View Poll Results: A poll
Voters: 161. You may not vote on this poll
For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
02-27-2008 | 09:21 AM
#151
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,221
Likes: 0
From: Howard PA USA
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
Badger Girl I do have to say all of the general hunter's ed courses I have been too were severly lacking when it comes to bowhunting. (In fact we had a regular Hunter ed instructor come to our class because he knew nothing about Bowhunting or archery and had been teaching it in the hunters ed class.) [:@]It taught you the very BARE minimum if that. It was basically, this is and arrow, this is a bow, and treat them like a gun when handling them and thats about it. So IMHO some sort of more extensive bow ed is necessary.
02-27-2008 | 09:28 AM
#153
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 0
From: Erie, Colorado
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
Let me put itanother way....another simple analogy.
Let say we have fifteen people on the planet, and they are all sitting in a court room. The case before the court: Bowhunting vs. No Bowhunting...
At the plantiff's table sits Wayne Pacelle (Wayne's STATED mission is to eliminate bowhunting in all 50 states). At the defendant's table sits Badgergirl (a hunter). The judgerepresents the government. Thejury represent the 80% of the population that doesn't hunt.
Wayne starts his arguement. He shows picture after picture ( we know they're out there) of various animals with arrows sticking out their heads and bodies (it is hard to show evidence of bullets sticking out of same). Hispointsare pretty convincing to the jury..."it is just inhuman and wrong", he states. "It is a waste of natural resources", he says.
The judge (the government) makes the claim that a bow (not a gun mind you, and the reason why we need bowhunter training)in the hands of a competent, properly trained, and skilledindividual is a valuable means of controlling/preserving wildlife. The jury sits up and pays attention here...
At the defendant's table, Badgergirl, standing over her lawnmower, replies "I learned how to operate this lawnmower on my own. I do not need your stinking training, nor do I needyou meddling in my affairs!" All the while, Wayne is holding a picture in one handand pointing to it with the other. Wayne is grinning from ear to ear...The jury has his complete attention.
How many of you think the defendant will win this case? Badgergirl?
Again, a small price to pay to play!
Let say we have fifteen people on the planet, and they are all sitting in a court room. The case before the court: Bowhunting vs. No Bowhunting...
At the plantiff's table sits Wayne Pacelle (Wayne's STATED mission is to eliminate bowhunting in all 50 states). At the defendant's table sits Badgergirl (a hunter). The judgerepresents the government. Thejury represent the 80% of the population that doesn't hunt.
Wayne starts his arguement. He shows picture after picture ( we know they're out there) of various animals with arrows sticking out their heads and bodies (it is hard to show evidence of bullets sticking out of same). Hispointsare pretty convincing to the jury..."it is just inhuman and wrong", he states. "It is a waste of natural resources", he says.
The judge (the government) makes the claim that a bow (not a gun mind you, and the reason why we need bowhunter training)in the hands of a competent, properly trained, and skilledindividual is a valuable means of controlling/preserving wildlife. The jury sits up and pays attention here...
At the defendant's table, Badgergirl, standing over her lawnmower, replies "I learned how to operate this lawnmower on my own. I do not need your stinking training, nor do I needyou meddling in my affairs!" All the while, Wayne is holding a picture in one handand pointing to it with the other. Wayne is grinning from ear to ear...The jury has his complete attention.
How many of you think the defendant will win this case? Badgergirl?
Again, a small price to pay to play!
02-27-2008 | 09:41 AM
#154
Fork Horn
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
Thanks for the lively debate everyone...I think I'm out.
I have to draft a letter to my state legislature begging them to please make sure I am properly trained by the state before I do anything outside the 4 walls of my house.
I have to draft a letter to my state legislature begging them to please make sure I am properly trained by the state before I do anything outside the 4 walls of my house.
02-27-2008 | 09:44 AM
#155
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,983
Likes: 0
From: Sturgis, SD
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
Of courseTHEY get to decide the rules...but in a democracy, I am a part of THEY! So I have a right and responsibility to contribute to THEIR decision.
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?
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?
The public domain agument was not settled in the 50's sorry. To buy a bow license prior to any of the bowhunter education classes, in the stateswhere I lived, you did not need a Hunters Ed or safety card. You needed $20. So no, they are probably not universally mandatory. The Hunters Ed class, which I took, which included absolutely no information on bows, was only needed to buy a general or rifle big game license.
The Bowhunter education classes were started to address this loophole in the system. There was no requirement to get a bow license.
As for democracy, check the poll at the top.
02-27-2008 | 09:44 AM
#156
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
From:
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
ORIGINAL: Badger_Girl93
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]
ORIGINAL: brucelanthier
Using your same logic......If you want to hunt in your backyard (or private land)fine, no mandatory classes. If you want to hunt on public land then the state has an obligation to ensure that you do it safely .
ORIGINAL: Badger_Girl93
Those are public employees, not individuals mowing their back yard. Big difference. Employers have an obligation to ensure a safe work place. The state does not have an obligation to ensure that individuals safely trim their hedges.
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.
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]
Obligation, and responsibility of the state. The state takes that responsibility when they "issue" a hunting license to a individual that can access "public land" with a weapon, that they have in fact took the proper steps to insure the public's safety as well as the individual. I know you don't like the Gov't, but like it or not, "they" are our biggest supporters (DNR). We are their tool for management. I'm sure the DNR fights more battles "for" hunters against the anti's in a day, then I will ever in my life. If Mandatory is a tool they need to fight the good fight, then I'm in! By the way, there are 3 hunters in our group that are "archery only" hunters. We only draw "archery only" tags, so you're right, a gun safety course really doesn't address our special needs. Hmm.
02-27-2008 | 09:50 AM
#159
Fork Horn
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
RE: For or Against Mandatory Bowhunter Education
ORIGINAL: iamyourhuckleberry
Badgergirl,
Just answer the question before you go! Then you will be free to move about the country...with my blessing
Badgergirl,
Just answer the question before you go! Then you will be free to move about the country...with my blessing
Mez,
As for democracy...the poll indicates that I am in the minority...I still have a right and responsibility to contribute to the debate. Thanks though for pointing that out.