INFO: Trad Archery for Bowhunters



Author Topic: Privilege or right?  (Read 10758 times)

Offline Tsalagi

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 333
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #40 on: February 03, 2010, 01:11:00 PM »
Well, Achilles, I don't totally disagree with you. But if we didn't have hunting laws, there wouldn't be any game left. Look what almost happened to the buffalo. Look what did happen to the Passenger Pigeon and Carolina Parakeet. The Aurochs was hunted to extinction in Europe.

Hunting laws do serve a purpose of regulating how much of a species you may take. Without which, some corporations would hire market hunters (like the ones who nearly wiped out the buffalo) to stock boutique gourmet markets with wild game meat and end up wiping out entire species in the never-ending corporate pursuit of "25% growth per year". Kill 25% more elk every year, do the math, and you'll learn that elk would become extinct within a few years. Let's not forget that in absence of hunting laws, corporate market hunters would be using helicopters for elk and 4 gauge punt guns to bring down entire flocks of ducks and other game birds. And let's also not forget that every slob hunter and his brother would be out there "sprayin'-n-prayin'" at everything that moved with every high-cap semi-auto from Kalashnikovs to AR-15s.

Myself, I'd rather have the protection of laws of which I don't agree with some than have zero protection and no laws. There is a place where people can go live that basically has no laws and cannot enforce those it does have. A country called Somalia.

Laws are the price we pay to live in a civilized society. Even tribal societies have laws, or they couldn't exist. With rights come responsibilities. Unfortunately, human beings have proven themselves unable to overcome their own personal greed or penchants for harming other human beings in order to live in a law-free society where rights are absolute and without laws to regulate them. Therefore, laws are the "road signs" that inform what the right entails and the proper way the right is to be exercised. No, it's not perfect. But there never has been a perfect civilization on Earth. Every law will rub someone the wrong way. But a society cannot exist without them, not even a primitive hunter-gatherer society.
Heads Carolina, Tails California...somewhere greener...somewhere warmer...or something soon to that effect...

Offline -Achilles-

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 184
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #41 on: February 03, 2010, 02:07:00 PM »
I don't think anyone disagrees with hunting laws but they would disagree with the evergrowing prices of licenses and tax.My point is if you ask the Gov for permission to hunt then you are not free and Gov can take the privledge away.The 2nd amendment clearly states we have this right but we let them take that away and now we have to ask permission...So why would anyone of you think that we have a right to hunt?

Offline Tsalagi

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 333
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #42 on: February 03, 2010, 06:12:00 PM »
Well, Achilles, I agree with some of that. For example, here, I cannot afford an elk tag. That's not right. My belief is hunting is a right that should not be taken away because a handful of people don't agree with hunting morally. Now, a ring of elk poachers here just lost their hunting rights. I fully support that. People like that don't deserve them.

The 2nd Amendment is a case of a right that has some limitations. Yes, our government has gone way too far in restricting that right, but it's usually state governments that do that (such as California, for example.) Does that mean I think people should be allowed to own anything they like? No. There is no valid reason for individual persons to own something like, say, a 155mm self-propelled howitzer, for example. But do I think society has a valid reason to forbid carrying a personal weapon for self-defense? No. Society has a collective right to defend itself against private ownership of things like artillery pieces, nuclear weapons, bioweapons, bombs, and so forth through enacting laws forbidding private ownership of same. But the individual has an equal individual right to defend him or herself through ownership and carrying of personal weapons. Because of this, there are restrictions on types of weapons one can own and so forth. Unfortunately, this has gone too far in the direction of trampling individual rights and the collective rights of society are not served because it does not make for a safer society but, rather, makes a less safer society by ensuring a supply of defenseless victims. The flip side of that coin is we could have no laws at all and people could own heavy artillery and we end up with 1980s Beirut with rival gangs shelling one another's neighborhoods.

I didn't ask permission to hunt. I attended a hunter safety class and then purchased a license that the fees of which go to support wildlife. I'm a firm believer in paying my fair share for the animals I take from the peoples' land. (Yes, it's government land, but theoretically it belongs to the people.) One thing that can be done to stop the rising prices of license and tags is to get active in your community and stop the government subsidies being paid to corporations and sports teams to build factories and stadiums in your state. Those things have to be paid for somehow, usually by taking money away from other state programs and agencies like game and fish among others. Almost every major league sports stadium built in a community is paid for by raiding parks and recreation, schools, or other programs (like wildlife departments)for the money which is given to the sports team in subsidies. There's one place to start in making sure we're not paying in increased tag fees for someone more than able to afford paying their own way.
Heads Carolina, Tails California...somewhere greener...somewhere warmer...or something soon to that effect...

Offline -Achilles-

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 184
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #43 on: February 04, 2010, 12:01:00 AM »
And the people can take that right away at any time...I disagree on your gun stance...The right to bare arms is clearly stated and I should be able to own any gun I want,right to carry without permit or registration...But we have given that right away and it will take revolution to get it back...Eventually we will be disarmed completely but it won't happen overnight...Our only hope of solving this problem in a peacful matter is to get out and vote for libertarian candidates like Ron,Rand Paul.

Offline Brian Krebs

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 2117
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #44 on: February 04, 2010, 12:48:00 AM »
Where to begin.. first the libertarian party at one time suggested all federal land should be sold at auction to pay off the national debt.
 If you want to hunt where you used to: contact the Chinese consulate.

 I believe the first gun law taken to the Supreme court had to do with a sawed off shotgun. As it had no military use; it was not covered by the protection of the constitution. Actually though- it was a favored arm in WW1 trench warfare.
 How we ended up the direction it has taken from there: is a long twisted trail.
 
There are a lot a rights that have limitations; like free speech- you cannot scream 'FIRE!' in a crowded theater.
 You have a right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure... go board a plane and you will find out the meaning of 'reasonable'.
  You have a right to be tried before your peers- but you might have to settle for whats there.
  There is a right against cruel and unusual punishment; but hanging; the electric chair and death by needle: are not considered cruel.
 
 Our rights are subject to opinions of the supreme court.

  Hunting IS a right in some states- like Vermont.

 In most states it is considered a privilege. (That we could change).

Couple things I want to straighten out- the passenger pigeon was not hunted to extinction.
 The passenger pigeons all bred at the same time; and they would fill every tree in a wooded area with nests.
 When the eggs hatched; and the squabs were big but not feathered - the people in the communities would chop down trees and fill their larder with squabs.
 It got down to the last tree with nests in it- and that is what did them in: mothers with canning jars.

 The bison was killed almost off - not for the hides and meat or by products; but instead it was an encouraged act by the government to destroy the food and resources- that the bison provided the native Americans. The killing of the bison was to starve out the 'Indians'.

The first organized anti-hunters -were rifle hunters- united against: bowhunters.

 I see bowhunting as a right.
THE VOICES HAVEN'T BOTHERED ME SINCE I STARTED POKING THEM WITH A Q-TIP.

Offline Tsalagi

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 333
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #45 on: February 04, 2010, 01:54:00 AM »
Achilles, you disagree on what part of my gun stance? The part about not owning 155mm artillery pieces? Sorry, but I cannot in any way support that. Having seen nifty things like claymore mines discharged, I in no way support private ownership of such weapons. People that want to play with those, well, the army is always looking for such people. That's where I got that out of my system, heehee!    :D    Hey, they paid me for it!    :)  

Voting for libertarians isn't our only hope, and neither is a revolution. People getting off their keesters and getting involved in their communities, caring about and helping their neighbors, watching their local officials closely and gathering petitions to unseat them when they do wrong, and organizing their own communities is what needs to happen. There's more to freedom and rights than guns, my friend. Much more.
Heads Carolina, Tails California...somewhere greener...somewhere warmer...or something soon to that effect...

Offline -Achilles-

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 184
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #46 on: February 04, 2010, 02:40:00 AM »
"Voting for libertarians isn't our only hope"...The Democrats and Republicans are on the same side going in the same direction in different ways.If we keep voting for either party we will lose all our rights that are inherent.The constitution doesn't give you these rights you are born with them.The constitution was written to let the Gov know what they could do and what they couldn't.We are looking at martial law in america if and when another terrorist attack like 9/11 happens.The Gov has no right to use military against its citizens and it has in fact already done so in new orlands with door to door gun confiscations.People need to wake up!...This is why I support oathkeepers.org.

Offline -Achilles-

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 184
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #47 on: February 04, 2010, 10:16:00 AM »
I 4got to answer your question...lol..."I didn't ask permission to hunt. I attended a hunter safety class and then purchased a license that the fees of which go to support wildlife."...If you had to get a licence or permit to do it then you asked permission...look it up in the dictionary..."The part about not owning 155mm artillery pieces?"...I think the 2nd amendment gives us the right to have automatic guns but I'm not sure what a 155mm is so I can't comment...lol...hand grenades or bombs I wouldn't support...I'm sure you know what the 2nd amendment was meant for....revolution,protection

Offline Tsalagi

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 333
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #48 on: February 04, 2010, 12:56:00 PM »
Well, Achilles, again, I support some of what you say. But, again, without hunting licenses and tags, how do you propose to keep the gourmet markets from killing every elk they can using helicopters, aerial spotters radioing herd location to hunters on ATVs, and so forth? Bear in mind, every corporation now demands 25% growth per year. So, if Acme Wild Game Meats' board of directors demands 25% growth per year, how do you think they will accomplish that? This is why game laws were enacted in the first place.

In general, early on, the U.S. had very little in the way of laws. But, as I said, people could not overcome their own personal greed or penchant for destroying Nature or the lives of others to attain that wealth. So, this is why those laws were enacted. Yes, you might hunt ethically without game laws, but will everyone else? No, they won't.

 I'd rather have game laws than go out tomorrow and find the skeletons of the last deer herd here, wiped out by market hunters. I'd rather have game laws than go out tomorrow and find all the rabbits were poisoned to death and then all the raptors ate them and died. All too often, people (usually people after absolute power themselves) will tell you that you're not free in an attempt to get you to accept their ideology. And they might even be right that you're not as free as you should be. But the ideology they plan to install will make you not only less free, but a slave. Beware of "We have all the answers and our system is perfect!" political parties. The ideology of "no laws" espoused by some libertarians is actually the ideology of those with the most weapons making the rules. Much of what some libertarians espouse isn't anything new. It was once called feudalism. That's not the kind of world I want to live in.

People do need to wake up. But there's a lot more to it than guns, my friend. Guns are merely part of the tip of the iceberg.
Heads Carolina, Tails California...somewhere greener...somewhere warmer...or something soon to that effect...

Offline Brian Krebs

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 2117
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #49 on: February 04, 2010, 11:30:00 PM »
Um .... exsqueese me :  but isn't that line "periscopes are merely part of the tip of the submarine" ??
THE VOICES HAVEN'T BOTHERED ME SINCE I STARTED POKING THEM WITH A Q-TIP.

Offline Tsalagi

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 333
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #50 on: February 05, 2010, 12:39:00 AM »
It depends on if it's the Yellow Submarine or not.
Heads Carolina, Tails California...somewhere greener...somewhere warmer...or something soon to that effect...

Offline -Achilles-

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 184
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #51 on: February 05, 2010, 03:29:00 AM »
Tsalagi...I am all for game laws but maybe they should call it something other then a license?...wildlife restoration fee?...The libertarian party isn't the party of no laws, the founding fathers were christian and libertarian and they wrote down the laws in the constitution for the Gov to know what it can and cannot do.

Offline -Achilles-

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 184
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #52 on: February 05, 2010, 03:46:00 AM »

Offline Tsalagi

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 333
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #53 on: February 05, 2010, 03:01:00 PM »
Achilles, if it's an issue of semantics, go ahead and call the license a "wildlife resoration fee" now and avoid government involving itself once again.   :D
Heads Carolina, Tails California...somewhere greener...somewhere warmer...or something soon to that effect...

Offline Maxximusgrind

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 197
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #54 on: February 12, 2010, 05:14:00 PM »
Does it really matter if its a right or a priveledge-Truth is if you dont play by their rules or pay whatever they tell you to you get put out of the game.there was a guy named Claude Dallas(I think,it was a while ago)decided to live off the land and didnt care about asking the government-It didn't end well.
Measure twice,cut once,then beat it to fit

Offline Brian Krebs

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 2117
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #55 on: February 12, 2010, 06:57:00 PM »
Claude is doing fine now.....now.
THE VOICES HAVEN'T BOTHERED ME SINCE I STARTED POKING THEM WITH A Q-TIP.

Offline Tsalagi

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 333
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #56 on: February 12, 2010, 08:55:00 PM »
"Truth is if you dont play by their rules or pay whatever they tell you to you get put out of the game."

Kind of like driving. Wait, that's not really a right. Ok, kind of like owning a house; i.e. property tax and zoning laws.
Heads Carolina, Tails California...somewhere greener...somewhere warmer...or something soon to that effect...

Offline Maxximusgrind

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 197
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #57 on: February 12, 2010, 11:53:00 PM »
Yep.So even if its a right they can still take it away,or take you away.I have the right to hunt but if I cant afford the licence what difference does it make?
Measure twice,cut once,then beat it to fit

Offline Tsalagi

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 333
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #58 on: February 13, 2010, 01:01:00 AM »
I agree. I can't afford elk tags here. I'm not saying they ought to be free, but need to be affordable to working people and not just wealthy people. But I've seen the price of your "sports pak" in Oregon and you guys are getting a heckuva better deal than we do here. Our elk tag alone costs almost as much as your sports pak.
Heads Carolina, Tails California...somewhere greener...somewhere warmer...or something soon to that effect...

Offline Maxximusgrind

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 197
Re: Privilege or right?
« Reply #59 on: February 13, 2010, 01:32:00 AM »
I agree,its not that bad yet by comparison.And most years I do get sportspac even though I usually dont fill a tag.But even though the cost may be comparibly low there are those who cant afford it.I am not whining,I have been pretty blessed,but I was just stating that if you cant afford an elk tag where you live it really doesn't matter if your state calls it a right or a priveledge.The only thing that matters is that you should get to hunt.
Measure twice,cut once,then beat it to fit

Users currently browsing this topic:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
 

Contact Us | Trad Gang.com © | User Agreement

Copyright 2003 thru 2024 ~ Trad Gang.com ©