Do we..
 

Need to watch what kinds of things we say (on the forums), in fear that the anti's might get it and hold it against us? IMO, anything that is said these people will change it around for the worst, after all they are ANTI hunters. Do we need to conduct ourselves in a manner we wouldn't otherwise, because we are "fearfull" of them?

RE: Do we..
 

I think in some ways we do just because they can take the slightest thing and turn it into something HUGE and way out of wack.
MO

RE: Do we..
 

I'm not fearful of any anti hunting group nor will I ever be! Those people are so far gone there's no need to even bother with them! jmo!

RE: Do we..
 

Kyle, in today's day and age I think we need to monitor ourselves in every facet of our lives including what we say on these forums. While we are a fairly close nit community this is a public forum and as such anything we type here can and will be used against us. Our admins and moderators do a good job of keeping the flock tended, but there is too much material on here for them to catch everything so we have to be careful.

The way I view it is this islikehaving lunch with friends in the company cafeteria. Yes, you are amongst friends and can let some off-color stuff fly, but you still have to mind your surroundings because you never know who can overhear you.

RE: Do we..
 

we arent fearful,but we cant be stupid on here although im sure moderators are watching over us here to kind of keep a look out for any suspicious posts and threads

RE: Do we..
 

IMO, there is a difference between being pro-hunter and anti anti-hunters. As long as we comment on the positives of hunting and rebuttles to anti-hunting arguments then we are fine. It is when comments are made about how "dumb, stupid or wrong" anti-hunters are that get hunters in trouble. Do I agree with anti-hunters? No. But I also don't agree with conservatives. That doesn't mean I think they are dumb, stupid or wrong it means that I disagree with their opinion and will defend mine and debate against theres. Personal attacks won't, as they shouldn't, get hunters anywhere.

RE: Do we..
 

I see what your saying Bry, and somewhat agree.

But, no matter what we say, they will change it to something it's not. So either say it, or don't....the end result will be the same IMO.

RE: Do we..
 

We are told anything we write in an email(eletronic), to write it as if we were reading it in court.

As you can tell, I do not follow that rule:D

RE: Do we..
 

I agree with you Kyle, the anti groups will spin what we say no matter its actual meaning, therefore - why bother censoring ourselves. To be honest they'll never have enough ammo to take us out anyway. Product, Tourism, and Liscense sales contribute far too much money to the economy at all levels, and that's before we even take into account of the expenditure multiplier where our initial purchases are funding for someone elses job, who will take his/her earnings and spend! I read a senior thesis not too long ago that had data showing revenues collected on hunting related sales (product, tourism, liscense) through the multiplier effect contributed over $1.5 Billion to the state of WI alone!

What does PETA contribute?

RE: Do we..
 

Oh boy....;)

RE: Do we..
 

No.

RE: Do we..
 

If your fearful to talk about hunting or aspects of hunting because of the antis, well then you already let them win.

Just use a little common sense when posting on these boards.

RE: Do we..
 

I think we should have some what of a respectful manner on the way we talk and present ourselves as hunters. The more respectful we look to the non hunters, the better we will be in the end against the anti's. The non hunters are the ones we need on our sides. I myself make sure my field pictures of the animals I take are well cleaned up so when I do post them on the internet or show them to a friend who might be a non hunter no one will be disgusted by my sloppiness or offended. Every little bit does help in my opinion. And if they still are offended its not by my being sloppy with how I represent myself as a hunter.

RE: Do we..
 

Steve, you bring up another good angle.

If we are more repspectful in what we say and do, we may convince NON hunters (not ANTI hunters) that hunting is good for everything, and not horrible like the antis think.

We need to remember that there isn't PRO-Hunters and ANTI-hunters, like in everything there are people in the middle of a subject.

RE: Do we..
 

I do agree with this. I like the distinction you make between non-hunters and Antis. Non-hunters are the swing vote in this issue and not giving them a reason to dislike us weighs heavily in our favor.

RE: Do we..
 

Exactly Kyle! Its not to often your going to sway a anti over to our side but the non hunters are the biggest population that we need to reach out to and show the utmost respect in how we handle ourselves in our hunting story's and pics. Good post also Austin!!;)

RE: Do we..
 

I agree with representing and expressing ones self with class, but we should not limit the types of discussions we have based on outside pressure or possible perceptions.

RE: Do we..
 

Regardless of what you think, it always wise to be careful about what you say. Could stuff on here be used as ammo for the antis, sure. Could stuff on here be used to prove our side of the argument, sure. Either way we can't be idiots and say whatever the heck we feel like. If we want people to hate us, then we could say stupid things like the Rev. Wright or even the Dixie Chicks.

RE: Do we..
 

I believe that its our right and freedom to hunt. Its a sport that been passed down for generations set in place by our forfathers. If the antis come here and start twisting information to support their cause so be it. Its their right to be dumb. Its the choice of most of those "open minded people" to be completely close minded to views outside their own.
I also believe that the day may come when one of the psychos gets into a position to change the hunting rights laws.... When that day comes, other rights that are taken for granted in this country should be looked at and evaluated for future revamp...Like the freedom of speach, I don't personally think the manimals should be able to sing about beating white guys and shooting cops or doing drugs.... But, its the "freedom" losers hide behind. Maybe that right should be revocked as well.
One of the things that makes this country great is that I can sit here and type to others about how much I love the sport, whether its deer, duck, quail, wabbits, or Giraffes....
Otherwise, I'm goin to Canada to cash in on nationwide health care, Molson xxxand moose.

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

RE: Do we..
 

See my previous post. Calling anti hunters dumb is making a rash generalization that will not help the hunting community by any means.

RE: Do we..
 

It is dumb. I get your point. Don't care

RE: Do we..
 

The fact is, like it or not, the antis will use what we say to sway the views of the non-hunters that Schultzy refers to. As a result we have to be mindful of what we say and how we say it so that we don't inadvertantly shoot ourselves in the foot so to speak. Kyle is right in that they will try to twist anything we say to make us look bad. We just have to make sure we don't make it easy for them to do that.

RE: Do we..
 

Right on Bry!!!

RE: Do we..
 

I just think that every thing we do as hunters should be done in the most favorable light possible.So when someone who is not a hunter and may not be an anti hunter thinks hey this person is thoughtful,intelligent,articulate etc.
The anti hunters are extremists for the most part,we have very little possibility of influencing their opinion,but we don't want to assist them by presenting ourselves as idiots either.

RE: Do we..
 

My apologies. Seeing as how you are involved with Huntingnet, a hunting community, I assumed that you're adoration of hunting led you to respect the others here enough to want everyone to be able to continue hunting. My mistake.

RE: Do we..
 

You tell him Wahoo!

RE: Do we..
 

This is a good way to conduct ourselves on the forum...I would not censor myself on the forum, but I would be cautious in the wording somewhat. As far as cleaning up your field pics...it's a good idea.

RE: Do we..
 

I agree,there is nothing we can say or do that is going to change the way an anti-hunter feels,but the same can't be said of a non-hunter,we can influence the way they feel about hunting and they are the ones we should try to win over not the anti's.Just imagine what a non hunter would think if they witnessed nonethical behavior or just something done in bad taste that reflects on all hunters.Should we watch what we sa or post because of anti-hunters?The answer is no.Should we for non-hunters? The answer should always be yes.

RE: Do we..
 

This is a site for anyone, though I wouldn't expect an anti hunter to be here for long. This bunch will scare the sh_t out of anyone....on a serious note, I don't think we need to fear anyone, or anything, there is far too much money brought in to each state by hunters every year, the gov't knows this and I seriouly don't think anti hunters really have a lot of power with congress. Any politician knows that hunters are a large base of voters all over the country, they would be foolish to mess with it.

RE: Do we..
 

The antis will make hay over whatever they wish with no help from us. They've never needed us to give them ammunition since it's so much easier to rely on emotional appeal to the uninformed , or outright lying. I don't worry about what small minded fools think, the vast majority of the US public knows what value weoffer and support us anyway. The antis, especially the animal rights psychos, are at best viewed as harmless lunatics by most people, they have no real credibility. I've also noted with wry amusement that they also have an innate talent for shooting themselves in the foot. There's a commercial on tv right now for the ASPCA that features singer Sarah McGlachlan begging for "$18 a month to rescue poor abused animals" like those similar ones for child outreach in foreign countries. Most people I've spoken with find them outrageous in view of the fact that millions of human children starve to death evey year, yet these jagoffs seem to think dogs and cats that should never have been born are more important. That, above all else, is the antis weakness, nobody cares about their idiotic causes but them.

RE: Do we..
 

I have never been one to "hold my tongue" in any situation, and I believe that most people on this forum have the requisite knowledge to promote hunting and the outdoors in the most favorable light possible. As for fueling the "Anti" movement, they are going to do what ever it is they do regardless if someone on here makes a less than ethical statement.