Disturbing article in NY Outdoor News

[nyantler]

I find it more disturbing that some of you think that breaking the law because you don't like the law is okay. Having the opinion that you don't like the law is fine... condoning the breaking of that law because of your opinion.. not fine at all.

[JoeHunter]

I find it more disturbing that some of you think that breaking the law because you don't like the law is okay. Having the opinion that you don't like the law is fine... condoning the breaking of that law because of your opinion.. not fine at all.

...and you have probably always stopped for a full 3 seconds at a STOP sign...your whole life!   The NYS youth hunting age laws are absurd...or should I say DISTRUBING! lol.

Edited January 12, 2015 by JoeHunter

[nyantler]

 

...and you have probably always stopped for a full 3 seconds at a STOP sign...your whole life!   The NYS youth hunting age laws are absurd...or should I say DISTRUBING! lol.

 

Thanks for helping my point... I knew it wouldn't take long. So the fact that someone may or may not stop at a stop sign for three seconds justifies breaking or condoning breaking all other laws? ... or just the laws you don't like we can break if people don't stop at stop signs? It gets kind of confusing for me... maybe you mean that because YOU think the law is absurd... it's open season for anyone to break that law? I think the best idea is to have no laws at all, because every law has somebody out there that doesn't think its a good law.

[phade]

I find it more disturbing that some of you think that breaking the law because you don't like the law is okay. Having the opinion that you don't like the law is fine... condoning the breaking of that law because of your opinion.. not fine at all.

Seriously? Talk about a wide paint brush.

[jjb4900]

when I started this thread I honestly thought I would get responses speaking out against the said violator, that really backfired...which is pretty surprising after hearing all the complaints about people using other's tags, hunting without licenses..etc..,oh well. Oh, and I apologize for using the word "disturbing" that was a bit dramatic, but I really thought this thread was gonna go the other way.

[nyantler]

  

Seriously? Talk about a wide paint brush.

Wide, narrow, who cares?..  Having an opinion does not give you the right to break the law. By condoning it you are telling me you would break the law based on your opinion as well... either way I find that disturbing and not right. Simple and to the point... just because you  don't find that disturbing and wrong... doesn't change my opinion.

[stoneam2006]

when I started this thread I honestly thought I would get responses speaking out against the said violator, that really backfired...which is pretty surprising after hearing all the complaints about people using other's tags, hunting without licenses..etc..,oh well. Oh, and I apologize for using the word "disturbing" that was a bit dramatic, but I really thought this thread was gonna go the other way.

I agree with the tag....dad wanted him to shoot a deer....dad should have tagged it...but the rest of it in my eyes wasn't bad other than bragging on fb

[fasteddie]

Letting an under age unlicensed kid shoot a deer is not right . Having someone else put a tag on that illegal deer is not right . The father and the relative (whose tag was used) and the kid all got off too easy . I wonder if the father hunts with a spotlight also .

[Terry]

A law is a law, regardless of anyone's opinion of it. Breaking one is the same as breaking them all. It's that simple.

[NFA-ADK]

I find it disturbing he shot another buck that same year.  I guess they figured he deserved it? 

[nyantler]

when I started this thread I honestly thought I would get responses speaking out against the said violator, that really backfired...which is pretty surprising after hearing all the complaints about people using other's tags, hunting without licenses..etc..,oh well. Oh, and I apologize for using the word "disturbing" that was a bit dramatic, but I really thought this thread was gonna go the other way.

 

Don't apologize! It is disturbing and not the least bit funny...  those that are condoning this families actions are the same guys that have already told us on other threads that they don't necessarily adhere to laws that they don't agree with... the rest of us are just "holier than thou" and "better than everyone else" and probably a few more things that will come up later in this thread.

[phade]

Wide, narrow, who cares?.. Having an opinion does not give you the right to break the law. By condoning it you are telling me you would break the law based on your opinion as well... either way I find that disturbing and not right. Simple and to the point... just because you don't find that disturbing and wrong... doesn't change my opinion.

I disagree. i break the law when i deem it ethically responsible. i think most people in the world have a similar viewpoint. Very few people would be as righteous as where your opinion originated from. Breaking one law isnt the same as breaking all of them or the more serious ones.

You have never done 56 in a 55?

Edited January 12, 2015 by phade

[nyantler]

I disagree. i break the law when i deem it ethically responsible. Sue me.

No surprise that you would disagree... and like I said in my last post "Someone who condones the law breaking of others are usually willing to break the law themselves".. still not surprised... and still doesn't change my opinion on the subject... it does however change my opinion of you.

[phade]

No surprise that you would disagree... and like I said in my last post "Someone who condones the law breaking of others are usually willing to break the law themselves".. still not surprised... and still doesn't change my opinion on the subject... it does however change my opinion of you.

Oh please. Pretty sure there are very few people on this planet that have not willfully broken a law.

Your logic is so flawed on this. We'd be flying the Union Jack if pansy asses like those who dont break the law existed in the late 18th century.

I strongly believe in the law. It is a tie that binds. But, nothing but God is infallable in my book. Laws made by man are no exception. Sometimes laws are wrong either situationally or in context or in purpose. Simple fact based on the history of humans.

Edited January 13, 2015 by phade

[stoneam2006]

Wonder how many guys have those plastic 50 round mags for their old 10/22 those are illegal

[skully]

I really probably should have used the word "funny", not sure why I used "disturbing", but too late to change that now............

 

Ok I hear you.

[nyantler]

 

Oh please. Pretty sure there are very few people on this planet that have not willfully broken a law.

Your logic is so flawed on this. We'd be flying the Union Jack if pansy asses like those who dont break the law existed in the late 18th century.

I strongly believe in the law. It is a tie that binds. But, nothing but God is infallable in my book. Laws made by man are no exception. Sometimes laws are wrong either situationally or in context or in purpose. Simple fact based on the history of humans.

LOL... We're talking about a hunting law here, not being oppressed and taxed to death by the British...  My logic is merely that breaking the law because YOU don't agree with it is wrong... if you want to get a coalition together where all of you get together and do a hunt where all your underage kids shoots an animal that's a whole other thing... and is making a statement of protest about your belief with the participation of others...  if everyone made their own decisions about which individual laws they would abide by based on their own opinion of the law... that would be just caos... no flaw in my logic.

[skully]

Ok so breaking some laws are ok and not disturbing? just trying to see this ever moving line of demarcation.

 

Your kidding right?  Disturbing to me would be that piece of in florida that threw his 5 year old son off a  bridge just to piss off his mother.  Once again people we are talking about violations that are equivalent to small speed tickets. And you call this garbage   Disturbing ?

Edited January 13, 2015 by WNYBuckHunter
edited for language

[skully]

Whats next,  I find it very DISTURBING that that car was going 15 mph over the speed limit.          Incredible

[phade]

LOL... We're talking about a hunting law here, not being oppressed and taxed to death by the British... My logic is merely that breaking the law because YOU don't agree with it is wrong... if you want to get a coalition together where all of you get together and do a hunt where all your underage kids shoots an animal that's a whole other thing... and is making a statement of protest about your belief with the participation of others... if everyone made their own decisions about which individual laws they would abide by based on their own opinion of the law... that would be just caos... no flaw in my logic.

Ill tell you a secret, our independence didnt start with everyone on the same page. It started with each individual not agreeing with a law and then breaking it, individually before ever doing it as a coalition.

just because this is a hunting law makes zero difference. A law is a law is a law, right? Break one break them all, pretty sure that was said in this thread.

But now you are saying that its ok to break a law if you break a law with others at the same time to protest? At least thats what it appears, correct me if I am wrong. Thats directly in conflict with your earlier statment ideology. So now there is a good reason to break the law if you dont agree with it? Kind of wishy washy there.

Edited January 13, 2015 by phade

[phade]

Your kidding right? Disturbing to me would be that piece of shit in florida that threw his 5 year old son off a bridge just to piss off his mother. Once again people we are talking about violations that are equivalent to small speed tickets. And you call this garbage Disturbing ?

I think you are quoting the wrong person or something.

[DirtTime]

OK, where's a link to the actual article? Not Photo Shopped image, a real link to the article.. I want an actual link to a legitimate web site. 

[Five Seasons]

These threads suck because all the perfect law abiding citizens show up.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Four Season Whitetail's]

the breaking of the laws is not disturbing at all.....we all know it goes on and apparently is quite acceptable...........what I found odd, is the outcry from the 'villagers" backing this when usually people are totally disgusted by anyone who uses another's tag on a buck they didn't kill, because we all know how sacred an animal that is. The fact that the Father, who is of an obvious superior intelligence, had the ingenious idea to put it on social media and fact that he further embarrassed himself by making ridiculous statements defending it are only an added bonus. 

There was no outcry from people for using someone else tag because its second nature to many and so many people now do it that its no big deal. I do not believe some laws are for the better and those laws are the ones i push, just as all of you. Just because i smoke with my left had makes me a crook here but not a crook in other states. The dad letting him shoot i have no problem with but it would have had my tag on it and it would have only been known by a very tight nit group of people.

[phade]

OK, where's a link to the actual article? Not Photo Shopped image, a real link to the article.. I want an actual link to a legitimate web site.

I may regret asking, but why? The pix is readable. Maybe subscribe to it? Just a thought. Placing all content online for free isnt smart on small scale news outlets. Its not like its the NYT.