Gun discharge hearing tonight putnam

[mike rossi]

ACTION NEEDED TONIGHT*****Attention Sportsmen and women in Putnam and surrounding counties!!
It was just brought to my attention that TONIGHT at 6:30 our Legislature will be hearing an argument that Shooting guns and Hunting in Putnam should not be allowed. Please if you can make it show up to the Putnam Legislature Building at 6pm and voice your opinion. Spread the word so that we don"t get a sneak attack on our rights! Share this everywhere!

[BizCT]

Putnam County or is Putnam a town somewhere in NY?

[mike rossi]

I do not know - the post is an exact copy of the message I received, I am just passing it along. I guess you can call both the town and the county and find out, if you do please post the info here.

[mmkay]

It's Putnam County NY.  It looks like the county received a letter from a resident and will be addressing in their meeting.

 

see link below...pages 23 thru 28 

 

http://www.putnamcountyny.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Protective-Svcs-Mtg-11-09-15.pdf

[mmkay]

contact info for can be found here

 

http://www.putnamcountyny.com/legi/legislators/

 

I left a VM for my rep, if I hear back, I'll post his reply

[Uptown Redneck]

Not knowing the specifics of this case all I can say is that unfortunately as communities keep expanding, open areas and land available for hunting will continue to be lost. It appears that more and more time will be spent searching out fewer and further spots where hunting is allowed. On the plus side there's always archery where the availability of lands open to hunting isn't as restricted.

[mmkay]

spoke to the county executives reps...they stated this is going no where...county exec. is pro-gun and pro hunting....they basically said a new resident (Citidoit) moved into the county and is complaining, so they need to address it

Edited November 9, 2015 by mmkay

[CFHunter]

spoke to the county executives reps...they stated this is going no where...county exec. is pro-gun and pro hunting....they basically said a new resident moved into the county and is complaining, so they need to address it

That is how it starts though. Same thing as someone moving into a heavily AG county then complaining about the smell and such.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[BizCT]

It appears that Paul Saloom from Brewster started this.

[The_Field_Ager]

It's an epidemic. Liberal policies turn cities into places where even they no longer want to live. Then they move to the country and bring their stinking attitudes with them. It will only get worse as long as liberalism remains as vocal and influential as it currently is. Liberalism = destruction and decay.

[Uptown Redneck]

It's an epidemic. Liberal policies turn cities into places where even they no longer want to live. Then they move to the country and bring their stinking attitudes with them. It will only get worse as long as liberalism remains as vocal and influential as it currently is. Liberalism = destruction and decay.

The best thing about Liberalism is it drives fools like you insane.

[The_Field_Ager]

The best thing about Liberalism is it drives fools like you insane.

 

[Uptown Redneck]

I'd rather be a moron then an ******* like you

Edited November 10, 2015 by WNYBuckHunter
Edited for language. Please see forum TOS.

[The_Field_Ager]

I'd rather be a moron then an ********* like you

 

 

Damn, ya got me good there:

 

[mike rossi]

spoke to the county executives reps...they stated this is going no where...county exec. is pro-gun and pro hunting....they basically said a new resident (Citidoit) moved into the county and is complaining, so they need to address it

 

That may be so, but let me point out two things.

 

First, it gets a movement in gear. Even though a county wide ban  seems out of reach, a ban on county property, waterways, or within certain municipalities is easy to envision. 

 

Second, I read from the link you provided, that the County Executive's name is Mary Ellen. How pro hunting can someone named Mary Ellen be?

 

Within the pdf document at the link you provided Mary Ellen Odal sent a message to Elizabeth green and Nicholas Deperno asking quote: " Tell me how you are going to proceed"; referring to the complaint. That doesn't bode for strong  leadership nor does it sound like a person well informed about hunting and/or firearms or who has given prior thought to the matter. Or is concerned about it either. it sounds like a person who doesnt know what to do. 

 

Then what happens when the county executive changes? The movement to ban hunting can even be the impetus which threatens a politicians job. Even if she does not retire, get voted out, or reach term limits, do you know with certainty how we she react to possible political pressure by an organized movement? 

 

That is why such boastful , over confident statements that encourage inaction are harmful. A well behaved and professional presence at public forums is ALWAYS needed. None of this "its going no where" bull.

 

Now, if this was not a forum open to the public, that is not my fault, I am just the messenger, but in general terms that does not invalidate what I am saying. I pass on what I am asked to, but I am not a language interpreter fluent in idiot and moron.

Edited November 10, 2015 by mike rossi

[mmkay]

Mike

 

I called...posted what I was told...that's what you requested in post #3.  just a messenger here, that all.  You requested info...I got you (and others) the meeting agenda and feedback on what i was told...I wasn't being boastful or over confident, I was relaying word for word what i was told.

 

sorry if this didn't help you

 

 

[Uptown Redneck]

How can someone say whether a person is for or against something based upon their name?

[mmkay]

How can someone say whether a person is for or against something based upon their name?

 

You can't she's a Republican.  is fighting enforcement of the safe act and fought local newspapers to prevent release of handgun owners info.  I believe she is a lifelong resident of county (50+ yrs).

 

Most of the huntable land in Putnam is state land, city or a controlled by a few large hunt clubs in Kent. Gun hunting in Putnam will remain until the Republican's loss control of the county.  But its been a one party county forever, so it is very unlikely to happen.

 

Again, just providing information (or opinion this time)

 

MMMMMMMMKAY!!!!!

[mike rossi]

The movement to eliminate or reduce hunting in Putnam county is going to exist longer than any one politician's career. 

 

Therefore, it is not wise to ignore a growing movement (it always grows) because some politician or her aid tells you its all under control is . That goes for the officer of some hunting club who also says its under control. However, that is exactly how hunters frequently respond to these matters. And yeah, I do define that as overconfidence. 

 

 

When these discussions happen it is important to have a presence at them. I don't mean standing with signs and going off on rants. Some of these hearings are informational, where you do not have the opportunity to voice your opinions,but you sometimes may ask questions. Other hearings are for input from the public. A presence at both informational and input hearings is important, but keep it professional.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 10, 2015 by mike rossi

[mike rossi]

I also wanted to say that I appreciate that McCay looked up  the county agenda and posted the link here. More people should be doing that sort of thing. Not only does it help out it shows different people are interested in a matter, which is also important. People are less likely to act if they dont get their own hands dirty and/or they dont see more than a few people involved. 

 

However, I became frustrated at the suggestion this matter be ignored. That goes against what needs to be done regarding not only this matter but all hunting related matters. The "dont worry about this one" mantra is used often, and every time it is it reinforces to things: 1) inaction 2) follow, dont take initiative. The hunting community needs to grow away from all that.

 

The narrative about liberals and democrats also entered the discussion here. When you actually participate in these policy hearings or otherwise interface with policy makers you wont be debating which party is driving a proposal or which party is ruining the country. If you do you will look like a fool and probably be ejected. 

 

When people are trying to "get it done", they dont really want to play around with the liberal dem narrative. It does nothing to inform people about anything meaningful or get them to engage. 

 

So, the point is complaining about the democrats does nothing and it moves the focus away from actually doing something productive. This hate narrative is very popular with hunters, but there is also no shortage of  places to discuss it online. So why enter it into a conversation that is trying to mobilize hunters into action? This thread is not a place for it.

 

Never the less, we conducted an investigation into the matter of the influence of political party on hunting policy. The results of the investigation conclude that political party does not influence hunting policy. The investigation spanned very wide into different scenarios. It examined different states. It examined different game animals. And it covered a historical period from present back to the 1950s or earlier. Under all those variables, political party was not a factor. If you are interested in reading the report refer to these two links:

 

http://nydovehunting.weebly.com/the-effects-of-democrats-republicans-and-election-years-on-re-instating-hunting-seasons.html

 

http://nydovehunting.weebly.com/our-elected-officials-in-the-field.html

 

 

[HectorBuckBuster]

These wacko's propose something big to get this in the news. Even if they don't get there whole idea passed and only a small part of it, its a start, and they just keep going from there until they reach the big picture they started with.

[mike rossi]

These wacko's propose something big to get this in the news. Even if they don't get there whole idea passed and only a small part of it, its a start, and they just keep going from there until they reach the big picture they started with.

 

You pretty much nailed it. You roughly described mounting political support, what we and the DEC have been telling hunters they need to do to reinstate dove hunting in NY. 

 

I wouldn't call them wackos though. I have indeed encountered some insane anti-hunting premises, but name calling goes nowhere. The guy who complained in Putnam indicated he has been a resident for 20 years, and seemed to be aware of the traditional hunting practices in the area as well. So,I would say the new people moving next to the dairy farm analogy doesn't fit well for this one either. Look, at one of the Senate hearings which only hunters who were invited by senators, the question about effective range versus maximum range was asked 10 different times to 10 different hunters who all appeared at least 60 years old. Only one, a retailer, was able to understand and answer the question. What kind of confidence does that install in non hunters? The average anti hunter has a masters degree. The average hunter has only attended school until the eighth grade. 

 

The number of people who fight against hunting in NY is relatively few. When a bill is pending or the DEC has an open public comment period, usually less than 1,000 anti-hunters engage, especially when they believe hunters are also engaged. However, when they think they are pulling a sneak attack or hunters are divided, they are extremely well organized and quickly weigh in with much larger numbers. The situation among lawmakers is similar. There are about 212 NY State Legislators. Out of that 212, there are only four NY politicians endorsed by the humane society and have a history of introducing numerous bills to limit hunting opportunity. The other 208 lawmakers will consider what their constituents tell them when they make up their minds about how they vote on a bill. Sometimes a lawmaker will be contacted by one or two people about a bill, other times they will be contacted by 5,000. So the morale of the story is don't worry about every democrat in the world, worry about making your own voice heard. But when you are heard, make sure you got your facts straight.... And, things like field and stream are not good fact sources, by the way.....