Home

+1

I've understood for a long time what the real agenda was. But understand the anti-hunters are in it for their own reasons.

The govt is facilitating it to take away your ability to survive off the land when the coming battlefield arrives.

Look at everything they've done so far to ensure food is single-sourced or at least bottle-necked. Think of the bison slaughter that took away the Indians' autonomy. Same idea.

Liberals live(and rule) by emotion. Anybody who believes they have an agenda beyond that is as stupid as they are.

Their emotions sure have cost us a whole lot of liberty.

As a cop, you ought to know that it is not necessary to prove motive to prove a crime. Liberals' motives ain't nearly as important as their ability to destroy our liberties. And that ain't stupid.

Drama queen eh? Who's the one making up stuff about the other guy here? That would be you chief.

I recognize the enemy, and donate my time to counter the enemy. But like I said, these particular nut jobs don't have a chance, in my opinion. If you get your panties in a wad every time some leftist comes down the pike with a hare-brained idea, you'll spend your life with a wedgie and miss the bigger threats to boot. If you scream "the sky is falling" on a daily basis, pretty soon you lose credibility.

I think organizations like the HSUS are a much bigger threat. Most people don't even know what they're up to. So that's where I focus my attention.

None of my comments are directed towards the original poster. I know he's the real deal, and I like to keep up on these things. This is what I objected to:




Who died and appointed you spokesman?

Back to one of your previous posts. You said you have friends on here who've hunted with you. Have a couple of them send me PMs to that effect. No names or anything like that, just "I know him and have hunted with him, he's the real deal."

If they are guys who've been here a while with some credibility, I'll publicly retract what I said about you not being a hunter, and apologize.

You vastly underestimate my concern about what you think of me, or my hunting abilities, or my buds sending you a PM about anything.

Your main concern being the HSUS shows your lack of ability to identify the real enemy.

While HSUS is anti-hunting, the Center for Biological Diversity poses a ten times greater threat to anyone that enjoys public land in any way. They also pose a threat to the industries that use public land, as well as the hunters and shooters.

Obama's EPA, the USF&G, and other government agencies are a greater threat as well, with USFS, BLM, and the Natl. Park Service being the enforcers.

Why don't we agree to disagree?

Quit whining and trying to pull your dick out. Your threats make you look small as well... You obviously are not one that checks to see how deep the water is before jumping in the creek.

Don't we have enough on our plate without fighting each other?

Good freakin' grief.

Aren't the two of you in CO? How about a beer between you and settle this?

As for threats, yeah CBD is an enemy as are the captured agencies listed (BLM used to be "Beef, Logging, & Mining" - it's now "Butterflies, Lizards, and Mice"). HSUS has teeth, but it's been wounded heavily by the Ringling Bros. case and there are a lot of holes in that ship. PETA is a joke.

The real threats are those coming out of the PRK and NYC; extremely wealth individuals who either 1) fund animal rights cases because everything is cute and cuddly and hunters are "evil", and/or 2) buy up every damned bit of land they can to lock others out from hunting/fishing/access (a second subset of #2 funds hare-brained schemes like selling off public lands to private investors - and the Chinese will be the biggest buyers).

We've got FAR more in common and at risk to fight FOR with each other than we have to fight over as differences.

I agree.

And no, I ain't in liberal Colorado...

Just a quick check-in here from Blue State Country.

Twenty eight million people live within 100 miles of downtown Manhattan, NYC. If they made that half-circle its own state it would be no. 2, just ten million behind California.

In fact I'd recommend such a visit for anyone Out West, Down South or anywhere in Red State Country, these people collectively exercise a lot of National political clout on all of us, everywhere (our current Administration for example).

The majority of these people are so far removed from the lawful use of firearms and/or hunting that ANY Greenie policy proposal has a chance of passing.

Being a career high school teacher too I have witnessed the fundamental shift in attitudes among our young folks over the last three decades and the power of the MSM and electronic media in shaping those views.

The long-term prospects of ALL the shooting and/or hunting sports are worrisome and I wouldn't take any threats or proposals lightly.

Birdwatcher

Though it must be noted that the land mass of Manhattan is 33.77 square miles as compared to California's 163,696 square miles.

Slight difference.

Carry on...

Much less at the voting booths.

Not to quibble, but Birdy's 100-mile diameter half-circle contains about 15,700 square miles. A bit different than 33.7.

I saw this in a movie the other night - After Earth with Will Smith & his son. Supposedly a "series of cataclysmic events" forced humans to abandon the planet. 1,000 years later the ship Will Smith and his son are on crash lands back on Earth.

Absent human interference and left to its own devices, Earth, to quote Will Smith's character "everything on this planet has evolved to kill humans."

Hell, it's that way now. Life feeds on life, or more properly upon the taking of life. We're nothing more than another animal that feeds on some and can/does feed others.

Well, I can assure you that I don't take any of these threats lightly. These threats collectively are why I donate my time and money to something other than a message board filled with like-minded individuals.

More on that below.




First, I already offered to meet face to face with him, but he declined.

Second, I agree with your quote above, especially the part about wealthy donors who bankroll these things, they are a huge reason for the successes that these groups have and it seems that every time something bad happens, it's one of these people from somewhere else who bankrolls the whole deal.

Money and lawyers are key. We need more of that on our side.

Third, as far as needing to stick together and not fight each other on these issues, I agree 100%, which is why I took issue with this guy's comments in the first place.

From what I can tell, all he does is flap his gums here.

But there are thousands of people all over the country who donate their time, skills, and money to promote hunting and get more people involved with it. That will be key to our success, more voters on our side. Some of these volunteers are retired with lots of time on their hands, but lots have demanding jobs and still find time to contribute. A lot of effort goes in at the local level, focused on things that impact these people directly. The thing they/we have in common is, we all do what we can.

So who the hell is this jerk-off to come along and throw these people under the bus, denigrate them, and give them the back of his hand because they don't happen to share HIS particular priorities or do the things he thinks they should do:

Pull my dick out? I'm at a loss to understand your use of crude language here.

I'm just giving you the chance to substantiate some of the things you've claimed here, without risking blowing your "cover" LOL.

So far you've claimed to have buds on here you hunt with, and you've claimed to have written articles for the Hunter Ed Journal (I'm assuming IHEA). But you refuse to back any of that up.

You also claimed to belong to multiple organizations that promote hunting, which turned out to be a couple cattlemen's associations you refuse to name.

I think you're a phony. Prove me wrong "cowboy."

And as far as making "threats," let's get one thing perfectly clear: I've made none. Or, if you think I have, go back and find them.

What I said was, any time you think you're man enough to say the things you've said on here to my face, you let me know.

Just giving you the opportunity to live up to the cowboy code.

I'm not surprised you won't.

And by the way, your first line in the quote above means you're even more concerned than I realized.

Who knew?

I'm the same guy that posted about a friend in need of help, and under attack by anti-hunters.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...Road_We_Don_t_Want_to_Go_Dow#Post8899990

The suggestions he got were to direct him to contact various organizations, mostly though SCI.

In many cases, his phone called went unreturned. In all cases, not one dollar was donated. Not one. The organizations would not even give him a letter of support.

You can read the aftermath of the lawsuit here.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...ttlement_ends_SE_Oregon_coyo#Post9058123

So, yeah. I stand by what I said. I meant it.

Actions speak louder than words.

You have a PM incoming.

Thanks for the PM.

But as you said above, we will have to disagree on this.

I'm not a member of SCI. Their focus and objectives are a little different than mine. But by all accounts from people who are familiar with them, they represent hunters and our interests well, and they're an effective organization in that respect. I value and appreciate that, even if they're not fighting the same battles I would choose.

Organizations like SCI and RMEF need to represent their membership and spend their limited funds on things that are important to their members. They have to pick their battles.

A few years back RMEF got in hot water on the wolf issue. A lot of people got pissed and quit, because RMEF went against a lot of member's wishes.

I didn't quit, and I'm glad I didn't. Even with that mistake, I figured on balance they're better in promoting hunting and habitat preservation/improvement in the areas and for the species that are important to me than any other organization I know of. And they got new leadership and changed their position, which I was glad to see.

I can understand why some people are still pissed because wolf reintroduction was a big deal and affected a lot of people.

But throw an organization like SCI under the bus because they didn't jump in and help a friend of mine? Come on, man!

SCI didn't choose that battle. Your friend did. I sympathize with the guy, sounds like he got a raw deal, but you seem to think SCI had an obligation to jump in and help, and that's where we differ.

It would have been nice if they helped, but I don't think an individual should feel entitled to their help in getting out of a situation of his own doing. For all you and I know, they may have taken a look at this and concluded it was a no-win situation.

My point was that we need an organization that will back the American hunters on American issues.

I understand where SCI stands. Safari is pretty exclusive to Africa. They spend the bulk of their time, money and effort there.

We need an organization that stands for protection of hunting privileges of Americans and will defend litigation and introduce and back legislation that deals with the frontlines of the battlefields we have here in the U.S.

The ones that would take our freedoms are well funded as well as well organized. It's time we did the same.

How about U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance?

http://www.ussportsmen.org

About: http://www.ussportsmen.org/about-ussa/

USSA Foundation: http://www.ussportsmen.org/foundation/