Return to the Pet Debates Forum

 o
State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishing

Posted by savannarose (My Page) on
Tue, Nov 7, 06 at 12:51

We have an ammendment on our local ballot today re. making hunting and fishing protected rights under the state constituition.
Are there other states doing this also? And is it actually necessary to protect hunting/fishing or just being used as a way for politicians to get votes and recognition? (I've heard both views.) Thanks!


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I dont know your state but there are more than one taking that action. We DO have a right to keep and bear arms(as individuals)(confirmed by the U.S. Attornies general John ashcroft) but hunting is considered a privelege. With the lefties looking to take back control of congress, it is important to take every action immaginable to protect out traditional American way of life. Its imperative to vote. These people will assualt our freedoms as never before, just listen to what they say and believe them.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Thanks for your input. I planned to vote for it today anyway, but had heard the ammendment might be more hype than substance. Appreciate your take on it.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

It is my sincere wish that the "lefties" succeed in changing the course of the status quo. IMHO it is not the "lefties" who are assualting people's freedoms, just listen to the fear that those to the right invent for their convenience and use same to make people think they are safer on the right.

That's the beautiful thing about this Country. We all get to exercise our right to vote. I really hope everone exercises that right today!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

It's unfortunate that the priviledge to fish and hunt could be taken away.I wouldn't be shocked if it happened in the near future. When a country can't even decide if a parent has the right to know if their 10 yr. old is getting an abortion, nothing surprises me.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

My husband and I love to say yes we have the right to bear arms as the consitution states so everyone should have a musket! I don't mind sport hunting and fishing when managed properly, I hate when I see stories about over fishing wiping out certain fish. People act like, it's just fish whats the big deal but they are part of the echo system and when it gets out of balance we all loose.
I do think we need more gun laws to ban all automatic rifles. I just don't see why you need one for hunting. Hand guns for personal protection that are semi-automatic I think are okay but should be regulated more. I hate that a person can walk into a gun show here in AZ and buy anything they want without any waiting period or background check.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

One more thing about fishing that bugs me, is catch and release laws. People act like the endangered fish that they had the joy of ripping out of the water is going to be fine after they have a hook in its mouth. Many of these fish die from shock, because of the experience of being yanked out of the water is too much for them. Sport fishing is fine if the fish is not a threatened species that you can just "catch and release". If your catching something or killing it then it should be eaten not mounted on your wall like people do with swordfish!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

"Protect [our] traditional American way of life"????
Why is that important? Who says hunting is an American tradition? Isn't it a basic instinct that we all have as Homo sapiens? Is it because hunting and fishing might very well be necessary since the righties are doing nothing to protect our food supply from terrorists?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

We are not talking commercial fishing here. At least I didn't think so.There are limits that you are allowed with certain species. If you are breaking laws, then you deserve a hefty fine and possibly jail time. Please be more specific about endangered species and ripping them out of the water. What endangered species specifically?
I'm just glad I grew up in a family where we spent family time on a boat or on shore catching fish (or not).We kept some to eat, some were released. Tell you what, there is nothing better than Walleye fillets after a day on the boat. IMO. Sure miss that.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

QQ - couldn't have said it better.

If you read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the right to bear arms was written at a time when there were no police force protecting citizens and really no functioning bodies of law enforcement and the like. People were left to their own devices in order to protect their property. These people who decide they need to have an automatic weapon for their own protection in their home are nuts. Likely they will be shot with their own gun, or worse, one of their children or a friend of their child will shoot themselves accidentally. See it everynight on the news...

Also, has anyone seen the recent reports regarding the continuing depletion by over-fishing our waters of fish and shellfish, to the point where there may not even be the option of eating same in the future as they will be totally extinct?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Automatic weapons have been banned since circa 1939; you cannot just walk into any gun show in the United States and walk out with a handgun, or any other gun either; enforcement of some of the more than 4oo existing laws pertaining to forearms would be the very best deterrent to crime; The msm(main stream media) only shows how weapons can be used an ill manner as they are anti gun, anti American socialist, elitist, propaganda machines; many more times they are used to protect individuals;. Its quite obvious that some people just dont have a cocept of the Constitution, In actuality the ENTIRE constitution was written before modern mayhem, your argument could be similarly applied to ALL Amendments. Have YOU read the Constitution?? Have you read the Anti Federalist papers?
Sure its an American tradition, a tradition to be enjoyed by all no matter their class, pocketbook, religion, or political persuassion. it wasnt allowed by commoners in Europe, that was reserved for those few whom had title to the land, poaching by the common folk was punishable by death.
Yep, read those articles re: over fishing. We can have rules but they arent always followed by Japan, Iceland, et cetera.
Quirky is correct, hunting / gathering is/was a human instinct/tradition, it still is for many. So is war. BUT, if one is not aware of why hunting/fishing is important, there is not a great deal that can be said in their persuassion.
What should the righties be doing to protect our food supply?? I see a ton of hate and naysayers but they are mighty lean on plans/ideas to make changes.
jenme, what we DONT need is any more gun laws, what we DO need is more enforcement of the 4oo + laws already enacted.
Many fishermen are learning how to handle those fish and return them safely to the water wothout damaging them. We are learning the importance of each species and becoming more educated all the time. Sporstsmen are the #1 conservationists that there are.
I dont feel threatened 1 iota for loss of rights to the right, its the left that scares Hell out of me!
I am troubled by the above mentioned idea of those with guns in the house are likely to be killed by those guns, its just so out of touch with reality it doesnt justify an debate.??


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I agree that unintentional shootings do occur way too often, more and more we see where kids are bringing the guns that had at home to school to go on a rampage. I heard briefly about technology that would allow one person to his gun. I think that this would be great especially since so many people are not responsible about locking up their guns in gun safes like they should. Of course teen kids find ways to get into these too. But it's not just teens that are accidental victims little kids too. I understand that compared to other things that children die from the statistics are really low, until it's a loved one then the numbers don't start to tell the story of the grief. I wish everyone that felt they HAD to own a gun did the right thing and locked them up but I don't think that will ever happen.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Well, the ammendment to protect hunting and fishing rights won easily here in GA.
My kids grew up hunting and fishing, too and all learned to use guns responsibly. We belong to the NRA which has great gun safety classes available.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Be aware, the anti gun crowd scored big Tuesday. So called "common sense" gun legislation is gonna have an easy sail in the House, and in fact some forms passed on Tuesday around the nation. Problem is they only make sense to the anti gun crowd, they are stupid, redundant, feel good actions which do nothing to prevent crime. WHY wont the liberals punish the criminal instead of the lawful folks? The answer is easy, CONTROL.
The technology of 1 person being able to operate any weapon is not a solution and wpould create many more hardships than otherwise.
If we truly want to save our children we coulkd lock up pedophiles, feed them properly, keep them off the streets, know where they are and who they are with, put criminals in jail, keep the out of automobiles, and we could TEACH them about GUN SAFETY. Sure, gun accidents happen, there are nut balls who do stupid things, but isnt it silly to just attack 1 area, like guns, when there are SO many ways to be harmed or die??
Our state, Pennsylvania, didnt fare so well. The democRATic governor won re election, he is not hunter friendly and is trying to have the state take over the Pa. Game Commission; this would severly diminish what the Game Commish has accomplished.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

What should the righties be doing to protect our food supply??

I don't know. Why do I always have to be the one to figure everything out? For starters my local water supply is unguarded. Meanwhile there are plenty of cops sitting on the highways handing out speeding and HOV lane tickets. Would it be a total waste of resources to have patrols around the water supply? They could take all the cops on traffic duty and they'd form a human chain around the lake. If you don't like my human chain idea then ask the douchebags in the whitehouse get a team of experts to figure it out.

As for gun control, I really don't have any official opinion on this other than to say if the citizens aren't allowed to have guns, how are we going to stand up to the government should things go awry? Isn't it the fear that someone may have a gun what has most criminals or potential criminals thinking twice?

And I think you mistook my reply as an agreement. Your "heritage" (what you mean by "tradition") is not the same as mine and it's not important to me that it's preserved. I highly doubt your ancestors packed up their SUVs with the brats and head out to shoot deer but if you want to believe that's how the tradition goes, then go right ahead. On the other hand I have a big problem with making hunting and gathering a privilege* instead of a right whether I'm using a gun to find my next meal or a spear I carved out of a log.
I don't have a problem with regulations with sport fishing and hunting because without those regulations there wouldn't be enough food to go around.

*Privilege, as in a special right authorizing somebody such as by licensing. Ex: Driving is often described as a privilege not a right. To which I also have to disagree!)


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I'm a leftie and I have no problem at all with law abiding sport fisherman and hunters. I'm not anti gun either.

I think known pedophiles should be euthanized.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I am offended being called stupid. I am a college graduate with 2 post graduate degrees. Even at a high school level my grammer and speaking skills were better than that of our current President who presumably received his education from an ivy league institution? How that makes sense is unbelievable to those who have attended prestigous schools and this is the representative of what is coming out of ivy league colleges?

My affiliation is different than yours, and it is my strong belief that the way we are currently governed is unacceptable to me. I am personally very pleased to see Ed Rendell re-elected as well as they way that the rest of the 2006 mid term election went. Those who have finally had enough went to the polls and cast their vote. Get a grip, its the votes that count right - remember how GWB won his first presidential term?

What, would you have rather had a Lynn Swann puppet regurgitating the right's views and things that are really none of their business i.e.; stem cell research, right to choose, just to mention two of the most important rights afforded in this Country.

Do you think that the government should be able to monitor people's personal phone conversations and other private behaviors without court order? If you are comfortable with that, I say to you, you are the one who is stupid. Go ahead, let GWB lull you into thinking you are so much safer with him at the helm. That's what really sends me is the intelligent people who are actually buying what he is selling. My opinion, stop drinking the koolaid and remember that you are not safer because of this administration.

BTW, a week ago, "Rumsfield and Cheney were absolutely staying" per GWB. Not so, Rumsfield has "resigned" and barring a change in health status, we are stuck with VP Cheney.

It amazes me the way the the right wingers manage to twist and turn every issue back to the war on terror. Is terror an entity. Kind of like the war on drugs, no? The terrorists are not in Iraq. Should we go into Columbia and take over, what about other drug producing Countries. If you are in favor of all this thinking that the US has the right to decide for every other country that does not operate their countries as we do, should do so according to the book of Bush, then perhaps you should round up all the NRA card carrying young men and ask them to enlist because at the rate things are going, we need many more troops should we chose to insert our beliefs into other countries' business. Also, who better than those who want to use guns for recreational use, at least the skills could be used to put their money where their mouths are.

Lastly, it is not just not nut balls who have gun accidents. What a ridiculous undeducated statement.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Last time I checked "grammer" was spelled grammar. Also "country(ies)" wasn't a proper noun when used in that context.......however it's a free country. Hope we can keep it that way.
Very glad we can still hunt and fish-and express our opinions. And carry our NRA cards. Mine's in my totebag right now.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

labmomma, you may have found something that you and I actually agree on :)


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I think Querky and I are more in agreement than not. There are some details that may seperate our thinking?
I will be happy to see the end of the Bush family, wasnt too happy with 1 world order George Sr. either. Not that I brought the Bushs' into play?
Nah, it was hard to cast my vote for Swan, he is/was not the right man, neither was Ridge. Rendaell is not on my list of worst characters as are Jon Carry(the guy who loathes the military and its troops), and the Clintonistas, (trailer trash who made it big, kinda like Federline).
Many NRA members are vererans and present military people. Not hard to figure considering there are 4 million members(I am not presently).
I dont recall calling anyone stupid!? And, degrees dont impress me too much, I grew up surrounded by PhDs. could you point out where I mentioned the international war on terror? I cant find it? I really dont like to be referred to as a right winger, if in fact you were referring to me, I am not. I just refer to those types as NUTS.
Of course it is not just nut balls who have accidents; accidents can happen to anyone, but I do not understand why so many involve kids? There are plenty of nut balls who do have guns and should not. The war on drugs is serious, individuals can do everything to end that, quit/dont start doing drugs, the war on terror is maybe just a little different??


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Go for it lefties!!LOL. Been a leftie all my voting life. beleive in gun rights.Have always considered myself a conservative. Have never seen one on the right. As for the future am going to the middle with independents. Am not by any means alone.
Can't spell worth a durn. Have a good education.
Unless i'm writing something about science don't worry abt sentence structure or spelling.
Oh! have been bush bashing since the first day george was'nt elected.
We Americans can't be through till we cleanse the whole gov. with people who have no experiance with the status quo.....Independents.
oakleif


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

It's unfortunate that the priviledge to fish and hunt could be taken away.I wouldn't be shocked if it happened in the near future. When a country can't even decide if a parent has the right to know if their 10 yr. old is getting an abortion, nothing surprises me.

For both of those you can thank the "lefties".

I hate when I see stories about over fishing wiping out certain fish. People act like, it's just fish whats the big deal but they are part of the echo system and when it gets out of balance we all loose.

That's commercial fishing-- not sport fishing. Especially now with the gaining popularity of catch and release, the most conservation minded people you'll find are carrying fishing rods.

I do think we need more gun laws to ban all automatic rifles.

NO ONE can own a fully automatic firearm without a class 3 ATF license. You have NO IDEA what it takes to get one. Under normal circumstances, the only people who are granted class 3 permits are law enforcement. My brother, who's a Connecticut state tropper holds a class 3 license, and even as a state trooper, they investigated him just as much as they did me when I went for my top secret military clearance in boot camp. They DO NOT PLAY with this kind of stuff. it's easier to get a federal firearms dealer's license!!

Many of these fish die from shock, because of the experience of being yanked out of the water is too much for them.

What kills the fish is the buildup of lactic acid in their flesh from effort expended during the fight, and then the stress of being in a livewell, in the case of tournament fishing. If you've ever noticed on the saturday morning fishing shows, especially the tournament anglers will do their level best to get the fish into the boat as quickly as possible for just this reason-- the shorter the fight, the less the buildup of lactic acid. Once the fish is on board, there are additives put into the water in the livewell to help calm the fish, as well as retore its natural protective slime. For info on this compound, do a search for a product called "Please Release Me". Keep in mind, especially during tournaments, it can cost an angler literally thousands of dollars if a fish dies in the livewell. Alot of these tournaments are determined by OUNCES, and the penalty for a dead fish is usually 8 ounzes, which could mean the difference of a place standing or two, and even for amateur open tournaments that could mean the difference of a couple thousand dollars, or a couple hundred dollars.

Is it because hunting and fishing might very well be necessary since the righties are doing nothing to protect our food supply from terrorists?

Is that so?!? How many terrorist attacks have we suffered since 9/11??? It's the LEFTIES who want us to give in to the terrorists in the hopes that we "don't make them mad at us", and maybe they won't bother us then. It's also the LEFTIES who want to tie the governemnt's hands at every turn. No, we have to treat the Gitmo prisoners like honored guests-- these same people that if given half the chance, they would slit your throat and mine!! No, we can't trace suspect money trails. No, we can't monitor suspect communications. NO, IF THE LEFTIES HAD THEIR WAY, WE'D SIT HERE UNTIL WE GOT BOMBED AGAIN, AND THEN THEY'D SIT THERE AND POINT THEIR FINGER SAYING SEE?? I TOLD YA!!

These people who decide they need to have an automatic weapon for their own protection in their home are nuts. Likely they will be shot with their own gun, or worse, one of their children or a friend of their child will shoot themselves accidentally.

This, I couldn't agree with more. However, the statement immediately preceding it--

the right to bear arms was written at a time when there were no police force protecting citizens and really no functioning bodies of law enforcement and the like.

Is completely wrong. Did you know that there is NO MANDATE FOR ANY POLICE FORCE to protect any individual? They have a mandate to protect society as a whole, but individuals have no right to protection, and I have actual cases to back this up. If asked for them, I'll have to dig them out, but suffice to say, I've gone up before state legislatures over this, and I do have the material to back up everything I claim here, and I WILL dig them out if necessary.

Also, has anyone seen the recent reports regarding the continuing depletion by over-fishing our waters of fish and shellfish, to the point where there may not even be the option of eating same in the future as they will be totally extinct?

Again, this is commercial fishing, and I agree, it needs to be STRICTLY regulated.

I think known pedophiles should be euthanized.

FINALLY a lefty I can agree with!! :-)

stem cell research, right to choose, just to mention two of the most important rights afforded in this Country.

Those aren't rights. They're crimes against humanity.

Go ahead, let GWB lull you into thinking you are so much safer with him at the helm.

Oh yeah-- I'd MUCH rather have someone like Murtha or Pelosi at the helm, so they can try and UNDERSTAND the poor misguided terrorists, and we can all get along happily ever after. GET A GRIP!! Understand this-- These people, and I don't mean ALL Muslims-- but these RADICAL Muslims, will not be happy until ALL PEOPLE think exactly like them, and those who don't, MUST BE KILLED. There is no reasoning with these people. END OF STORY!!

Lastly, it is not just not nut balls who have gun accidents.

This is absolutely true. Some of them drive a mercedes....over their husband..... THREE TIMES.....ON TAPE!! Maybe we should have legislated car control too? What about steak knives? They're responsible for more murders than guns in this country. Maybe we should outlaw steak knives too? How about baseball bats? Tire irons? NINE Irons, for that matter!! (think Kennedys) It's not the guns that should be outlawed-- There are already enough laws on the books to regulate them. ENFORCEMENT is the key, and WORRYING MORE ABOUT THE VICTIMS' RIGHTS THAN THE CRIMINALS' RIGHTS!!


 o
Post Script

Just one other quick thought-- The second ammendment does NOT protect the right to hunt. AS someone put it earlier in this thread, that IS a priveledge, not a right. It actually protects our right to bear arms as protection of all our OTHER rights.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

savanahrose - thanks for pointing out my bad "grammar" spelling and word capitalization issues, you are correct except when referring to one' own Country, so as not to be confused with the country as in the rural, etc LOL :0). I do think I'll be able to look at myself in the mirror and like the person I see, and the type of person I am. Would never want an NRA card, that would be the type of card I would be burning. Yep that's just me a little to the left.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I've not been able to confirm that "this Country" should be capitalized, nor "current President" capitalized when used that way in a sentence.
My spelling and grammar skills are imperfect, too. English is a living language and can survive a little improvisation, even by President Bush.
Thankfully, we're still free to join the NRA or not as we see fit and continue to hunt and fish in Georgia and elsewhere. I'm so glad we can have freedom of speech and can post our differing views.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

savanahrose - Here here! You would be surprised. I have a very dear friend whom until just recently, realized that we voted for different parties. We are so alike in morals and values, we have daughters of the same age, parenting skills mirror one another, she feels that a woman has the right to choose, despite that not being the "party line" of the republican party? I do know it is against the Catholic church, that I know for sure. So I won't say I know for sure what the republican position is. Actually I think LB is trying to get her husband to settle down a bit about womens' issues??

The point is, my dear friend and I are so alike in our thinking, and the way we lead our day to day lives, we just automatically assumed that when we stood side by side in the voting both that we would be voting for the same people. Not so. That said, we respect one another immensely despite a few (very few) debates and disagreements, mostly about how much she feels that GWB is keeping her safe. I don't agree, but that's her right to feel that way. Actually, I love her enough to be glad that she feels safe...

I never get the rule book out on capitalization of words or dictionary - only when I am working, since then I am billing by the hour.

I feel exactly like you, in that I am proud to live in a Country (c) that affords so many people freedom of speech. I really don't think after being born and raised here, that I could live in a country (C) where this is not a right. I have traveled alot and do respect cultures of other societies and I am very careful when abroad so as to not exercise my freedom of speech. Actually, I usually try to keep my mouth shut. It makes it so much more enjoyable for my husband:0).

Have a great weekend!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Are there other states doing this also? And is it actually necessary to protect hunting/fishing or just being used as a way for politicians to get votes, and recognition?

Savannahrose, there is a new wave of state constitutional ammendments being plopped on ballots that are almost always unneccesary. Georgia is, by no means, alone in this trend.

I think these things are put on the ballots to get voters with a certain demographic that will aid certain politicians in getting the votes they need to get (re)elected. By putting this ammendment on the GA ballot; it drew out some sportsmen who might not have otherwise taken the time to vote.

Georgia didn't need this ammendment; Georgia politicians did.


 o
RE: cindyb_va above post...

Oh, yes, amendment, not ammendment. Sorry for the spelling problems in the above post :).


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Thanks, I voted in case it would protect hunting and fishing rights but appreciate your explanation and believe there's some truth in that, too.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

My my, this thread is all over the place!

This is not a liberal (left) nor radical (right) issue. In fact this is both an economic as well as philosophical issue.

As long as taxes such as Pittnam-Robertson apply to sporting goods like firearms, ammunition, fishing lures, fishing poles and the like, then the right to hunt and fish should be protected. Without those funds conservation as we have come to accept it would not exist. Those funds have been used for the purchase of land and the management of both Federal and State resources. This country owes a huge conservation debt to the financial sacrifice of our hunter and fisher people. We can readily see that other users of our public lands have complained about user fees or potential taxes on their specialized equipment. My word, the American public screams when the entrance fee to a National Park goes up $2. Yes, everyone who hunts or fishes has every right to be proud of their collective conservation accomplishments and their contributions that allow ALL Americans and visitors to enjoy our natural resources.

I fall into the camp that believes hunting and fishing are part of our primal heritage. As a civilized man I find this a much better outlet for those needs than arguing with my neighbors or behaving as an anarchist. I'm not saying that the sports person crowd is immune from misuse of firearms or killing their fellow man, but overwhelmingly it is not them, but rather our civilized city denizons who seem to be most often the killer amongst us. Hunting and Fishing teaches us the value of life ... including human life. In this vein I believe the privilege/right to hunt and fish is important for all of us.

So whether you agree or disagree, this is more than a political issue, it is also an economic issue that affects all of us. Without hunting and fishing I have no doubt that we will sell off many of our National Parks and BLM lands. Who is going to be willing to pay the additional taxes to keep/acquire/maintain these lands?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

simpleman, I couldn't agree more.

And is it actually necessary to protect hunting/fishing or just being used as a way for politicians to get votes, and recognition?

Don't let em fool you. PETA and other groups like them are hard at work coming up with referendums and legislation to outlaw ANY kind of fishing and hunting. This kind of legislation is unfortunately, VERY necessary. Because of groups like this, other groups have had to stand up to combat the lunacy that passes as conservation legislation. Up here, there's a group called SAM (Sportsman's Alliance of Maine). Better than 1/2 their budget goes to combatting PETA and other animal rights groups, who think we shouldn't hurt the poor fishies.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

better stated than I can do.
The right to fish/hunt, the right to farm, and some other special rights are needed, it is not just about politicians getting out the vote.
By declaring these rights and making them law, we protect those interets from harassing lawsuits such as the smell of manure, the noise of shooting, et cetera. As more people crowd into the countryside they bring with them certain ideas which are foreign to the ways of open space.
In our state the governor( a dem. elected by city populations) is trying to take control of the state game comission, take away comission lands purchased with license revenues. he would turn these lands into areas for casinos to collect taxes and reduce property taxes. This is but 1 case of several tries at stealing what only the sportsman has paid for, no tax dollars support any game comission activities.
There are federal mandates to cover many areas but states need to make their own declarations as well. Thus each states own right to hunt, right to bear arms, right to farm, etc. Even smaller governments such as townships declare right within their borders, many times that is how the states rights come to be.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

bill vincint and simpleman,
I can't add a thing to what you have posted. Just wanted to say THANK YOU. :-)

fancifowl, I find myself agreeing with your posts 99% of the time so far. We'll just have to agree to disagree on the 1%. :-)


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I've no problem with hunting or fishing. I personally think the hunting and environmental folks should join hands....it would be the perfect storm, politically. Destroy the environment...destroy hunting and fishing.

I DO have a problem with gun nuts and the NRA. The people who insist that they need that AK to hunt deer. They NEED those armor piercing bullets to bring down a caribou.

My fervent wish for gun nuts is that they and their families are forced to to move to violent neighborhoods where guns are all around, on display and in use all the time, 24/7. See how much you like it, then.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I DO have a problem with gun nuts and the NRA. The people who insist that they need that AK to hunt deer. They NEED those armor piercing bullets to bring down a caribou.

I have to agree with that. Wayne LaPierre is more than a little bit off the charts. However, I can understand why they go so far off the right. In order to do battle with groups like Sarah Brady and HCI, who are just as far off to the left, they NEED to be way out in order to ever hope to strike a relatively acceptable balance. I don't know for sure that that's what the story is, but that's the way I see it.

Now, as for the semi auto assault weapons, I used to have a gun collection that most liberals would go into cardiac arrest over. My goal was to have one weapon from every conflict this nation's ever fought, and although, they stayed in the cabinet most of the time, they DID come out from time to time to go "plinking". My 2 favorite plinking rifles were an AR-15 and an M-1 carbine. The ammo was cheap, and they were both alot of fun to punch a bunch of holes in paper or tin cans. I DID have one weapon that would be considered an assault rifle that had a very specific utility purpose, and that was my M1-A1 (semi auto version of an M-14). I used to compete as an amateur in local club shoots, and one of the competitions I used to shoot in was what's called a 200 meter flag shoot. They put an orange pennant on top of a 36" long by 1/2" wide wooden dowel, and you have two rounds to hit it. Obviously, making a standing shot with open sights and over 600 feet between you and the target, you need an accurate weapon, and that M1-A1 was the most accurate rifle I've ever shot, and it was my weapon of choice for that competition.

I can understand people being a little nervous about the fact that when I had my collection I could've invaded a small country. But all my guns were legal. They were all registered (even though they didn't have to be), and I had no problem with ANY law enforcement coming into my house to inspect my arms and how they were kept, if it made them feel better. I even took it a step further. Any weapon I ever bought would be brought down to my town's police station for a ballistics sample, just in case, God forbid, any of my guns were ever stolen and used in the commission of a crime. (Several of my friends were cops)

I also had a permit to carry a concealed weapon BECAUSE of the fact that I worked alot in Downtown Hartford, Ct. and downtown Bridgeport, Ct. , and more than once I witnessed things no one should have to see. So, as far as seein how much I liked it, it only made the decision for me to HAVE to carry a weapon of my own all the time. I ALWAYS had both a 9mm Baretta 92 and a .380 Colt Mustang on me at all times. Since I moved away from Connecticut, I've felt safe enough that I had no need for a permit, so I've never gotten one in either of the other two states I've lived in since. But if I DID feel threatened, I wouldn't hesitate to apply again, and carry again.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Gun nut can mean different things to different folks, I consider myself a "gun nut", but that is becuse I like guns, I like to look at them, own them, shoot them, and talk about them. I had a collection of over 35o total, 80% being of 1 maker, a third of those 1 model. Gun nut to another person may refer to a total nut case who has a gun.
Wayne LaPierre speaks differently in a personal conversation; he does have to rally the roops, so to speak as do politicians prior to elections.
As far as hunting with semi auto rifles, such as an AK or mini 14, it is legal in some states and a good gun for some uses; not many criminal types are prone to use these weapons anyways, not practical in crime for several reasons, concealability being 1. Armor piercing rounds??? Come on, who has these, they are available but criminals might not score them too easily!
The problem with most arguments against guns is ignorance on the part of the anti gun faction and out right lies by pols.
We all may heve differences with the NRA, but, without them there would be no private ownership of guns. Protectinr the right to keep % bears arms is not the only function of the NRA, they offer multi services including gun safety coueses and police training, monetary grants to sporting clubs.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I had a collection of over 35o total, 80% being of 1 maker, a third of those 1 model.

Let me guess-- model 98 Winchesters, either pre 64 or commemoratives. :-)


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Mostly Rugers, and 35 of those were Blackhawks. About 15 of these were customized new models, rebarreled, tricked out total custom. A Few very rare pieces. various Bunch of Sako deluxe pre Garcia. few savage 1899s and 99s. My friend and neighbor had the largest collection of stainless Ruger revolvers in the country. If Bill Ruger would have made anything other than guns, he would have been revered even more than he was. What a genius.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

The thing most people seem to forget about the 2nd amendment is that pesky "well regulated militia" part.

Good for you, Bill. You are a responsible gun owner. I know lots of people who have guns, and I'd say only a tiny fraction of them are "responsible."

I guess I don't quite understand, though, why you felt you had to carry 2 guns? Just curious. Cuz I lived in some neiborhoods of Chicago that were VERY scary, and I didn't(and still don't)own a gun.

I don't believe everyone should own a gun. I also don't believe everyone should drive, either. April


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Simpleman, As usual you made sense in a good rational way and calmed things down abit.
I'm a big time conservationist and i also beleive in the NRA and hunting. The deer population needs to be controlled for one thing.
A lot of people who don't have decent jobs depend heavily on a deer in the freezer every year for meat.
oakleif


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I don't own a gun. Never have, never will. I'm the odd one in Texas. I will defend your right to carry one though.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I guess I don't quite understand, though, why you felt you had to carry 2 guns?

April-- like I said, I had alot of friends as cops, and they kinda convinced me on the importance of having a back-up. Just to give you an idea of the kinds of things I've seen on the job, right around the mid 80's, we were working at one point on a housing project in Bridgeport, Ct.. They were tearing down tenament buildings and putting in single level housing in its place. We were doing all the bathroom tile in these units. Well, this one day, I was sitting outside with my crew eating lunch, and there were a bunch of people milling about at the tenament across the street, several of which looked like dealers. Before we even realised what happened, this black caddy with the windows all tinted out comes flying up and two rastafarians got out with MAC-10's and almost literally cut this guy in half, jumped back into the caddy, and went flying back out.

That was my last straw.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I would carry different weapons for different times. Lightly dressed in warm weather the Mustang, or even the little Berretta .22 , was suited to a T; woods walks might demand a revolver in Colts .45 ; the high capacity ruger 9mm was a general purpose carry.
Its easy to have many different weapons when all of the different reasons for the many styles, calibers and uses are considered. I dont carry any longer as my eyesight is not too good, it would be stupid of me to think I might only put the bad guy out of commission. I have but 2 pieces left now, a .22 rifle and a .22 revolver.
I tend to believe that most gun oeners are responsible and most hunters are ethical, the few idiots are the spoilers.
I am right now researching the early militia of Pennsylvania; if the Quakers would have had there way, there would be no militia, the native peoples may have remained in control, and we would still be under the crown. The well regulated portion may not be much of a factor,also it has been decided that it is an individual right to keep & bear arms.
How did this thread get under "animals" anyways?!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Fishing and hunting being on the ballot to make it a right and not just a privilage. Some think it's not necessary, others think it is a must. I personally think we should make it a right before the privilage is taken away.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I really think it was put on the ballot to garner votes. It's a straw man ballot issue.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

April-- In this specific election, it very well may have been. I don't know enough about your state's politics to say one way or the other. But this is by far, not a straw man ballot issue (though again, it may have been USED as one this time around in your state).


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

PETA wants total liberation of all animals. No pets, no livestock, no use of animals by humans for any reason. No zoos, no farms, no hunting, no fishing. No seeing eye dogs, no riding horses, no sheepdogs. NO uses by humans of animals for any reason. They want everyone to be a vegan. No eggs, no meat, no leather. No animal testing. Set all animals free to roam the earth without boundaries. No profiting from animals, no movies with animals or documentaries either. NO uses of animals by humans at all. None.

You have to wade through a lot of less extreme ideas on their website to get to the truth but it is there if one looks as I did recently.

I am a Leftie but I do not belong to or support PETA


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I've had my run-ins with PETA. If you go to the thread linked below, you'll see the rest of the post the following quote is taken from, concerning their intelligence of beating on my boat, during a tournament, no less:

Nevermind the two jerks in a canoe who overestimated my patience level this past july, by paddling up to my boat, and SMACKING THE HULL with their paddles, and then not expectimg me to do anything about it!! They got their wish. I stopped fishing right there. But they found out the hard way they really needed to rethink their strategy. They were in a canoe. I was in an 18' bassboat with 125 horses hanging off the transom.

They went swimming.

Here is a link that might be useful: I am game!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I like PETA. They are somewhat effective, and they make me laugh. Unlike some other humane groups I could mention.

Once again....PETA is a straw man. They only get noticed because they put their money where their mouth is, unlike some other humane groups I could mention. They're not a large organisation, nor do they have lots of money.

relax...your damnable AK's, fly rods and Manolo Blahniks are safe. And will be forever and ever, amen. Try to worry more about protecting the environment. Get mad about THAT. About a threat that's REAL.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Like I said earlier-- some of the biggest conservationalists you'll ever meet are carrying a fishing rod. And to that, I'll even go so far as to add those carrying a rifle or shotgun, as well. (think Ducks Unlimited, Buckmasters, etc.)


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

So, was there any real danger in Georgia of PETA pushing through anti-hunting and fishing legislation? To the point of its citizens feeling like they must amending the state's constitution to protect themselves? PETA has grown mighty indeed!

I just cannot fathom that there was enough critical mass for a constitutional amendment.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

There ARE real dangers, these types of legislation protect the future, not just the present. Antis have tried to shut out dove hunting in several states, I thought it was silly to have to pass a bill protecting dove hunting until I discovered it was endangered. Some legislation does seem silly, until the root cause is investigated. Could you imagine there would have to be a law protecting hunterswith arms) from those who would jump between them and a target(deer,bear,?), or run thru the woods banging garbage can lids, or disturbing any organized sporting event. These few nuts can get big covereage from the MSM(mainstream media)and add to their following. Most sheeple dont think, they just have knee jerk reactions.
we have a PETA group here, a woman(really a male but youd never know) removes its clothes and gets painted like a tiger and caged with supporters in tow to demonstrate??something or other. Well, he,she, it went to china and pulled the stunt only to end up in Chinese prison!!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Actually, I forget which state, but on Paul Harvey the other day, I heard that atleast one state DID outlaw dove hunting, and that was only ONE of the animal rights laws I heard passed.

a woman(really a male but youd never know) removes its clothes and gets painted like a tiger and caged with supporters in tow to demonstrate??something or other. Well, he,she, it went to china and pulled the stunt only to end up in Chinese prison!!

As my father always used to say-- shmart people those Chinese!! LOL


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Bill,

That would be the wonderful State of Michigan which nixed the dove hunting season. It's a season that we had on a trial basis in only a few southern counties.

In this case the hunters (myself included) got what they deserved. The percentage of defeat was approximately 80% against, 20% for. A very misleading ad campaign by those against (what else is new in politics) and absolutely NO sportsman group stepped forward with even one advertisement for the hunt. Even the Michigan United Conservation Clubs, who carry big political clout in this state, didn't step up for hunters on this one.

When you consider that one out ten people here buy a deer hunting license and even with a good turnout of voters (45+%) the measure got dumped so handily, it makes me wonder if I'm the last generation of hunters.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I totally agree that most hunters and fisherman DO worry about the Environment.

Bill, PETA freaks tried to stop you from fishing??? you fired up your boat and their canoe tipped over? ROTFLMAO good for you.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Their canoe didn't tip over from starting up my boat. Their canoe tipped over from me pulling out from where I was on the trolling motor on high speed, then picking UP the trolling motor, dropping the big motor, firing it up, getting out into the middle of the lake, and turning around, heading at them at full trottle on plane (about 50 mph), and about 100 yeards from them, cutting the wheel hard-- AT full throttle-- and throwing about a 4 foot wake. THAT'S what sent them swimming.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Could it be that I am the only poster not impressed at all by bill_vincent's adventures. Bragging about negative behavior is so immature. Get over yourself already.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Negative behavior? Let me ask you a question-- What would you do if someone came up to you in a mall parking lot, and began ramming your car with a carraige, just because they didn't like what you bought? Would you just let them get away with it?

NO????

Get over yourself, already!!

Quite frankly, I don't give a damn if you're impressed or not. You come near my boat banging on it, and you're LUCKY if all that happens is that you go swimming!!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Thank you bill for confirming what I had already assumed by your more than angry response which included a threat. You are a person with some big anger issues, or perhaps not enough self confidence or maybe no common sense. Perhaps your gun permits should be re-evaluated or, maybe a psych evaluation is in order.

Don't threaten me, it doesn't frighten me. Do you feel like more of a man to threaten and bully?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I'm not threatening anyone, unless you have plans to try and beat on my boat, and even then it's not a threat, but more of a warning. I'm simply stating-- just as I would become severely irate if someone were to intentionally bang something into my vehicle (and I would expect ANYONE would, even a bleeding heart such as yourself), I become JUST as irate when someone does it to another investment which is just as big, that being my boat. It has nothing to do with anger issues, and no, you're not going to bait me into a confrontation in here, which makes absolutely no sense.

If you're one of those who would just let it go, I feel very sorry for you and your family. I believe in protecting what I've worked for.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Funny how Bill was attacked by nut cases in a canoe, and a poster only mentioned that Bill is the one with the anger issues.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

If I was out in my boat fishing and someone beat on my boat with an oar for any reason other than they were in the water drowning and were trying to get my attention, I would be angry.

I don't blame Bill at all for being angry at the folks in the canoe.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Look folks, I'm sorry I related that story. I didn't mean to start any kind of controversy. iluvcats has her point of view, and that's that. Lets not get sidetracked from the OP, which is extremely important.

Suffice to say that extremists, no matter WHAT kind of package they come in, whether they call themselves conservationists, animal rights activists, treehuggers, etc.-- NONE of them, inlcuding extremists to the OTHER side, do anyone any good, and unfortunately, the only way to combat them is to legislate against them.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I have a few opinions on the topic at hand. As has been stated previously, much more eloquently than I could hope to write, extremists of any position can be dangerous.

I also think classifying folks with broad characterizations is misleading and divisive. I am an independent thinker, conservative in some ways and liberal in others; I resist classification, and am not a party-line sheep.

Hunting and fishing, though a privilege, shouldn't be solely for the privileged as it was in the old world and increasingly as the animal rights extremists gain incremental footholds I believe these activities should be established rights.

Gun control? In my opinion there is no real argument for more gun control, more enforcement certainly, but no more regulations/laws. Most of what I see/read in the media are criminals with guns or children with access to guns that shouldn't. If there is a criminal with a will to commit violence the weapon will be whatever they can find/steal/make.

More injuries and deaths are caused each year by poor or distracted drivers or drivers who are impaired in one way or another than by legal firearms.

Though an alien notion to many nowadays hunting and fishing are good quality, positive, events for the family with the added benefit of providing nutrition as well. I hunted and fished every inch of the great state of Wyoming, as well as many nearby states, with my father and grandfather and I will continue the tradition with my son and daughter regardless of what the PETA's or other rights thieves have in mind. My 2 youngsters enjoy walking down to the back forty with me and watching me squeeze off a few rounds, from an appropriate distance of course, and at an appropriate time (as determined by me) they will get their first firearm and begin shooting themselves. I can't wait.

Regardless of how you may interpret or feel about the 2 Amendment I embrace, enjoy, and practice these rights our forefathers fought for and preserved for us.

One last thought, stem cell research & right to choose = crimes against humanity? Wow, just wow.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

One last thought, stem cell research & right to choose = crimes against humanity? Wow, just wow.

All I can say, without starting a whole new forum about it, is we just have to agree to disagree. As is pretty obvious my that statement, I have very strong feelings about both those subjects (and it has nothing to do with being a "party line sheep", but rather more to do with my faith in God), and from your reaction, your feelings are just as strong to the other side. Being that there's not really any middle ground, nothing will be solved by attempting to hash it out.

As for passing the tradition on to your kids, that's great!! How old are they now?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Yea, start another thread. until then, what is the diference between stem cell and embryonic research? (it's big) but the media skips over it. what is the difference of being government funded and go for it? Just because our govenment doesn't want to fund certain research, doesn't mean they'll try to stop it. Go for it! Some of us just don't want to pay for it. No one is stopping you.And you'll probably make much more progress by keeping the government out of it.Let science move foreward, leave govenment out of it. Pay for it out of your own pocket. Just don't take it out of my pocket if it's against my morals.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Thats the whole thing about the leftists. They cant leave the govt. out of anything! Up until this Bush, who grew the government to such a bloated state? Thats easy.
Sure there is middle ground, there almost always is, just the 2 sides dont want to see it. There just is no middle ground on rights, they can only be interpreted 1 way, the way they are written.using the reasoning behind them set by those who wrote them. Where do these whacked out liberal interpretations come from??


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

3 and 4 and it will some time before anything more than fishing will be appropriate. In the meantime I have built a great pistol/rifle, archery, and trap range down back.

Agreeing to disagree on other topics is the best that can be hoped for. Unfortunately, all the while there are extremist forces at work intoxicated with the notion of power and control who whittle away at our rights everyday in the name of a theology many find preposterous.

As you stated yourself there is no middle ground and without it there will never be peace, only more and increasingly violent conflict as each side clamours for control of the minds of the minions.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Unfortunately, all the while there are extremist forces at work intoxicated with the notion of power and control who whittle away at our rights everyday in the name of a theology many find preposterous.

Man, this thread is very quickly becoming a political minefield. This is yet another one I could develope an entire forum over (not just a thread) and in fact, there IS a forum I go into to discuss this very topic on a daily basis.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I'd actually be interested in knowing whether those who would protect animals' "rights" would also protect humanity's rights at all stages of development? That would be an interesting discussion.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Just after posting the last comment re. animal/human rights I noticed among the gardening-related ads on the right hand side of the animal debates postings screen was an advertisement for a Raleigh abortion clinic with "24 hour emergency services."
Why? How does Yahoo come up with that "sponsored link"? Random coincidence or connection?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Are you concerned about the right to choose to kill a baby or the rights of the baby, when you talk human/animal rights and abortion in the same breath? :-)


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I'd actually be interested in knowing whether those who would protect animals' "rights" would also protect humanity's rights at all stages of development? That would be an interesting discussion.

I have a feeling that you'll find that people who speak up most for animals rights will be mostly pro choice.

Just a guess.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Pretty good guess if you are talking animal rights (like PETA) and not animal welfare advocates.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Yes, I'm talking like PETA. (or is that PITA!!)

I find it strange that liberals will fight for the rights of all those weaker than the majority, whether it be animals, criminals, illegal aliens, TREES, ANYTHING....... but children.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Yea, it's ok to rip a baby from the womb, but don't dare yank a fish out of the water!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Aint that the truth tho!! I usually never give the issue more than a passing thought, but never thought of the analogy above.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

"And is it actually necessary to protect hunting/fishing or just being used as a way for politicians to get votes and recognition? (I've heard both views.) "

As a hunter and avid outdoorsman, I know many people that feel there is a lot of legislation aimed at ending hunting and fishing. Why is this? More than one group who back referendum votes have bluntly stated that as their ultimate goal. They know that it would not pass to put out a flat "outlaw hunting" vote, so they try to snip off as manageable a piece at a time as they can.

A good example would be the trapping ban that was passed in MA some 7-8 years ago. The public was fed a campaign against trapping that showed leghold traps, animal suffering, etc.- a good visual campaign that got votes and the ban passed. OK- but if you look at what was voted on- there were a lot of "riders" there that the public heard little about. An example- no longer would you have to be a hunting license holder in the state to be on the game comission. The comission votes on matters of public and hunter safety along with policy meant for the good of the animal populations. So- you could now appoint someone that had no hunter safety training or experience. Someone that never speat a day hunting or fishing. Someone who may not understand the extent of the public land bought with sporting licenses for purposes of preservation, or how much Pittman Robertson tax money from firearm and ammo sales goes to preservation. They threw in some bear hunting and other regulations as well... all packaged as "leghold traps".

The same is done for gun control, abortion control, and several other hot button topics. Like it or not- it's the tactic that gets a group results.

So- if your interest is in preserving hunting, or gun rights, or abortion rights, or property rights (thinking of recent domain cases), or whatever- the action is often relegated to constant "defense" against laws that might limit rights. That is absolutely a losing approach. Suppose that you have a stellar 95% win rate against laws that limit any given right- that means that laws are being passed against your interest, but nothing is being done to balance or counteract the limitation of your rights!

This "hunting amendment" type approach is meant to be a pro-active approach to create a seawall somewhere that will prevent piecemeal destruction of hunting rights. So- this is of interest to people in the public. For a politician- it does strike a serious chord with many in particular districts, so it's a good political tool for votes.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Very good Pablo. People need to become more educated in casting their votes, a truly wasted vote is the uninformed vote, you cant just make decisions based on one theme but all a candidate stands for must be weighed.

I had added an afterthought to my above post but it didn't take; there is another forum in garden web totled " Hot Topics" where some posts may be more applicable. Even ones such as this.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I don't believe taking innocent human life is a "right" but was wondering whether there would be any general consensus between those who believe in animals' "rights" and who are in the most part anti-hunting and fishing, anti-animal experimentation, etc, as far as whether they hold those same standards for the human population as well? I see subjects like euthanasia, abortion "rights", & stem cell research surfacing in the animal debates forum postings.
I've wondered, too if animal-rights folks are pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia(for people), pro-stem cell research or not ,but don't really know the answer.I saw someone interviewed on the news who was supporting a shoot-on -sight law against poachers in India. Poaching is terrible but a human life for a tiger's?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

"Poaching is terrible but a human life for a tiger's?"

Well, if a guard saw an armed person trying to destroy any other national treasure (suppose it was the Constitution, or an endangered panda in a zoo)- people would have less question I suppose. The fact that it's outside should give it no less protection, IMO.

Add to that the fact that organized poachers in many parts of the world are VERY willing to use those same guns to shoot at people- and your only recourse in stopping the crime may very well be shooting.

"Hey- stop that!"

"Blam! Blam! Blam!"


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I am against PETA/PITA

For law abiding fishing/hunting/gun ownership

For stem cell research, embryonic or otherwise. Good grief, the embryos are frozen and will be thrown away, if the "parents" give permission, why not use them to possibly help people? No one will "adopt" them, there are tens of thousands of them in frozen storage just sitting there and only a few have ever been adopted.

For a woman having the right to terminate a pregnancy safely and legally.
It is a sad state of affairs that birth control isn't 100% effective or 100% available to all regardless of finances.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I don't believe taking innocent human life is a "right" but was wondering whether there would be any general consensus between those who believe in animals' "rights" and who are in the most part anti-hunting and fishing, anti-animal experimentation, etc, as far as whether they hold those same standards for the human population as well? I see subjects like euthanasia, abortion "rights", & stem cell research surfacing in the animal debates forum postings.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
PETA has donated $300,000 to firms that are researching alternatives to animal testing.
Can you guess what the alternative is?
Yep! You guessed it. Human embryos!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Can you guess what the alternative is?
Yep! You guessed it. Human embryos!

And this is just ONE of the reasons I'm so strongly against stem cell research. Just as with some of the legislation Pablo talked about that seemed so passive, but actually undermines hunting and fishing, so is research using cells from frozen embryos, step one. It's the first step down a road that if most could see where it led, NO ONE would want to head down it. Alot of things they want to do with stem cells can't be done with cells from frozen embryos. For that, scientists want to use cells from partially birthed BABIES (as opposed to fetuses). See where this is going? They're using the technicality that the baby's not quite out of the birth canal, so it's not born yet, and therefore, not a person. Can't ANYONE see the lunacy in that way of thinking?

People need to learn a little respect for human life (which DOES start at conception). Until that time, I don't care HOW many gun control laws you legislate, and how many metal detectors you put in our schools, it's not going to stop a THING!!

Respect for HUMAN life is where it all begins!!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Abortion is probably always going to be legal, so why not use aborted embryos (or frozen embryos) to benefit others?? And if abortion was no longer an option, and women were forced to carry unwanted pregnancies to term, who would take care of millions of unwanted children??


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Ever heard the word adoption?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Oh please, there are not enough adoptive families as it is. Come to think of it, not one anti-abortionist I've ever talked to has personally adopted any unwanted children...


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

or responsibility.
Doncha love how DumocRats talk about gun laws/bans as saving the life of just one child, take a breath and next sentence want unlimited abortions???


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

There are a huge number of diseases that researchers could find cures for with embryonic/stem cell research.

Adoption is wonderful if that is what the choice of the pregnant woman choses. I am glad that our Country affords women the choice and rue the day that Roe v. Wade is overturned which I believe will happen during the next 10 years in light of the Bush "stacking the deck" in the Supreme Court.

We have lost justices who had respect for rights afforded under the Constitution and Bill of Rights, not trying to legislate from the bench.

Doesn't any righter out there think it odd that Chief Justice Roberts and his wife have two adopted WASP children? The people I know can't get a baby like that, how did he manage it? My friends adopt from China, Vietnam, and other poor countries because that's where babies for the "regular" people are available from, unless of course they chose to go through the back door with a suitcase full of money and a well versed nicely dressed attorney.


 o
Stem Cell Research

I hope common sense will prevail and allow embryonic/stem cell research and its benefits to be fully explored.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Some people make no sense. On the one hand they say abort the babies because they are unwanted and it's a mothers right to kill her baby. On the other hand they say people have to adopt from other countries because that's where the babies are available.
It's sure is a mixed up world.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

so why not use aborted embryos (or frozen embryos) to benefit others??

Because it's just another step in society saying it's okay to have a complete disregard for human life-- WHEN IT SUITS SOCIETY. From which kids take the lesson that it should then be okay to disregard human life when it suits THEM. It's not that big a jump!

There are a huge number of diseases that researchers could find cures for with embryonic/stem cell research.

You're right-- and the first disease that it'll cure is life.

I am glad that our Country affords women the choice and rue the day that Roe v. Wade is overturned which I believe will happen during the next 10 years

I pray to God that you're right.

that's where babies for the "regular" people are available from, unless of course they chose to go through the back door with a suitcase full of money and a well versed nicely dressed attorney.

Unless they knew the mothers. That sounds like typical secular progressive left wing blog GARBAGE. Give it a rest.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Embryonic stem cell research is NOT done on aborted babies.

It is done on frozen embryos left over from infertility treatments which are normally thrown away after the parents decide there is no possibility that they would want more children.

Dozens of "test tube" embryos are created for each couple during these infertility treatments and only a few are implanted in utero and grow to be children.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

ssshhh buyorsell888- don't let your karma run over their dogma


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

buyorsell, Thanks for enlightening the group here on the way embryonic stem cells are used. There are millions of embryos frozen in limbo and headed for the trash. Sad when we could use some research to help the people afflicted with terrible diseases. Unfortunately, my daughter is one of them. That's why I advocate so strongly for the research.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

buyorsell, Thanks for enlightening the group here on the way embryonic stem cells are used.

I realise this, and I said so. I think what you missed in my statement is the following:

Just as with some of the legislation Pablo talked about that seemed so passive, but actually undermines hunting and fishing, so is research using cells from frozen embryos, step one. It's the first step down a road that if most could see where it led, NO ONE would want to head down it. Alot of things they want to do with stem cells can't be done with cells from frozen embryos. For that, scientists want to use cells from partially birthed BABIES (as opposed to fetuses). See where this is going? They're using the technicality that the baby's not quite out of the birth canal, so it's not born yet, and therefore, not a person. Can't ANYONE see the lunacy in that way of thinking?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Bill asks ..Can't ANYONE see the lunacy in that way of thinking?
............................................................Yes I can.
If there was some way that only excess embryos from fertility clinics were going in the trash were used, it might be a different story. I believe those are already being used. Am I wrong? I just don't think we should create a life just to kill it to hopefully save another life. And with abortion being legal,and late term abortions being done in Kansas because the mother is (depressed) well I just shudder to think about it.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I think when you cheapen life at any stage there's a trickle down effect on all stages and conditions of humanity.
Several years ago there was a controversy over whether research from Nazi medical experiments could be used in current medicine. The answer, if I recall, was that because the info. was obtained unethically it could not be used even for good purposes.
There seems today to be a major ethical disconnect in the medical world.
I very much hope for better things to come from our court system.
A great site to visit is Feminists for Life. They have alot of well reasoned answers to common questions re. abortion, and from a woman's perspective.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I wasn't going to comment on this thread. I really wasn't. But you guys just haaaad to bring up stem cell.

My husband is a type 1 diabetic. I was hoping they would find a cure in our lifetime so that he may live a longer life with me.

Destroying life to save life violates the President's policy. Yet the president is willing to sacrifice life for life in Iraq.

Apparently you can have your cake and eat it too.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Come on, Do you really think there is a parallel there?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

On August 9th, 2001, President George W. Bush announced that federal funds may be awarded for research using human embryonic stem cells if the following criteria are met:

The derivation process (which begins with the destruction of the embryo) was initiated prior to 9:00 P.M. EDT on August 9, 2001.
The stem cells must have been derived from an embryo that was created for reproductive purposes and was no longer needed.
Informed consent must have been obtained for the donation of the embryo and that donation must not have involved financial inducements.

I'm sorry about your husband, but what more do you want our president to do?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

What a freaking right wing hang out this place is! I'm a proud leftie, animal rights, tree hugging liberal environmentalist who is pro choice, pro stem cell research, anti guns , anti hunting and anti war...and who hates George Bush w/ every breath I take!..And FF..Clinton's are trailor trash??!! What a joke. Their IQ's combined are in the stratosphere. She lived in the suburbs in an upper class neighborhood and they both excelled at Ivy league schools and Bill was a Rhodes scholar..Contrast his intellect w/ the boob in the WH who can't say nuclear and doesn't read the papers and never had been to Europe till he was president. He is a moron!!And talk about trash..A walking , talking cowboy who spits and drops his "g's". He was a druggie and a drunk and failed at everything he undertook till he found Jesus.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Yeah, but he learned a new word yesterday "foment". When I heard him speaking I was busy working, and thought I had heard incorrectly, but no. He was giving a speach regarding staying the course in Iraq. Unfortunately, whoever is writing his material should take baby steps in making him look literate....

Have to say Lily, it has been quite lonely here on the left until now.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Would having a reverence for life label you politically? I think we can look outside the box and try to come to a consensus on moral issues.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Clinton's are trailor trash??!! What a joke. Their IQ's combined are in the stratosphere.

Most geniuses that I've known didn't have the common sense God gave a GOAT. But that's okay, because most geniuses I've known were also so stuck on themselves they didn't believe in God, anyway.

He was a druggie and a drunk

Oh, that's right-- Clinton didn't inhale. WHAT A CROCK.

Atleast Bush isn't using the Whitehouse to get laid!!

Don't EVEN start comparing Clinton to Dubyah. I'm not a big Bush fan (any more) either, but I truly believe that Clinton played HUGE part in where we are right now with respect to 9/11. If he wasn't so concerned with getting stains out of dresses, he might have been able to think straight with that genius brain of his about what was happening around the REST of the world!!


Bill and Hillary go back to their home town for their highschool reunion. As they're coming into town, they stop at a gas station to fill up. Low and behold, the gas jockey is one of Hillary's old boyfriends. They strike up a conversation and exchange pleasantries, catching up with each other, and promise to see each other at the reunion. As they're pulling out of the gas station, Bill turns to Hillary and says "I wonder what it would've been like if you'd married HIM instead."
Hillary turns to Bill and says "Then YOU'D be pumping gas and HE'D be in the Whitehouse!!"


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

P.S.
We have Mennonite friends who are pro-life, pro-hunting, and anti-war. They are also non-political and don't vote.
I do think political action is appropriate in a democracy, as well as free speech, but sometimes it's counter-productive to pin labels on each other like "left" or "right." Some issues can be worked on by both sides.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I'm sure Lily316 also voted for that high integrity individual John Kerry, even though his grades at Yale were slightly lower than the President's. I love the hate spewed by the ultimate lefties. Love everything and everybody, unless they disagree with you, then hate their guts with a vehemence that would make Bin Laden smile. Be pro-women but feel Muslim Fundamentalists are just misunderstood, that makes sense.

I would love to jump in here on this stuff, but it's easier to watch Bill handle it.

Bill, if I come to Maine, will you take me fishing? LOL.

Kevin

I like muskies. Preserve the resource, practice CPR-Catch, Photo, and Release.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Hey, the Amish voted in large numbers in the Bush/carry election. A very new trend for such a outwardly apolitical group, and many Menonites do vote also (Of course there arent large numbers of Amish, ohio has the largest population at about 55,000).

even my wife a liberal from a long democcRAT family voted against kerry. I voted against kerry too as did a whole bunch of folks, that doesnt mean it was a vote for Bush, just no other realistic choice.

Hillary might be bad news but at least she is mostly conservative from a Republican family. If we must be stuck with Dums in power, they may as well be the most conservative of the lot .
Absolutly Clinton caused the great divide.
Maybe he isn't trailor trash, just a smart dude with a red nose with no character, and a rapist who aided and abetted the enemy during the viet Nam war.

I may no understand, but, explain this please: How can you stand for animal life, be a tree hugger, yet applaud the death of human infants?? Its all confusing.

try the 'Hot Topics" forum, lefties thick as fleas on a hound dogs hind leg over there!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Didn't realize there are Amish that vote now. Thanks for the info. Maybe I should check with our friends and see if they've begun to do that, too.
The Amish and Mennonite families we know tend to have very large families. It would be interesting to see what changes might happen if they all began voting.
I read that folks who consider themselves "liberal" tend to have fewer children and that eventually this will play out in political changes for our nation.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

What a freaking right wing hang out this place is! I'm a proud leftie, animal rights, tree hugging liberal environmentalist who is pro choice, pro stem cell research, anti guns , anti hunting and anti war...and who hates George Bush w/ every breath I take!

Feel better Lily? :-)
I see some lefties are hanging out in our right wing hangout. I'm a proud conservative, animal welfare, environmentalist, pro life, pro adult stem cell research, pro right to own guns, pro right to hunt, pro troops, pro war to protect our country and our way of life from terrorists. I don't love our president with every breath I take, in fact he has been a disappointment. He's not enough of a spitting cowboy for my taste :-) He does have morals though, as opposed to Bill Clinton who has none and was a total embarassment to this country. Give me a moral president any day over one who can't keep his thing is his pants long enough to get out of the White House.

By the way, let me get back on topic a little bit here. Lily, you say you are an environmentalist and anti hunting. Those two don't go together.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Does anyone either or the right or the left really believe that Clinton was the only president to ever have "relations" with someone other than his wife?

It was the the independent prosecutor who made a circus of a little sex. Many tax dollar were wasted on that witch hunt.

At least Clinton didn't deceive congress and the American people taking us to war on bad information, if that's really what it was, or perhaps he was just looking to keep the ball rolling in the hopes of a 2 term presidency after 9/11. Seems funny that whenever Bush has something bad in the press an elevated threat level is announced, or "chatter" has been picked up by Homeland Security. Another joke - Homeland Security, they are doing about as good a job as Mike Brown did in New Orleans and Mississipi during Katrina.


I really don't see what someone's sexual prowess has to do with their ability to govern?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Does any body really believe Clinton was impeached for sex acts?? Does any one really care?? Only those with their heads stuck in the mud think that! the only crime that could be pinned on Al Capone was tax evasion. But it got him out of society didnt it.
What I do notice and a good reason why I now continue to lean further to the right is that liberals dont reason with any amount of depth. They are short on facts, on vision, and morals.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

In the eyes of the rest of the world, Bush is a much bigger embarrassment than Clinton. Clinton's infidelity was no big deal to anyone but his wife and to the Republicans who were out to get him.

No one is aborting or creating embryos for stem cell research.

Why is it that some feel it necessary to call names? DumocRat etc? This is a debate form but there is no need to resort to acting like a child on a playground....


 o
stem cells

On August 9th, 2001, President George W. Bush announced that federal funds may be awarded for research using human embryonic stem cells if the following criteria are met:

The derivation process (which begins with the destruction of the embryo) was initiated prior to 9:00 P.M. EDT on August 9, 2001.
The stem cells must have been derived from an embryo that was created for reproductive purposes and was no longer needed.
Informed consent must have been obtained for the donation of the embryo and that donation must not have involved financial inducements.

I'm sorry about your husband, but what more do you want our president to do?


The derivation process (which begins with the destruction of the embryo) was initiated prior to 9:00 P.M. EDT on August 9, 2001.

That date is the problem, those stem cells are almost gone. No new stem cells may be used. Without Federal research grants, much research cannot happen.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I have read a TON of good stuff on this thread, wow! The PETA thing just blows me away, I knew they had a real strong view against animals, but saying no pets? what about all our furbabies that can't take care of themselves? I am sure my 2 lb dog would last a real long time outdoors (owl food) and no riding horses? my mothers horses would be devastated, most of them come running up to the gate when you go out there and practically place their own heads in the halters, now I call that animal abuse. No seeing eye dogs? I guess those people don't realize working dogs LIKE to work, most are uncontent when they are retired, a friend had a retired German Shepard Police Dog, took them forever to get him to eat he was so unhappy not doing anything, her hubby was a security guard and finally decided to take him with him to work, what a difference in that dogs life.

my political views are kinda odd I guess, I don't believe in abortion, do believe in guns, do believe in animal rights (as in no animal abuse, hunting in fair terms, not hunting something tame in a pen, would you actually consider that hunting? where is the sport in that?) but I do believe in hunting and fishing (LOVE Crappie) I don't like to actually go hunting, but I fully support my husband and if both my boys would like to do so they are more then welcome to with the understanding they have to learn the CORRECT way to hunt, the stem cell thing is touchy, my moral belief is no, but if they really could find cures for diseases with it thereby saving lives I would say yes.
so I just don't vote, mainly because don't keep up with all of this stuff and I would be afraid of voting for the wrong thing or for the wrong President (just haven't found a canidate I am comfortable with yet) but I also don't complain about our president, I didn't vote so I don't have the right (I just grumble alot under my breath)
no one else is scared witless by Mrs. Clinton? she scares the crud outta me.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

"It was the the independent prosecutor who made a circus of a little sex. Many tax dollar were wasted on that witch hunt."

As the father of a brilliant nine year old daughter, I find it interesting that people on the left think it's no big deal that the President of the United States can have a young woman INTERN under his desk performing an oral sex act on him while he talks on the phone and smokes a cigar.

Maybe it's just me, but if my daughter at sometime during the course of her life and education has the opportunity to be a Whitehouse intern, I'd like to think the man in the top job wouldn't think a blow job was part of her duties.

Kevin

I like Muskies. Preserve the resource, Practic CRP-Catch, photo, and release.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

fancifowl: I am not short on facts, visions or morals at all. What I am, is informed. I haven't had any of the republican koolaid that you all have been drinking. Apparently it must have something in it that allows you to see the world through rose colored glasses rather than from a clear lens for what it is.

Buyorsell said it best: In the eyes of the rest of the world, Bush is a much bigger embarrassment than Clinton. Clinton's infidelity was no big deal to anyone but his wife and to the Republicans who were out to get him.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Micke, I believe you are an advocate for animal welfare and not animal rights. I've posted the difference below. This will be an eye-opening site, if you're not really familiar with what Animal rights really stands for.
http://www.sover.net/~lsudlow/ARvsAW.htm

You'll be shocked to see some of the quotes by AR groups and where the money goes.


Animal Rights Goals

To end all human "exploitation" of animals -
this includes, but is not limited to, raising
and slaughtering of livestock for human or
animal consumption, eating meat, hunting,
using animals for any medical or veterinary
research, zoos (regardless of how well
managed), circuses, rodeos, horseshows,
dogshows, animals performing in TV
commercials, shows or movies (regardless
of how well treated any of the above are),
guide-dogs for the blind, police dogs, search
& rescue dogs, and the practice of owning pets.
PETA (People For The Ethical
Treatment Of Animals)

HSUS (Humane Society Of The
United States)

*****************************************
Animal welfare
To prevent suffering and cruelty to animals. And to
provide care and good homes for pets in need. This
often includes, but is not limited to, the funding and
running of animal shelters (to provide a sanctuary for
abandoned, abused, homeless, or unwanted pets, and
to place them in good homes where possible, provide
painless euthanasia for those that cannot be adopted,
and to educate the public about the need for
spaying/neutering their pets to prevent more surplus
animals ending up in shelters), enforcement of
anti-cruelty statutes (where their authority permits),
initiating, lobbying for, and monitoring enforcement
of legislation to ensure more humane standards of
care for livestock, laboratory animals, performing
animals, and pets.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Hey, Bush is defanged, we hope. See what I mean, IT WAS NOT ABOUT SEX. It was about SO much more. such as , selling secrets to China, renting the Lincoln bedroom, my golly, it could go on and on. What if monica had been a Chinese spy and held the "sex act" over his head-blackmail. How bout that Madeline A. dancing the jig for old kim in Korea? How about the staff wearing blue jeans and Ts in the White House. The reason the rest of the world is worried about bush is that he just might hold them responsible for what they do.
I dunno, maybe its you labmomma who drinks the coolaid! I'm more of a Bourbon or good Port wine man.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

okay I stand corrected, I am a animal WELFARE activist:)


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Welcome to the club! :-)


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

No, I prefer a vodka martini straight up.

Last comment on Bush. I do not think Bush has the right to "police" the rest of the world. Besides not having any money or troops left, how would the American citizens feel if another world leader took it upon himself to tell us how to live our lives, what kind of government to have, etc.

As for political slamming, we will to agree to disagree. I need to shake that drink.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Does anyone either or the right or the left really believe that Clinton was the only president to ever have "relations" with someone other than his wife?

No, there was one other-- Kennedy. Oh right-- he was a democrat, too!! (also Clinton's confessed idol, for what seems obvious reasons)

At least Clinton didn't deceive congress and the American people taking us to war on bad information, if that's really what it was

Lets put it this way-- if it WASN'T bad info, then The Brits, Russians, and Germans were ALSO all fooled by the same info. And before anyone starts saying that Germany was against the war, that was for financial reasons. They were getting kickbacks from Sadaam.

I really don't see what someone's sexual prowess has to do with their ability to govern?

You're right-- it has NOTHING to do with it. However, trying to get your fanny out of the fire after getting caught literally with your pants down has EVERYTHING to do with it, because while he was busy LYING and trying to cover his ass, Bin Laden was allowed to LIVE when we HAD HIM PEGGED!!

Kevin-- Bet on it!!

Clinton's infidelity was no big deal to anyone but his wife and to the Republicans who were out to get him.

On the contrary. It was a VERY big deal to Bin Laden, who would not be breathing right now if it weren't for that stupid moron being distracted.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Labmom, thats my drink, I prefer mine slightly dirty(als FDR) and stirred tho!

The UN is trying to dictate how our country should be run,(world courts, disarm Americans, etc.) when Bush 41 bought into the 1 world order crap is when I lost faith in him.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I knew somebody would yell The Kennedys. Clinton's confessed idol was Thomas Jefferson. Any event, I am sure there are as many Republicans who behave in the same manner. Not saying it is good behavior, but I do not think it is exclusive to one party or the other.

I don't think I would be bragging about our Republican representatives' behavior, does the behavior George Allen, while knowing he was being taped, continued to use racial slurs, inspire confidence in his leadership? There are so many Republican examples of much worse and detrimental behavior that affect our County as a whole both on foreign and domestic homefront, that I could write a book.

"Lets put it this way-- if it WASN'T bad info, then The Brits, Russians, and Germans were ALSO all fooled by the same info. And before anyone starts saying that Germany was against the war, that was for financial reasons. They were getting kickbacks from Sadaam".

Difference is our Country is supposed to be a democracy. Mr. Bush mislead both the Congress and the citizens, and went to war without the necessary congretional go ahead. I don't really care what the other countries did, I care about what my Country has done. Also, where are those WMD's? Do you really think they are all hidden away only to be brought out on the off chance that we can ever get out of that situation while we still have some men and women who haven't sacrificed their lives?

"Clinton's infidelity was no big deal to anyone but his wife and to the Republicans who were out to get him".

"On the contrary. It was a VERY big deal to Bin Laden, who would not be breathing right now if it weren't for that stupid moron being distracted".

I guess Bin Laden got a memo that Clinton had his pants down, so go ahead and plan 9/11? Don't think so. Unless, of course, you know something I don't. Please show me where you have gotten this particular bit of information. I ask this because I don't think you are correct.

The pending terrorist attacks were imparted to Bush by Clinton personally during the transitional period between the election and the Bush inauguration, and then by Richard Clarke to Bush's brain, Condy Rice and Cheney.

The events of 9/11 were predicted one month prior to same through a urgent memo from the CIA which was ignored by Bush, well either ignored or he couldn't read it, since he was on his month long vacation in Crawford.

Compare the number of days worked Clinton vs. Bush, I bet you will be surprised at the number of days actually worked, and by worked, I mean leading our country, not campaigning, vacationing or fundraising.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Monica Lewinski was NOT a "young girl" who was taken advantage of.

She was a grown woman who bragged to multiple friends before she moved to DC that she was going to try to have sex with Clinton.

I do not agree with infidelity but I do not think it was a matter of national security!

The whole thing was a joke in the rest of the world where many men of power have mistresses or even more than one wife.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

The whole sex thing is a waste of time. There is no party line on lies and deceit and behaving like scoundrels. Its what could have happened, like blackmail or worse. What if Monica had been an enemy agent?
Boy, lots of similarity , clinton and Jefferson!! laughable at best!.

Kennedy was no honorable dude by other means. Papa Joe bought him the presidency, after his chosen son was killed. He ordered John to appoint Bobby as AG. He didnt have a lot of hope for Chappaquidi Ted. He spent fortunes getting his boys elected for business reasons(money). He wanted to control the nations wealth but he He couldnt run for office because every one had his number, he was dirty and the entire country knew it.

I do think he did some good things for America, we'll never know the rest of the story.

It is true that many great/powerful leaders kept sevice women and men, some like Alexander the Great kept young men for sex before a great battle. It gave them a feeling of power over other men. They were not queers or homos. Been the down fall of more than a couple of them too.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

The Republicans have far many more sex scandals than the Dems..Just two off the top of my hat..Mark Foley and the Reverend Ted who had weekly phone calls to the WH discussions about their right wing agenda..Then there's Newt and Rudy w/ their three wives each, and Bob Barr and Bob livingston..and my brain hurts from trying to remember them all. Bush was a falling down drunk w/ two DUI's and was a coke head and you make fun of Clinton's "didn't inhale"??? The Shrub was stoned for 20 years till he found Jesus..Laura was going to divorce him if he didn't straighten up. So you honestly think if his name wasn't GB, he would be anything but the failure he was till elected Gov..And by the way, Bill Clinton NEVER drinks alcohol...And the rumor is Bush has started again. Boy, is he getting old and stressed looking. It must be weighing on his puny little mind all the thousand of people he is responsible for killing and maiming. Where's your pro life now?? What about Iraqi babies and pregnant women and children???Instead of worrying about a few stem cells which will be discarded , what about living breathing people???


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Lily, I dont know what planet you are on? You can find equal dirt on either side, the dems are just not held to as high a standard by the press. How bout Gary Studds, remember him, a Dem, how bout Ted Kennedy, you know him, the list continues.
You seem to gather information and trudge thru life wearing blinders.
Iraquis are killing women and children, thats what arabs/muslims do, kill and hate.

You seem to be filled with such hate and so little facts, its not a healthy situation.

Rumors, yeh, good argument there.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

She hates Texans and cowboys. They walk and talk funny, and they spit. She needs to eat some great BBQ beef brisket in Texas. That would calm her down a little bit.

It's a well known fact that good BBQ loosens up tightly wound people. It's science. The lip smacking smokey flavor of slow cooked fatty meats makes people see things more clearly.

I know a great place in Taylor, TX, if anyone's interested.

Kevin

I like Muskies. Protect the Resource. Practice CPR-Catch, Photo, and Release.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Kevin, it might be that Jack Daniels in the bbq and the glass beside you that loosens one up a bit!!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I'm more of a blended whiskey man myself, though I don't refuse Jack if offered.

Long neck bottles of beer out of ice filled coolers is the way to go with BBQ in my opinion.

I do believe that some people need more pork and beef fat in their diets. It would relieve some of their stress and prolong their lives.

CPR-Catch, Photo, and Release.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

LOL, these posts are cracking me up. Husbands work called off today. SNOW and ICE in TEXAS! Not so bad that he didn't go out and pick up some cold beer, Jack and some BBQ though. It's a good day. :-)


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Posted by muskyhopeful (My Page) on Wed, Nov 29, 06 at 15:02

"It was the the independent prosecutor who made a circus of a little sex. Many tax dollar were wasted on that witch hunt."
As the father of a brilliant nine year old daughter, I find it interesting that people on the left think it's no big deal that the President of the United States can have a young woman INTERN under his desk performing an oral sex act on him while he talks on the phone and smokes a cigar.

Heads up, Monica Lewinski was not a 9 year old. She was a grown woman able to make her own decisions.

I too am the parent of a beautiful, brilliant 16 year old daughter. However, I, unlike you, have no illusions that I will be able to have control over her behavior once she is an adult.

Also, what does that have to do with the glut of tax dollars spent on that witch hunt?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Does no one on the left have any concern about the message that was sent to our young people? "Well, it was ok for the President of the United States....no big deal...it wasn't sex....only republicans had a problem with it....clinton's infidelity was no big deal.
Well, maybe it wasn't a big deal to some adults, but I think it had a negative impact on our young people. Yea, Clinton was some kind of role model, that's for sure.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I'm on the left. I sure do worry about what kind of impact role models have on children. And who do you think sets the biggest example for our children? THE PARENTS!

With that said, I think that Britney Spears has a bigger impact on what a young girl does then an old man on TV, president or not!

Infact, in the Monica/Clinton scandal both parties were highly ridiculed. Children also see that. And trust me NO 16 year old girl wants to put herself in a position to be ridiculed.

I worry far more about the example that young female celeberties set because that is who young ladies look up to.

I'm 27 years old and was raised with very high morals. I NEVER looked at Monica and said "Well, if she can do it..." And as a wife, nor do I think for one second that infidelitey is no big deal.

Parents are so quick now a days to blame the media for how their children are acting. If a child is raised correctly the media should not make them consider dropping their moral standards.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I LOVE Texas BBQ Brisket, LOVE IT.

I agree that Britney, Paris and other young celebs have far more influence over today's teens than any President.

Children should be looking to their parents, families and those close to them such as teachers, coaches or pastors to be role models. Instead they took to MTV, whose fault is that? Partially their parents and partially sick pedophile teachers, coaches and pastors who have given good ones a bad name or fear to be close to a child because they might be accused. It is really sad.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Have to agree, parents reap what they sow with their children.

But I am having trouble with the example set by Bush, coke snorting, alcoholic, lost driver's license, draft dodging, daddy's alum position assuring GWB entrance to Yale, etc. Would you want your child using Bush as a role model?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

What about the message sent to young boys? Hey it's OK for the President of the United states to get a BJ outside of his marriage and no one thinks it's a big deal.
Yes the Adams the parents are the ones who need to protect their kids from the likes of Britany Spears but GEEZ, after the Clinton porn, they have to protect them from the evening news too? Shouldn't our President be someone for our young people to look up to? We can explain to them why Britany Spears is not a person that they should want to be like. Now we have to say "I want you to grow up with morals, so I don't want you to grow up to be a cheating, lieing, scumbag like the former president Bill Clinton?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I would have been protecting my kids from the evening news long before the Clinton/Monica scandal!!

"We can explain to them why Britany Spears is not a person that they should want to be like. Now we have to say "I want you to grow up with morals, so I don't want you to grow up to be a cheating, lieing, scumbag like the former president Bill Clinton?"

Or most the other people in congress for that matter.

But what I am talking about is the values that parents place in their children throughout their life. If those values are within a child/teenager/young adult the "I don't want you to grow up to be a cheating, lieing, scumbag like the former president Bill Clinton" or other members of congress and our society goes without saying! They already know it!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Wow!

I'm away from the forum for awhile and we're off to radical tightie righties bashing the liberal loosey liberals? and vica versa? When did this become a political forum? And for the most part with rhetorical name calling? Come on folks, I left that behind for a couple months with the mid term elections. However, since you all threw the door wide open.....

I, like our families and friends, were raised as Barry Goldwater Republicans. Agree or not, as we matured all but one out of seven children is now a Democrat, Christian, gun toting, hunter, fisher person and a lover of the out doors, this country, our troops and America. All of us are conservative when it comes to economic matters and liberal when it comes to social responsibility, which we consider our Christian imperative and obligation. Our careers include a CFO, two CPAs, three high school teachers, an insurance agent, plant manager and a nurse. Oddly, the Republican is a social worker, athiest and pretty much the opposite of the foregoing ... go figure. So much for stereo types. Like our collective siblings, I'm proud to be called a LIBERAL. But in all fairness, I'm more similar to the liberal Republican as personified by Nelson Rockefeller than I am to Ted Kennedy or John Kerry.

As a parent (baby just turned 21) we limited television, encouraged reading of anything and everything, encouraged independant thought and discouraged accepting anything a politician, teacher, friend or television said. I couldn't agree more with the_adams that parents have much more to do with how their children turn out than do politicians, sports heroes or tv shows. If my kids are any indication, then there is hope for all of us.

As for the message sent by our presidents to our children, I would much rather deal with a picadilly in the oval office for Clinton or an affair such as DDE and that lesson (of what not to do) than I would with W who lied about why we are in Iraq and then proceed to kill our grown babies (another example of what not to do). Both are moral low ground and if I have to choose between the two as to which is worse, I would choose the latter. But if you agree wrong is wrong, then they are equally bad. After all, is the murderer worse than the rapist? Or is is the other way around? As for whether W was mislead or not, let's not forget that Colin Powell was unable to make a convincing case in his presentation to the UN. Many Americans, myself included, were never convinced that Iraq possessed WMDs. If we're going to invade any country with an evil leader than why not Korea or Idi Amin? Arguably, both as evil or more so than our disposed dictator there.

Soooo, rather than continue this political rant.....is this political debates or animal debates? If someone would like to continue a friendly political dialogue, I am ready and willing to do so. All we risk is a new way of looking at the same issues. But may I suggest we carry on off forum and allow this one to be dedicated to its stated purpose?


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

"I too am the parent of a beautiful, brilliant 16 year old daughter. However, I, unlike you, have no illusions that I will be able to have control over her behavior once she is an adult."

I get it, it was Lewinsky's behaviour. Sounds like maybe you're another liberal woman in love with Bill Clinton.

I have no illusions as to the control I will have over my daughter's behavior once she is an adult. What I find interesting is that anyone that has a daughter (or son for that matter) can think Clinton's behavior was no big deal. When our daughters are 23 or 24 or whatever Monica Lewinsky was at that time, regardless of their own personality deficiencies, I'd like to think if they are exposed to men in power, much less the President of the United States, those men would have the common decency to not participate in sexual acts even if one of them crawled under the desk and begged for it. It's okay for old Bill, however, to just kick back, light a cigar, and talk on the phone to another world leader. Then the coward didn't even have the balls to admit it to the grand jury.

If you think that's acceptable, I'm sorry for you. In the next presidential election you'll be able vote for another woman that found it acceptable. If she had any respect for herself and this country, she would have walked away from the Whitehouse. Then maybe people wouldn't find her so creepy.

As for Foley, the Kennedys, weird evangelists, or any of these other arrogant bastards, they're all a bunch of losers, on boths sides of the aisle.

"Also, what does that have to do with the glut of tax dollars spent on that witch hunt?"

Clinton committed perjury, that's why those dollars were spent. That money wouldn't have been spent if he would have had the guts to admit he's an idiot. But who gives a crap, right? It was only a little fellatio, all the world leaders are doing it. Everybody lies about sex, why should we care if our President does it?

Believe me, if it was Bush with a young intern under the desk, and the Democrats were running Congress (like they are now), the pitchforks and torches would be out in force. It would make the investigation of Clinton look like an Easter egg hunt.

Now you and the rest of the liberals can come back and tell me blah, blah, blah, Bush lied, Bush this, Bush that.

You know what? I'll admit Bush isn't the guy I hoped he would be. Things have gotten very confusing in Iraq, though I don't think we can stop taking the offensive against fundamentalist terrorism.

Will any of you admit the Clintons are scumbags after honestly assessing their characters? I won't hold my breath.

Kevin

Practice CPR-Catch, Photo, and Release.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Thank you Muskyhopeful, You were a breath of fresh air. I was feeling like I was being suffocated from the left.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

I don't know where to even start. I saw three or four long posts since the last time I posted that I'd like to tear to shreds. But I know the people who need to listen to it will be turning deaf ears on it, and those that DO read it, it'll be preaching to the choir, so I'm not even going to bother.

Bush is no boy scout, no doubt about it, and he's exercised some pretty bad judgement. But ANYONE who would take the likes of Clinton, Kerry, or Ol' Teddy over Bush, I really feel sorry for. And as for Gore, I'm SO thankful he didn't win the election in 2000 I don't even want to THINK about how he would've handled 9/11!!

He'd have been another ostrich, like Carter-- hiding his head in the sand!!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Damn you bill vincent! You are going to cause me to make a confesion here. I VOTED for AL GORE! I HATED BUSH because of environmental issues.I actually cried tears of sorrow when Bush won. When 9-11 happened, I got down on my knees and thanked the Lord that Bush was in office. I've loved him ever since. I get mad at him and think he needs to cowboy up, but thank God we don't have a Gore, Kerry,or Hillary yet. They will not protect our country.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

If Gore who won the presidency actually made it to the WH winning by over a half million votes, we would NOT be in Iraq. We would have gone to Afghanistan and 3000 of our soldiers would not have died. Bush is a stupid loser whom the world thinks has lost what little mind he has. The worst president in our history..Can you tell I hate him??


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Have you looked at Gore lately? Every time I see him I think , Dear Lord, Please forgive me for voting for that man. I look at Bush and say Thank you Lord he won. Best President in our history. I can't figure out why I hated him so much first time around.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

The things young boys are gleaning from the current administration is that a long term congressman has been able for years to have sex with his pages. It has been pushed under the rug and the side joke of all. Talk about putting your head in the sand. Finally, one page had the courage to come forward and expose this guy for what he is a PEDOPHILE not a drunk who needs rehab.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

We would have gone to Afghanistan and 3000 of our soldiers would not have died.

Lily, I don't like what's heappened with regard to Iraq, either. But let me tell you something-- the thought of Al Gore as president when 9/11 occured is enough to keep me awake at night. He reminds me very much of Carter, who happened to be MY commander and chief when I was in the military, and Carter proved just how inept he was as a C&C during the hostage crisis. Gore would have been no different, except that it would have been worse because it was on such a larger scale, and it happened on our own soil. I also firmly believe that HAD Gore been president, there would have been other attacks since 9/11. Iraq was a mistake. No doubt about it. But it was a mistake based on bad intel and advice from terrible advisors (I'd LOVE to see Rumsfeld croak!). But all this left wing hogwash about how he's turning back into a closet lush and the rest of it, is just that-- hogwash.

Also, if you think the way he's aged since in office is an indication, it's been said many times that ANY man will age 20 years over a four year term as president. ANY man. Look back. You'll see what I mean

Talk about putting your head in the sand. Finally, one page had the courage to come forward and expose this guy for what he is a PEDOPHILE not a drunk who needs rehab.

Labmomma, I couldn't agree any more on that issue. ANY man (OR WOMAN) who molests kids should die a slow painful death. But here's something to think about-- don't just look at the repblicans. What about these liberal judges across the country who are giving pedophiles a free walk when they come to court? The most recent one-- a man who sodomized a 6 year old little girl-- GOT PROBATION!!


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Democrat or Republican it isn't about political affiliation with regard to this particular issue of crimes against innocent children. We need to elect judges who will do exactly what you propose to the pedophiles.

That means, however, that everyone who is eligible needs to exercise their right to vote. I personally know several people who will tell me, "I am only one person". It makes me furious. If everyone took this tact, no one would go to the polls. I ask these people, well if you don't care, please go to the poll and vote again for me. I try and explain to someone who doesn't vote, who and why I am voting for. It does make people think about things. If nothing else, you have sparked a thought in an otherwise silent citizen.

We also need to let our lawmakers know what we want. It is very easy to do over the net. You go to either Senate or Congress it allows you to type your State in, it then gives you the links to email anyone who has anything to do with your State/district. I've done it several times and I am so computer illiterate, it's not funny. It takes literally 2 minutes to draft a short email to your lawmakers voicing your concerns. They do listen, I have received written responses, email responses, so I know that someone is reading the mail. May be an assistant or intern, but our concerns will be heard if you take the time to do it.

It makes me sick to my stomach to think of a child, anyone's child in a pedophile's sight. Each state elects or appoints the county and state level judges. The federal judges, however, at all levels, get their jobs based on their political affiliation. Sad but true.

So, yes things can be changed, one small step at a time.

It just doesn't make sense to me to give up, and not try to make things better.


 o
RE: State Constituitional Ammendments to Protect Hunting & Fishin

Hold on here! Have you forgotten about Gary Studds for cryin out loud, a Democrat! Reelected even after admitting being a predator; the dems do not hold their own to very high standards. Its kind of silly to argue who is the worst of the lot, there are good and bad on both sides of the aisle.

Look , even gore knows he lost the election, do you think for one second he would have dropped it if he really thought he'd won!
Carter, the easiest person to forget, without a doubt the most failed President in our history as a nation.
I was sick when bush got the nod, my image of him improved for a while but now, I am very disappointed. Now we are looking at a new crop of pres. hopefuls who I am not too hopeful about.
Its not hard to see we are headed for great trouble, the 1st muslim has been elected in the United States, he demands to be sworn in using a Koran!!


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: This thread has reached the upper limit for the number follow-ups allowed (150). If you would like to continue this discussion, please begin a new thread using the form on the main forum page.


Return to the Pet Debates Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here