jjb4900

not against the donating at all when the deer are being taken for the right reason (obviously my right is different than others), I've personally experienced people who have taken deer and when you listen to them talk about getting rid of it, you would want to vomit......these are the people I would rather not see take any deer because they don't value any part of it unless it has antlers that they can put on the wall.........In my opinion, there's a big difference between the hunter who has an area with an overpopulation and goes out with the intent to kill a deer to donate to a needy family, and the guy who has a pocket full of tags and feels the need to fill all of them with the donation being an afterthought and a way to dispose of the deer, and really gives no thought to the idea behind it.

The "better system" is to know the area you hunt and take it upon yourself to make the right decision..........like I said, if you hunt an area that has an overabundance, fill all your tags. If you hunt an area that does not, why would anyone attempt to fill all their tags? regardless of what you do with the deer.

Is that what you got out of that? what I'll say is that DEC gives out way too many tags in many areas and just because you have them doesn't mean you should try and fill them all just for the sake of saying you did.......and I guarantee you I'm not the only one who feels that way.,

it's a simple question as to why people do something, no different than people questioning why some people feel the need to kill button bucks or deer that other people feel shouldn't be killed because they don't meet the criteria of what they consider deer that should be killed for one reason or another....as a hunter, I'm more concerned with the preservation of a resource than I am with killing deer to feed the homeless.....if you love to hunt, enjoy the time in the woods, killing should be secondary......if you're in a situation where you're killing deer that have become over populated and are creating a nuisance, than that's fine and I have no problem with it....to each his own.

let me rephrase that by saying I don't understand why some kill deer just for the sake of killing them and dumping at these place......I realize that there are other reasons deer have to be killed and that would result in way more deer than someone can use.

as much of a shame as it is, I never quite understood guys who kill way more deer than they or their family can use and dump them off at these places.......

Doc, you failed to take into account that the youth of America have been spending countless hours playing military themed video games preparing for this type of thing.....so don't worry, we're in good hands.

I saw the same video, looks like it was the National Guard as well as the Police who were partaking in this confiscation...the one Marine also said they would do it if ordered to do so, obviously it's not just the Police who would fold and do this if ordered as many have suggested.

He has a slight edge on the politician who say's waiting for the gunman to reload and then taking him out when that opportunity presents itself

I don't know about that, it looks like a pretty effective method to me.

I think this is more a matter of someone instructing another to discharge a weapon recklessly into the night at an unidentified target than it is about the choice of a weapon for home protection..........a 12 gauge ain't a bad choice if you're shooting inside your own home.

does anyone know what all these counties voting to repeal this law really means? does it hold any weight on its own or does someone need to take this this information to a higher court and try to find it unconstitutional and have it totally repealed as a state law? Cuomo already said he does not care that the many gun dealers will refuse to sell to NY as long as the law remains in effect, so I assume he feels the same way about the counties repealing it on their level.

not identifying your target seems like a bad idea....could be a family member sneaking home, just ask the olympic runner who says he did just that prior to finding out he just killed his girlfriend......and yeah, I know, just saying.

I would think you have to show ownership of the weapon prior to the law going into effect, buying a bunch of 10 round magazines prior without having a gun to put them in may not fly......just a thought.

that's funny, now I'll shut my mouth so intelligent people like you can speak...........hahahahahaha.

enough with the hate already, should we hate every priest just because a few thought it was ok to have sex with boys? should we hate every teacher just because a few decided it was ok to download kiddie porn? should we hate every cop just because a few have tarnished their badges? should we hate all those in military uniforms because a few have raped children and mowed down innocent people because they snapped?...I would hope not.

I can tell you this, the way the current law was written, they failed to write in any exemptions for law enforcement, that is supposed to be added before the final draft is done..........so those sales should or shouldn't have been available to anyone at this point in time, unless they are still operating under the old law, not quite sure of the exact date when everything is enacted or exactly what was being sold.

that's what I thought, you have to have shown the transaction took place prior to that date..but, do you already have a pistol permit? the gunshops in my area won't even show you a pistol without a valid permit, let alone let you make a purchase.

I"m pretty sure I read somewhere that if the purchase was made prior to the laws going into effect, that you can still take possession of what was ordered.....if that law is already in effect and you don't have a receipt showing the transaction having taken place prior to the new law, then no, you can't have a 10 round magazine.............I'll see if I can dig up that info.

I don't think they will lose any customers, the majority of people have shown time and time again that they are willing to be pushed around by the gov't, much like a company will step up and take up the slack from the companies who stated they won't sell to us and continue to sell to NYer's all in the name of the almighty dollar.

can it really be possible that the politicians are that stupid to think these laws are going to make a difference in crime rates?

yeah, but it was a six shot revolver...not an assault rifle with a high capacity magazine that we all know is the preferred weapon of criminals, and had this gun been registered this never would have happened.

I'm sure your buddy appreciates you sticking up for him every time he gets called out on it...you're a good friend, keep up the good work!! he's a big boy, from what I'e read he has no problem defending his opinions and thoughts, the same as everyone else.

if someone stating a fact that law enforcement officers have had exemptions from weapons ownership for years and nobody spoke up makes you sick, than you should see a doctor, because it's only gonna get worse.

that wasn't directed at you..there are some who are holding the cops on the street accountable.....and they didn't reinvent the wheel with this current laws, law enforcement has always had exemptions from certain weapons laws.