|
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
[quote]ORIGINAL: SignOfTheTines Thats ok you say, one states exam should be good in all states. My state bowhunters merit badge should count in the other states. Except in practice, in the real world this will probably not work as intended. You would think Concealed handgun licenses should be reciporcal in all states but in practice they are not. How much government in practice is VERY differnet from the theory and good intentions that were in mind when the laws were created? Why would any reasonble hunter want to make it harder for any new hunter to get into the sport, enjoy the sport in other states and give alarmist liberals any more ammo? (if *bowhunting* is so dangerous and threatening you need to pass tests to do it legally, then maybe it deserves more scrutiny) Think that arguement won't be raised someday? Think again. |
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
I'm going to say no I'm not for it. Reason being Is I don't want the goverment involved. Our hunter Ed classes I think do the job close enough already. Either way you look at it your always going to have idiots out there bow hunting who shouldn't be!!
|
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
ORIGINAL: Badger_Girl93 ORIGINAL: Goodgrief I was going to leave this, but, I asked my neighbors brother this evening who works for our DPW, and yes in fact they do have to have safety courses in all of their equipment ie; Lawnmowers, weed wackers, and the like. Hard hat, gloves, glasses, steel toed boots. It has nothing to do with rights, it's about safety. And, like I stated earlier, I "have" no proof yet, but maybe injury claims and law suits against the state, may have played a originating role in the decision to adopt the mandatory courses. |
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
I beg everyone to use good judgement here...
I ask this: 1) would you allow anyone to walk onto your propertyto use your car? Especially, if they were not properly trained to use it?No, you say? Then why the heck would you allow anyone to use your wildlife if they were not properly train there? The Declaration of Independence refers to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Meaning, there will be timeswhen youwill be requiredto work for something-it is not given, nor are you entitled to haveit. We have established our government to help protect life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all-not just those that think they know better than the rest. It is a fine line we walk. We as hunters need to show non-hunters (about 80% of the general population)that we care enough to become proficient with a valuable natural resource.And, that we are willingto protect thesafety of the individualandgeneral public. If we do not, trust me, they will take it away! Do you want to risk that simply because you think you know better? Examine bowhunting in England if you think I'm kidding. Again, it is a small price to pay (work) to play! Chad, How much do you get paid to teach? I'm willing to bet it's nothing! I'm also willing to bet individual DNR departments make nothing and basically cover their costs associated with hunters training courses (It not a government get rich quick scheme). |
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
ORIGINAL: brucelanthier ORIGINAL: Badger_Girl93 ORIGINAL: Goodgrief I was going to leave this, but, I asked my neighbors brother this evening who works for our DPW, and yes in fact they do have to have safety courses in all of their equipment ie; Lawnmowers, weed wackers, and the like. Hard hat, gloves, glasses, steel toed boots. It has nothing to do with rights, it's about safety. And, like I stated earlier, I "have" no proof yet, but maybe injury claims and law suits against the state, may have played a originating role in the decision to adopt the mandatory courses. But on another note, yes the govt. does have an obligation to ensure that i hunt safetly and responsibly on public land. That's why they made me take a mandatory hunter's ed course. That's why I have to show my hunter's ed card before i can buy a license. And the mandatory hunter's ed class covers the govt.'s obligation....IMO,there is no obligation foradditionalbow only courses. All these public domain arguments do not apply to the question at hand. IMO, the states obligation is satisfied by the courses that ARE ALREADY MANDATORY![8D] |
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
ORIGINAL: iamyourhuckleberry I beg everyone to use good judgement here... I ask this: 1) would you allow anyone to walk onto your property to use your car? Especially, if they were not properly trained to use it? No, you say? Then why the heck would you allow anyone to use your wildlife if they were not properly train there? The Declaration of Independence refers to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Meaning, there will be times when you will be required to work for something-it is not given, nor are you entitled to have it. We have established our government to help protect life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all-not just those that think they know better than the rest. It is a fine line we walk. We as hunters need to show non-hunters (about 80% of the general population) that we care enough to become proficient with a valuable natural resource. And, that we are willing to protect the safety of the individual and general public. If we do not, trust me, they will take it away! Do you want to risk that simply because you think you know better? Examine bowhunting in England if you think I'm kidding. Again, it is a small price to pay (work) to play! Chad, How much do you get paid to teach? I'm willing to bet it's nothing! I'm also willing to bet individual DNR departments make nothing and basically cover their costs associated with hunters training courses (It not a government get rich quick scheme). I think the part that people are forgetting is that we as hunters are not in the Majority. And thats why we need to prove to that 80% of the Non-hunting public that we are safe and ethical and provide a service to the general public. If we can't do this then they will take our hunting rights away. IT WILL HAPPEN!!! |
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
They never covered bowhunting safety in hunters ed here.
|
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
This was/is a good topic PA. Glad you brought it up.
Just another point that I as a bowhunter like to see and is taught in the class is the shot selection portion. What is taught is proven shot selection on game.Outside the class, mybasic assumption on the topic is ask five people, get five different answer type deal. I'm not real confident thatevery beginner will be given proper advice if at all on the subject. What is taught wil give a solid foundation on the subject. I don't believe many people try to purposely mislead people in their advice though, it's probably what has worked in their experience. What I have found as my bowhunters years progress is that what is taught in the shot selection portion is truer and truer. |
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
Not exactly...hunting on public land is not an official duty of a govt. employee. Once again...big difference.;) But on another note, yes the govt. does have an obligation to ensure that i hunt safetly and responsibly on public land. That's why they made me take a mandatory hunter's ed course. That's why I have to show my hunter's ed card before i can buy a license. And the mandatory hunter's ed class covers the govt.'s obligation....IMO,there is no obligation foradditionalbow only courses. All these public domain arguments do not apply to the question at hand. IMO, the states obligation is satisfied by the courses that ARE ALREADY MANDATORY![8D] Correct, not an official duty, a privilege being extended to hunters by the gvmt. to use their land. Becasue it is their's, they get to decide the rules. So yes, the public domain argument does apply here. You won't be granted immunity because you don't agree with their logic or classes. Were you going to present your side and try to get this changed I'd suggest you come up with a better argument and reason than I don't think I should have to. |
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
ORIGINAL: mez Correct, not an official duty, a privilege being extended to hunters by the gvmt. to use their land. Becasue it is their's, they get to decide the rules. So yes, the public domain argument does apply here. You won't be granted immunity because you don't agree with their logic or classes. Were you going to present your side and try to get this changed I'd suggest you come up with a better argument and reason than I don't think I should have to. The public domain argument basically says that the govt. has an obligation to ensure safe and responsible use of public resources. That argument does not apply here, because that obligation is ALREADY being met with EXISTING hunter's ed programs. In case you missed the original topic, we are not discussing whether hunter's ed classes ought to be mandatory. They already are and I support that. The discussion is whether or not an additional bow hunter course ought to mandatory for bow hunters. The public domain argument was settled "back in the 50's" when hunter's ed programs started. And now that they are probably universally mandatory, the public domain issue is fully satisfied in my opinion. Why has no one addressed this yet? Does anyone think that the current hunter's ed program does not satisfy the govt. obligation to ensure safe and responsible hunting? |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:48 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.