ORIGINAL: Hokieman
ORIGINAL: Killer_Primate
I’m not trying to be combative, so please don’t take it that way from my text because it isn’t how I’m intending my tone.
I find it hard to believe that hunters would want the animals to have a day of rest. Further, I’m fairly certain that if I were going to pick a day for the animals to rest, it wouldn’t be on one of my only two days off. I have one day a week, to take my four children hunting.
I’m also finding it a little hard to believe that you guys (VHDA) are concerned about giving the private landowners a “break.” Further, to state that you’re going to give a private landowner a break from your hunting style would mean that it weighs on the landowner and is an inconvenience to them. I would agree with that, but don’t think that you or the VHDA would.
I think the reason that the VHDA didn’t support Sunday hunting is, religion and spite.
Religious people and their “day of rest” seems to invoke into everything they do. But… Church and state is supposed to be separate. What they want, shouldn’t impact what I can do. Hunting is the right of very American, not a privilege the other six days a week.
I also believe that the spite is in there, and thick. Dog hunters have numbers; and with numbers comes power. But when power is abused, it usually doesn’t last for long, and the chips are working against you. More people and less land shrink your hunting areas/opportunities with every passing year. Go look at Fairfax county; bow only, well or firearms with a special permit, but who really does that? And… No Dogs.
Let me ask you this; how do you think other hunters would view the VHDA had they supported Sunday hunting the way it was written?
My opinion is; We (other hunters) would have said “wow, the VHDA just helped get Sunday hunting approved, even though they can’t participate. Maybe we should all stick together, and back each other. Why can’t dogs run deer on Sunday? What can I do to help them?”
But instead, the VHDA, along with the anti’s were there to oppose, and now, we have an even further divide.
No seriously there was no spite at work. However we have undertaken some name calling and been attack daily. We are here to support the hunting dog community members and give them a voice in the general assembly. I believe there was already a divide between hunters, landowners and anti dog groups when the hound study came into effect. They all jump on board and helped each other in acusing the hunting dog community of breaking laws and being sorry and not hunters. Who stood up for us. where were you.
Hang on a minute,
You have a choice to make here. Not just on this forum, but in your quest for dog hunting bliss (for lack of a better term).
You mention name calling as if that justifies anything. The choice is, do something to make it better, or do something to make it worse. And it is your choice, not mine. I’m not a dog hunter. I have no reason to justify it.
You can’t answer a question with a question. I’ll answer your question, and then you answer mine.
I was at home, unaware that this bill was even being addressed in Richmond. I have never contacted anyone on the political scene to denounce dog hunting or any other type of hunting. As I stated previously, and multiple times, I hope that dog hunting sticks around, but I’m aware enough to be able to see that it is going to take more than dog hunters trying to convenience the public that they aren’t doing anything to be upset about.
Now if you wouldn’t mind answering my question to you, it would be appreciated.