&*!#@* Hunters!

[Jonathan Hanson]

Did I get your attention?

I am a hunter. Not only am I a hunter, I've published articles about guns and hunting, I've written op-eds supporting hunting, and I'm a founding member of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. I value hunting as a heritage, as a means to connect with nature, and as a valuable conservation tool.

Yet every season it's exactly the same around our house. The overweight guys show up on ATVs, driving up and down, "scouting." Bud Lite cans sprout on the roadside, along with toilet paper filigree. Trespassing is epidemic, as are ATV and truck tracks across virgin desert. Guys with rifles sit on the hillside 200 yards from our house, apparently hoping one of the deer that come in to our yard for water two or three times a day will wander within range.

It is easy to dismiss this. "Oh, those aren't real hunters." Sorry, guys - those are hunters. They have hunting licenses and rifles. They are the face of hunting seen by most of the public. When I hunt, when the people I know hunt, no one sees us because we are quiet, do not litter, and practice our skills far from the sight or even sound of other's houses.

I think the hunting community is far too dismissive of this problem, out of fear of alienating "fellow" hunters. I disagree. I believe responsible hunters should be doing everything we can to drive this mutant subspecies extinct. Confront them, photograph them and report them, whatever. Hunting (much like backcountry driving) is under enough pressure from outside groups; we don't need to be giving those groups more ammunition from within our own ranks.

Any thoughts?

[Skylinerider]

I absolutely agree. This years hunt was one of the worst I can remember simply because of folks like you are describing. I know in Utah, the number of hunters is dropping, and I feel like it is because of the types of people you describe. Most folks just don't want to deal with all the B.S. and stupid people anymore. It's now just me and my father who go hunting out of about 8 or so that used to go out. It's sad.

[DaveInDenver]

mutant subspecies

Any thoughts?
I am not a hunter. Not that I'm anti-hunting, just never exposed to it since no one in my family hunted. Although I was almost accidently shot by a hunter, it was my fault since not growing up around hunters I didn't know about these things, deer season and what-not, and that riding a mountain bike during deer season was not smart... He'd heard me and if this had not been the early 1990s with all the ugly anodized blue and purple bike parts and unnatural clothes dyes, I might have been actually shot. None-the-less, I've been around hunters at work and stuff. How sure are you that it's a subspecies? Seems to be a stereotype that has some basis just in my little non-scientific sampling of people I've worked around (and I don't exactly work in a blue collar field). It's just like a lot of things, ATVs and technology have made it easier, so the entry isn't so tough. Head down to the sporting goods store, throw down the credit card, take a hunter safety class and now you are a hunter just like they show on the Saturday morning OLN TV show.

[Jonathan Hanson]

Well, I do know plenty of conscientious hunters. But the mutants are far too numerous, that's for sure.

Almost getting shot while riding a mountain bike is not your fault! A hunter should never even raise his rifle until he's sure of his target. That simply bolsters my point about the number of bozos out there. It's not the duty of non-hunters to stay out of hunters' way during hunting season; it's the duty of the guy with the rifle to stay out of everyone else's way.

[calamaridog]

I think the hunting community is far too dismissive of this problem, out of fear of alienating "fellow" hunters. I disagree. I believe responsible hunters should be doing everything we can to drive this mutant subspecies extinct. Confront them, photograph them and report them, whatever. Hunting (much like backcountry driving) is under enough pressure from outside groups; we don't need to be giving those groups more ammunition from within our own ranks.

Any thoughts?

I would caution anyone from confronting armed idiots, however, you should always notify the Fish and Game officials or the County Sheriff of violators. I guess it depends on the behavior, etc. I feel we are all obligated to report violators and I have no reservations about reporting or documenting such behaviors. I have personally reported unlicensed fishermen as well as reporting a suspected poacher.

I have the cell phone number of a DFG Officer who I used to work with. I called in some unlicensed fishermen at one of the reservoirs. He was there within 45 minutes citing them. It was a good feeling:wings: You know how you always wish there was a cop around when you need one?

Hunting near dwellings is tasteless. There is no excuss for it, unless you have permission to be on private property or something, even then, I don't want to see a road or a roof anywhere near my hunting grounds. I certainly fail to get it?

I basically stopped hunting in San Diego because my favorite hunting areas are now an illegal aliens stomping ground - covered with trash and ruined for my lifetime.

[DaveInDenver]

Well, I do know plenty of conscientious hunters. But the mutants are far too numerous, that's for sure.

Almost getting shot while riding a mountain bike is not your fault! A hunter should never even raise his rifle until he's sure of his target. That simply bolsters my point about the number of bozos out there. It's not the duty of non-hunters to stay out of hunters' way during hunting season; it's the duty of the guy with the rifle to stay out of everyone else's way.
Well, almost shot is something of a dramatic statement. He did see me, just that I didn't see him. I think he yelled out mostly because us riding through probably spooked any deer that were around. He certainly was not happy in any case.

I'm sure there's lots of good hunters. Just like anything, just takes one to ruin it for the masses. One yahoo with 35" mudders, glasspacks and a case of beer stain 100 mellow OHV users in the eyes of a hiker. I think it's good for you to recognize it and say something. I personally think too often we (true really in all user groups) don't take enough of an active roll trying to police ourselves.

[Desertdude]

I got involved in hunting with my dad at a young age. Shot my first deer at age nine in Pennsylvania. I have been around guns and the sport for ten years after that first experience, usually Pheasant, grouse, or deer. What I started to notice was the increasing yahoo factor out in the field. Partially due to the population growth in the areas I lived and hunted. Eventually it just seemed to dangerous to be out in the woods with al the other folks with guns and weekend warrior attitude. So I left the sport and the passion.

I agree TV has played a big part in where it all been going.

...As of late, I've been thinking of experiencing a hunt once again. But I am guessing it will be in some very remote secluded area with a guide.

[calamaridog]

...As of late, I've been thinking of experiencing a hunt once again. But I am guessing it will be in some very remote secluded area with a guide.

Exactly!

Remote sounds good:)

[Haggis]

Coming from a family that has hunted not only for the pleasure of it but also back in the day it was our main source of meat, I too am disgusted with this sub species of "sportsman". I believe it stems from the general slide into laziness that our culture as a whole has sprialed down into. Guys to lazy to go any further than their ATV can carry them, or people afraid of the cold so they tool around in their trucks road hunting. Every year it gets worse. Though I feel it is a small percentage of the hunting populace, like Johnathon said they are the ones most visible as the true sportsman are actually out hunting. There has always been a sub section of guys where hunting is just an excuse to go out and party and act like idiots, those are the same guys that tear up the woods in thier 4x4s and Atvs.

Two years ago I was out bear hunting on our property and spotted the nicest buck I ever saw, a 12 point. I scouted out his habits and set up a tree stand on an island in our creek. The first day I was up the stand before light and was set up for him, thinking that the hunters on the Game Lands would push him onto our property where he had been laying low. As soon as it got light I looked back towards the house and could see hunter orange in our campground spot just up from the house. I then got down from the stand and approached the gentleman who was in my campground and asked him what the hell he was doing. "Hunting" he replied. When I informed him that he was on my land and what the hell was he doing hunting 150 yards from my house, he didn't see a problem with it. Upon further questioning I found out he was from Pittsburgh, and when I asked him if he would like it if i stood outside his house with a loaded rifle, he didn't think it was a good idea but yet couldn't make the connection. Besides that he informed me that he bought a hunting license so he could hunt anywhere he liked. I informed him that that license was for public land and did not entitle him to access to any privatily owned land and if he didn't get his fat *ss off my land there was going to be problems. Got his license number, and pionted him towards the Game lands border and made him walk the road and not through my property. After escorting him out, I headed back to my stand just to find someone up in it. Since no one was in my stand this gentleman figured it was O.K. to just commandeer it. Sent him packing towards the boundry also.

My land is not posted because of the trout stream that flows through our acreage. When I was a kid I up and down this stream fishing, hunting, and goofing off and I don't want to deprive some other kid the chance to do the same. But the actions of the last few years get me thinking about posting it. And it's not just hunters, some of the worse offenders are trout fisherman who trash the property every year, ignore the cable across the campground entrance and get their cars stuck, and then there's those that get all drunked up and make *sses out of themselves. I don't even fish the first week of trout season anymore, I find myself policing the grounds and wondering why I keep the property open.

As to what to do about it, I'm not sure. I think challenging them to a duel and mounting their heads on pikes along the property borders would be a deterrent, but civilized society frowns upon that kind of archaic behavior.

[Desertdude]

.. Last Sunday while meeting up with Scott Brady for a quick video shoot around table mesa area, we were both driving in our Tacoma's heading to a hill climb. There were a group of harley driving gun toters target practicing. The targets (not sure what they were shooting at) appeared to be us. The shooters where aiming uphill for a couple hundred yards away in our direction with no backstop - the rounds were hitting the ground 20-50 feet away. I radioed Scott and said we need to get out of here...

Needless to say I won't be traveling in that area again.

[Rexsname]

Just because it might be frowned upon doesn't make it less effective or even a bad idea. Some people are alive today simply because it's aginst the law to shoot them.

REX

[Jonathan Hanson]

Yep: Haggis himself is asking for a touch of the rapier if he doesn't quit butchering the spelling of my name . . .

[Martyn]

Jonathon, this is no sub species this is the majority. Hunters who abide by guidelines and principals are the sub species.

IMO this is what happens when you allow almost anyone to own a gun. Allowing unfettered gun ownership has it's consequences and this is one of the outcomes.

I would venture to guess that none of the people sited in this thread are technically "Morons" so their IQ doesn't disqualify them from gun ownership.

[Desertdude]

Yep: Haggis himself is asking for a touch of the rapier if he doesn't quit butchering the spelling of my name . . .

Martain's next :)

[grouch]

They do it differently in Texas. They set up a timed feeder to get the deer good and trained then sit in a stand so they can make their 50 yard shot with the new 300 WSM. The one thing they have in common is their desire to leave beer cans and various other discarded stuff. The one thing they don't have in common is in Texas there are very few public hunting lands so what little resource is here gets messed up pretty fast. You problem Mr. Hanson (I checked to avoid the rapier) is the mocrowaive society we live in where everyting has to be easy and quick. I am not sure there is any deffense against it either. There is alot of money to be made off hunting licsenses and sale of this years latest and greates 600 yard flat shooter. What ever happened to fair chase? Actually stalking your prey? Bless Tred Barta's soul for putting the way it should be on TV complete with his failures and all.

[calamaridog]

Well,

I'd say the knuckleheads are much more visable. I don't know what percentage of hunters are doing this stuff, but obviously it is too many.

I'd say perhaps the issue isn't gun ownership but rather the ease with which a hunting license is awarded.

[fisher205]

Jonathan, you've opened up numerous pet peeves of mine with this topic: ATV's, slob hunters and slobs in general. ATV's have allowed more slobs to get out an abuse the outdoors than any invention. The Bighorns and the Black Hills are overrun with the stupid things. Hunting season look more like ATV fests than hunting season.

I grew up in Winner SD, one of the prime pheasant habitiats in the nation. It is now owned or controlled for payed hunters. I can't go back there hunt any more w/o paying to hunt. I then lived in Prescott AZ, we hunted quail, and ducks out through Skull Valley, North Chino, and the Cherry road. The private areas have been closed to hunters and the public have been over run with ATV's.

Back up here in South Dakota I still have places to hunt, but it will take me all day of hiking, high stepping through weeds to get a limit of pheasants or grouse, if I get them. Luckily I would rather spend the day with a couple of friends and our dogs, than doing the 15 guys marching down a corn field to 4 guys blazing away and then bragging "we got our limit in 30 minute" party Hunt. (Even I will admit it is really exciting to watch 100 birds come out of the end of a field).

So thanks for letting me vent. -Brad

[Martyn]

Martain's next :)

I love the way spell check allows that one to get through :)

A solution to this whole problem would be to employ these errant hunters at local tire shops around the country. They could specialize in removing those stubborn lug nuts :)

Martian

[tdesanto]

Hunting licenses should be revoked at any sign of littering or disrespecting the land. On the second offense, the hunters should be banned from hunting for 10+years. 3rd offense, lifetime ban?

Ultimately, it all boils down to education.

Also, is there a volunteer program with the local game warden to help them spot these schmucks? I know that the game wardens are terribly outnumbered and have too much territory to cover to catch stuff like this.

Pasquale, that's a pretty scary scenario you describe with the shots coming within 50'.

[Desertdude]

Pasquale, that's a pretty scary scenario you describe with the shots coming within 50'.

Tony, Sometimes it feels like the wild west out there...

[spressomon]

Each sport has its idiots. I was raised on hunting and fishing and to respect the sport, the weapons, the surroundings and the animals you take...but I am continually depressed at how little common sense and respect go into these activities. As mentioned above: Their latrine is basically anywhere they 'end' up; no respect for the sheer killing power of what they carry/fire; no respect, really, for anything/anyone other than themselves...and sometimes you wonder if they even respect themselves; beer cans, bottles, trash...you name it!

As Martyn stated: These ARE the majority! Scary!


Many (majority??) 4x4'rs display the same type of mentality (or lack of) and lack of regard for where/how/when they travel and the damage (including incredible amounts of litter that lie in their wake). You think hunters can drink some beer and throw cans/bottles around...let me take you to some 4x4 camps!. And look out for the idiots that belong to both groups :( .

Unfortunately eventually all this will just be a cause to close off the great outdoors: "We have met the enemy: It's us"!.

[TigerPaw]

I totally agree that hunting has been completely overrun with idiots. I see it all the time when I'm out with my daughter or some of the other people I hunt with. Being of the "pack it in, pack it out" mindset, it really pisses me off, too, to see trash everywhere. I usually end up packing out other people's left behind trash with mine. I've always taught my daughter and any of her friends that come along with us to have a respect for nature and everything connected to it. I've also worked hard to teach them the hunting ethics that some of the other morons have no clue about. Florida has a hunter safety course that anyone born after 1975 has to take in order to get a license. Even though I didn't have to take it, I did anyway when I took my daughter for her class. One thing we have to remember is to reiterate and practice what the kids have learned in order for it to stick when they're out on their own. I've always said that people who hunt are a different breed of person. They are more family-oriented, respectful, polite, and less likely to get into trouble than other people. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case anymore.

I'm also a member of a 4WD group here in Florida and it really ticks me off when some of the people on the board just don't seem to understand or care when it's hunting season. I've made it quite clear a few times that I really don't appreciate the extra activity on public hunting land during hunting season. Alot of the areas they ride in are WMA's and I've,surprisingly, had several non-hunters stand up and support my point by reminding everyone that they are guests of these WMA's and that hunters only ask for a few months out of the year to use them undisturbed. The clubs are welcome to use them any other time, but they will share our burden of keeping them clean and enjoyable for everyone. It just shows that some people are responsible and courteous with their 4WD behavior while others aren't. No matter what bunch you belong to, there are always a few rotten ones to spoil it for everyone.

[Haggis]

Yep: Haggis himself is asking for a touch of the rapier if he doesn't quit butchering the spelling of my name . . .

Oops, sorry about that. For some reason I get a mental fart every time I spell your name. I'll write it on the blackboard a hundred times to get it stuck in my brain.

Jonathan, Jonathan, Jonathan, Jonathan.............

[Martyn]

Oops, sorry about that. For some reason I get a mental fart every time I spell your name. I'll write it on the blackboard a hundred times to get it stuck in my brain.

Jonathan, Jonathan, Jonathan, Jonathan.............

Haggis

Can you do lines for me as well??

[Haggis]

Haggis

Can you do lines for me as well??

Not until I spell your name wrong, Marten....:oops:

[texas taco]

Wow you all think you have it bad. Where I live is the exact location that the "Larry the Cable Guy" hunter originates from.I am not a hunter I do not think it is wrong to hunt. Down here in South East Texas we have Thousands of acers of land that is priviatly owned land that lay waist all year just for a few months of dear season. Years ago I was in a 4x4 club. We worked with the forestry service to build, and maintain nice ohv trails.The local yahoos discovered them. 44"gumbo mudders+Budlight+realtree camo= the good guys gettting the trail's that you could enjoy with your family taken away. Because of that mind set that is preveailant in are area it is extreamly hard to find quality back country experinces.Try taking your 3 year daughter backpacking in forest full of this type of hunter! sorry for the soap box rant, i am just glad i am not alien from another planet. Maybe we should move out west. Colorado sounds nice this time of year!

[Haggis]

I don't think this type of behavior is able to be fixed with any form of legislation, society as a whole has become to self absord. To many people are more concerned about immediate wants and to hell with anyone else. That's way there are so many slops in any type of hobby or pursuit.

As far as hunters go, I don't agree that it is a majority of hunters from my experiences, but that might be regional. Also it's not a class issue either, I've seen slobs from rednecks to high rollers, some of the worst being people who think to highly of themselves and their "status". Old english guns and tweeds does not a sportsman make.

All we can do is to follow the principals we hold, pass them on to the next generation, and try to lead those that are willing into a better way of doing things. Some you cannot reach and no amount of training or legislation will change their way and morals can't be tested in a written exam.

[Jonathan Hanson]

Mark, I agree that more legislation won't fix it, but if concerned hunters helped their game and fish departments enforce existing laws, it might reduce the slob foctor.

In a way it's unfortunate that game department derive their funding from the sale of licenses. Such a system only promotes selling licenses to anyone and everyone. G&F in Arizona isn't likely to put up posters in their offices slamming irresponsible ATV riders. And they're certainly unlikely to suggest that Arizona hunters get off their butts and walk to hunt.

[Mike S]

I eventually stopped hunting big game for the reasons cited in the posts here. Nothing at all to do with the actual hunting, just the dorks that I would meet too often.

On reflection, one of the reasons that we see an increase in the number of Bubbas in the field is that people like myself and others here have quit the field. And what is left?

In California, we have pig hunters. Wild pig hunters. They hunt nearly year around. I have met some of them while bird hunting, and some are people you would be prepared to like. Many are not. If I see any pig hunters in an area, I wll not put my dogs on the ground for fear that they will be shot.

We live in a democracy (of sorts) and have to be prepared for this type of person by being out there and setting a better example - for those people, and for the general public.

JonathAn, do NOT get me started on ATV's. Like jet skis (PWC) they are one of the major annoyances when out of doors. The worst part is that the Bubbas who drive them are breeding more!!

[taco2go]

I think articles like the ones in this month's National Geographic will help inculcate responsible hunting. Hopefully more hunters and non-hunters read it.

As a non-hunter living in a part of MI that is vehemently passionate about hunting, it takes some effort to get away from the “44"gumbo mudders+Budlight+realtree camo” stereotype.
But, as has been alluded here they do help bankroll the nation’s state fish and wildlife agencies- and- apparently they also impact the economics of conservation efforts: Hunters contributed 280 million dollars in 2006 to dozens of groups that devote most of their revenue to conservation.- among other interesting tid bits in the article.
Interesting read.

[007]

The fish and game should promote a "wood land watch" program and incourage people to help out. They could give out stickers you could put on offenders vehicles that stated an infraction had occured and would be under investigation.

They could set up drop boxes for you to leave plate #'s and witness statements.

They could offer free tags and training for "honorary fish and game agents" who would help patrol and report.

In Montana they close off most atv trails during the season which keeps bubba on the couch watching football where he belongs.

I'm an avid motorcycle rider and hunter but I believe ATV hunters are the plague of the earth.

[1leglance]

To me this is nothing more than the gun side of the 4x4 land abuse issue we see year around...
my answer is simple and cliche..
be the change you want to see...
make it happen...
see it, own it...

yes the person has a gun, yes they are a slob, yes they might be an idiot but if YOU don't do something about it why should anyone else?
If you aren't comfortable comfronting the person then make sure you have all the phone numbers of relevant angencies in your area...and call them! Immediately so they can respond, don't put it off till tomorrow, don't hope someone else will do something, just do it.
Those of you who went to the expo trophy and caravaned out know that I stopped to talk to the family shooting across the plateu...they just weren't thinking and with some calm quiet talking they moved down the road to a hill with a backstop...they walked the area before shooting and thought all was well, simple ignorance nothing more and nice folks....
today wheeling in the table mesa west of I-17 area...lots of shooters, 1 group without a backstop just shooting down a wash..10min stop and talk about all the atv's cruz'n the washes and they turned 90 degrees to where at least they had the bank as somewhat of a backstop...they had never heard the term before :)
so be the change you want, pick up trash, talk to people (be cool not angry) and the world will either be a better place or you will die trying :)

[Wanderlusty]

Good points, Lance....

I think that while some folks may know better and choose to do as they please, most folks do as they do out of ignorance of the 'better way' than out of malice.

As far as talking to them...that's just going to be a situation by situation call.

Now...if we could just get folks to pick their shell casings up after they go shooting....

[texas taco]

Good points, Lance....
Now...if we could just get folks to pick their shell casings up after they go shooting....
Not to mention the bullet riddled old targets.

[Suty]

As a avid Bowhunter, I must agree with all that has been said. I left gun hunting years ago, looking for a greater challenge I turned to the Compound Bow. This lasted about 2 years , once I found out that the " Aftermarket" had started making Laser range finders that mount on Bows. A "thing" that allows you to carry your Bow at full draw, so you don't even have to draw your bow in the stand or blind. Just pull the trigger and it releases.... I now shoot only Longbows and Recurves. I use my fingers for releases, my eyes to aim and cedar for my arrows. Everyone I have met on the Traditional Side of Bowhunting has been a True Hunter and outdoorsman. All of which I would not have a second thought of inviting them to my House for Dinner. Much like what Expo is for us, Tradgang.com is for Traditional Bowhunters (check it out). So, Hunters have Heart, there is hope, and that hope may come from where we as hunters least expect it......Our Youth, Take a Kid Hunting, and show them the right way....not the TV way.

[edgear]

I am a hunter, but do not own an ATV. But after helping to carry out 3 elk on my back this year, I can see how an ATV would be an appropriate tool for such a task. Despite that, I doubt I would still ever want to own one. I think the reason we were able to go three-for-three on filling our tags is that we chose to hike up where no motorized vehicles were allowed. I actually felt much safer up there, because I knew there wouldn't be any ATV hunters trying not to spill their beers.

I took the Hunter Safety Class when I was about 12, and think anyone considering taking up hunting should do likewise. I mainly hunt birds (dove & quail), and always enjoy hiking out into the desert, far away from other hunters. This was my first time hunting elk, and I'm sure I'll continue to do the same in years to come.

I like to think that the money I pay for licenses & tags will go to conservation efforts to keep these lands open & available for hunting & fishing, but I think I need to take a more proactive role in helping to remedy this issue of problematic hunters out there.

Good topic Jonathan -- thanks for starting this thread!

[fisher205]

This summer two of my friends saw some guys bait fishing and keeping the fish on a catch and release area of the Tongue River. They went to get the plate numbers from the guys' truck to turn them in. The plate number was 666. They concluded the Devil was a bait fisherman and it may be safer not to turn them in.

[sammy]

Hi folks,
I read a lot of the posts here but I don't post much. I have to put in on this one though. I love hunting and take a 3 month vacation every fall to hunt. I live for wilderness hunting. Most guys that hunt cannot get a mile from the road without an atv. I hate the dam things. Are most hunters slobs? I have to say I believe yes. The same though is true of most ATV users whether they are hunters or not . I walk or canoe to my hunting areas after getting as far back in as I can with my 4x4 truck. My truck never comes off the "road or track" Those slob hunters we all see are not conscientious hunters. If you have no respect for the animals, or the country then you shouldn't be in the outdoors. This is true of so called hunters,offroaders or whatever. Are most hunters slobs? yes nowadays I'm afraid they are but I think that is true of many people today not just outdoorsmen. Just look at society in general. The problem is a lack of respect and that covers a great many people in our society not just hunters.
regards
Dan

[KMR]

Hunting season has become a war, and I increasingly find myself on the side of the wildlife and the environment.
What if open season, became just that, a true OPEN season. You could be permitted to bag any offensive individual in possession of a hunting license. :elkgrin:
By employing principals of true hunting, stalking, concealment, physical exertion and PATIENCE, the morons could easily be out played and taken at their own game.
Just think how easy it would be to pick off a bubba blazing by on a ATV from your concealed rock outcropping, wouldn’t even hear the shot coming.
All I can think of when out hunting, while hearing the first pot-shots of the morning before the dark has lifted enough to see your hand in front of your face, is that the tables should be turned in the interest of true conservation, there are not too many deer in the woods, just to many “hunters.”

(my above statement is tongue-in-cheek, I do not advocate murder, but it is what I think of when out in the woods during hunting season, or when the house gets spot-lighted, or when I see blatant trespassers…….)

[p1michaud]

Tony, Sometimes it feels like the wild west out there...

Sometimes! I can't recall who I was speaking to about this during the Expedition Trophy, but what a culture shock for me. :gunt:

I've been around guns and hunting for 15+ years now. I've lived through the time where you could walk up to the store with a valid Firearms Acquisition Card (FAC) lay down your hard earned cash and walk away with hunting rifle or shotgun. Since those days, you have to go through a Hunter Education (provincial) and Fire Arm Safety (federal) course before you can get a Possession and Acquisition License (PAL similar to the FAC but need to pass the courses). Now in Canada, we have very strict Firearms regulations and it was quite a shock to see people carry guns with them, let alone discharge them at an unsuspecting piece of junk mistaken for a target (i.e. propane tanks). We still get the yahoos shooting around during hunting seasons, but you don't see people out with guns outside of hunting season (roughly 2 months of the year). Perhaps I've been living a sheltered life :oops:



Did I get your attention?

...Guys with rifles sit on the hillside 200 yards from our house, apparently hoping one of the deer that come in to our yard for water two or three times a day will wander within range....

Any thoughts?

Jonathan,
I typically try to say too much on these types of threads but can't resist the temptation in this case.

Are there any laws against discharging a fire arm near a house, camp, barn or other buildings? Here we have to be 200m away from a house before discharging a shotgun or 400m away for a rifle.

I have made the following observations in the 15+ years I have been hunting:

I call it the "Jekyll & Hyde" effect, get certain people out in the woods, with a gun in their hands out on their ATV or 4X4 and they start to do stupid things that they would not normally do.
ATVs have allowed easier access to hunting areas IMO
It's all about the immediate gratification
Most people just don't know better, they usually listen when you try and educate them.


12 years ago, I was nearly shot in the neck/head with a .22 riffle (accident and negligence on the hunters part). One of my friends and I were out hunting for partridge and met two other hunters. We stopped and chatted for a while standing in a circle, when out of the blue one guy standing to my left stepped back, raised his gun and pointed at a squirrel. I had not seen this and was stepping back when my friend yelled, grabbed me and pulled me forward. When the shot went off, his barrel was 4" from the back of my head. The only reason I did not get hit was because my friend was paying attention and for that I will always be grateful. The outcome could have been very different. After a few moments when things started to sink in, I lost it and yelled at this guy. They packed up and headed out of the woods, so did we. I was pretty shaken up by the close call. Now I pick my hunting partners very very carefully...and am always nervous around people holding guns that I don't know until they show me that they are careful. I observe, it's not a written test!

People need to be better educated and trained before being allowed to carry any fire arm and there needs to be some form of gun control IMO. Don't get me wrong, the regulations here are not perfect and that's a whole different discussion. My observations is that the gun control regulations here keep the honest people honest, I'll leave it at that.

Sorry for the rant, but I love nature and hunting! We as sportsman need to respect it and others regardless if they hunt or not. :sport_box

[MaddBaggins]

if they are only 200yds from your house, I'd say thats easy pickins...for you. :)

Kidding aside, I feel ya. I usually don't see those types when I hunt becasue I get farther out there and away from any kind of road.

[Wanderlusty]

Not to mention the bullet riddled old targets.

No kidding. At the Trophy, we retrieved:

a 'muffler man' that was 4-5 old mufflers assembled into something resembling the shape of a man...riddled with bullet holes....

a bullet riddled front bumper

more propane bottles than you can count

and...on the sand course, someone found a partially buried car door...

It's crazy..and sad....

[Scott Brady]

Maybe the solution is not fewer hunters, but fewer ATVs... Fewer/no ATV's would purge the outdoors of many of the yahoos referred to above AND significantly reduce the plague of "off-trail" ATV riding I see.

As ATVs near the size of a flatfender Jeep, their ability to access even further (carry more fuel and supplies) into the backcountry and more powerful engines and better suspensions allow faster speeds and a more destructive effect.

Based on my experience with the behavior of 90% of the ATV riders out there, they should be banned from all non-OHV areas. Or at a minimum, no ATV rider outside of an OHV area should be unlicensed, and every ATV should have a plate on it. I rarely favor regulation, but this must happen soon, before the places we love are gone.

And Mike, good point about the breeding. I have been reading some scary statistics about birth rates among the educated and successful in the US.
Unfortunately, only (mostly) the Bubbas are breeding, and they are buying everything for the next generation from Walmart...

[grouch]

And Mike, good point about the breeding. I have been reading some scary statistics about birth rates among the educated and successful in the US.
Unfortunately, only (mostly) the Bubbas are breeding, and they are buying everything for the next generation from Walmart...
Don't worry about the breeding issue, I have a plan for that. When I am ruler of the world I will put birth control in cigarettes.

[Martyn]

Maybe the solution is not fewer hunters, but fewer ATVs... Fewer/no ATV's would purge the outdoors of many of the yahoos referred to above AND significantly reduce the plague of "off-trail" ATV riding I see.

As ATVs near the size of a flatfender Jeep, their ability to access even further (carry more fuel and supplies) into the backcountry and more powerful engines and better suspensions allow faster speeds and a more destructive effect.

Based on my experience with the behavior of 90% of the ATV riders out there, they should be banned from all non-OHV areas. Or at a minimum, no ATV rider outside of an OHV area should be unlicensed, and every ATV should have a plate on it. I rarely favor regulation, but this must happen soon, before the places we love are gone.

And Mike, good point about the breeding. I have been reading some scary statistics about birth rates among the educated and successful in the US.
Unfortunately, only (mostly) the Bubbas are breeding, and they are buying everything for the next generation from Walmart...

Lovely idea about having fewer ATV's. If the number of calls we get for Off Road trailers that are capable of hauling an ATV are any indication of the number of ATV owners who want to get further back into the bush, then it isn't going to happen.

Hunters, 4X4 owners, ATV owners are all pointing the finger at each other. They/We are all to blame. If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem, it's a tough line to take but it renders results.

In my life it's racism and homophobia, if someone says something racist or homophobic I call them on it, because not doing so is condoning the behavior.

So next time you encounter something that goes against your principals or morals become part of the solution.

[lowenbrau]

In Northern Canada we have rules prohibiting folks from hunting for a certain number of hours after flying in an airplane. I'd support a similar, (though shorter) prohibition period following travel in a vehicle or ATV. Around here we call those bad hunters "road hunters" I watched from my deer stand recently as a guy drove onto a well site with his diesel pickup and glassed the hayfield with his rifle scope and then stuck a set of antlers out the window (truck still running) and rattled them! I wonder what his success rate is.

I'm one of those hunters you'll (hopefully) never hear about. I'm all camoed up and in the trees before sun up and after sun down. Except for the political pro-gun bumper sticker and the Ducks Unlimited window sticker most folks probably wouldn't know I'm a hunter. As in any group the bad apples get the press.

[Mike S]

I think Scott is spot on... ATVs seem to be one reason tha sport is risk. I realize that ATVs are useful - for ranchers, dog trainers, and others. But to HUNT off an ATV on public ground is less than sporting, and leads to environmental damage the instant the rider turns off the trail. I have seen it many times.

I think licensing ATVs and drivers is a good idea - with a test for proper operation and responsible behaviour. Most states already do this with motorcyles, why not ATVs?

I also think that closures in many areas would improve the quality of the outdoor experience... no ATVs ridden in camp grounds, or in sensitive areas of BLM and national forest lands.

Of course, enforcement is needed. The problem is, how could these rules be enforced?

[FortyMileDesert]

Out here (N. Nevada) the intelligence of the hunter or offroader seems to be proportional to the distance from civilization.

The further you are from Reno/Sparks:

The less quad/motorcycle tracks across virgin land.
The less trash = cans, bottles, bullet casings.
The less bullet holes in abandoned cabins and mining camps.

The BLM, USFS, Nevada game wardens and local cowboys seem to do a pretty good job in general of policing the riff-raff.

[DaveInDenver]

I think licensing ATVs and drivers is a good idea - with a test for proper operation and responsible behaviour. Most states already do this with motorcyles, why not ATVs?
I've been thinking about this lately since writing my Moab EIS/RMP plan comments. It seems like often everyone hates ATV. OHV drivers hate them because they are not licensed and in the way on signed roads and trails (many of which they are illegal to operate on anyway, being unlicensed). Motorcycles and MTBs hate them because they widen singletrack and damage narrow trails. Everyone hates them because they don't take much skill to learn and drive. During trail (both 4WD and MTB) days we hear the USFS people say they don't seem to know what to do with them. They drive all over the place and do a disproportional amount of damage and illegal trail cutting. So do most states require non-road worthy vehicles, like a dirt bike or maybe a boat, to be licensed? I'd guessed you'd pay some sort of fee, but there's no license plate right? I would think one easy thing would be to make every motorized vehicle user have to get endorsements on their driver's license for the vehicle type. So an ATV user would have to get maybe a motorcycle endorsement to use an ATV. You hate to throw one user group under the bus, but sometimes I think it would be best for the 4WD, motorcycle and mountain bikes (as long as they are lumped in with motorized OHVs) to distance themselves from ATVs.

[Wanderlusty]

I've been thinking about this lately since writing my Moab EIS/RMP plan comments. It seems like often everyone hates ATV. OHV drivers hate them because they are not licensed and in the way on signed roads and trails (many of which they are illegal to operate on anyway, being unlicensed). Motorcycles and MTBs hate them because they widen singletrack and damage narrow trails. Everyone hates them because they don't take much skill to learn and drive. During trail (both 4WD and MTB) days we hear the USFS people say they don't seem to know what to do with them. They drive all over the place and do a disproportional amount of damage and illegal trail cutting. So do most states require non-road worthy vehicles, like a dirt bike or maybe a boat, to be licensed? I'd guessed you'd pay some sort of fee, but there's no license plate right? I would think one easy thing would be to make every motorized vehicle user have to get endorsements on their driver's license for the vehicle type. So an ATV user would have to get maybe a motorcycle endorsement to use an ATV. You hate to throw one user group under the bus, but sometimes I think it would be best for the 4WD, motorcycle and mountain bikes (as long as they are lumped in with motorized OHVs) to distance themselves from ATVs.


I'll vote for you if you run for office with this platform....

Seriously, I agree with your idea, and think that there should be special licensing for both vehicle and driver. And while at it, lets beef up motorcycle licensing too, requiring as a minimum the MSF Basic Rider course.

Too many states, including my own, you merely take a written test and a quick 'you pass if you don't fall over' parking lot test. I have heard some riders around here say that their 'riding' portion of the test consisted totally of 'did you ride the bike up here, because if you made it, you must know how to ride' and there ya go!

I prefer the route I took. I bypassed the 'weak' state rider test because I took the MSF, and that exempts you from the riding portion.

I think I started veering this topic slightly off course, but I think it relates...

[Photog]

Yet every season it's exactly the same around our house. The overweight guys show up on ATVs, driving up and down, "scouting." Bud Lite cans sprout on the roadside, along with toilet paper filigree. Trespassing is epidemic, as are ATV and truck tracks across virgin desert. Guys with rifles sit on the hillside 200 yards from our house, apparently hoping one of the deer that come in to our yard for water two or three times a day will wander within range.

It is easy to dismiss this. "Oh, those aren't real hunters." Sorry, guys - those are hunters. They have hunting licenses and rifles. They are the face of hunting seen by most of the public. When I hunt, when the people I know hunt, no one sees us because we are quiet, do not litter, and practice our skills far from the sight or even sound of other's houses.

I think the hunting community is far too dismissive of this problem, out of fear of alienating "fellow" hunters. I disagree. I believe responsible hunters should be doing everything we can to drive this mutant subspecies extinct. Confront them, photograph them and report them, whatever. Hunting (much like backcountry driving) is under enough pressure from outside groups; we don't need to be giving those groups more ammunition from within our own ranks.

Any thoughts?

I agree, completely. I grew up hunting in Eastern Arizona. We would talk with the ranchers abount hunting in their area. Ask if all the gates need to be closed (as we may find one open now & then). Ask if there are any problem areas to avoid. Ask if they are having coyote problems we could help with. These ranchers always liked to see us coming down the road, and would come out to greet us and chit-chat for a while. They would tell us about the same problems Jonathan is describing. This was before the days of cell phones and ATV's. We observed a few idiots, and passed the info on to the Game & Fish.

With cell phones, it is much easier to point the Game Wardens in the right direction. We should try to make contact with those that are hunting in bad form. Most of them just need some training. BUT; you will run into a few that know exactly what they are doing, while they are breaking the law, so be prepared for a bit of a confrontation.

ATV's seem to be the modern horse, without all the daily maintenance. Hunting from horseback was never fruitful, for the folks we met; but using horses to get into the back country, then get off and hunt-by-foot, always worked great. ATV riders are like the horse hunters. Hunting season is just an excuse to go ride the ATV, and carry a rifle. I think ATVs should probably be licensed to drive on public roads, and be restricted from single-tracks.

When I was in Arizona, the law was not to hunt or fire a rifle/pistol within 440 yards (1/4 mile) from occupied buildings. Has the wording changed in the last 20 years? Littering is already against the law, as is driving across the open desert. Turn them in, if you see them.

The silent majority needs to increase their influence in the field. Talk with the ranchers/landowners. Talk to the unthinking hunters. Talk with the game wardens. Never, never, nerver give up!! (Winston Churchill).

[p1michaud]

Around here we call those bad hunters "road hunters" I watched from my deer stand recently as a guy drove onto a well site with his diesel pickup and glassed the hayfield with his rifle scope and then stuck a set of antlers out the window (truck still running) and rattled them! I wonder what his success rate is.

Funny, we call those guys "Hollywood hunting"!

As for ATV licenses. Here the rules surrounding ATV's are driven by Province. In New Brunswick, if you own an ATV you have to have a license plate on it (~$50/year) and must registered in your name. If you sell it, you are responsible to make sure that the registration gets transfered to the new owner. You can't drive on or within 7.5 m of a public road, although most cops will not bother you if you are putting along at the edge of the road not causing any issues. Then you have to carry mandatory liability insurance (~$200/year when I sold my ATV 3 years ago). The liability insurance is to protect other people should something happen when you are operating the ATV. Aditionally there are some interesting restrictions on age to operate the ATV. Some good information here: "Off-Road Vehicle Act (http://www.gnb.ca/acts/acts/o-01-5.htm)".

Cheers :beer:,
P

[Scott Brady]

You hate to throw one user group under the bus, but sometimes I think it would be best for the 4WD, motorcycle and mountain bikes (as long as they are lumped in with motorized OHVs) to distance themselves from ATVs.

I am in complete agreement, well said.

And I am sure there are many well intended and responsible ATV riders out there, but in my experience they are overall the most destructive and out-of-control group I encounter on the trail. I just hope new controls can be enacted and enforced before that segment brings the whole community down.

[Photog]

When I look through my American Rifleman and other hunting/shooting magazines, I see a large number of ATV advertisements.

Exactly where can people use these pieces of recreational equipment responsibly (outside an OHV park)? As far as I can tell, it is just roads and jeep tracks. Why not just drive a truck / jeep / suv? Is an ATV more convenient to hunt from? It is still not legal to shoot from a motorized vehicle, including motorcycles and ATVs.

[DaveInDenver]

And I am sure there are many well intended and responsible ATV riders out there, but in my experience they are overall the most destructive and out-of-control group I encounter on the trail. I just hope new controls can be enacted and enforced before that segment brings the whole community down.
I think the point you make here is key and I think the ATV user groups (if there are any) need to recognize that they need to do a better job of educating and enforcing rules before they can benefit under the umbrella from the work done by groups like Tread Lightly, Blue Ribbon, IMBA, United 4WD, etc. to keep trails open to mechanized users. Personally I think Honda, Yamaha and Bombardier need to really step and get these people under control, but as long as Blue Ribbon and the like do the ground work for them without question, why should they? I happen to think Toyota, Jeep, Hummer, Rover, etc. could do a better job of supporting the work of advocacy groups in our behalf, not unlike what REI and Patagonia do for the Sierra Club and the like. But that's a different tangent.

[jim65wagon]

but, but, but...If I can't ride an atv how am I supposed to hunt!? I'd have to walk and if I walk I'll sweat and then I'll smell bad and the deer will smell me coming to them and then I'll never get a shot! You may as well take my gun from me! :REOutShootinghunter

Seiously, I, like Haggis, have run off people from land I previously owned. Most notably 'chuck hunters who used the excuse that their Grandad owned the land - 15 years prior! I also wound up posting said land because not only did my barn door get rabbit shot, the fence in front of my house got a high speed round!

No I don't have any answers, just that we police our own actions and try to police others without putting yourself in a dangerous position. Sometimes all it takes is a polite reminder, sometimes it takes a sterner approach.

[DesertRose]

To me this is nothing more than the gun side of the 4x4 land abuse issue we see year around...
my answer is simple and cliche..
be the change you want to see...
make it happen...
see it, own it...

yes the person has a gun, yes they are a slob, yes they might be an idiot but if YOU don't do something about it why should anyone else?
If you aren't comfortable comfronting the person then make sure you have all the phone numbers of relevant angencies in your area...and call them! Immediately so they can respond, don't put it off till tomorrow, don't hope someone else will do something, just do it.
Those of you who went to the expo trophy and caravaned out know that I stopped to talk to the family shooting across the plateu...they just weren't thinking and with some calm quiet talking they moved down the road to a hill with a backstop...they walked the area before shooting and thought all was well, simple ignorance nothing more and nice folks....
today wheeling in the table mesa west of I-17 area...lots of shooters, 1 group without a backstop just shooting down a wash..10min stop and talk about all the atv's cruz'n the washes and they turned 90 degrees to where at least they had the bank as somewhat of a backstop...they had never heard the term before :)
so be the change you want, pick up trash, talk to people (be cool not angry) and the world will either be a better place or you will die trying :)

Lance, I have to say I was really impressed by your ability to talk with people.

I think you could work up a mini-course for us all to teach how to approach people like this, how to talk to them to get the message across positively.

I'm serious - I could really use some help. I get really annoyed - partly because week in and week out during the hunting season we just get plain tired of trespassers, trash, and stupid behavior. It's tough then when you got a live person to re-find your "calm center" and talk to them in a way that is constructive.

The first thing that always springs to my mind is to say, "Se habla Espanol? Porque hay un senal que se dice 'NO TRESPASSING' entonces creo que usted es de Mexico . . ." [Do you speak Spanish, because there is a sign there that says "no trespassing, therefore I thought you were from Mexico"]

Or

"What is it about 'NO TRESPASSING' don't you understand?"

Or

"The deer around here come in to our water troughs and are tame as dogs . . . is sitting here on a hill, within sight of my house, with your rifle aimed across my yard, your idea of fair chase, or are you a lazy slob?"
:)

But really, Lance, let's get some good advice from you when you come out here for the Tread Lightly training - in advocacy-speak. What works for spreading the word about our messages in light-on-the-land and safety for hunting.

[Jonathan Hanson]

It's insane not to have ATVs licensed. Right now we're at a total loss trying to report someone we see doing something illegal. "Um, he was fat? And, um, he was drinking a Bud Lite." Doesn't narrow the field much.

ATVs are rapidly increasing in size and weight, and consequently the damage they can inflict on habitat. Unfortunately thay are also increasing in popularity, and we live in a democracy. That frightens me. It means the rest of us must be better lobbyists.

There is a 1/4-mile law for shooting near buildings in Arizona. That's absurdly, dangerously short for rifles of any caliber. And when we see two guys who have already trespassed, driven their ATVs across virgin desert, and are now glassing for deer within 200 yards of our house, are we really supposed to assume if a buck came over the ridge they'd hold their fire?

Forget legal distances. It's just damn rude to hunt within sight of someone's house unless you have asked permission.

The other day a group was walking a hill about 500 yards from where I was glassing them from our porch (I have a laser rangefinder). One of the bozos was using his rifle scope to look for deer, and apparently just look around. That is, point the rifle at something, then look through the scope to see what it is. I'm not sure what I would have done if I'd seen him point it at our house, but in Arizona, the law states clearly that if someone points a firearm at you you are justified in assuming he means you bodily harm. And I do know the drop on my Rigby 7mm with 140-grain handloads at 500 yards . . .

[KMR]

Jonathan,
Don't you guys live in a mud hut with skunks in your well?
They probably just thought the place was deserted. :sombrero:

[GaryMc]

My unofficial position, as a BLM Ranger, hunting season sucks.
The majority of the hunters I contact are trashing the land with their ATV's (Texas Wheelchairs, as we like to call them:) ) and beercans. Also,the majority of hunters I deal with are out of staters that have no idea that it's not OK to be a moron
There are the few hunters I deal with that are very conscientious in their actions. I tend to give them hints as to where the game has been.

[VikingVince]

The other day a group was walking a hill about 500 yards from where I was glassing them from our porch (I have a laser rangefinder). One of the bozos was using his rifle scope to look for deer, and apparently just look around. That is, point the rifle at something, then look through the scope to see what it is. I'm not sure what I would have done if I'd seen him point it at our house, but in Arizona, the law states clearly that if someone points a firearm at you you are justified in assuming he means you bodily harm. And I do know the drop on my Rigby 7mm with 140-grain handloads at 500 yards . . .

Hey Jonathan,

I presume you are wise enough to not shoot the guy...lol...although it's not really funny. I seriously...seriously doubt that the Arizona law you cited would apply to a hunter at 500 yards, during hunting season, having a rifle pointed in the direction of, or in your opinion directly at, your house. It you shot and killed the guy, it would certainly be an interesting test case!! :) The law would most likely be interpreted as giving one the right to invoke lethal self-defense if the perp was within "reasonable" proximity with a gun pointed directly at you. I think you know that and, no doubt, your statement was simply benign "posturing." (good reading, though!)

Something to keep in mind....Let's say something like you describe did occur and you or someone else killed a hunter at 500 yards for pointing a gun at your house. Everything you post in a forum like this would be requisitioned and would contribute to your frame of mind...and would most likely be construed as prejudicial...IMO, you would most likely be convicted of manslaughter, at least....but, like I said, it would be an interesting case!!!

[ntsqd]

Over a month ago I was on the Dusy-Irshim Trail in the Sierras near Shaver Lake. On our way out from the trialhead I noted that as we got closer to town the number of hunter camps grew exponentially. Commented to the guy in the fuel station about how the hunters weren't very far from town, did they expect to find a deer there? Sure weren't any obvious camps in the back country.

The guy commented that near the beginning of the Primative Season he'd been outside mowing his lawn when he heard a "TUUUUNNNGGGGGGGG!!!" and looked up to see an arrow stuck in his roof. He figured that since it gets worse up there every year that he now had to wear Blaze Orange just to mow his yard, which happened to be near a meadow.

I worked in a gunshop while in college. Every year, back in the day, we would get one or two who wanted an AK to go hunting with. That cartrige would be perfectly suitable for the coastal range antlered coyotes that we call deer, but the firearm?

I wish I knew the solution. In the OHV advocacy arena 'self exposure' seems to be used against them. May or may not be the solution here too.

[Haggis]

Here in PA all ATV's must be registered and dispay a license plate. If the ATV is operated off the owners property the ATV must have a liability insurance. We own an ATV, a Honda Rancher, it's registered but not insured for it never leaves our property. To us it's a small tractor that hauls firewood, lawn stuff for the wife, and plows snow ( though when we get a good lake effect storm I use our Case skidsteer).


And Mike, good point about the breeding. I have been reading some scary statistics about birth rates among the educated and successful in the US. Unfortunately, only (mostly) the Bubbas are breeding, and they are buying everything for the next generation from Walmart...

Some of the worst offenders I'v ever seen in these parts are supposedly educated and successful, but think they're free to do what ever they want and to hell with the rubes that live where they want to hunt. Most of our problems up here stem form "hunters" from Pittsburgh and Cleveland. who come up here to hunt (urban slang for getting plastered) and roar around on their ATVs. And if it's raining or snowing heavy there is a steady parade of high end pickups and SUVs with Ohio plates and vehicles with Pittsburgh car dealer stickers driving the circuit around our house. Shopping at Wal Mart does not make any one a Bubba. Acting like a fool and a jerk is not a class issue.

[Haggis]

The fish and game should promote a "wood land watch" program and incourage people to help out. They could give out stickers you could put on offenders vehicles that stated an infraction had occured and would be under investigation.

They could set up drop boxes for you to leave plate #'s and witness statements.

They could offer free tags and training for "honorary fish and game agents" who would help patrol and report.

Pa has had a program for decades with both the Game and Fish Commissions, where they recruit people to be Deputies. The intent was to have an extra set of eyes to watch for infractions, and to give a hand in stocking programs and other projects. Unfortunately, these programs seem to draw folks who are either more interested in using the program to enable them to know where game and fish are being stocked, to redirect fish and game to private lands (ie buddies property), or to exercise their new powers for ego gratification. They've come to be known as "Sucker Wardens" and are despised by the majority of people. This Spring I had to escort one these Deputies off my property, after he was trying to encourage a couple of teenage fisherman into illegaly snatching a big brown trout. I knew this Deputy, he was not in uniform or showing his badge, and was obviously trying to goad these kids into a fine. After I ask him to show me his badge, he tried to claim he was there to investigate why I had chased off a handicapped boy from my property. I have never seen a handicapped person on my property and if I had I would have been the first to help that person catch a fish whether it was helping that person access the stream or just to stick around to BS. And even if I was a complete *astard, it's my property and I'll chase off any one I want. He said he was going to call the Warden, and get me fined even though he couldn't name a violation. I told him go right ahead and that he could even use my phone, both the regional Game and Fish Wardens are on my dailer. Being in the lumber business and harvesting on State Game lands we had a good working relationship with both agencies. That got him to leave and I then reported him to the regionial Warden. So in the end Bubbas are everywhere.

[DesertRose]

There have been some really good suggestions (immediately above, especially) about watch groups and programs to curb these types of activities.

But Arizona unfortunately is an extreme "protectionist" state. Arizona Game & Fish balks at anything, anything at all, that could be construed to limit the so-called rights of hunters. I was appointed to a citizen's advisory group to the Arizona Game & Fish Commission, and I am continuously amazed at how knee-jerk the reactions within G&F and close allies (hunters groups) when anyone suggests something like you have. As if somehow it's the crack in the dam . . . when in fact, the boorish activities of the majority will be the death knell of hunting - since the 2 biggest urban areas - voting blocs - now lean solidly to non-hunting. All it will take is a concerted effort by HUS and their insane exec director to take aim at AZ as they have in other states and shut down hunting . . . they have succeeded in several states on dove hunting, for example. . .

Likewise OHV groups go nuts when we try to introduce something sane like the Copper Sticker, licensing ATVs. It's been a multi-year battle to get it done, and I don't think it's there yet. It should have been a slam-dunk. But the clubs went nuts.

Nothing will happen til we do something to balance extremism - it's what is driving Arizona's conservation climate.

[Jonathan Hanson]

Kevin, I'll have you know it's not mud, it's Rastra. Hmph.

"Texas wheelchair" is going to stick. Brilliant.

Good point about citizen deputies. But we still need a better way for ordinary conscientious citizens to effectively record and report land abusers. Registration for all ATVs is the obvious first answer. Here's a statistic to scare you:

The number of titled all-terrain vehicles in Arizona went from 51,000 in December 1998 to more than 230,000 in July 2006.

[DesertRose]

Jonathan,
Don't you guys live in a mud hut with skunks in your well?
They probably just thought the place was deserted. :sombrero:


:xxrotflma :xxrotflma

[ntsqd]

Jonathan, I had a thought on the way to work this morning. What you need are some black fatigues, black face paint, a flat black wooden replica of a Barrett 82A1/M107 .50 BMG with a real (though cheep) 36x target scope on it, and a prone shooter's mat. Have the mat in place somewhere easily seen from that position.

When they see you glassing them with that "rifle" they'll probably leave a stain on the rocks.
:)

[Wanderlusty]

Registration for all ATVs is the obvious first answer. Here's a statistic to scare you:

The number of titled all-terrain vehicles in Arizona went from 51,000 in December 1998 to more than 230,000 in July 2006.

WOW.....

Exponential growth for sure.....

I don't have the stats for Arkansas, but I do notice that there are a lot more ATV dealers than just a few years ago.

I also notice ATV's in places they 'should' seem out of place. We live in a subdivision ( :oops: ) and in this one, and the previous one we lived in as well, at least a couple folks have ATV's....actually SEVERAL have ATV's, but at least a couple who have them, ride them around the subdivision. And FAST. I found tracks in my yard a few months back where they cut through. Before we moved in, a fence behind our property was mowed down by a guy on an ATV who was using a drainage ditch as a 'mud bog' and lost control. It knocked a hole in the common subdivision fence, as well as the corner of my neighbors fence. His 3 dogs got out. Luckily, they were retrieved before they got too far.

So....this ATV issue goes beyond wilderness conservation. There is a serious need for licensure and education....but it just isn't happening....

[Scott Brady]

Acting like a fool and a jerk is not a class issue.

For the most part, that is true.

However, nearly all of the offenders on ATV's I find are most certainly from another class. "classless" :)

And don't think that I am associating money with anything related to education and success. My definition of all things related to wealth, knowledge and success have all been entirely redefined in the last few years. i.e., someone on a small sail boat in the Sea of Cortez that only graduated from high school, yet reads daily and speaks three languages and has travelled the globe is more than wealthy and successful in my mind.

And yes, I do associate the Yahoos with Walmart, and I will make no apologies for that. If anyone that shopped there even spent ten minutes researching the negative impact that chain has had on our country, small towns, packaging trash, death of the mom and pop stores, complete loss of an entire retail segment, and nearly complete funding of a communist military that we will likely fight in the future, one would never step foot into that place again. The people that run that empire, the people that support it and the garbage packaged as products are all extreme warning signs of things to come for our country. Yet most bury their head in the sand and say, give me another $3.99 toy for my kid, or $7.99 FRS radio, or $14.98 dog food made in China.

I don't want to go more into that, as it will quickly slide into political debate. That is just my little rant before coffee this morning, so take it with a grain of salt (Made in North America Salt, purchased from a locally owned grocer, of course) :shakin:

[Martyn]

I see lots of talk of ATV control, limits and training of hunters, even suggestions of Eugenics to help the situation. Nothing on gun control.

Seems a little unreasonable to suggest we place limitations upon everything else and allow the weapons to remain at liberty ???

I would have thought that reasonably minded people such as ourselves, even the pro hunters and NRA members would see that this is part of the equation. Or is it so sacred a subject that we dare not bring it up?

[Mike S]

Martyn

Actually it is very rare for someone to be shot or killed in a hunting accident. In these few cases it seems that the gun is not at fault, but the operator that was in error.

I do not think that gun control is an answer to the subject under discussion. That battle has largely been fought over the last 30 years, and where we are now is likely to be the status quo for the near term future.

The problem being discussed here, to me at least, is indicative of a larger social problem. The values associated with learning and earning the privledge of hunting has given way to a sense of entitlement. This seems to be evident in many areas of outdoor activity. This lack of consideration and respect has resulted in closure of free hunting access by many landowners.

ATVs are a symptom of this - I seldom see anyone older than 50 hunting from an ATV. I do see a lot of younger people riding them. It would seem that younger people would better able to walk through the country than an older person. I am over 60, and can easily manage a 10 to 15 mile walk behind my dogs while bird hunting - and I do not at all consider myself as exceptional in this regard. So why do we 'need' ATVs for hunting? I do not think we do, it's just another product that can be sold to a huge market.

[Scott Brady]

Guns already have controls in place, ATVs in AZ do not. Hunters must have a hunting license, and their guns are purchased with specific controls.

I am only suggesting that ATVs MUST have a license plate and be ridden by licensed drivers. That would immediately reduce the problem in AZ.

[Martyn]

Very valid and well though out points, I'm not in disagreement will all of it.

However if you pull everything together the ATV, the hunter, the gun, and add that to a lack of enforcement the situation gets out of hand.

How many of us are likely to confront the owner of an ATV who has just torn up the environment when they are armed with a gun? How many of us are likely to confront a hunter for any reason if they are armed with a gun?

For me it's the intimidation fact of the weapon that is scary. And the fact that gun ownership is not limited to the skilled trained owner, but to anyone who can show they are of age, a resident of a State, and can provide a thumb print (I do realize that regulation are different between the States).

If I am then to believe what I'm being told, that a large segment of the owners of ATV's are beer drinking individuals of low IQ, I think we have a problem.

The lack of confrontation (amicable confrontation) means that an opportunity to inform and enlighten the other party is lost. No dialogue to show the opposite side of the situation occurs. No education takes place. No progress is made.

The registration of the ATV makes sense if you want to report an offense, given they have a registration plate. But this is retribution not education. The education would have to come with the licensing.

[Mike S]

Very valid and well though out points, I'm not in disagreement will all of it.

However if you pull everything together the ATV, the hunter, the gun, and add that to a lack of enforcement the situation gets out of hand.

How many of us are likely to confront the owner of an ATV who has just torn up the environment when they are armed with a gun? How many of us are likely to confront a hunter for any reason if they are armed with a gun?

For me it's the intimidation fact of the weapon that is scary. And the fact that gun ownership is not limited to the skilled trained owner, but to anyone who can show they are of age, a resident of a State, and can provide a thumb print (I do realize that regulation are different between the States).

If I am then to believe what I'm being told, that a large segment of the owners of ATV's are beer drinking individuals of low IQ, I think we have a problem.

The lack of confrontation (amicable confrontation) means that an opportunity to inform and enlighten the other party is lost. No dialogue to show the opposite side of the situation occurs. No education takes place. No progress is made.

The registration of the ATV makes sense if you want to report an offense, given they have a registration plate. But this is retribution not education. The education would have to come with the licensing.
Martyn, I think you have it partl correct. but there are some things left out...

1. FIREARMS - Purchase of a firearm is subject to both state and Federal regulations - and a mandatory wait while a background check is performed - they take a serial number from the gun and proof of residence, citizenship, etc. prior to delivery. The BATF takes compliance by sellers VERY seriously.

2. HUNTING is subject to a different set of state regulations - a license is required. This requires anyone (exceptions according to age by state) to have passed a recognized firearms safety education class - at least one full day of instruction on safe handling, firearms capability, and related laws within the state. This is required to buy a hunting license. The exception is that many states do not require this for hunters buying non-resident licenses, or for persons over a certain age - usually to allow people born before a certain date, WHO ALREADY ARE LICENSED under the law, to continue to be licensed without the requirement. I firmly believe that this is one of the major reasons that deaths form firearms when huntng is so rare.

There is no reason that licensing and education on use and law regarding ATVs should not take place. It does not restrain the right of people to own or use ATVs, but would regulate what seems to be a growing problem in many Western states.

[Jonathan Hanson]

Beilieve me, I'd be all in favor of an IQ test before someone can buy an ATV or a gun, but I don't think that one will fly.

Part of what we're dealing with here is the simple downside of living in a free society. Start down that slope of testing, education, permits, and restrictions, and you wind up in England, where personal freedoms are vanishing (and the crime rate is soaring).

Gun control advocates often point to automobiles as an example of licensing and testing, to which I always simply respond, "And how many licensed drivers do you know who shouldn't be driving?" Licensed drivers kill more people every year than unlicensed gun owners. Bad example.

Actually, I would be totally in favor of a nationwide firearms owner license. You take a course, pass a background check, get fingerprinted, certify at a range that you are competent. Then - that's it, no more restrictions. No magazine capacity limits, no one gun per month purchasing, carry it however you like. Want a full-auto HK MP5? No problem. But that one won't fly either.

I'm afraid that the only way to control much of the behavior we've been discussing is punitive. All of the people involved know that trespassing is wrong. Most know they can't shoot within 1/4 mile of buildings. They know they shouldn't throw Bud Lite cans on the ground. They don't care. You walk up and in your friendly manner point out that littering is rude and they'll laugh at you. Hit 'em with a $500 fine and they stop laughing.

[Suty]

I do not own a ATV, I have hunted and still hunt with those that do....Fortunatly, those that I hunt with are responsible and take care where they tread. However, I must wonder every morning when they fire up all the ATV's and head out, what game they hope to see?? I will stay in camp, sip another good cup of Camp Coffee, pull on my Boots, grab my Longbow,Quiver and head out Walking. Its amazing what you see at a Quiet 3mph vs. a very Noisy 20mph....? Thats right, I do this because I Love Bowhunting and the Outdoors not to see how fast I can get from stand to stand or how much Noise I can make. I now Hunt the Cadena Ranch in S.Tejas, they don't allow ATV"s on their 13,000 Acres. Casadores de Tejas, Suty

[Photog]

I see lots of talk of ATV control, limits and training of hunters, even suggestions of Eugenics to help the situation. Nothing on gun control.

Seems a little unreasonable to suggest we place limitations upon everything else and allow the weapons to remain at liberty ???

I would have thought that reasonably minded people such as ourselves, even the pro hunters and NRA members would see that this is part of the equation. Or is it so sacred a subject that we dare not bring it up?

Martyn,
There are many weapons to hunt with, firearms are but one type. Hunting is not a Right. Gun ownership is a Right (2nd Ammendment). The Right to own firearms is to keep our government under control, and to keep our country safe from invaders. The Bill of Rights are a set of controls on the government, not on the people. Hunting wild game is not the reason for the 2nd Ammendment.

Hunting is not a Right. It is a privilege, like driving a car, ATV, etc. Don't confuse the two issues, just because you may use a firearm while hunting.

If ATV owners, and hunters can not follow the law while engaging in their sports; those priveleges may be severely restricted, or removed.

[Photog]

Jonathan,
It sounds like you live in a very rural area. Would it be safe and legal for you to do target practice on your property?

If so; maybe you could set target against the hill where the trespassers like to sit, and conduct some target practice periodically. This might make your property less appealing to the "hunters".

You could post signs suggesting that there is target shooting and it could be dangerous, right next to the "No Trespassing" signs. Similar to the signs around the Gun Club's property.

[Jonathan Hanson]

We do live in a very rural area. I can shoot from my porch if I feel like it. Roseann and I determined that the next time we had hunters obviously using our watering hole as a focal point, we'd head down to the combat range we have set up in the wash and do a bit of practicing.

[DesertDouglas]

Jonathan--great idea, but make sure you use "Tannerite" targets.

[Photog]

Does a "Tannerite" target have a negative effect on trespassing hunters.

Edit: link (http://www.tannerite.com/) I now understand.:violent-smiley-031:

[Jonathan Hanson]

Oh yeah:

http://www.jandrhanson.com/jh/Tannerite1.jpg

http://www.jandrhanson.com/jh/Tannerite2.jpg

[calamaridog]

I see lots of talk of ATV control, limits and training of hunters, even suggestions of Eugenics to help the situation. Nothing on gun control.

Seems a little unreasonable to suggest we place limitations upon everything else and allow the weapons to remain at liberty ???

I would have thought that reasonably minded people such as ourselves, even the pro hunters and NRA members would see that this is part of the equation. Or is it so sacred a subject that we dare not bring it up?

I think reasonably minded people realize this issue has absolutely nothing to do with gun control. The types of guns being used for hunting are NOT even the types of guns being considered for gun control.

I have no issue discussing the idea of gun control where it applies.

[calamaridog]

I was raised on hunting and fishing and to respect the sport, the weapons, the surroundings and the animals you take...but I am continually depressed at how little common sense and respect go into these activities.

I think Dan hit the nail on the 'ol head right here.

This is an issue of outdoor ethics and education.

[Mike S]

Jonathan, I think they might appreciate the double "WOP" of that .375 H&H. Would be a nice attention getter.

[BigAl]

Well, this thread just got interesting:)

Oh yeah:
http://www.jandrhanson.com/jh/Tannerite2.jpg

[Haggis]

Registration for all ATVs is the obvious first answer. Here's a statistic to scare you:

The number of titled all-terrain vehicles in Arizona went from 51,000 in December 1998 to more than 230,000 in July 2006.

As far as ATV registration goes, just remember that although we have had the registration system for approximately 8 years, I'm online complaining about ATVs. It's darn hard to get a tag plate off a trespassing ATV that's careening away at thirty mph throwing muck and dust up in its wake. I don't have any idea if or how much PAs registration system has helped with ATV trespass but it's put more money into the insurance industry.

Jonathan, the ridge that these "sportsman" are using to glass your waterhole, is it on your property? Can you do anthing to make it unuseable to them? Plant a cacti garden? Raise a visual break of shrubbery or fencing that will impair their useage of that spot? Install razor wire and unexploded ordinance signs? Or is the trespass to widespread for such tactics to work? It's to hard to enjoy life when your on guard duty all the time.

[Martyn]

I think reasonably minded people realize this issue has absolutely nothing to do with gun control. The types of guns being used for hunting are NOT even the types of guns being considered for gun control.

I have no issue discussing the idea of gun control where it applies.

I guess our ideas on gun control and where it applies are miles apart.

My question would be why not control the guns used for hunting? It may keep them out of the hands of the "ATV driving, environment bashing, beer swilling, low IQ, hunters" that I have been hearing about. Shouldn't effect the law abiding skilled hunters.

[1leglance]

I try to be a person of solutions...
These ideas are based on not having seen your property but on just what you 2 have said here.....if anything pops into my head (lots of empty space there) once I see your place in dec I will chime in again...

-If there is a place that folks are at all the time I would post a sign stating there is a house within illegal shooting range and any shots fired will be assumed to be intentional and may be responded to with deadly force.
-Is there any way to change the landscape of the area the hunters favor to make it less appealing for them but still "natural" ?
-Since a hunter wants to be quiet and stealthy and not have game disturbed then I would walk towards them shouting "don't shoot, hiker present" and maybe an airhorn so that they realize you are trying to be safe as you approach (and of course that spot is no good for hunting now) then have your talk with them...Just so you know this is private property and no hunting, our house is near, wife and I hike alot and don't want to get shot and oh by the way what is your name in case anything bad happens.
- Check the laws on trespassing and your obligations & rights to keep folks off your land.
- Talk with your county sheriff, game & fish and every other agency about your "fear for your life" (a legal phrase) in these situations and ask for phone numbers you can call if someone is spotted on your land and scoping your house.

Honestly I have found that keeping, my cool, helping them see the safety side and "you wouldn't want to be the person who killed someone" and lastly and often most importantly I introduce myself by name and ask their name at the beginning and use thier name frequently since that takes it out of confrontational to educational...I hope...not always. There are those folks who will bluster and in your case since it is your land you can just stay there, talk make noise, write down info about them and their weapons (in case of a shooting), thier rigs...a nice thing to note is tires and tell them "in case of property damage it is important to note your tire)...

I you don't have/want a fence then frequent signs...

That is all off the top of my head...making it NOT the place to be is a form of changing things, and good luck.

[Jonathan Hanson]

The ridge in question (in the last couple of incidents) is not on our property, but on the private property of another, absentee, owner. I'd like to contact him and find out if we can have a loose sort of power of attorney to go tell trespassers to leave.

The spot is less than 200 yards from our house, and thus well within illegal shooting range - if someone shoots. The hunters we see on the public land around our place, whithin 1/4 mile but not actually shooting, are violating no law except common courtesy and that of fair chase.

I'd rather not debate gun control here, but anyone who thinks keeping firearms out of the hands of private citizens will reduce crime should read this:

http://www.reason.com/news/show/28582.html

It's not the guns, it's the society.

[DesertRose]

The issue here is ATVs, not guns - I'm not bothered by these guys having guns. I try to keep perspective here - the likelihood of us getting shot by them is infinitely small. The likelihood of us getting killed on Highway 86 driving to Tucson is very large - do I want to ban or more strictly control the licensing of drivers around here? No. I don't believe we can control people with laws. We have too many laws about stupid behavior - seatbelt laws, cell phone laws, now smoking-in-cars-with-children laws - that can't be enforced anyway. And most of the scary people out our way who do have guns are the meth lab people and the drug smugglers - who are here illegally and have guns, and no laws stop them. I just don't see banning or further controlling as a way to solve anything. Drugs are as controlled as they can be. It doesn't stop people using them. Okay, enough.

So, to get back to the right subject: it's a behavior issue that I think is best solved the way Lance is suggesting, that is positive education - directly.

I'll admit most the slobs are actually nice guys who are just thoughtless. I'll try it next time if I can get close. (Note: I do have little patience for the older ones who are just careless/thoughtless than I do for the teens and 20-somethings who tear around at high speed joyriding - that's what most of us did at that age - I remember some dumb stuff we did both on Honda 90s and on horseback that probably pissed some neighbors off pretty good!).

Signs: already plenty in place, they are largely ignored out here, even by people you'd think would know better (one major problem: there's this incredibly ridiculous notion that dry washes are public right of way - some stupid holdout from a 100-year-old "navigable waterways" law that was used to make the lower Colorado River and the Verde accessible for moving around logs and commodities to the gulf or rail access). So we have bozos saying "well you can't keep us out of this wash (which goes right by the house) - it's public" - not! And in Pima County it's illegal to drive in washes.

Education, then.

Far more important here is that we don't want hunting or other 4WD activities banned because the visible majority are causing others to look to ban things.

On education: Today, Jonathan and I are taking time out of a very very busy week to have lunch with 2 guys who work for and with an organization that normally we are loathe to support - I don't want to name it, but they are very litigious and powerful here - because they are putting forth legislation - a law, mind you - that would further restrict what hunters can do. We want to talk with them about why they are not working on education rather than litigation.

Stay tuned.

[Hltoppr]

On education: Today, Jonathan and I are taking time out of a very very busy week to have lunch with 2 guys who work for and with an organization that normally we are loathe to support - I don't want to name it, but they are very litigious and powerful here - because they are putting forth legislation - a law, mind you - that would further restrict what hunters can do. We want to talk with them about why they are not working on education rather than litigation.

Stay tuned.

Good luck with that guys....:chowtime:

-H-

[Mike S]

...My question would be why not control the guns used for hunting? It may keep them out of the hands of the "ATV driving, environment bashing, beer swilling, low IQ, hunters" that I have been hearing about. Shouldn't effect the law abiding skilled hunters.

Martyn. I would be very hard to draw a line. Impossible to accept that our legislators could create, or our government would administer any such laws intelligently. Really.

"I am from the goverment, and I'm here to help you." The second biggest lie ever told. We all know what the first one is...

[Martyn]

Martyn. I would be very hard to draw a line. Impossible to accept that our legislators could create, or our government would administer any such laws intelligently. Really.

"I am from the goverment, and I'm here to help you." The second biggest lie ever told. We all know what the first one is...

Mike

It seems that guns are a sacred topic that no one is really willing to discuss. It's part of the problem here but it's much more convenient to talk about the person rather than the gun.

I laugh at myself, my stupidity for thinking that such a discussion could really take place in a system where ownership of a gun is a right and citizenship a privilege.

There is no discussion to be had, no matter what is said the right of ownership is enshrined.

Oh well, it's Thanksgiving Eve I must have something I need to do. Everyone enjoy your holiday with friends and family.

[ntsqd]

snippage.....
Martyn. I would be very hard to draw a line. Impossible to accept that our legislators could create, or our government would administer any such laws intelligently. Really.
On that note, from a recent email sent to me:


Click here to read this story online:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1121/p25s09-usju.html

Headline: U.S. Supreme Court takes up gun-rights case
Byline: Warren Richey Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
Date: 11/21/2007
Washington - The US Supreme Court has agreed to examine one of the
most disputed provisions of the Constitution – the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

On Tuesday, the justices announced they will take up an appeal involving the constitutionality of a Washington, D.C., law that bans the use or possession of all handguns.

The case is expected to make guns a key issue in next year's presidential and congressional elections, with the high court likely to hand down a decision in late June – four months before voters go to the polls.

Analysts are calling it political dynamite.

"This will be one of the biggest decisions ever to come down at that part of the political schedule," says Paul Helmke, president of the Washington-based Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

"For the first time in history we could get a definitive ruling on what the Second Amendment really means," adds Dave Workman, an editor at Gun Week in Bellevue, Wash. "Gun rights is going to become a centerpiece of the 2008 presidential race, whether these guys like it or not."

The case, District of Columbia v. Heller, will take the justices back to the founding of the republic to the speeches and writings of the framers themselves in an effort to decode a constitutional enigma that has divided appeals court judges and the nation's most distinguished legal scholars.

The potential landmark case is the first time since 1939 that the Supreme Court will confront whether the Second Amendment protects an individual's right of gun ownership or merely a collective right to keep and bear arms while serving in a state militia.

The answer is important because it could set the ground rules for gun-control laws across the country. If the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, it will limit government efforts to restrict the prevalence of guns among law-abiding citizens. Gun-control efforts would have to be reasonably related to a government interest, and entire categories of firearms – like handguns – could not be banned.

In contrast, if the right to keep and bear arms is a collective right exercised solely for the purpose of serving in a state militia, individual gun owners could not claim the protection of the Constitution against gun-control laws regulating the private use of firearms.

The Second Amendment reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Some analysts read the amendment as providing for an armed populace and say the first clause is an explanatory statement of the necessity of having an effective military force at the state level – independent of the national government.

Other analysts see the first clause limiting the scope of the right to possess and use weapons to enrolled service in a state-regulated militia.

The Founding Fathers didn't simply write the Constitution. They also had to sell it to reluctant state residents who were fearful that the army of the national government might become as oppressive as the British military. The Second Amendment seeks to answer that fear.

Under the new government, each of the states would retain their ability to organize their own militia. The basic building block of the militia was an able-bodied citizen who reported for state military service, sometimes with his own military-grade weapon.

At issue in the Heller case is to what extent the Second Amendment applies to the private possession of guns in a modern American city. A federal appeals court in March struck down Washington's handgun ban because it violated what the court said was an individual right to firearms. The city is asking the Supreme Court to overturn the appeals court's 2-to-1 decision.

"This is the first time in the nation's history that a federal appellate court has invoked the Second Amendment to strike down any gun control law," writes the city's Solicitor General Todd Kim in his brief to the court.

Nine other federal appeals courts and the highest local court in Washington have declined to embrace an individual-rights view of the Second Amendment, Mr. Kim writes. The decision "drastically departs from the mainstream of American jurisprudence," he says.

"Only this court can resolve these conflicts about the central meaning of the Second Amendment," Kim's brief says. It adds that the issue is "quite literally a matter of life and death" because of the dangers posed by handguns.

The case arose after Dick Heller, a security guard, sued the city for allegedly violating his Second Amendment rights when police officials refused to issue a license to allow Mr. Heller to keep a handgun in his home for protection.

Under a 1976 law, the city allows only disassembled or locked rifles and shotguns. All handguns are illegal.

Heller and a group of other city residents sued, claiming the handgun ban and other city gun restrictions are unconstitutional. The appeals court agreed.

Even though they won, Heller's lawyers were also urging the Supreme Court to take up the gun case and rule in a way that establishes a national precedent upholding an individual right to keep and bear arms.

They dispute the city's characterization of the state of the law. Two federal appeals courts and at least 10 state appellate courts have upheld individual gun rights, says Heller's lawyer, Alan Gura, in his brief to the court.

"Considering the Second Amendment's text, the overwhelming weight of scholarship, the long history of judicial enforcement of the Second Amendment and its state analogs, and the consistent characterization of the Second Amendment by this court," Mr. Gura writes, "it is the 'collective rights' theory, not the individual right to arms, that departs from mainstream American jurisprudence."

Gura responds to the city's argument that its handgun ban is a matter of life and death with statistics that he says show criminals have been able to easily circumvent the ban. "Even were the city's gun ban effective in reducing crime, which it certainly does not appear to have been, it would still be unconstitutional," Gura writes.

In agreeing to take up the Heller case, the court rejected questions posed by both sides in the litigation and wrote its own question. The question: "Whether the following provisions [three sections of the D.C. gun law] violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?"

[calamaridog]

Let us not talk about gun control in this thread. We can have a meaninful dialogue about the issues in another thread. The Supreme Court agreed to take up the issue as ntqsd pointed out:

http://expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9512

[Mike S]

Mike

It seems that guns are a sacred topic that no one is really willing to discuss. It's part of the problem here but it's much more convenient to talk about the person rather than the gun.

I laugh at myself, my stupidity for thinking that such a discussion could really take place in a system where ownership of a gun is a right and citizenship a privilege.

There is no discussion to be had, no matter what is said the right of ownership is enshrined.

Martyn - I think we ARE discussing it. Just no one is agreeing with you yet.

Yes, the right to ownership of firearms is 'enshrined' in the Bill Of Rights - in the Second Amandment to the Constitution, and provides the following:

A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

This is a prohibition against the government infringing a fundamental right that was established by the framers of the Constitution. This right is as basic to Americans as the right to freedom of religion or freedom of speech. It is not something that may be tossed lightly aside because some people find it inconvenient You might as well discuss tossing freedom of speech out the window because you don't like the content or language used in a public communication.

And no, I am not an NRA member or a survivalist hiding in the Idaho back country.

I have seen a number of countries where a few licensed citizens are licensed to have firearms, and thousands of unlicensed crimnals own them as well. In the UK these regulations are becoming ever more restrictive, while at the same time, violent (gun) crime is soaring. I believe that an armed society is a polite society. You are guaranteed the right to disagree by the same Constitution that protects my right to own a firearm, if I so choose.

I would be happy to move this discussion to another thread, if you wish to begin one.

[Haggis]

The ridge in question (in the last couple of incidents) is not on our property, but on the private property of another, absentee, owner. I'd like to contact him and find out if we can have a loose sort of power of attorney to go tell trespassers to leave.

You might want to see about leasing the hunting rights to your neighbors property, that would give you the legal jurisdiction to post the property yourselves and to run folks off. Just make sure you know your neighbors mind well, because it might give him the notion to bid off the hunting rights to the highest bidder. You might just be able to work out a lease for just the notion of monitoring his land for vandalism for him. We have some of our timberland leased to some hunting groups for next to nothing just so there are some extra eyes on the properties for timber theft and ATV trespass.

[Martyn]

Martyn - I think we ARE discussing it. Just no one is agreeing with you yet.

Yes, the right to ownership of firearms is 'enshrined' in the Bill Of Rights - in the Second Amandment to the Constitution, and provides the following:

A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

This is a prohibition against the government infringing a fundamental right that was established by the framers of the Constitution. This right is as basic to Americans as the right to freedom of religion or freedom of speech. It is not something that may be tossed lightly aside because some people find it inconvenient You might as well discuss tossing freedom of speech out the window because you don't like the content or language used in a public communication.

And no, I am not an NRA member or a survivalist hiding in the Idaho back country.

I have seen a number of countries where a few licensed citizens are licensed to have firearms, and thousands of unlicensed crimnals own them as well. In the UK these regulations are becoming ever more restrictive, while at the same time, violent (gun) crime is soaring. I believe that an armed society is a polite society. You are guaranteed the right to disagree by the same Constitution that protects my right to own a firearm, if I so choose.

I would be happy to move this discussion to another thread, if you wish to begin one.

Mike, I'm sorry I should have been clearer.

I do believe you and I were discussing the issue, others don't wish to really discuss it.

I'm not looking for agreement with my view point, I'm asking perhaps too much, asking that people who love guns and hunting reflect on the issue and may be ask themselves if guns in society haven't become overwhelming.

I'm also asking that they read your quote " A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" and research the historical context of the time the amendment was made. And ask themselves how it is relevant today.

They are hard questions because if you love guns, why would you ever question any of it? You are in a position of power, the law backs you up. Sometimes you just have to question your fundamental beliefs to make sure you are on the right track.

But it's OK I'm still laughing at myself! I really don't have much to add beyond that.

[Mike S]

Looking for the archaic form and meaning of the word miltia, I found this interesting citation -

"I ask, Sir, What is the militia? It is the whole people...To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
--George Mason (One of the framers of the U.S. Constitution)

In archaic useage, the 'militia' is actually all citizens who atand ready to assemble, under the control of the state, and defend the state or their property. The state provided a core of trained (at some level) officers to command the militia groups. In essence, a civilian army, which has been he tradition in the United States all through it's history. WWII was fought by the US with a civilian army.

I am not a constitutional scholar by any means. The Amendment is clearly a recognition of the value in having the people armed. In fact, it was mandatory for many years that all men from 18 to 50 to be armed. This was also true in England, and began around the time of Henry VIII, but was was contnued there.

Even when I was a boy the Army maintained a Department of Civilian Marksmanship which supplied and promoted the use of firearms to civilian organizations interested in participating. So this 'armed citizenry' idea has a long history in the US.

To the issue of gun control... should the people be free to own firearms? I think yes, subject to the limitations of the law. There are many regulations governing who may purchase firearms, what type of firearms may be purchased, how they may be purchased, how purchase records are to be kept, how the weapons must be secured, etc.

Likewise there are laws governing the transportatio, carrying, use and abuse of firearms. If these laws were completely enforced, no criminals would be armed, and anyone using a firearm in a feloneous manner would be sent to prison.

The fact is, however, that criminals will always be armed. The question is -- will the people be in a position to defend themselves against the criminals? If an intruder breaks into my home, or threatens me with deadly force, I am within my rights to defend myself - with any weapon that comes to hand. It happens that I prefer a Colt .45 ACP pistol for this task, rather than a kitchen knife or a baseball bat. The principal of deadly force is to counter with an equal or greater force.

Using a firearm against another person - no matter the provocation - is a very serious matter. But so is murder, rape, and mayhem. If there was no violent crime in the world, we would not be having a debate about gun control, because there would be no threat from criminals and the illegal use of firearms.

That summarizes my thoughts on the subject.

[Scenic WonderRunner]

I've scanned this thread.........but not read the whole thing.

But...........

I'm starting to think that a Video Camera..........Might be your Best Weapon!..............:REOutArchery02:

I would be furious!......and I would also want proof!

Because I would be making plenty of phone calls!


How about a video camera in your hands.....and an AR15 over your shoulder!:REOutShootinghunter :ar15: :costumed-smiley-007



.

[DesertRose]

I've scanned this thread.........but not read the whole thing.

But...........

I'm starting to think that a Video Camera..........Might be your Best Weapon!..............:REOutArchery02:

I would be furious!......and I would also want proof!

Because I would be making plenty of phone calls!


How about a video camera in your hands.....and an AR15 over your shoulder!:REOutShootinghunter :ar15: :costumed-smiley-007



.

Great idea - we've thought of it. But ATVs are unlicensed here. Absolutely no way to find out who they are. Two years and counting to try to pass the new Copper Sticker to license these things . . . being blocked by coalitions of 4WD groups. Again, people afraid of "control".

We are good trackers (we teach tracking) and I have several times tracked back ATV tires to camps or trucks. That helps.

The Copper Sticker will be a great thing, if it ever happens.

[DesertRose]

Good luck with that guys....:chowtime:

-H-

The guy from the Center for Biological Diversity never showed up. Never emailed me back to say sorry. Never called. (Despite a confirmation email sent Monday that he'd see us there.) This is the organization that is going to be pushing to ban the use/sale of lead ammunition in Arizona because condors in northern Arizona are apparently dying because they are ingesting lead from carcasses. We feel that banning will piss off mainstream hunters even more about conservation, and that education and local restrictions (like just in condor country?) would be better.

So much for reaching out. Cynical me thinks that the Center makes too much money on publicity for things like this - their constituency does not WANT them to sit at tables with the "bad guys." They WANT them to use the big L stick (litigation, legislation) to beat them. But I'm just cynical from too many years in this biz.

We had a nice chat and lunch with our other friend (who does not work for the Center).

Hoping to keep working together with him on outreach, and also getting a real conservation hunter appointed to the AZ Game & Fish Commission - a spot is open.

[Jonathan Hanson]

Martyn, I only wrote that I didn't want to debate gun control here because I was trying to keep the subject on topic. However, you obviously feel that gun ownership is an intrinsic part of the problem, and that's completely fair.

I also don't normally like to debate gun control because I've found it a quick way to destroy friendships, and I certainly would never wish to do that with you.

The reason I think debating gun control ruins friendships is that it is not a logical debate, it is an emotional one. I have found that most people who are against private gun ownership are not that way because they have examined evidence and concluded that private gun ownership correlates to higher crime (there is no such evidence, as pretty well proved by the link I posted). They are that way simply because they do not like guns and therefore do not wish anyone to have them. That's okay, too, but it doesn't foster a classical, logical debate, only argument.

If we are to debate violent crime, we need to debate the society, not its inanimate tools. Just as if we were to debate drunken driving we would discuss the root causes of alcohol abuse, not whether we should ban cars.

[Martyn]

Martyn, I only wrote that I didn't want to debate gun control here because I was trying to keep the subject on topic. However, you obviously feel that gun ownership is an intrinsic part of the problem, and that's completely fair.

I also don't normally like to debate gun control because I've found it a quick way to destroy friendships, and I certainly would never wish to do that with you.

The reason I think debating gun control ruins friendships is that it is not a logical debate, it is an emotional one. I have found that most people who are against private gun ownership are not that way because they have examined evidence and concluded that private gun ownership correlates to higher crime (there is no such evidence, as pretty well proved by the link I posted). They are that way simply because they do not like guns and therefore do not wish anyone to have them. That's okay, too, but it doesn't foster a classical, logical debate, only argument.

If we are to debate violent crime, we need to debate the society, not its inanimate tools. Just as if we were to debate drunken driving we would discuss the root causes of alcohol abuse, not whether we should ban cars.

Jonathan

First let me say that I'm not about to lose a friendship because of a debate. My personal views on a host of subjects are so "off base" that if I did that I'd only have imaginary friends.

I conclude that any discussion of gun regulation or control can't really take place on a forum. Most people have their positions and don't want to move from them. As you say it's an emotional position for most people.

I’m disappointed that the art of debate seems to be lost, or is losing ground, and people are not exercising there mental abilities to defend or attack a position. Rather they spew forth half truths they heard from someone else, facts that have not been verified, or straight propaganda.

I'm interested in a persons rational on why they think a certain way, and I hope that by posing a different point of view I can broaden their perspective.

I learn nothing from the gun owner who states I own a gun, I have the right to own a gun, and the only way you will get it away from me is over my dead body. Accompany that with a picture of their gun collection.

I'm also not against gun ownership, I think they are good tools in the right hands. I do feel that there are many legal gun owners who probably shouldn’t own a weapon of any description, and I don’t think that everyone needs to own a gun.

I am surprised by peoples paranoia and fear when it comes to justifying their ownership of a gun. I'm also surprised by the number of anarchists among us.

Oh well, maybe this is a debate we can have around a campfire as we share each others beers.

[Suty]

Jonathan

First let me say that I'm not about to lose a friendship because of a debate. My personal views on a host of subjects are so "off base" that if I did that I'd only have imaginary friends.

I conclude that any discussion of gun regulation or control can't really take place on a forum. Most people have their positions and don't want to move from them. As you say it's an emotional position for most people.

I’m disappointed that the art of debate seems to be lost, or is losing ground, and people are not exercising there mental abilities to defend or attack a position. Rather they spew forth half truths they heard from someone else, facts that have not been verified, or straight propaganda.

I'm interested in a persons rational on why they think a certain way, and I hope that by posing a different point of view I can broaden their perspective.

I learn nothing from the gun owner who states I own a gun, I have the right to own a gun, and the only way you will get it away from me is over my dead body. Accompany that with a picture of their gun collection.

I'm also not against gun ownership, I think they are good tools in the right hands. I do feel that there are many legal gun owners who probably shouldn’t own a weapon of any description, and I don’t think that everyone needs to own a gun.

I am surprised by peoples paranoia and fear when it comes to justifying their ownership of a gun. I'm also surprised by the number of anarchists among us.

Oh well, maybe this is a debate we can have around a campfire as we share each others beers.



I Own 2 Bows, does that make me a anarchist ? or does that only come with Gun ownership.....:) .......:REOutArchery02: .. Tu Compadres, Suty

[jeffryscott]

to get back on topic, my first job out of college was in NW Colorado. Hunting season was like Christmas is to much of the rest of the nation's economy. We did a special hunting section each year at the newspaper, so I quickly became familiar with both good and bad. A co-workers father was a longtime game warden and one of his favorite stories was the time he was at lunch, saw a car fly by with a couple of carcasses tied to the hood. He left lunch, pulled the out-of-state licensed car over to chat. The hunters were very impressed with their game and were eager to discuss the "deer." When asked how they knew they were "deer" the gentlemen pulled out a black and white line drawing from a dictionary showing a deer. The game warden cited them and confiscated the pronghorn antelope.

I heard so many stories like that from him, it scared me off of hunting and it has only gotten worse. The places I see people shooting up in Redington (over hills, into valleys) is terrifying. Education is key, but people are so resistant of it. And I'm certainly not going to approach them to suggest they shoot elsewhere when I have kids in the car.

[Scott Brady]

Martyn,

In my experience, it comes down to nature vs. nurture... You were nurtured to dislike guns; it is part of your upbringing and geopolitical framework. For me, it is the opposite. I was raised around weapons, trained to shoot them in the military and have had formal training to use them in the defense of my family. I am completely comfortable handling a gun. I rarely carry one, but if I do, I will not hesitate to use it in the defense of my wife.

Guns are like religion, it reflects your nurturing. If you were born in Syria, you would likely be Muslim, India - Hindu, England - Christian.

And as with most things, the key is to find the truth, somewhere between the two extremes.

[grouch]

I learn nothing from the gun owner who states I own a gun, I have the right to own a gun, and the only way you will get it away from me is over my dead body. Accompany that with a picture of their gun collection.
With all due respect Martyn, you have learned something. You learned that there are people that value their civil rights more than they value a debate of ideas. You also learned that to some people there is something worth fighting and possibly dying for. Guns are more than tools, they are extensions of ones personality and intentions. Any Texan will tell you, an armed society is a polite society.

[Ursidae69]

And as with most things, the key is to find the truth, somewhere between the two extremes.

That is the point I think, nobody will discuss the middle ground because they are entrenched. I grew up with hunting and guns. I have pictures of me with my first rifle and I cannot hold it up without my Dad's help at 6 years old! LOL... Point is, I was nurtured with guns in my family and yet today I find many reasons to move to a middle ground. Nobody wants to talk about it though, it's simply the same old "Nobody will take my guns..." stuff which is not the intent of a debate.

[Ursidae69]

With all due respect Martyn, you have learned something. You learned that there are people that value their civil rights more than they value a debate of ideas. You also learned that to some people there is something worth fighting and possibly dying for. Guns are more than tools, they are extensions of ones personality and intentions. Any Texan will tell you, an armed society is a polite society.


That is just inflammatory dood, discussing something is harmless and meaningful.

EDIT: I take that back 7wt, if that is your reason for not debating it, then that is your reason, and that is not inflammatory. I just wish more people would be willing to discuss the 2nd amendment more. I don't want it gone, but I think some compromise should happen. But, I'll get pounded for it, so like others have said, this is not the time and place for that debate. My Dad always told me, never talk religion or politics with your friends if you want to keep them. Good advice from an old cowboy I think. Anyway, back to bashing ATVs, I was enjoying that aspect of this thread. :peepwall:

[grouch]

That is just inflammatory dood, discussing something is harmless and meaningful.

EDIT: I take that back 7wt, if that is your reason for not debating it, then that is your reason, and that is not inflammatory. I just wish more people would be willing to discuss the 2nd amendment more. I don't want it gone, but I think some compromise should happen. But, I'll get pounded for it, so like others have said, this is not the time and place for that debate. My Dad always told me, never talk religion or politics with your friends if you want to keep them. Good advice from an old cowboy I think. Anyway, back to bashing ATVs, I was enjoying that aspect of this thread. :peepwall:
Not inflammatory at all. I am sorry you feel that way. I did not say I was one of them and that is where you made your mistake. I will discuss it with anyone that will honestly entertain my views. I used to belong to a shooting club when I was in school. I shot competitively for spot and fellowship. I know plenty of people who have no interest in discussing amending the 2nd. To them, the 2nd amendment does not give a person the right to bear arms and I fully agree with that. That is a God given right that the framers wanted to protect by writing an amendment to prohibit the government from taking away such rights. The only comment that was inflammatory was the "dood" comment that you seemed to have tried to take back or diminish without actually doing so. Examine you motives and you will agree it was an attempt to talk down to me. That being said, I am not offended in the least.

My personal lifestyle has outgrown the gun thing for the most part. I still love to shoot but the severe loss of hearing has taken away my zeal. I cannot be around most firearms anymore because I am unwilling to damage my ears anymore. I have an 85db (left) and a 95 (right) db hearing loss at 4000Hz for the audiologist out there. You know how you ears ring after a day at the range? Mine have never stopped ringing, it is with me always from here on out. That being said, I am still going to try to preserve your right to own and bear arms, regardless if you choose to do so.

Out of curiosity, what compromise in the 2nd are you seeking? What would help you feel better about someone owning a gun? The problem is not the people who abide by the laws. The problem is with those who break the laws so any additional law would be more for them to break. The only compromise I am interested in is one that would make it easier for people without criminal records to buy firearms. I would also like to see educational programs in school so that children understand that a gun is not a tool in a video game and there are no resets. Vilifying firearms will not make anyone’s life safer. In fact it will only serve to endanger the lives and sovereignty of our nation. Make not mistake, the American way of life is under attack from both within and abroad. Guns are merely another point of division for us to get distracted over while our rights are systematically removed.

[Ursidae69]

I was not talking down to you 7wt, I do not know you personally and would have no basis to do so. I use 'dood' frequently in casual conversation written and verbal. No worries.

I take exception to statements like "an armed society is a polite society..." and would call statements like that 'inflammatory' because there is no way to back that claim up. Additionally, by my personal experiences in my life, I find that statement incorrect. Having lived part of my life in Texas and graduating high school in Texas, I can make that judgement. :) Nothing personal against you, I just disagree with that statement.

[grouch]

I take exception to statements like "an armed society is a polite society..." and would call statements like that 'inflammatory' because there is no way to back that claim up.
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
Robert A. Heinlein

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_A._Heinlein

http://thekeymonk.blogspot.com/2005/11/armed-society-is-polite-society.html

Mr Heinlein makes perfect sense to me. In earlier ages, men carried around rapiers to defend their honor. Later it was dueling pistols. Now is it a keyboard and venom. Seems something is missing if you ask me.

[VikingVince]

"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
Robert A. Heinlein

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_A._Heinlein

http://thekeymonk.blogspot.com/2005/11/armed-society-is-polite-society.html

Mr Heinlein makes perfect sense to me. In earlier ages, men carried around rapiers to defend their honor. Later it was dueling pistols. Now is it a keyboard and venom. Seems something is missing if you ask me.

What's missing are people with good minds who can think beyond quoting a science fiction writer and believing it's credible.

[1leglance]

all this gun talk is well and good and worthy of a seperate thread...
however being a solutions oriented person and with full knowledge that Jonathan & Roseanne might like some ideas on practical things they can do...I would like to ask that this thread come back on topic and any futher gun control talk go to a new thread...

There have been some great ideas...
getting hunting right to the hill so they can keep the other hunters away
posting signs
programing all relevant numbers into phones to call in violantions in real time
talking and educating the offenders
and more I have missed I am sure since I lost track of the solutions with all the control talk.

Lets hear more good practical ideas for all the wise ones out there.....

[Jonathan Hanson]

Thanks, Lance.

We have decided to take a several-pronged approach. First, we know the local Game and Fish officer well, so the next time we have a situation in progress we'll call him. Second, the next time we see someone glassing so close to our house we'll walk over and talk to him, ask him if he knows there's a house within prohibited shooting distance, if he knows he is on private property, and then mention that the deer nearby come into water in our yard two or three times a day even when we're sitting on the porch, and that we're sure shooting such an animal wouldn't meet his definition of fair chase.

But if I catch fat guys throwing beer cans off ATVs while driving through virgin desert, diplomacy is off.

[grouch]

What's missing are people with good minds who can think beyond quoting a science fiction writer and believing it's credible.
So you don't like my point of view. I can respect that but I haven't once attacked anyone here and I don't appreciate your implying that that I haven't thought beyond a quote or that I am lacking a good mind. I was simply pointing out that I was not the originator of the deemed terribly offensive comment. Go ahead and impune the originator all you want, however his profession does not mean he is wrong on the topic. I love how personal attacks come from the "open minded". If you or anyone else want to remove your gloves please PM me and maintain the integrity of this site. Attack the argument, not the person.

[Lost Canadian]

With all due respect Martyn, you have learned something. You learned that there are people that value their civil rights more than they value a debate of ideas.

With all due respect to you 7wt, Civil rights are simply legal rights provided by man, for man. Man is inherently flawed, to suggest that the laws written by men are beyond debate reads like an emotional responce and not one that had been given much thought.

[grouch]

With all due respect to you 7wt, Civil rights are simply legal rights provided by man, for man. Man is inherently flawed, to suggest that the laws written by men are beyond debate reads like an emotional responce and not one that had been given much thought.
Well if you feel that way then you can gladly give you freedom and liberty away, but don't take mine. Again, people who disagree with you may not have thought it out fully but I am not one of those people. I just disagree with you. The only thought not well addressed is the concept that it is possible to disagree with you with out it being emotional like Vince's comment. If you honestly believe without man you would have no rights than you are free to think that way. I know where my rights come from and it sure isn't a bunch of legislators.

Now to actually correct your statement, civil rights are rights acknowledged by man, not given to by man. While man is inherently flawed mainly due to original sin, it doesn't mean that any further debate on previously addressed topics would be correct either. You may not realize it but you are suggesting that there is no absolute truth and all man made laws are subject to the political wind and the whims of man. That is not a world that I want to reside. You may find it comfortable however.

You have to ask yourself why the 2nd amendment was written the way it was. Where did the right come from if the only written record of the concept clearly states that the right shall not be infringed? It doesn't state that it gives you the right because it is understood that that right is pre-existing. So any amendment to the 2nd would have to read that the government has the right to infringe upon your God given rights. Now if you can point out where I have not thought about this please let me know so I can educate myself.

[Lost Canadian]

You placed a great many pejorative assumptions on my words. I simply stated that mans laws, even those entrenched and described as constitutional law should fair game for debate. I never said that the constitutional law of a country should be easily changed, as you implied, only that people should have the freedom to debate its contents.

[grouch]

You placed a great many pejorative assumptions on my words. I simply stated that mans laws, even those entrenched and described as constitutional law should fair game for debate. I never said that the constitutional law of a country should be easily changed, as you implied, only that people should have the freedom to debate its contents.
No, you clearly stated that civil rights were granted by man for man. I even qouted you. Your beliefs that it should be debatable stem from your belief that man grants rights. I did not once imply that any changes in the Constitution would be easy, you did that in order to discount my argument. I stated that it would be open for changed based on political whims, it would still however have to go through proper ratification. It seems as if you are backing off of you stance that man grants rights. That is good because I would hate to point out to you that any right given by man is a right that could be taken away my man.

[Lost Canadian]

No, you clearly stated that civil rights were granted by man for man. I even qouted you. Your beliefs that it should be debatable stem from your belief that man grants rights. I did not once imply that any changes in the Constitution would be easy, you did that in order to discount my argument. I stated that it would be open for changed based on political whims, it would still however have to go through proper ratification. It seems as if you are backing off of you stance that man grants rights. That is good because I would hate to point out to you that any right given by man is a right that could be taken away my man.
I'm not arguing semantics. I said Civil rights are "legal" rights provided by man, for man. I'm not speaking of natural rights.

[grouch]

I'm not arguing semantics. I said Civil rights are "legal" rights provided by man, for man. I'm not speaking of natural rights.
Maybe that is where our disagreement comes from. I believe that gun ownership is a natural right. I believe the framers felt this way too based on the language used. That means that any argument to limit said right is an argument not worth having and not open for debate. As far as a mental exercise I am willing to debate it all day long, as long as it doesn't lead to an actual loss of personal rights.

Try taking this guys guns away....:gunt: and by this guy I mean the cartoon guy, not me.

[Lost Canadian]

You would have had no argument from me had you not said "that people value their civil rights more than they value a debate of ideas." It's peoples visions and ideas that lead to the introduction and creation of civil (legal) rights in the first place. Civil right is designed to provide protections and privileges to citizens through law.

Anyway, sorry for taking this way way way off topic.

Back to the original post.

[DesertRose]

What's missing are people with good minds who can think beyond quoting a science fiction writer and believing it's credible.

Whoa, guys - this is getting personal and unkind.

Lance, THANK YOU for trying yet again to get us off the gun issue! But I suspect it won't work. :) :gunt:

[Jonathan Hanson]

7WT and Lost Canadian, I think you two did a pretty good job on backing off on a debate that always gets heated. But, um, Vince?

Someone actually started a 2nd amendment thread in general. But it seemed to die because no one but the choir was singing.

As Roseann mentioned earlier, this has nothing to do with guns. Does anyone believe that when the bozos we've been discussing go riding without guns that they suddenly don't trespass or litter?

[Desertdude]

I think the hunting community is far too dismissive of this problem, out of fear of alienating "fellow" hunters. I disagree. I believe responsible hunters should be doing everything we can to drive this mutant subspecies extinct. Confront them, photograph them and report them, whatever. Hunting (much like backcountry driving) is under enough pressure from outside groups; we don't need to be giving those groups more ammunition from within our own ranks.

Any thoughts?

So how do you convince/educate others of their self policing rights, if the ground rules seem to have changed from a gentlemen's sport to a free for all ?

[Jonathan Hanson]

Aye, there's the rub.

[Kermit]

I think we need to chip in and get this for Johnathan for Christmas.

http://www.netlinkenterprises.com/prodimages/024-ATV.jpg

http://www.netlinkenterprises.com/prodimages/001-RH.jpg

[Jonathan Hanson]

That thing plus Tannerite. Christmas fun!

[grouch]

That thing plus Tannerite. Christmas fun!
That may just be your solultion, Tannerite. Sprinkle a couple of these around your place and the hunters won't want to hunt exploding deer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue28iK-xChs&feature=related

[snipecatcher]

They do it differently in Texas. They set up a timed feeder to get the deer good and trained then sit in a stand so they can make their 50 yard shot with the new 300 WSM. The one thing they have in common is their desire to leave beer cans and various other discarded stuff. The one thing they don't have in common is in Texas there are very few public hunting lands so what little resource is here gets messed up pretty fast. You problem Mr. Hanson (I checked to avoid the rapier) is the mocrowaive society we live in where everyting has to be easy and quick. I am not sure there is any deffense against it either. There is alot of money to be made off hunting licsenses and sale of this years latest and greates 600 yard flat shooter. What ever happened to fair chase? Actually stalking your prey? Bless Tred Barta's soul for putting the way it should be on TV complete with his failures and all.

We aren't ALL like that, though I would say about 75% of the hunters I know are, and it sickens me. Personally I prefer stalk hunting with my old Enfield, and lately I've gotten into bowhunting. By the way, while high fencing seems to be cheating, and I've thought it was too in the past, I'm starting to discover that most high fenced places are all that bad. My stepbrother witnessed a nice 10 point and a doe jump over the 8' high fence that our neighbor has around his land. We have 70 acres of low fenced land, and do our best to bring in the deer. I'm just happy to be out there, the scenery is beautiful, and watching the critters, whether deer, pigs, raccoons, bugs, anything, is an added bonus. That plus fresh venison!
-Dan

[snipecatcher]

Haha, just saw the hunter Dan action figure. I actually have one of those on the mantle of my fireplace, it was given to me as a Christmas gift last year by a friend.
-Dan

[canucksafari]

I quickly scanned this thread but see it has sure changed subject since the beginning. Personally, I don't see the problems as a hunter issue (or a gun issue). Well, maybe you would be less willing to confront a bunch of drunk yahoos with guns (I wouldn't give them the respect of calling them hunters). Really it is an issue/sympthom of a disposalble society which does not repect people or the environment (private or government). We have the same problem here in certain areas where the younger crowd likes to go and have a blow out in their 4Bs. Problem is that there is a smaller segment of this group that are a bunch of no minds who probably never had to clean up after themselves. They give all wheelers a bad rap because they leave their mark (trash, damaged property, etc.). The good wheelers and the good hunters rarely are recognized, unless they form a group to clean up the other mess and are featured on the news. Bottom line, its not the gun or truck but the person. The more society accepts that type of behaviour in other areas of life the more you will see it in your back yard.

[Flounder]

I don't have anything against hunting in general. I can't do it. I shot a deer when I was 17 and I've felt guilty ever since....poor little fella. :( Many were raised hunting and I can appreciate their enjoyment of it as a sport and a means of putting chops on the table.

There is something disturbing about some hunters. I can't put my finger on it. When I lived in Alaska I met a guy who just beemed with joy when he told me he shot the bear my wife and I spent a few years watching in our nearby meadow. That bear was like a member of our community. We called him Vern. Dead at the amusement of a hunter. What ever. No judgement, just a sad event. It's not like he poached Vern. Someone okay'd Vern's death sentence.

Another guy I know here in Prescott is extremely "well to do." He and his family often take high zoot hunting trips to Africa where he gets to enjoy shooting as many baboons as he can shoot. His accounts of shooting the males defending the females and young are nothing short of horrific. For him it's the killing that gets his jib hoisted. I knew a kid in school that liked to kick dogs for sport.

Hunting is a weird one. You can't distill it down to the act itself as all hunters pull the trigger for different reasons. My buddies in Scotland hunt as a part of the ceremony of it all, and as far as I know haven't shot anything but a hill side in 10 years.

Anyway....those are my unsolicited two cents.

[Scott Brady]

Everyone has different experiences and feeling about it. Some are built to be warriors, killers, whatever (and they usually end up fighting the wars), others want nothing to do with killing. For me, if I had a big bull elk in my scope, I would not pull the trigger. A small cow, which would provide a healthy abundance of game meat, I would. I am not a trophy hunter.

I do love wingshooting though, and absolute joy for me personally, the whole experience of canvas, dogs, fine shotguns owned by my grandfather, etc. accessing a remote field with my overland machine and spending time with friends. The perfect reflection of what I am about.

My uncle Dave once told me:

"When I was a young man, I killed anything that moved. When I was a little older and more successful, I wanted to kill the biggest thing that moved. Now that I am older, I don't want to kill anything at all"

I don't think it would be fair for a non-hunter to judge a conservationist hunter. Hunting is something that is buried deep into some peoples DNA, it is their nature. Nearly everyone eats meat, some just actually do the killing. Killing of food is just part of the human puzzle, being an omnivore.

[big sky trapper]

Everyone has different experiences and feeling about it. Some are built to be warriors, killers, whatever (and they usually end up fighting the wars), others want nothing to do with killing.


I don't think it would be fair for a non-hunter to judge a conservationist hunter. Hunting is something that is buried deep into some peoples DNA, it is their nature. Nearly everyone eats meat, some just actually do the killing. Killing of food is just part of the human puzzle, being an omnivore.



One of the best from this thread ...well said

BST

[mmtoy]

I've never been a "hunter." I played at it when I was young, hunting jackrabbits and aluminum cans with small rifles. While I was a rather unsuccessful hunter, I did grow up slaughtering cows, pigs, chickens, etc. for food. Not for sale, just for the family (mmm... hand salted, home smoked beef...). At some age, I just didn't want to do it any more (hunting or slaughtering). I still eat meat, but I have no interest in being at the first-stage butcher block again.

That out of the way (it seems there's a little bit of a need to explain one's "side" in this discussion, which is too bad...):

I believe the first post has little to do with hunters. It has to do with inconsiderate people who believe they deserve to go wherever they want and do whatever they want, and to hell with the rest of the world. These people are pervasive and end up in every activity I've been involved in (camping, climbing, biking, whatever). Because these particular ones carry a gun and a have this belief, confrontation (whether it's done calmly or not) is dangerous.

How to deal with them is the question, and I don't think it's been well answered here. Perhaps because the question is lost in the pro- and anti-hunter discussion...

[Photog]

I've never been a "hunter." I played at it when I was young, hunting jackrabbits and aluminum cans with small rifles. While I was a rather unsuccessful hunter, I did grow up slaughtering cows, pigs, chickens, etc. for food. Not for sale, just for the family (mmm... hand salted, home smoked beef...). At some age, I just didn't want to do it any more (hunting or slaughtering). I still eat meat, but I have no interest in being at the first-stage butcher block again.

That out of the way (it seems there's a little bit of a need to explain one's "side" in this discussion, which is too bad...):

I believe the first post has little to do with hunters. It has to do with inconsiderate people who believe they deserve to go wherever they want and do whatever they want, and to hell with the rest of the world. These people are pervasive and end up in every activity I've been involved in (camping, climbing, biking, whatever). Because these particular ones carry a gun and a have this belief, confrontation (whether it's done calmly or not) is dangerous.

How to deal with them is the question, and I don't think it's been well answered here. Perhaps because the question is lost in the pro- and anti-hunter discussion...

Excellent point. Too much off-topic discussion on peripheral topics.

THere have been a few posts on the topic, and a few suggested solutions; but they are tough to find now. It does come down to the lack of respect, and how to deal with it.

How would any of you deal with it, outside of hunting season? Trespassing, ATV activity, littering, etc...?

[Streakerfreak]

Excellent point. Too much off-topic discussion on peripheral topics.

THere have been a few posts on the topic, and a few suggested solutions; but they are tough to find now. It does come down to the lack of respect, and how to deal with it.

How would any of you deal with it, outside of hunting season? Trespassing, ATV activity, littering, etc...?

Unfortunately, there is not much you can do with the jerks of the world. There are just too many of them. We just need to keep on moving ahead. Post signs, group cleanups, notify authorities, education, etc. Even if they do not work, that is about all you can do aside from vigilante justice. This leads to other problems. People like this make what would be wonderful clubs like the Sierra club into something that actually does harm. For every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction. In this case, it is one group taking an extreme counteractive response to the other destructive extreme. Educate as much as you can, but there are too many people who think they are god on earth and they can do whatever the hell they want. I always felt it is just a big man thing. People who feel inadequate in some part of there life so they act in such a way to make themselves look like a macho man. When in reality they are just idiots:REOutShootinghunter . If that makes any sense to anyone.

[Kermit]

Excellent point. Too much off-topic discussion on peripheral topics.

THere have been a few posts on the topic, and a few suggested solutions; but they are tough to find now. It does come down to the lack of respect, and how to deal with it.

How would any of you deal with it, outside of hunting season? Trespassing, ATV activity, littering, etc...?

Besides putting up a huge fence, I don't see how you get around it.

The guy on the ATV, probably doesn't see any harm done. Everything is so checker board out here, unless there is a sign it is hard to tell, what land belongs to whom. I have many routes I like to ride on, even if there is a sign you might miss it. Usually the private is stated clearly, I try to give much respect as I can, ride slow, make little dust and noise.


Then there is education, the dealers don't want to do it, it may scare off their customers. I know there were some dealers here in AZ who hired a lobbyist to fight against the Copper Sticker Program, because of fear of loosing money. The Copper Sticker was going to be a good thing, all of the Arizona dirt bike clubs were for it. What do you do when the people (the dealers) who are supposed to on your side, aren't really?

So what do you do? You can try talking to the guys individually, but that usually doesn't go too well...trust me I have tried. People just don't care, they think they have the right, and nothing short of shooting back is going to stop it. Might be able to get through to a few. As a whole, I think it is futile. You can keep telling yourself "If only everybody did so and so..."...or you can tell yourself not sweat the small things.

I have people who love to use my driveway as a turn around, it really drove me nuts, I almost put up a fence or a chain to keep them from doin it. Which would be an expense and a hassel every time I wanted to come and go...so I try not to sweat it.

Just because these guys use ATV's doesn't make them *******s or idiots, sounds to me there are judgements being made. Until you actually sit down and talk with them, how do you know what type of person they are? Just because they don't hunt like a purist, doesn't mean they are in the wrong. Maybe the guy has a heart condition and can't walk like he used to, you never know. My dad liked to hunt, he used to be a damn good bow hunter. But, sometimes life gives you a raw deal, he came down with MS, before he got real bad, he hunted from an ATV, I would go with him, and help him with the carcus, needed a winch to hoist it up in the bed of the ATV. We didn't hunt for sport, we were "purist" used every part of the animal. Just used an ATV to make life a little easier.

As for me, hunting bores the hell out of me. Just so you know...


We had one of these...great for hauling a dead deer.

http://www.travelizmo.com/archives/2007-polaris-sportsman-6x6-atv.jpg

[Scenic WonderRunner]

I have a lot of relatives in Minn. So sometimes I check the local news.

Tonight I ran across this story of a hunters bullet going into a home and into a girls pillow in her bedroom!

http://www.kare11.com/video/player.aspx?aid=58268&sid=270374&bw=hi&cat=2 <~turn on your volume


I don't know how long this link to the video will work....but here ya go.


.

[fjcruzn]

Very interesting thread! Unfortunately, those of us who prescribe to "tread lightly" and other environmentally sound policies and practices are the minority... Yes, I support our collective efforts to "educate" folks, but...

Before I retired I was a NPS Ranger. The political pressure on land management agencies by lobbyist groups, manufactures and large organizations to allow expanded/unrestricted use of public lands is enormous.

This goes hand in hand with the hunters who make "sound shots" at noise in the brush or tresspass on private property. We live in interesting times where respect for others is overshadowed by the "me first" mentality.

cheers,

dale