Grouse

Woofer said, "In closing, an individual who poses a threat to himself and/or others should not have the right to own firearms. But that threat should be defined on an individual basis." Exactly the post I was going to make to reply to Virgil. As long as someone is a good citizen, meaning never convicted of a felony or declared insane, his 2nd Amendment rights should not be infringed, at all.

Mother Nature can be a real beech!

The anti's just scream a lot and make a lot of trouble. I think the majority of non-hunters look at those photos and find them interesting, not offensive. Maybe those pictures actually get a few non-hunters to finally give hunting a try. I have not given Trump's sons much thought. I like them and respect them now. The Donald is a different story. His daughter has always been of interest to me though.

A harbinger of things to come as the economy gets worse. Thefts of anything worth a buck will go even higher as money gets tighter for petty criminals. They are already stealing copper wire and tubing from homes they break into, tearing down copper phone lines from telephone poles, and ripping aluminum siding from houses. And they resort to this type of crime, because they don't have enough cash to buy a gun, yet.

Virgil, you have asked many questions on this thread, but have made no statement about what you think. Why not tell us your opinion?

He is also known to support Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan by giving them weapons and bombs to make IED's with. It is only logical to believe he would give a nuke to terrorists that would wind up in Times Square in NYC. I'd say the world would be wise to control him and Iran in general. Countries like Iran with crazy attitudes are a threat to the entire world. But to address the original point of this thread, it ain't the nukes or the guns, it's the country or man who uses them for evil, that is the threat.

If you look on the form you fill out when you buy a gun, there is a question asking if you belong to a group that wants to overthrow the government, or have you ever vowed to do so, answer yes or no. A "yes" answer disqualifies you from being approved to buy a gun. The first amendment has limits, just like all rights do. Saying you would like to see the government taken over by intelligent folks is free speech. Saying you want to overthrow the government by force is actually treason. There is a legal way to take over the government, and there is an illegal way to do it. Vowing to do it the latter way, will get you barred from gun ownership in this country.

Multiple times in the past they have declared their intention to annilate Israel. It is something they have vowed for years. If they get a nuke, it will give them the power to accomplish what they have vowed to do for years.

No. It's OK to control certain owners who have proven, and proof is the key, to have dangerous intentions. The object of control is the owner who has declared dangerous intentions and wants nuclear weapons. Stating you wish to use nukes to attack another country and wipe it off the face of the earth, rather than have them purely for self defense, is grounds for control by the rest of the world.

I don't need them for hunting but I like the 5 Hour Energy shots. They work without all of the unnecessary volume and you won't need to pee as much.

Nukes don't cause war. Been tons of them around for decades and they haven't started a war yet. They did finish one though. Somebody has to want to use them to start a war. Iran wants to use them. Hope that helps.

Long video, but it goes a long way to explaining why America is so polarized today. http://billmoyers.com/episode/how-do-conservatives-and-liberals-see-the-world/ Worth the time to watch.

She still has hope though. The other woman said if she blows through all of her money, she still has that safety net and can get food stamps again. Proof positive that government entitlements encourage irresponsibility and stupidity.

Seems to me a warm spring means all of the breeding is done with by May 1 and the gobblers don't respond to calls anymore. Last year was a warm April and I saw lots of turkey activity and gobbling at dawn, all month long. But by May 1, there were few turkey and only a little gobbling going on. I didn't get a gobbler last year. Now in years when it didn't get warm until May 1, I always got a bird, sometimes two, in the first week of the season. Just my observations from my own personal experience.

She also wrote a really great book on cooking wild game. My kind of woman!

If the barrel you bought has a slower rate of twist designed to work well with lighter weight varmint bullets, you may not get good accuracy with bullets of 100 grains or more. Heavier bullets need a faster rate of twist to stabilize. Check the twist rate in the barrel if you want to use it on deer.

Now she will hire a lawyer and sure them, because the rules allow it.

I don't know. Never is an awful long time. When this society crumbles and lawlessness reigns, I think you will see a lot of concealed carry without a permit.

Maybe she's afraid her friends in the "Occupy" movement will kick her out if she gives up the food stamps.

You gotta see it to believe it http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/07/amanda-clayton-michigan-lottery-winner_n_1327156.html?1331149937&icid=maing-grid7%7Cmaing10%7Cdl6%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D141615

Some states have smart people in high office. NY ain't one of them.

Doc, how would the law be applied by a warden if a shooter was 500' from a house but shot a deer within 20 feet of the house? The term "discharge" is interpreted to mean not only where the gun is, but also where the bullet goes. Same applies to archery equipment.

Yes, but it is important to realize you can not shoot into a safety zone, or towards the house in it. I believe that goes a long way to insuring safety.

The safety zone is the 500' radius that surrounds any structure that is expressly included in the hunting laws, and prohibits loaded firearm or nocked arrow possession, or discharge of either, inside that zone. The law also states shooting into that safety zone from outside the radius is illegal as well.

Doc, it is already legal to do what you want to prevent, if the hunter has permission from the owner of the land he is on and is 150 yards from the neighbors house. And he can not shoot an arrow into the neighbors yard, lest he violate the safety zone law.