iamyourhuckleberry

Anyone care to discuss elitism?

Nice work Deerdust.

Yes indeed, Lord have mercy!

deerdust

Todd, I see you can read, but when will you learn to comprehend what you are reading? As I stated, this is your personal opinion and conditioning.

I never said anyone was talking about making it illegal, but I am sure some would. I simply stated that per State Laws it has been deemed a legal means of hunting for those that choose to do so.

And I am sure that the Geeky Bookworms don't create meanings to the words to suit their liking. If they have, we seem to have adapted to their meanings. The definition I gave is the correct application to our discussion.

Again, personal conditioning and opinion.

Why would they? They have always been referred to as Butchers

Because the people as a consensus can't ever seem to come together to agree on anything, is why we have appointed Congressman and Senators to create the laws that govern our way of living. Your freedom gives you the right to try to vote in who you think will do the best job. Whether or not you agree with the laws they instill is >>--> Guess what: LOL Your personal conditioning and opinion.

I am not downloading the laws of your state to find out for sure, but I know that in most states, what you did is illegal, without 1st getting permission from your states area Conservation Officer to dispatch the animal. Which, if caught doing so is generally subject to prosecution for poaching.

I agree with you 100% on this.

Alltlk4

[QUOTE=ipscshooter;3818393] If what I do is legal hunting within my State as defined by the state wildlife agency, then, you are required to consider it "hunting" and it is inappropriate for you to rant for pages about something you've never experienced and that you know about only via assumptions, speculation and biased information filtered by anti hunting groups.

First off my experience is from a guy who I know on a semi personal level who owns such a place. We spoke at length and he told me about his operation. I told him at first that it was not hunting. In prior post I have stated that I have backed off somewhat of my 100% against stance. It is not for me and others may do as they please, just don't look for my appoval. I have tried to stear this ship in the right directions and we have went on many tangents I doubt I can find my way home. Which I am actually thankful for. It has been a great discussion that has bordered on heated but has still been informative. This is what a forum is about. If all parties agreed on everything it would not be worth the read.

I will disagree that without going on a canned hunt you can only make assumptions and speculation is not true. If that it is true then I must be speculating about the holocaust as well because I was not there. Because if you ask the Nazi's they will have a different story than the Allies. So who do I believe the Nazi's or the Allies, PETA or the american sportsman. I don't need to watch the propoganda to know what I think about it. I pointed out the show as a reference to what we were speaking about. It was interesting. Do I take everything they say at face value, no. They have an adgenda also. Both sides stretch the truth. It is up to each person to wade through the BS and decide what to believe.

Todd1700

Not illegal where I did it but I will tell you straight up that before I waited 2 hours for a cop to show up in the rural area I live (if he showed up at all) I'd put the animal out of it's misery legal or not. Just being honest. If that has any bearing on your opinion of me then so be it. I did not and would never remove the carcass from where it lay.

Well according to this crowd since you were never a Nazi and did not participate in the actual extermination of Jews anything negative you say about Hitler, the Nazi's or the holocaust is rank speculation on your part and therefore utterly meaningless. Just as you must have shot a tame animal in a pen to have an opinion on that subject as well. Because as we all know the human mind cannot fathom anything that the body attached to it hasn't actually done. LOL!

That clear it up for ya?

iamyourhuckleberry

Todd,

Some things are black and white, others are not. The Nazis broke laws (would you like me to enumerate them for you?), trials were held, and violators were hung. You cannot possibly be so ill-informed to make such a comparison ( I refrained from saying what I really thought...giving you the benefit of doubt).

Moving on...

Animal husbandry has been around for thousands of years. It has been a major part of human evolution even in the most remote part of our planet. The Nenets of Russia, for example, have tended reindeer for thousands of years. And get this, they used fences to harvest them. Icelanders brought reindeer to their island for meat, fur, and economic gain. You can say the reindeer is the icelandic cow. They hunt them! They also allow others to hunt them! Is hunting a reindeer there any different than hunting_______( fill in the blank). Where can they go, it's an island for goodness sake? New Zealand...an island with once domesticated animals is hunted daily. In Europe, the concept of a "public trust" is completely foreign (animals are owned by the estate on which they are killed). The concept of "ownership" creates a tremendious amount of grey area (has ever since men began congregating). It is that grey area, individual rights protected by law, under discussion at present. What I find perplexing is how seemingly a well educated person, like you, can in one breath defend individual freedoms and in another express opinion to abrogate them. If I were to call it as I see it, I'd scream " Todd you Hypocrite!"

Now please do continue to exercise your first amendment right-even on the internet (see Reno vs.ACLU). Not unlike your right to hunt, many of us will honor your right to spew excrement.

One additional thought, could you provide us with the exact statute(s) which gives you the right to kill one of the people's injured deer. That would be great-thanks!

Todd1700

I defend the right to do this but reserve the right to consider it something less than hunting. If you can't grasp that simple concept which is in no way at odds with itself then I'm sorry for you. It's pretty simple. A good analogy would be that I support the right of free speech even for groups like the American Nazi Party while at the same time despising what it is that they have to say.

A doe in the ditch of a private road across our land hit by a vehicle. It was during deer season and it was daylight. Please if you will provide the statute I violated by shooting her under these circumstances? Not that I would give a #### if you could.

Because

I stand by my earlier claim unabashedly. Where our land is located and with what it would entail to contact the authorities (no cell service, very few homes nearby where a phone could be reached) and the likelihood (slim to none) that a county law officer would be dispatched to this area from Monroeville (well over an hour away) for nothing more than a suffering deer, I'd have put her out of her misery if she had been beside the only paved road in the area at midnight on the 4th of July. It's the merciful thing to do.

iamyourhuckleberry

Quote:

I defend the right to do this but reserve the right to consider it something less than hunting. If you can't grasp that simple concept which is in no way at odds with itself then I'm sorry for you. It's pretty simple. A good analogy would be that I support the right of free speech even for groups like the American Nazi Party while at the same time despising what it is that they have to say.

If for some reason you became king with absolute power, would you honor and yet despise? I surmise, probably not. The only thing you're missing from your arrogant kingdom is absolute power. Thus, it's easy for me to say, "LORD HAVE MERCY" when encountering people like you.

Another good analogy would be to consider African Americans less than "human" on the basis they are "different". Thank God a lot of good folks saw where that path was leading and abolished it.

Quote:

I stand by my earlier claim unabashedly. Where our land is located and with what it would entail to contact the authorities (no cell service, very few homes nearby where a phone could be reached) and the likelihood (slim to none) that a county law officer would be dispatched to this area from Monroeville (well over an hour away) for nothing more than a suffering deer, I'd have put her out of her misery if she had been beside the only paved road in the area at midnight on the 4th of July. It's the merciful thing to do.

I am not going to argue the mercy of it. I would have done the same thing given the authority. I would never assume, however, I had the authority-even if my situation placed me ten thousand miles from Timbuktu! I'm not that arrogant. Had I killed the doe (mercifully) without authority, I would have immediately, or a soon as possible, notified the pertinent agency. Moreover, I would have accepted the consequences of my action. Did you do any of that? Did you have enough character to do the right thing, completely? Again, I surmise the answer is No. You grabbed absolute power for the moment and ran with it.

Thanks for some great insight Todd.

deerdust

Todd, I don't condemn you for your doeful mercy. Most ethical people would do the same. I was merely pointing out the potential legalities. Quite possibly, a Conservation Officer would have given verbal permission to dispatch the animal, if convinced that the probability of survival was slim. And that it would only lay and suffer until the final outcome.

I, myself shot a legal(4pts on one side) Missouri buck last year. One of the guides had hit it and told me about it at breakfast. We went to check its condition and found it to have 3 broken legs. It could only try and flop away from us. It was a pitiful sight, so I dispatched it. I could probably have gotten a tag for it from our DNR, but still had my Gun Buck tag anyway. The meat wasn't damaged, only broken legs. He made some excellent jerky, burger, and tenderloin steaks.

Todd1700

At this point I 'm pretty sure that no one outside of your own brain has any inkling of what in the hell you are talking about as it has no basis in reality any more. I'm convinced that you must be either a 12 year old on here trolling or an adult in desperate need of upping his daily dose of Haldol. Because given the fact that I have not at any point advocated banning these pen operations the above statement from you makes about as much sense as eating broth with a fork.

What law would I have to self report myself for? I shot a doe in the daytime with a legal weapon on private land during season. All else discussed along those lines were of the hypothetical nature and have not occurred yet. Do you possess any reading comprehension skills whatsoever?

But this is ridiculous to discuss anyway. You don't really care about my opinions, actions, or the legal issues concerning putting a suffering animal out of it's misery. This is just you once again trying to deflect the discussion off topic because you are getting your @$$ handed to you.

No that isn't a good analogy at all. In fact it makes no sense. But that's not shocking coming from someone that has to be the worst debater I have ever encountered. You make the most ridiculous analogies; you ignore points you can't defend; you constantly yet feebly and pathetically attempt to attribute words or thoughts to others that they have never remotely expressed and when all else fails you just stick your fingers in your ears and start screaming "Speculation" over and over again. I therefore find it useless to continue conversing with you. I'd be better off trying to explain to my dog how the ceiling fan works.

It brings to mind the old quote by George Bernard Shaw. "Never wrestle with a pig, it gets you dirty and the pig likes it."

Todd1700

Deerdust, I perfectly realize the tricky nature in disregarding the absolute strict letter of the law. Believe me I am no outlaw. But the laws on the books were passed and exist to stop people from hunting from the public roads, at night or out of season. They were not passed because the citizenry were up in arms about deer struck by cars being put out of their misery. Right or wrong I am a firm believer in the concept of situational ethics. For example I would not refrain from swimming out to and saving a drowning child in a park pond because a sign in front of me said "NO SWIMMING". Laws are great. Without them society would collapse into chaos. But believe it or not you can take anything, even adherence to the law, to a ridiculous extreme under certain, thankfully rare, circumstances.