Grouse

Ted is a board member of the NRA, he's politically connected, he supports law enforcement, entertains the troops and knows the facts when he speaks. He meets most of the criteria Doc mentioned. You must be blinded by your bias. He does reach voters who do not have cast in concrete views by going on TV interviews and talking about gun rights. People who listen to him, without letting their hatred kill their hearing, will learn from him and agree with him on the 2nd Amendment issues. Only a guy like Ted will get invited to speak on TV by the anti-gun media, because they are betting he will lose it and make a fool of himself. But most of the time they lose the bet and he makes them look foolish. The other times, it works to his advantage, because he gets ratings for those TV shows and they ask him to come back on and speak some more. If not for him, the voters wouldn't be hearing anything positive about gun and hunting rights at all.

Thank you for playing.

P.S. Happy Mother's Day to all you Mothers out there. (Unless you are one of those MOFO Mothers -- Mothers Opposed to Firearms Ownership)

I don't think American hunters and gun owners are looking for leaders. I think they are looking for pro gun people of noteriety that speak out about hunting and the 2nd Amendment. I for one, would love to see many more of them, but there doesn't seem to be too many stepping up to the pulpit. They know it will draw fire from the anti's, and that's a reason not to do it. But when they also believe it will draw fire from the hunters and gun owners they are trying to help, why would they even consider doing it? I'll bet Tom Selleck was asked to be the President of the NRA and turned it down. There are many famous people who own guns that don't tell anyone, and treat their passion for firearms like it is some type of evil vice they have to keep hidden in a closet. Mel Torme was a HUGE collector of firearms when he lived. Who knew? What famous people that are pro gun have to put up with, is equal to what others call hate crimes when it happens to protected classes of people. Just look at what Rosie O'Donnel did to Tom Selleck on air. People let it pass with barely a complaint. Would that happen if Glenn Beck attacked any gay marriage supporter? Heck no! The anti's have the legislators and the laws on their side. The only way to change that imbalance is to form a united front. Ted may not be for you, but for the good of the pro gun agenda, keep the criticism in check. What galls me is people who own guns, but do not belong to the NRA, and seem to have as many critcisms of the NRA, if not more, than they do of Ted. If you don't support the NRA, even if you don't belong to it, I don't see how you can ever expect to win any pro gun battles in the long run. They are the biggest pro gun voice in America today but the anti's love to point out they only have 10% of American gun owners as members. What message does that send to the general public? If you think handing down traditions within your family will be enough to keep gun rights alive, you're wrong. There are probably two anti gun families out there for every pro-gun family, and their propaganda is gaining more followers every year. Why? Because they are united. They don't attack the looneys on the anti gun side of the issue. They defend them. We better wake up and start doing the same or we will lose.

Wasn't talking politics there Scot. I was talking about another pro gun person the media has made out to be a whack job because she likes guns and hunting. Just figured maybe you ageed with them. I didn't say you were a Liberal and didn't call you any names, so don't think I was insuting you. Just extrapolating on your dislike of pro gun people that the general public seems to think is whacked out. Ted may be an attention grabber, but he needs to be to get the mesage out. If you think he has never accomplished anything, you don't know Ted at all.

Sarah Palin does, but I'll bet Scot and the rest of the Nuge haters don't have a good word to post about her either.

A large percentage of the hunting community doesn't believe their gun rights are in jeopardy, nor do they belong to the NRA. That proves how informed and intelligent they are. So what they think about Ted means nothing. You can believe your personal attempts to elevate hunting and gun rights in this country are working wonders, but the anti's say you are insignificant in their eyes and can be squashed like a bug. Profess you doctrine of these things to the general public and then ask them what they think. Chances are they will say you are self centered and focused on your opinion, just as any fanatic is. What does that do to educate them or change their opinion? Nothing. You and your "thousands" of friends won't reach even 1% of the public that Ted does, if you spend the rest of your life trying. It's a numbers game. It's advertising an idea. The grassroots approach has been under attack by the anti's for decades. It didn't work because things got worse for us. Time to take a different approach.

By the way...... If you think Nuge exploded in that interview, you've never seen him actually explode. He doesn't take crap from anyone, which I believe CBS edited out of that tape, and I respect him for that too.

If you recall, there was a time when the spokesperson was Charlton Heston. A brilliant, well spoken, Acadamy Award winner and member of Hollywood's elite. When he took a stand with gun rights advocates, the anti's tried to crucify him! They threw so much mud at him, it almost ruined his entire life's reputation as a stand up American. They even tried to cover up the fact he was a big civil rights advocate in the 60's that marched with Martin Luther King. This is why nobody with any fame wants to take the gun rights podium. It's career suicide! They are all self centered cowards and care not for freedom, rights or the US Constitution if it means risking their precious reputations and bankrolls! So I give Ted credit for taking this stand and speaking out. He's aleady made his fortune and is now looking at self actualization as his end of life goal. I respect that he really believes and couldn't care less what the anti's think of him, his message, or the way he presents it. He wants to make a difference about something he believes in, something he sees being destroyed by anti's. I whole heartedly respect him for doing that, and yes I will give him a pass on the rest of it, because it doesn't help our side of the fight to attack him. The one issue we should all be concerned with, is the one issue he excells at!

You guys who say you know what the public in general thinks, are making assumptions. Can you post a poll that would back up what you are saying? I believe the general public is smart enough to know who Ted is and what he does. I think they accept all of that and at the same time find it curious that he can involve himself quite intelligently in a very serious subject. Those who believe he doesn't do the 2nd Amendment any good are also making assumptions. It may not be pretty how he does it, but he is bringing the issue to the general public and is doing it convincingly. The subject is on the table and is being discussed by folks who had no idea there was another side of the issue prior to Ted bringing it to their TV. The public is smart enough to intepret what part of Ted is Rock & Roll, and what part of his message is factual and true. I believe they see him as a performer and do not think all hunters and shooters are looney because he acts that way to get attention. Any intelligent member of the general public is wise enough to hear the facts he speaks and take them into consideration, while rejecting all of the bravado and rudeness of the rock star. That, my friends, is how he is helping us. He is getting a positive, factual message about guns and hunting, out to the public, so they are hearing it and absorbing it, and he is doing it in an entertaining, albeit crude, fashion. But that is what the public tunes in to see. the train wreck coming. That's why he is getting the podium so often and that's why he does it. Hunters and shooters with a negative, judgemental attitude about his style of getting the message out there are making a mistake. The media isn't going to give the podium to anyone who isn't going to bring in ratings, therefore the message will never get to the general public if it is coming from the likes of the perfect spokesman so many of you think it should come from. The media wants the public to think all hunters and shooters are like Ted. I think the public knows we aren't, and is starting to realize the trash they've heard about guns and hunting is BS too. And you can all thank Ted for that.

Hey, the Nuge may not be perfect, but he's on our side. If you attack him, you side with them. It's that simple. If you think he should shut up, who do you propose to take his place? Name me any other well known person who is fighting the gun rights/hunting rights fight like he is. Anybody else doing it for our benefit? No. So then, it's either him or nothing. And if it's nothing, they win. We are silenced and they are the winners. And if you are OK with that, your judgement stinks.

As far as the Draft Dodger label goes, many young men opposed the Vietnam war, with good reason. Many were war resisters, more than they were draft dodgers. If you want to hold all who avoided the Vietnam War up as cowards, you need to include Geo W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich, Dick Cheney, Mitt Romney, Pete Seeger, Muhammed Ali, etc. During the years when the draft was in effect, you could legally avoid being drafted by volunteering for any branch of the military, including those that (back then) had little chance of ever seeing combat. That included the reserve component of all branches, plus the National Guard and Air National Guard units of every state, plus the Coast Guard. Thousands went to Canada and were eventually pardoned, because it turned out the entire war was immoral and unjustified and no one would argue any longer with any man's desire to resist fighting in Vietnam. My uncle was a Lt Col jet fighter pilot in Nam in the USMC when I turned 16 during the Vietnam war, and once told me if I got drafted to go to Canada. When I asked how he could say such a thing, his reply was, "I don't think there should be a single boot on the ground over there. The only way to fight that war is the way we do it. Drop out of the sky from 50,000 feet, unload all of the ordnance and hit the afterburners the heck outta there!" He had three tours in Nam at that point and he was dead serious. "Any man who wants to go to Nam to fight is a Goddam fool!" he said. He was a brilliant USMC officer, with a geat deal of war experience from WWII, Korea and Nam. Today, I believe more than ever before, that he spoke great wisdom then.

The header where I click FORUMS looks different now. A newbie might not see that is where you click to get to the forums.

The interview has been edited. At the 19 second mark and the 23 second mark, the continuity is broken. What was said by CBS at these two points that was edited out? Sounds like they are playing a tape that has been doctored to make Ted look like he is exploding for no reason. I trust CBS about as far as I can throw a baby grand. Nobody has a right to pass judgement on Ted. That's for God to decide in the end. Judge not, and you will not be judged.

I've taken two Bobcat on my land over the years. Both were about 30 pounds, one male & one female. Both were taken with one shot from a .22 magnum at about 50 yards.

Had a flock of hens in my back yard one evening and a couple of does showed up. One of the does walked over to a big hen and tried to touch it with her nose. The hen reared up, spun around and pecked the doe square on the nose real hard, causing the deer to retreat into the woods with the other doe right behind her.

The 30-06 might be a better choice if shots are long because it will have more energy on target at longer distances. It will also allow for shots on angles that require a great deal of penetration to reach the heart or lungs of the deer. You might think of the 30-06 as a bigger hammer. Sometimes it works better to nail something.

Out of the box accuracy means the rifle will do well without any modifications to it when you first shoot it. It doesn't mean it is sighted in and ready to shoot as soon as you take it out of the box. If it has no sights, it needs to have a scope mounted and be sighted in. But if they claim good out of the box accuracy, that means it should group very well without any modifications. That being said Savage has the best out of the box accuracy for a bolt gun in it's price range. Kimber is the best bolt gun for the $1000 to $3000 range.

You seem to have a pretty low stereotypical opinion of the average NY hunter WNY. If the hunters can pass a rigid permit application system that says they are qualified, why not let them hunt? The geese at airports can be hunted far off the runway, way off the flight path of jets, with no possible way to cause any harm. Besides, do you think a load of 3" #2 Steel at 100 yards or more, can actually bring down a 727? That can all be controlled by the people who control the hunts. Do you really think these private companies that are hired to shoot deer are professionals that do it right? Do some research and you may change your mind about those guys. Besides, who do you think winds up paying the tab for hired guns? We Do! Hunting is only allowed now because it keeps game populations in check. Be wary of any ploy to only allow hunting for priviledged or connected people, while excluding the masses. That can get way out of control real quickly. If you doubt it can happen, check into hunting in Europe today. That's the way it is there.

You could get the Youth stock and put a slip on recoil pad on it if it's too short.

If you want a bolt action, look at all the ones you listed, then look at a Kimber. I feel it is the best bolt gun for the money and then some. Top notch accuracy, light weight, American made quality for just a little more than some of the ones you are looking at now. When it comes to a bolt action hunting rifle, spend what you need to get the best and compromise somewhere else in your life. A Kimber will last your lifetime, as well as that of a few generations of your offspring.

If they give everybody a chance to get a permit, even if it is a tough process to pass through, I'm all for it!

I think any hunting that is only open to a priveledged few, or the politically connected, is a step in the wrong direction. They may also only shoot the geese, not eat them. Why can't they allow hunters who are screened for permits with background checks? Imagine if this "open only to government" employee hunting were to spread to many more areas of the country. Pretty soon we may start to resemble hunting in Europe in the past, where only royalty was allowed.

Used to see beaver in an area I hunted ducks. They would tail slap in the pre dawn to show their displeasure with our presence. Scared the hell out of friends I took with me who had no idea what that was. And if the black bear in the area started moaning within 100 yards of us, they were ready to leave when I told them what that was.

We think alike Bubba. I've been telling my friends the same thing for a couple of years now. But the puppet Walter has a lot more brains and common sense. I like Walter. Can't stand Biden.