifically bear hunt without baiting? Burn honey 1.5 onces at a time? EDIT: Upon rereading my post, I just wanted to clarify that I'm not implying anything, I'm genuinely curious because I still have not been lucky enough to see a bear in the woods (in season at least).

I agree, Texas is southwest. You'll fit right in there.

So, being pro-gun/hunting/sportsmanship, according to you, should mean, pro-givingconvictedfelonseasyaccesstofirearms? Yeah, I'm going to pass on that batch of Kool-aid.

I'm assuming you're just trolling at this point, because the constitution isn't a code of laws.

The same part of the constitution that allows for laws to prohibit felons from owning any other type of gun. If you want more detail than that, ask a constitutional lawyer. I can think of one that you may have heard of.

I got 3M, I'm hoping to get in a little bow hunting in at Stewart State Forrest. Struck out at 3H, which is a shame because that's where I really wanted to get one.

The title in your first post is not neutral. You make it should like the shooter is being prosecuted for actions you see as a valid response to a situation. "Defending" yourself implies you had cause. Opening fire on 3 people walking towards you (reportedly) without saying a word, is, for lack of better words, batshit crazy. EDIT: OK, just read your post above this one. If that isn't how you meant it, sorry for the misunderstanding.

Reread the article. The guy was looking for his own brother, not the shooter's brother. How can opening fire on three unarmed people without cause or provocation be justified?

So...you think it should be OK to open fire with no warning on 3 unarmed people just because they approach you? What exactly was he defending himself from? They weren't even looking for him.

Seriously? "The end of the country"? Give me a break. And the TEA party may have started as a grassroots movement for change, but now its funded by the Koch brothers, which makes it just another pawn of big money.

Your one small step will never be forgotten. He was a true American hero.

I also have a firm belief that the 12lb trigger leads to some of the inaccuracy in stressful situations.

So...no response to the above then? Thought so.

I'd love to see you put on a badge and see how calm and collected you are when an armed killer draws his weapon and starts firing at you from 8 feet away. And even better, you say police, who go through many hours of training, are not trained well enough to handle firefights in crowded areas, but you expect civies, who have ZERO training to do a better job. Sorry, I'm not seeing the logic there. Feel free to enlighten me.

Wow, you have an amazing ability to speak for and about all NYC cops. How many do you know, personally, that you can perpetrate such broad generalizations as fact? I would love to take the time to do this. Please posts some links so I can look at the numbers. Actually, shooting a fleeing suspect in the back is a no-no. For some reason review boards really don't like that one, so police try not to do it. Go figure? Again, I am in awe that you can channel and consolidate the feelings and opinions of so many police officers. Your Facebook page must be something fierce. And now you can speak for everyone else too! Well, you've already shown can predict the actions and feelings for 40,000+ NYC police and you can predict the thoughts and reactions of however many thousand CC civilians, predicting whose bullets hit 8 bystanders must be child's play. Sorry for not hold back like you requested, but when people make huge baseless generalizations, it kind of ticks me off a little bit.

I won't argue with that, the more training the better. I guess we can debate this part of the issue in more detail once the ballistics come in. If some of the wounds were caused from ricochets or fragments, you can't really blame the police for that. I'm just glad that none of the bystanders were wounded seriously.

CNN is reporting the officers fired 14 rounds. I can't find the numbers on the shooter, or the amount of times he was hit.