notasheep
-
Posts
74 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Hunting New York - NY Hunting, Deer, Bow Hunting, Fishing, Trapping, Predator News and Forums
Media Demo
Links
Calendar
Store
Posts posted by notasheep
-
-
An upright is the way to go belo as nyslowhand said above chest freezers become pretty unorganized.but either way do not plug into a ground fault.i guess their code now in basements.my freezer stopped working,after some troubleshooting found out the cheap Chinese made ground fault plug stopped working.changed it out with a regular recepticle and all well.
-
I use a scoped single action ruger .44 mag. With a little trigger work done to it...love it.
-
Oops he's Moses....my bad
-
I had no idea God a hand in giving us the right to keep and bear arms, interesting to say the least........oh, does he even exist?
Yea he's charlton Heston
-
I am a gun owner I'd like to see a gun safe or trigger locks required in homes with children or mentally handicapped people.or eliminating the gun flea markets in the south.i doubt the majority that also do are non gun owners...would love to see the source of that information.bubba the reason we're getting pushed around is because the gun lobby looks like a bunch of wackos.would also like to see where Bloombergs camp wrote the safe act all I can find is "sources" in reports published by gun manufacturer lobbyists hardly reliable sources.their only responsibility is to make sure they can keep selling guns and ammo.And the majority of people who want better gun control do not own guns. That is like saying the people who do not drive want to take away cars. If they do not want a gun fine, that is their business. If I want guns that is my business not theirs. That is the bigger problem is we let ourselves get pushed around by the majority who do not want us to have guns. Last time I looked this was a republic. If you think all gun owners suddenly said ok lets go to the table and work out "sensible" gun control measures, we would have a say? If you think the gun grabbers would stop if we had "sensible" gun control, you are the one living in the fantasy. As I said give an inch they take a mile and call us extremists when we push back. The safe act was penned well over a year before sandy hook took place. They waited for the right opportunity to pull it out. It was written by the Bloomberg camp. The only part Cuomo had in it was introducing it. and taking credit for it, which is back firing. he was a pawn in it all. Anything penned by the Bloomberg camp has nothing to do wit "sensible" control, and the plan is for it to go nation wide/ It is all about gun elimination and them controslling all the guns. I for one will continue to say from my cold dead hands. Why will I say that? Simple, because it is the only "sensible" response. If there ever was a tine to stand up, it is RIGHT now. and the constitution guaranteed me that god given right. Funny thing is the 2nd amendment is the only one we seem to need permission to use.
the second amendment, as adjudicated already, does allow the governments to put restrictions on gun ownership,hardly a god given right.and I'll say it again:the more we look like wackos the easier it will be to restrict gun ownership.also bubba there were many from the right,NRA endorsed , that voted for the safe act.and as far as backfiring I'm sure he will be reelected as will most if not all those who voted for the safe act.
-
I have no idea what you are talking about. This Governor and his merry bunch of libs need no "political cover". Haven't you caught on to that yet? The remainder of your reply says exactly that. So your proposed policy of appeasement is pretty much just a short-cut to eventual total confiscation. Now maybe that's exactly what you want, I don't know. We've had bigger surprises on here. But logic should tell you that stalling tactics are far better than simply buckling under and cowering before the bulldozer tactics of the left.
I'm just sayin that yes there are segments of America that want total confiscation,but there is also a vast majority that wants better control of the way arms are controlled in this country.if we as gun owners don't take a active role in how these laws are rolled out in the future,we will be bulldozed ie: the safe act.in my earlier post Instead of political cover I should have said political mandate.those polls are not just the left.theres a lot of republicans in Colorado and conn and elsewhere that are driving those numbers.
-
Just spewing the agenda and trying to be a gun rights guy at the same time. I swear they get an email every week with the talking points. Ok this week we say the right wing wackos are doing this and this.
sorry bubba i receive no talking points from anyone this attitude of mine is honestly the way i see it.i own handguns,rifles,and shotguns and really believe that they are being endangered by this-fight everything and keep losing strategy.its politics 101 the magority in this state and country say common sense restictions and our reponse is when you pry them from our cold dead hands its just an untenible position.what we do is strengthen the wackos-on the other side of the gun debate.
-
Anyone who is interested in any sort of gun ownership rights should be able to understand a little bit of history, and recognize a distinct pattern that shows that the anti-gun forces are interested in nothing other than total elimination of legal private gun ownership. If you don't understand that fact, I would suggest that you pull your head out of that dark unsanitary place and take note of a little history that has gone on in front of where your eyes should have been.
In '68 we started compromising on handguns (big-time), because that promised to be the end to all violent gun crime. Anti-gun forces have been nibbling away at gun ownership until now today here we are with a freshly passed law that has made a whole class of hunting rifles illegal for sale and a proposed registration system for grandfathered owners of those guns of that "made-up" category dubbed the assault rifle. Not only that, but the whole key to using any gun, the ammo, has now had a law added to add harassment and cost to every bullet you buy. And make no mistake, that is the sole purpose of the ammo background checks. It has no impact on crime at all, but is simply designed to throw roadblocks in front of people exercising their gun rights. That fact alone should be a clue to any thinking person exactly the mindset of those that we are told to compromise with.
So anyone who insists that systematic compromise is not a path to eventual gun confiscation simply is either unaware of the real motives of the anti-gun crowd, or are in the process of actively becoming part of that movement themselves. Yes you all believe that each little compromise will be the last, and apparently don't care that you really know that it won't be.
well one could continue to maintain your position, albeit a failing one, in light of new laws like the safe act and wait until they come and pry them from your cold dead hands, either way thats exactly what will happen as they continue to chip away at gun ownership with politics and the courts because they can. this my way or the highway position besides being a fantasy,...has given them the political cover to do so.the safe act was no compromise it was jammed down our throats exactly the way they will continue to do it...because it WILL work! so you keep spinning your simple talking points but it should be obvious,its happening and you still dont care that it is.crying about it after the fact is not working.insanity was defined by einstein as doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.kinda like the way you've got your head in that dark unsanitary place of yours and won't pull it out.
-
i did'nt expect to be right when i have a differing opinion than yours,oh self proclaimed haver of all the correct OPINIONS guy,nobody ever is lol... but thanks for not using five paragraphs to say it!Ha-ha .... You are certainly entitled to your opinion and also have a perfect right to be wrong.
-
give an inch, they take a mile and still say it is not enough. That is how we have gotten to this point. I love the argument that the 2nd amendment does not specifically say I can have a 16 round clip. Weak at best and also very foolish.
they probably said the same thing when they outlawed automatic weapons in the late thirtys too
-
Arguing,debating,call it what you will is a healthy way to help each other understand ones position and the reasons why we're passionate about the way we feel about a certain subject.and most of the time,I'll be the first to admit it's self serving.the division is becoming more prevalent because some of us have felt that there was nothing wrong with requiring for example trigger locks,gun safes,with children in the homes especially mentally disturbed ones ie newtown,conn,common sense shit but these suggestions were met with extreme resistance.ya know how many kids are killed accidentally by irresponsible gun owners...thousands.so when the lawmakers feel that the time is right to nibble at the edges they will and have succeeded .i watched an interview of Antonin Scalia after the conn.disaster and he was asked if the second amendment meant that assault weapons and/or high capacity guns were protected and could never be outlawed he responded that he really did'nt know and that that question could only answered when the court was presented with it and the argument was made for or against.he did say however that believed the founders never envisioned the arms that are available today.pretty scary coming from him.the courts have limited the type of weapons we are allowed to have and use.the smarter play,in my opinion,would be to work together to come up with common sense solutions to the obvious problems we have today instead of calling each other pinko commies whatever the f*** that means.those simpleton fall back positions will allow these lawmakers with a majority of the people to keep chipping away at the right to keep and bear arms.Scary really. I'll be the first to admit that as sportsman we don't help ourselves by arguing within over issues like ARs, crossbows and setback rules. However, I believe that these arguments simply demonstrate our passion and do not necessarily endanger our sport.
But when we're more divided then I think a lot of us thought over constitutional rights... that's scary. We knew there was opposition as there always has been with gun control legislation, but to discover many gun owners themselves are ok with it? man...
-
No, actually the problem is the attitudes prevalent, in NYS in particular, that the government should become the parent of the constituents. There is now an expectation that the government knows best and should be looked to as a replacement for individual initiative and responsibility. We cheered the fall of Russian communism, never recognizing that their style of government has been slowly replacing ours.
No actually the problem is wackos,with attitudes similar to yours,make us all look like lunatics hence empowering the legislators and governors to slam thru anti gun laws with little or no backlash because extremists on either side need to be saved from themselves according to them and the polls.so keep calling your fellow gun owners libs,pinkos,commies,....you just prove their point.
-
Cuomo signed the safe act but.....the democratic controlled house and the republican senate passed it allowing him to sign it.i bet most if not all will be reelected.
-
Your boys Scalia and Thomas ruled the militia thing was not relevant and you guys cheered when it meant individual protection...now you want to fight our government with wannabe AR's...if you closely read the amendment you will see the phrase Assault Rifle or Banana Clip doesn't appear I'll repeat again:There is no expressed constitutional right to 16 bullets in your wanna-be assault weapon.In fact there is no expressed right to own a wannabe assault weapon, tank, nuclear device, armed drones...etc. there are limits.We have a standing army and nonpiloted flying death robots...you think the founders wanted either of those things...if its unconstitutional let the courts decide.Sorry I was part of the latest thread derailment. My safe act opinions were never before aired but are now well documented.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The federal government was able to take machine guns off the streets when it became apparent that's what needed to be done.as the pro and antis continue to retreat from the middle and refuse to come up with common sense solutions we will continue to get knee jerk solutions from politicians. the second amendment won't have a chance.you can hate these politicians all you want but as the voting public continues to watch kids being butchered the more these politicians will be empowered to come with their own solutions, ie votes in the middle of the night,court upheld,AND most of those pols being reelected.stop cutting off your noses to spite your faces.
-
I don't like the idea of using bait to hunt bears.but as far as using dogs to hunt them it has been the way to hunt bears all over the U.S. For years.now Wisconsin will allow dogs to be used to hunt wolves.bears do kill and eat fawns,as the bear population grows in our state the sooner we begin to manage their numbers the better.a spring bear hunt,when they're out looking for fawns would be great,might even whack a coyote or two also.
-
Sure are a lot of ANTI crossbow hunters on this crossbow thread.
-
********
Well said
-
can't wait to get my hands on a crossbow and sit 50 yards from my neighbors house..........
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah Dude a sense of humor is truly is truly a gift from God
-
Ok. So being in between a deer and a house and shooting away from the house toward the deer makes the deer more likely to run toward the house (property)? More so than shooting from the middle of a property toward a deer that is in between you and the adjacent property? Do you have any experience hunting small parcels SteveB?
Yes it will....and those deer will get to 500 feet and stop and drop dead because if they don't the deer hunters will all look bad so screw all the hunters that may have an opportunity to hunt a spot that they may not be able to hunt now.and I know cause I killed 40 deer.
-
Fact is shooting deer 150 ft from buildings rather than 500 ft IS going to lead to more recovery conflicts.
Especially when recovery permission is not discussed PRIOR to needing it.
These conflicts will not be a positive image for hunters.
Hopefully those wanting to hunt within stones throws of peoples decks and dining rooms will
at least have the courtesy to talk to them about recovery 1st.
I just don't get why this rule automatically puts hunters in peoples dining and living rooms.im sure scenarios like Jason's is exactly why this change would make sense.and this recovery question spin is just that.the 500 ft rule was to put a safe distance between hunters and dwellings for stray shots...gunshots.
-
cabelas in cheektowaga opening this summer,dicks and gander mountain may as will pack it in
-
goood looking hound i love dogs
-
first off as most on here know I do allow recoveries and even had my cell # printed on my posted signs for just that reason...do you?...I never said MY deer...I said set up next to MY HOME and there will be no recovery...period...I believe out of anyone here..... I with a medium sized parcel may have the most ppl bordering me. Only one area someone could set up close to our home and I know from experience they will try...when they have a 150+ acre lease to hunt..
Now lets address the accidental release...It's happened to me and I know for a fact guys have mentioned that and loops letting loose...lets talk how far and in strange directions arrows hitting those unseen or thought would miss branch deflections also talked about here... In fact I had a shot on a live deer as well as my 3D that deflected off backs...on the live deer I watched the arrow zip up..not down... and off out into the woods and was never found...the target one went another 30 yards and through a steel live stock gate...
So yes some times things happen...with the attitude that you have displayed.... I would come to the conclusion that you'd be one of the........ got to get the buck at any cost ...no common sense hunters that some here worry about...Really you thought accidental release was a "peach"
As far as "peeping Toms...Well guys are guys and when bored glancing all around with the binoculars would not be an unheard of thing...I would not want to have a teen aged daughters bed room ..or my bathroom in view...sorry I have read some posts here....they don't put me at ease...and I would think it wouldn't some Dads on here either..... Not guys only ...woman are just nosy...I have a neighbor with a spotting scope a little over a 1/4 mile away...there's nothing she does not see...thankfully..... for she's alerted me on many occasions of trespassers. The point is ppl want their privacy and their ability to be at home around their yard! and feel safe and secure.....
careful...... the neighbor with the spotting scope thats 1/4 mile away could be looking into your bathroom....hahahahahaha....im sorry i..i could'nt resist!
-
I had to make the switch to using the Draw-loc from Hickory Creek Archery due to my disability, and I will say that they are expensive and somewhat awkward to use. It will be only a matter of time, and the Barnett crossbow I have will replace use of the Draw-loc, and life will go on in archery season like it always has. Get used to it. Cabelas will be a nice addition to the area, that's for sure.
love that sheridan park golf course by the way!loooong
catt county supports x-bow
in CrossBow Hunting
Posted
Love cattaragus county!