View Poll Results: A poll
Voters: 175. You may not vote on this poll
Situation Ethics????........2 Part Question .....**UPDATED WITH twils real life situation
02-25-2008 | 05:45 PM
#121
Site Bouncer
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,099
Likes: 0
From: Illinois
RE: Ok Ethics Police ........2 Part Question .................................................
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
The very folks you speak of as "out of touch green peace fanatics" have the same civil rights as America gives you .
I simply can not believe what I am reading from the same group of people that say the ainti hunters are fanatics and out to destroy hunting. They arn't the problem ,as you canclearly read here we don't give a dead rats ass about others property,others thoughts,and most of all others civil rights.
Keep beating your chests and making lame excuses for why you will knowingly break the laws that the simplest of man can understand. I'm to sick to continue.[:'(]
ORIGINAL: OHbowhntr
Nope, some of us RESPECT that animal enough to risk dealing with some ignorant anti-hunter type to follow up on what we started. I've never hunted in a situation where Scenario #2 would be an issue, however, I've put the shot over the fence, on a few occasions while hunting borders of land I was allowed to retrieve deer from, but not allowed to place a stand on. With archery equipment, MOST of the time, YOU are the only one who knows that shot was ever taken. Not saying I advocate tresspassing, but when there are pieces of land that are literally never seen by the owners for sometimes a period of 2-3 yrs, I suppose, I don't consider it trespassing as much as using the land GOD gave us. I do regularly hunt one such piece of land that the owners are some out of touch GREEN-PEACE fanatics that have not been to that property in at least 2 yrs as they live over 1,000 miles away and are the owners as a result of a "confused" willing. Call me WRONG or whatever, but I've never left the place any worse than it was when I happened upon it, and I've several times cleared the oil well path of debris when accessing it (on foot).
ORIGINAL: BigJ71
Oh wow!
I see that I'm also in the minority with only 7%............[
]
I think some of you guys take this (hunting)a little too seriously.[:'(]
Oh wow!
I see that I'm also in the minority with only 7%............[
]I think some of you guys take this (hunting)a little too seriously.[:'(]
I simply can not believe what I am reading from the same group of people that say the ainti hunters are fanatics and out to destroy hunting. They arn't the problem ,as you canclearly read here we don't give a dead rats ass about others property,others thoughts,and most of all others civil rights.
Keep beating your chests and making lame excuses for why you will knowingly break the laws that the simplest of man can understand. I'm to sick to continue.[:'(]
A lot of GREAT men and women gave their lives (and still do) so we can live free as out forefathers designed it to be.........Please don't lessen their sacrifice because of an animal. [:'(]
02-25-2008 | 06:20 PM
#122
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,164
Likes: 0
From: Moravia NY USA
RE: Ok Ethics Police ........2 Part Question .................................................
BJ and bawana - you may be the minority here, but I'm with you 110%.
ANYONE setting up where a wounded deer may run off the property onto one where recovery is not allowed should be accepting thepossibility ahead of time that a deer they shoot may go unrecovered. Fact is nothing goes to waste in the natural order of things. And playing the "God" card as reson to disrespect a persons rights should be embarrising to a real believer - using religion as an excuse to pursue their recreational activity illegally. I don't see how the use of "Gods creatures" other then the thinking, reasoning human that shot it would be disrespectful to that animal. If you truly feel that way, you could easily avoid it by not shooting to start with.
Steve - comfortable minority
ANYONE setting up where a wounded deer may run off the property onto one where recovery is not allowed should be accepting thepossibility ahead of time that a deer they shoot may go unrecovered. Fact is nothing goes to waste in the natural order of things. And playing the "God" card as reson to disrespect a persons rights should be embarrising to a real believer - using religion as an excuse to pursue their recreational activity illegally. I don't see how the use of "Gods creatures" other then the thinking, reasoning human that shot it would be disrespectful to that animal. If you truly feel that way, you could easily avoid it by not shooting to start with.
Steve - comfortable minority
02-25-2008 | 07:01 PM
#123
Thread Starter
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,679
Likes: 0
From: Heaven is my home, temporarily residing in WNY :)
RE: Ok Ethics Police ........2 Part Question .................................................
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
As I thought ,you have no dog in this fight.
ORIGINAL: PreacherTony
I used to own 35 ... why?
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
How any acres do you own Tony?
How any acres do you own Tony?
02-25-2008 | 07:09 PM
#124
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,167
Likes: 0
From: PA
RE: Ok Ethics Police ........2 Part Question .................................................
ORIGINAL: PreacherTony
Why is that Jim, because I do not own land anymore? Or is it because I owned a measly 35 acres?
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
As I thought ,you have no dog in this fight.
ORIGINAL: PreacherTony
I used to own 35 ... why?
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
How any acres do you own Tony?
How any acres do you own Tony?
02-25-2008 | 07:17 PM
#125
Thread Starter
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,679
Likes: 0
From: Heaven is my home, temporarily residing in WNY :)
RE: Ok Ethics Police ........2 Part Question .................................................
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
Why would you chose to publicly belittle the owner of 35 acres? Many here proudly, and should ,own far less.
ORIGINAL: PreacherTony
Why is that Jim, because I do not own land anymore? Or is it because I owned a measly 35 acres?
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
As I thought ,you have no dog in this fight.
ORIGINAL: PreacherTony
I used to own 35 ... why?
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
How any acres do you own Tony?
How any acres do you own Tony?
02-25-2008 | 07:30 PM
#126
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,167
Likes: 0
From: PA
RE: Ok Ethics Police ........2 Part Question .................................................
ORIGINAL: PreacherTony
Jim ... what are you talking about????? I was asking YOU if that was YOUR thoughts ...... dude, you have a serious chip on your shoulder ...... now just answer the question ..... quit deflecting .......
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
Why would you chose to publicly belittle the owner of 35 acres? Many here proudly, and should ,own far less.
ORIGINAL: PreacherTony
Why is that Jim, because I do not own land anymore? Or is it because I owned a measly 35 acres?
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
As I thought ,you have no dog in this fight.
ORIGINAL: PreacherTony
I used to own 35 ... why?
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
How any acres do you own Tony?
How any acres do you own Tony?
As every person answered your posted question ,you squrmed and twisted it so as everyone that did not admit to breaking one of Americas most outstanding rights,that being private property rights. as some how unethical.
You sir are wrong, and anyone that forgoes others the same basic rights you demand are also wrong.
Many a good mans has given more than should have been asked to defend the very things you willinglywalk on.
02-25-2008 | 07:45 PM
#127
Thread Starter
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,679
Likes: 0
From: Heaven is my home, temporarily residing in WNY :)
RE: Ok Ethics Police ........2 Part Question .................................................
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
If anyone has a problem here.....let me say it quite possibly might be .....ah............you.
As every person answered your posted question ,you squrmed and twisted it so as everyone that did not admit to breaking one of Americas most outstanding rights,that being private property rights. as some how unethical.
You sir are wrong, and anyone that forgoes others the same basic rights you demand are also wrong.
Many a good mans has given more than should have been asked to defend the very things you willinglywalk on.
ORIGINAL: PreacherTony
Jim ... what are you talking about????? I was asking YOU if that was YOUR thoughts ...... dude, you have a serious chip on your shoulder ...... now just answer the question ..... quit deflecting .......
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
Why would you chose to publicly belittle the owner of 35 acres? Many here proudly, and should ,own far less.
ORIGINAL: PreacherTony
Why is that Jim, because I do not own land anymore? Or is it because I owned a measly 35 acres?
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
As I thought ,you have no dog in this fight.
ORIGINAL: PreacherTony
I used to own 35 ... why?
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
How any acres do you own Tony?
How any acres do you own Tony?
As every person answered your posted question ,you squrmed and twisted it so as everyone that did not admit to breaking one of Americas most outstanding rights,that being private property rights. as some how unethical.
You sir are wrong, and anyone that forgoes others the same basic rights you demand are also wrong.
Many a good mans has given more than should have been asked to defend the very things you willinglywalk on.
Or is it because this thread has shown that 93% of hunters would do the same?
Or maybe because37% would actually shoot a deer on another guys property they knew did not allow hunting on?
Jim ... would YOU ever deny a guy permission to get his deer that died on your property?
02-25-2008 | 08:03 PM
#129
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,167
Likes: 0
From: PA
RE: Ok Ethics Police ........2 Part Question .................................................
no one that asked , And since when does a majorities viewmake a wrong equal to acivil right?
And your proud to point out that 37% of responders are admitted poachers. Or that 93% would willingly deny their neighbors civil rights.
Are there any others of the bill of rights you are so willing to over look? Freedom of speech comes to mind?
I find it a sorry time in our country's history that so many are so willing to deny the most basic of their neighbors civil rights for that of a dead deer. Pathetic is all I can say.
And your proud to point out that 37% of responders are admitted poachers. Or that 93% would willingly deny their neighbors civil rights.
Are there any others of the bill of rights you are so willing to over look? Freedom of speech comes to mind?
I find it a sorry time in our country's history that so many are so willing to deny the most basic of their neighbors civil rights for that of a dead deer. Pathetic is all I can say.
02-25-2008 | 08:25 PM
#130
Boone & Crockett
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 11,682
Likes: 0
From: Michigan/Ohio
RE: Ok Ethics Police ........2 Part Question .................................................
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
no one that asked , And since when does a majorities viewmake a wrong equal to acivil right?
And your proud to point out that 37% of responders are admitted poachers. Or that 93% would willingly deny their neighbors civil rights.
Are there any others of the bill of rights you are so willing to over look? Freedom of speech comes to mind?
I find it a sorry time in our country's history that so many are so willing to deny the most basic of their neighbors civil rights for that of a dead deer. Pathetic is all I can say.
no one that asked , And since when does a majorities viewmake a wrong equal to acivil right?
And your proud to point out that 37% of responders are admitted poachers. Or that 93% would willingly deny their neighbors civil rights.
Are there any others of the bill of rights you are so willing to over look? Freedom of speech comes to mind?
I find it a sorry time in our country's history that so many are so willing to deny the most basic of their neighbors civil rights for that of a dead deer. Pathetic is all I can say.
With the new eminant domain ruling that have passed in the supreme court the past year I find more damaging to the bill of rights; than anyone here taking 3 steps to retrieve a deer.
There use to be a time when neighbors were friends, now they may shoot your big deer
We have fallen and learned one great thing in America. How to protect our own interest, and only our own.I remember helping my uncle a WW II vet when he broke down in his car. He just laughed he had to call me, "20 years ago 4 guys would have stoppedto help me"
You're right Jim the Bill of Rights is being stepped on, with the boot of selfisness
There I feel better
