Pa Rep. Takes Poll on issues
12-03-2009, 10:20 AM
#1
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Pa Rep. Takes Poll on issues
Interesting post from another site. Found it interesting. Remember this is a poll of citizen in general which include but are not solely hunters. I found it interesting how little support there is for pgc license fee increase. Could you imagine if they had asked ONLY hunters?
-------------------
Local State Rep Oberlander (63rd) did a survey of local residents on their 2nd amendment views, some of the results. First is the number or percentage of those surveyed for or against a subject.
2,377/95% for the Castle Doctrine
2,021/90% for tougher enforcement of existing gun laws.
1,895/76% support HB 1541 (financially deter Pa cities and local gov. from enacting illegal firearms ordinaces.
1,601/64% do not support license increase for PGC
1,548/62% do not support lifting the ban on sunday hunting.
-------------------
Local State Rep Oberlander (63rd) did a survey of local residents on their 2nd amendment views, some of the results. First is the number or percentage of those surveyed for or against a subject.
2,377/95% for the Castle Doctrine
2,021/90% for tougher enforcement of existing gun laws.
1,895/76% support HB 1541 (financially deter Pa cities and local gov. from enacting illegal firearms ordinaces.
1,601/64% do not support license increase for PGC
1,548/62% do not support lifting the ban on sunday hunting.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 12-03-2009 at 11:52 AM. Reason: typo, spelled asked- saked.
12-03-2009, 10:25 AM
#2
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2G Gaines Pa
Posts: 524
They'll not get another red cent from me until they resolve these DMP issues. I've been in constant contact with our BOCs since April concerning crossbow issues, deer issues, and above all else bear issues. All they do is blow smoke out their a$$es. Screw 'em.
12-03-2009, 10:59 AM
#3
Fork Horn
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 343
People are making too big of a deal about crossbows. I HAD to use one for 3 years with a bad shoulder and a botched surgery, and they really only have an slight advantage over a modern compound bow, and carrying one around is worse than a normal bow. Now that my shoulder is fixed, and I am still eligible to shoot my crossbow in WV, I prefer my compound bow.
12-03-2009, 11:23 AM
#4
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Brent,most I know didnt support fee increase for pgc long before the crossbow situation. Although it didnt help their cause any NOT to take hunter opinion into account in that decision making where crossbows were concerned and to just go ahead with it and have the attitude and make the comments that they did, clearly not caring one lick what we thought. Crossbows or no crossbows that asnine attitude and ignore hunters again was more important as far as Im concerned.
Having said that, People not supporting more money for pgc is mostly because of deer herd mismanagement and not listening to hunters at all & catering to the enviromentalist/nitwits.
They have been prevented a fee increase by legislators, on behalf of US hunters, until now because of far too many doe tags continually being issued and no change in site, no promise of "bettering" our situation, only a continual downhill slide. I dont know one "hunter" personally that supports more money for the game commission, most because of the reasons stated.
Having said that, People not supporting more money for pgc is mostly because of deer herd mismanagement and not listening to hunters at all & catering to the enviromentalist/nitwits.
They have been prevented a fee increase by legislators, on behalf of US hunters, until now because of far too many doe tags continually being issued and no change in site, no promise of "bettering" our situation, only a continual downhill slide. I dont know one "hunter" personally that supports more money for the game commission, most because of the reasons stated.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 12-03-2009 at 11:29 AM.
12-03-2009, 11:30 AM
#5
Fork Horn
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 343
Brent,most I know didnt support fee increase for pgc long before the crossbow situation. Although it didnt help their cause any NOT to take hunter opinion into account in that decision making where crossbows were concerned and to just go ahead with it and have the attitude and make the comments that they did, clearly not caring one lick what we thought. Crossbows or no crossbows that asnine attitude and ignore hunters again was more important as far as Im concerned.
Having said that, People not supporting more money for pgc is mostly because of deer herd mismanagement and not listening to hunters at all & catering to the enviromentalist/nitwits.
They have been prevented a fee increase by legislators, on behalf of US hunters, until now because of far too many doe tags continually being issued and no change in site, no promise of "bettering" our situation, only a continual downhill slide.
Having said that, People not supporting more money for pgc is mostly because of deer herd mismanagement and not listening to hunters at all & catering to the enviromentalist/nitwits.
They have been prevented a fee increase by legislators, on behalf of US hunters, until now because of far too many doe tags continually being issued and no change in site, no promise of "bettering" our situation, only a continual downhill slide.
12-03-2009, 11:33 AM
#6
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2G Gaines Pa
Posts: 524
People are making too big of a deal about crossbows. I HAD to use one for 3 years with a bad shoulder and a botched surgery, and they really only have an slight advantage over a modern compound bow,
12-03-2009, 11:41 AM
#7
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Brent thats exactly the case. Pgc has some of the most arrogant, noncaring, very nonhunter friendly characters on the board & upper staff that you could ever imagine. That agency needs to be overhauled. A few of the upper staff need the boot badly, and a few of the "extremist" biologists need shown the door. They were only hired because audubon & others demanded more biodiversity minded people be hired, and some of the absolute worst commissioners to ever sit on the pgc board were in place at the time and made it happen amongst other atrocities. The commissioner selection process is also an absolute disgrace. It is so crooked its absolutely sickening. They like to call themselves an independant agency. They are anything but. Nothing but a sock puppet for the econuts at dcnr. and the governors office.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 12-03-2009 at 11:54 AM.
12-03-2009, 11:54 AM
#8
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2G Gaines Pa
Posts: 524
I honestly don't know what it is going to take to get some relief. They've been hammered by the hunters. They've been hammered by the legislators. They've been sued. I'm at a loss. I'm to the point where they totally disgust me as much as a pedophile neighbor would disgust me and I want no part of them anymore.
Ordinarily, I'd be out hunting today dawn to dusk. But I'll be damned if I'll pull the trigger on another deer and feel good about it until the PGC flunkies see the light.
Ordinarily, I'd be out hunting today dawn to dusk. But I'll be damned if I'll pull the trigger on another deer and feel good about it until the PGC flunkies see the light.
12-03-2009, 12:22 PM
#9
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Dont bother contacting pgc. Thats a time waster and little else. They are nothing more than a limp wristed lame duck agency. They have NO desire to listen to what hunters want. Even if they did, they couldnt change things if they wanted to with dcnr etc. pulling their strings and making sure the agency is made up of people more than willing to kneel at their feet.
Gotta continue to pound the legislators and get others to do the same. Its a war of attrition, not a sprint.
Also need a lot of luck.
Gotta continue to pound the legislators and get others to do the same. Its a war of attrition, not a sprint.
Also need a lot of luck.
12-03-2009, 01:31 PM
#10
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Another article on the survey, this from the Venango County Daily News:
----------------------
12/01/2009
Clarion County’s state representative Donna Oberlander’s Sportsman’s survey is showing strong support for expanding second amendment protections. Clarion and Armstrong residents are apparently showing disapproval to future hunting license increases and introduction of Sunday hunting. While the majority of the nearly 2500 residents who responded to the 2009-20010 Sportsmen’s Second Amendment Survey are definitely opposed to any future hunting license increases from the Pennsylvania Game Commission, they are even more strongly in favor of legislative solutions such as the Castle Doctrine (HB 40) specifically designed to protect and expand their right to keep and bear arms. 95 percent of the respondents indicate their support for the Castle Doctrine to fully restore the ability of law abiding gun owners to use lethal force to protect their ;hmes, businesses, or automobiles against criminal intruders. 90 percent favor tougher enforcement of existing gun laws to crack down on gun related crimes rather than additional gun control measures or firearms regulations. 64 percent would not support a hunting license increase to help the game commission address alleged financial difficulties and 62 percent donot support lifting Pennsylvania’s current ban on Sunday hunting.
----------------------
12/01/2009
Clarion County’s state representative Donna Oberlander’s Sportsman’s survey is showing strong support for expanding second amendment protections. Clarion and Armstrong residents are apparently showing disapproval to future hunting license increases and introduction of Sunday hunting. While the majority of the nearly 2500 residents who responded to the 2009-20010 Sportsmen’s Second Amendment Survey are definitely opposed to any future hunting license increases from the Pennsylvania Game Commission, they are even more strongly in favor of legislative solutions such as the Castle Doctrine (HB 40) specifically designed to protect and expand their right to keep and bear arms. 95 percent of the respondents indicate their support for the Castle Doctrine to fully restore the ability of law abiding gun owners to use lethal force to protect their ;hmes, businesses, or automobiles against criminal intruders. 90 percent favor tougher enforcement of existing gun laws to crack down on gun related crimes rather than additional gun control measures or firearms regulations. 64 percent would not support a hunting license increase to help the game commission address alleged financial difficulties and 62 percent donot support lifting Pennsylvania’s current ban on Sunday hunting.