13BVET

Simplicity, and less cost, existed years ago, and yet hunter numbers still declined-a proven fact. The killer for hunting, at least in my own opinion, is hunting opportunity. Certain parts of the state have been decimated so bad by development, it's not funny. Living in Dutchess County, I know this only too well. I'm actually giving it up, because there is not enough opportunity here to justify spending a damned dime on a license. I think I went out all of about 6 times this year-a sure sign that I'm definitely losing interest. Hell, we don't even have grouse here anymore. As I said, just not worth anything at this point, as far as I'm concerned.

I agree 100%. And, since 85% of deer hunting is done in the southern zone, that only leaves 15% that is done in the northern zone. Common sense dictates, that more money is spent on hunting goods in the southern zone.

Why in the hell would anyone want to come here, with all the idiotic gun restrictions? In my opinion, this is being done to deflect the Safe Act. What's also disturbing, is how non-residents will save $100 off on muzzleloader, and bow, and we'll save all of $1 on archery, and $10 on muzzleloader. The archery one is definitely a slap in the face. On another note, where are all these people going to hunt? Down here, we're already grasping at straws to find places to hunt.

Mike Rossi, why is it that every thing you post, seems to be politically correct? That website, is the same bunch of loons that wanted to ban the coyote hunting contest in New Mexico, I believe. Simply put, they're a bunch of liberal lunatics.

Kill the damned things any way you want-it's not going to break my heart.

Of course there's a law enforcement exception in this bill. Only the low life citizens, and the poor bastards returning from getting shot at overseas have to pay it. Here's the exception: 4. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT APPLY TO ANY PEACE OFFICER 20 WHO IS AUTHORIZED TO CARRY A FIREARM.

Agreed. The landowner definitely should ask what the person is doing there. In my case, there was no house whatsoever where I had accidentally crossed the line. In fact, when I did finally see one of the posted signs, it stated the land owner lived in Jersey. Nonetheless, I did leave right away.

I was going to say that myself. I know I inadvertently wandered on to someones property by mistake once. I was hunting a DEP property that I wasn't familiar with, and crossed the border line. I didn't know it, until I happened to turn around, and noticed the DEP signs pointed back the way I came. I left the other property right away. I was looking for grouse in laurel so thick, it wasn't funny. It does happen.

I notice once again, that you paint the military in a worse light than law enforcement. Screw you. Raped children? Mowed down innocent people because they snapped? What in the hell do you know about what they went through-you weren't there. You know nothing about what these men and women go through in combat zones. Hell, you've never even been in boots-that's pretty obvious. As for hate, I hate those who hate the military.

Does that mean that LEO's can buy these for their own personal use? I'm just trying to figure out why they were specifically marked Law Enforcement.

This is getting way out of hand. There is absolutely no question, at this point, that their whole intent is to disarm the people.

Tactical nukes would be self defeating for the government, so they wouldn't use them. The achillees heel of any organized force, is urban warfare. It takes a hell of a lot of resources to fight in urban environments. Just to clear 3 houses, takes a platoon of troops. To clear just one block, takes a full company. All the firepower in the world, can still be useless against a determined enemy. Most notably, when it comes to guerrilla warfare scenario. Vietnam, Afghanistan, and other war zones, have shown that it's no cake walk.

Called out on what? Shawn is a damned good friend of mine, and I'll sure as hell stick up for him too. So, I'd like to know just what I was supposedly called out on. I'll be waiting. I'm sure you'll enlighten me with your profound wisdom.

We're going to end up buying ammo at local shops anyway, because Gov. Homo's new law makes it impossible in the long run to order online.

So, if it has such a minimal impact, then why such a huge outcry about it? They have the right to sell their items to who they want to. Maybe if the FOP would butt out, then this would never have happened. The FOP's view on disarming the public is very clear.

So tell us, JJB. Since it's the cops who support these bans, who are these companies supposed to hold accountable? Merry Maids?!

Yup, and it didn't take you long to put your head up the cops a$$ as usual-did it?

We used to get the Pennysaver down here-haven't seen it for years. It just stopped being delivered for some reason.

The Fraternal Order Of Police is clearly NOT on the peoples side. Funny how they can't say "No, we don't support these unconstitutional laws", but they sure as hell have no problem getting up on stage, and saying "Yes, take the guns away from law abiding citizens", which they have done as recently as Obama's little suggestion on banning "assault weapons". Last I saw, there were a lot of badges up on the stages where these bans were instituted, that were applauding like crazy. Was it my imagination? As for losing my job, losing money, and all that bs, I've been there, thanks to my car getting impounded for nothing. So, take that pc bs, and shove it up your a$$.

The Fraternal Order Of Police have constantly supported erosion's of our rights pertaining to gun ownership. That is why Olympic is targeting law enforcement. The FOP supported the first "assault weapons" ban, and most certainly endorses this one. The original letter from Olympic, to the FOP clearly states this.

http://www.facebook.com/LaRueAccuracy

Fantastic! I love the way the letters to the NY government basically tells them to go to hell!

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Olympic-Arms-Inc/114264921930723?ref=ts&fref=ts Yet another company standing up for the citizens rights! Love it!

http://www.realtree.com/forums/lounge/111199-templar-custom-announcement.html Good for them!

I don't even own any so-called assault weapons, but history has shown that the Supreme Court is more apt to protect gun rights under the militia clause in the Constitution, than anything else. I don't think there were many decisions protecting gun ownership for the purpose of hunting (at least I can't find any). These are cases that clearly state that "military style" weapons are clearly protected. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller