Maybe on a case by case basis.....but not with my tax dollars!!!

This was an excellent thread to leave in the dead thread file, where it belongs.

Ok where you going to draw the line?

Getting your fire arm privilage taken for life is enough.


It's been a while but the last time I read the constitution it was the RIGHT to bear arms. Not a privilege.

Privileges can be taken away but if it is called a right in the foundation of what makes America great then I will say the something other people have said just not for the same reason...where do u draw the line. At what point does the government go to far?

Felons hunting.....
 

Non-violent felons, and if they had committed a armed felony, leave it up to the Parole/AG of the State in which they reside. My rule of thumb is, if you let them out and can't trust them around LEGALLY owned weapons, THAN WHY did you let them out in the first place? Just my take on it.

If Michael Vick can own a dog again, a non-violent felon should be able to bowhunt. & +1 on all the hypothetical and real life examples shared above.

What about that guy in NJ, Armando Pioppi Jr., btw, who was falsely accused and convicted with poaching the giant buck he legally shot. There was a story in D&DH on it this month. He had a dozen or so friends and neighbors he called the evening he shot it and served as witnesses and defense. All the evidence points to his innocence and despite that, the COs, so-called forensic experts, and his own lawyer basically screwed it all up. I encourage you to read that story if you can. It really shows how someone who is innocent can have the system fail them based on an "anonymous tip." It also shows you what to do immediately if you ever shoot a record book animal and how to defend yourself from personal and legal attacks.

That's getting a bit off subject, but it does go back to the point that you can's just say "he's a criminal," no bow or hunting privledges. It's simply ridiculous.

Along these lines, Minnesota has a law where the COs can confiscate your hunting equipment, vehicle and/or boat upon charging you with a hunting or fishing violation. They just take it, regardless of whether you've had a chance to prove your innocence. Your bow gone, taken away for the remainder of hunting season based on an alleged violation, which is often found to be baseless. Ridiculous.

It sucks to be Armando, and I'm sure he is innocent. But I would rather that laws be enforced and prevent the other 99% of truly guilty felons not be allowed possesion of a bow, or any other weapon.

Allowing special rules for wrongly convicted bow hunters isn't a good solution. Sorry.

I say TOUGH CRAP .

The country is filled with apologetic morons that think the rules don;t apply to them...until they do.

Personally I don't need to be in the woods with any more cumbags then that are already there.

THE ONLY WAY I WOULD SAY YES IS IF THE REINSTATE THEIR VOTING RIGHTS AND CAN ONY VOTE REPUBLICAN.

Other then that...let them watch hunting videos. maybe:patriot:

Bows are NOT considered firearms in New York.

Or anywhere else for that matter.

One they don;t fire...you need a propellant, and two...they are not arms. They are primitive weapons.

Better re re read the instruction manual.



However FELONS are FELONS no matter where you live.

Let them sit in the house and reflect on why they are not allowed to hunt.

Rules did not apply for them to get the felony charges .... breaking the law.

Now suffer.

tell ARMANDO to play hunting vids and Lady Gaga records.

El tougho crapo Armando !

I believe you can use a muzz. also here in ny. but I think I would rather hunt with some felons than some of the non-felons on here.

In Pennsylvania a felon can vote, it's when you're a felon and in prison that you can't vote.

I don't feel especially threatened by the idea of felons going around hunting with bows, I'm just not feeling sympathetic either.

I suppose I could agree with allowing NON-VIOLENT felons to have their rights restored. But, really folks, if you want to keep on owning guns and hunting, it's simple. Don't become a felon.

Just thinking, this thread should probably be in the politics forum.

The tough "BLEEP" metality is pretty funny, especially in a case such as the NJ situation where virtually everyone, hunters across the country, rallied behind the legal hunter except for the state COs and judge who realized they screwed up but wouldn't admit to it. So he's innocent and eveyone knows it but found guilty by one single judge (no jury in that trial - always request a jury trial or its like the Old West). But tough "BLEEP" to him and tough "BLEEP" to the 18 year old who made a non-violent mistake and spends the next couple of decades bettering himself and contributing to society.

Believe me, I'm the last one to be a touchy, feely tree-hugger. I lean more to the right and believe you should do the time for the crime. But once the time is done, it's done. You don't lock them up and throw away the key - EXCEPT for violent offenders who hurt and kill others, especially children. We need to focus on tougher punishments for these individuals instead.

Finally, so what if all of these people saying tough "BLEEP" were innocent but found guilty of some crime or wildlife violation. There was a case here in Minnesota this year where the guy was exonnerated a year later and finally got his hunting equipment back! How would you feel then? Would you like the rest of us to say tough "BLEEP?" You're guilty, the COs say you are, even if there isn't clear evidence. If you do the crime, you do the time. Even though you didn't? Didn't think so. As a Republican, and that shouldn't matter, I believe in the Constituion and want it to protect my rights, period.

I recently saw a show on MTV, true life: "I'm a sex offender"

all of these kids, and I say "kids" were like 18 or 19yo men, I think the 1 guy was a hs senior dating a freshmen for years... anyway they broke up, and she called the cops out of spite I believe, he's now a sex offender/felon for life.

another girl years later apologized to him for calling the cops etc... it's like sure, no sweat, no big deal, felon/sex offender, but "sorry" covers it...

Not exactly the scary sex offender you have in mind living around the corner from you when you think up "sex offender"

ive got 2 duI's if they ever told me i couldnt bowhunt. i would anyways its rediculous by the way my duIs were over 20 years ago, but i can still bowhunt just cant get an fid. in massachusettes

Sal, is just like voting Dem.
You make a mistake, and you pay the consequences.

Felons that can't hunt.
 

The only way a person should be denied the privalege to hunt is if they are extremely violent and have intent to harm someone (proven case not a trumped up charge) or mentally incompentant to know what is right or wrong. Or judged by the dummycrat girlie men on this forum. If someone is charged with a felony that did not occur with a firearm it should have ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with it. Everyone makes mistakes at some point in their life. NO! I don't have a record. I just don't condemn someone because they made a mistake when young. Politicians do it daily and are not charged No double standards.

In Tenn. Convicted felons are allowed to hunt, with a muzzleloader, bow, or crossbow. Felons convicted of a non violent felony, can own and hunt with a shotgun. I am a 24 year law enforcement veteran, and can say honestly, there are some convicted felons that I trust more hunting and everyday life than some that are not.

i dont know if anyone already mentioned this (didnt read thru all 10 pages), but bowhunting really kind of owes its popularity to something very similar with its beginnings (no not the indians), but the fact that confederate soldiers werent allowed guns after the civil war, so a lot of them used bow and arrow to hunt with, and what we have now is kind of an offshoot of that, just found that interesting.