Texas Bans Remote Hunting

"Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" <Buzcutt454@aol.com> wrote in message
news:115fs91tav4i79e@news.supernews.com...

> John's entitled to his opinion.

Of course. Too bad he has to wade into America and the 2nd at every
opportunity.

> It's just when he points fingers at others, and call -them- opinionated,
> that makes me laugh.

Typical leftie. Mirror glasses with the mirrors inside.

> He's just as opinionated as anyone here.
>
> And certainly, as we've verrrry clearly seen, less than open minded.

I love to hear the lefties bitch about conservatives being close minded,
ignorant, trailer trash, etc. as they hold high the image of themselves as
the "Party of Diversity and Tolerance".

> You're not arrogant John, you think you're aloof.
>
> And you're -knee deep- in it, like the rest of us.

He trucks it in as fast as we shovel it out.

On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 09:35:12 -0400, JOF <johnfrancis@sympatico.ca> wrote:


>I don't hunt period, so I suppose in that sense you could say I have a
>problem with hunting of any kind. It's not that I'm against hunting in
>principle, just that I guess I had enough killing when I worked a few
>summers in a slaughterhouse killing pigs, cattle and sheep because the
>idea of killing for sport holds no appeal for me. Kind of unmanly I
>know, but it's just the way it is.

Hmmm. I'd have thought that your experience with a slaughterhouse would
have had exactly the opposite effect, I know it did for me. Where I had
been sort of ambivalent about hunting for food before, I consider it
infinitely preferable to meeting death at a slaughterhouse. For example,
do you know what they feed lot cattle? I guess you have seen them
slaughtered. Think about that the next time you munch a burger.

>Seems to me that using a remotely operated killing device isn't very
>sporting, but then one could say the same about some of the other
>weapons and methods used in hunting today. I'd like to see some of our
>great white hunter types go up against a Kodiak, or even a little
>bitty Grizzly, mano a mano, or even armed with knives. Methinks many
>of our fine camo-bedecked hunters' cojones would shrivel to peas and
>their feet would be blistered from the pace they set scootin' in
>retreat. But that's another story.

I don't think you find many of the types you described "going up against"
various animals. Most of the serious hunters I have run into are quite
knowledgeable about the "backcountry" in general and often "needlebutts"
about the particular animal they are after. It seems to be more a contest
of "stalking" (dare I say "hunting"?) than any sort of a "mano-a-mano" type
of test.

Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA ghekhuis@earthlink.net
Illiterate? Write for FREE help

"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:7mvf515p57lop4l40gjpleduagict0l6qi@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 09:35:12 -0400, JOF <johnfrancis@sympatico.ca> wrote:

> >Seems to me that using a remotely operated killing device isn't very
> >sporting, but then one could say the same about some of the other
> >weapons and methods used in hunting today. I'd like to see some of our
> >great white hunter types go up against a Kodiak, or even a little
> >bitty Grizzly, mano a mano, or even armed with knives. Methinks many
> >of our fine camo-bedecked hunters' cojones would shrivel to peas and
> >their feet would be blistered from the pace they set scootin' in
> >retreat. But that's another story.
>
> I don't think you find many of the types you described "going up against"
> various animals. Most of the serious hunters I have run into are quite
> knowledgeable about the "backcountry" in general and often "needlebutts"
> about the particular animal they are after. It seems to be more a contest
> of "stalking" (dare I say "hunting"?) than any sort of a "mano-a-mano"
type
> of test.

I'm just waiting to hear about his blistered feet and shriveled peas after
he went mano e mano with the car interior.


--
One million Marines cannot seize Tarawa in a thousand years.
Admiral Keiji Shibasaki, 4 days before his death.

"Dennis (Icarus)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote in message
news:a0e41$4257f1a1$45010e17$20325@KNOLOGY.NET...

> I have a problem with hunters wo kill just for the sake of killing.
> Fortunatley this is a very small, darned near miniscule, minority.

Out here in the west, varmint shooting is big business.

Various wildlife control agencies regularly remove limits and license
requirements in area's that are experiencing extreme overpopulation cycles,
such as the nutria in Louisiana. In the riparian deserts of the west,
populations of jackrabbits and various ground squirrels cyclically become
destructive not only to themselves, but to the entire ecosystem.

"JOF" <johnfrancis@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:0imf51dj1g8ets4tnr12d29kns9ns4bjoi@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 05:33:37 -0400, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick"
> <Buzcutt454@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Good cites, and if taken in their roiginal context, accurate on my
> part.
> >
> > "I believe the Second Amendment covers that. The "Shall not be
infringed"
> >part is evidently sacrosanct annd inviolable."
>
> Which part was incorrect? Are you suggesting it is less than sacred
> and somehow open to interpretation? Was the "shall not be infringed"
> part supposed to go on to say "except in the case of remotely
> controlled weapons" or "other than for weapons too heinous for
> civilized man"?

Uhmm...John. The law doesn;t prohibit the possiession, operation, et cof the
remote controlled weapons
Have as many as you like.
Just prohibits hunting with 'em.

Take a quick peek at the 10th amendment. Something about "powers not
enumerated are reserved to the ststes, or to the people".

>
> Arguably we need to take the hunting part out of the equation in any
> case. I believe the real issue here is that if such a gun exists, then
> the govt will have it, and of course already does, only bigger and
> better. Ergo, a "well-regulated" militia better get some of those
> puppies because we need protection form our own govts. According to
> what we've been told here a well-regulated militia means everyman, so
> this should become a pretty hot item for personal armament.
>
> I'm picturing such a weapon mounted on every pickup truck roof, and
> the owner armed only with a PDA containing a high res lcd and
> controlling software and mebbe even a little bitty joystick. As long
> as the owner stayed within range of the transceiver he'd be safe. 8)
>
> >> It's your right to arbitrarily place everyone who doesn't love guns in
> >> the gungrabber category? What about the people who simply don't care?
> >> Are they your enemies too? -JOF
> >
> > As far as we can tell.
> >
> > You've never weighed in at that position, however. -Popeye
>
> I missed one? Sheesh!

Dennis
>
> JF
>
> I've learned that life is tough, but I'm tougher.
> But I've also learned that under everyone's hard
> shell is someone who wants to be appreciated and loved.

"JOF" <johnfrancis@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:8o3g515tbhp4eq3lardnnpikk0dgl4klef@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 10:59:30 -0400, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick"
> <Buzcutt454@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> I don't hunt period, so I suppose in that sense you could say I have a
> >> problem with hunting of any kind. It's not that I'm against hunting in
> >> principle, just that I guess I had enough killing when I worked a few
> >> summers in a slaughterhouse killing pigs, cattle and sheep because the
> >> idea of killing for sport holds no appeal for me.
> >
> > Thin skinned?
>
> I just got tired of seeing killing and blood from animals.

Sucks when it drips off those styrofoam containers at the supermarket.

> I was a great bunny killer as a kid. I shot plenty of jacks,
> squirrels, and groundhogs. And the squirrels and the groundhogs were a
> nuisance so I was actually doing a public service.

Musta been pretty fast getting them with a knife.

>The town police
> used to give out my name when folks asked if it was okay to shoot
> squirrels that were infesting their attics etc.

Ah.

A known Gunsel.

Trigger man.

Torpedo.

A Mechanic.

An Enforcer.

Have gun, will travel.

> >> Seems to me that using a remotely operated killing device isn't very
> >> sporting, but then one could say the same about some of the other
> >> weapons and methods used in hunting today.
> >
> > That's because you're grossly ignorant about hunting.
>
> I guess so.

Well you certainly seem opinionated on what an unfair slaughter it is.

Spend a few cold, wet hunting seasons humping up and down mountain side
trying to even -glimpse- a deer, you might have a different opinion.

You seem to think they run up and dive spreddleged on the car hood with
"shoot me, I'm furry" tattood on their asses.

Much better for you to see one inhumanely incarcerated in a zoo.

> > I might just bet a dollar that at least once in your life, you've had a
> >spoonful of sharkfin soup.
>
> Not that I know of.

Bet you wouldn't turn it down on moral grounds.

> > And I'm sure there's not a scrap of leather in your whole wardrobe.
>
> Then you'd be wrong.

Check.

> > How "sporting" was the death of your car interior?
>
> The interior's inanimate. I'm sure the cow that contributed the
> material was somewhat unhappy though.

So you hire your hunting done?

> How many great white hunters would still be in the game if the bears
> carried autoloaders and had the manual dexterity and the intellectual
> capacity to use 'em? Methinks there'd be a sudden drop in hunting
> license apps.

You'd be wrong.

Consider those that choose military and law enforcement careers.

> > I'd like to see you spend one week bow hunting, then come back and tell
us
> >how "sporting" you think it was.
>
> I don't know much about bows. I've heard of crossbows that can drive a
> bolt with at least as much force as a lot of guns. A long bow on the
> other hand probably puts a little more pressure on the hunter,
> although he can still stand off at a distance and plunk a few shots
> before the bear can get to him. Then there's the whole deal of hiding
> in a blind or up a tree, or better yet, using a remotely operated gun
> so there's no danger at all. Why not just drift some kind of gas
> downwind into the trees and then go take inventory of what falls down?
> It would be a lot more efficient.

"I try to couch my comments in neutrality. I try to remain
dispassionate. Reason fails when passion rules, or something like
that." -JOF

> >> Methinks many
> >> of our fine camo-bedecked hunters' cojones would shrivel to peas and
> >> their feet would be blistered from the pace they set scootin' in
> >> retreat. But that's another story.
> >
> > "I try to couch my comments in neutrality. I try to remain
> >dispassionate. Reason fails when passion rules, or something like
> >that." -JOF
>
> True, but sometimes I fail.
>
> > "In rec.scuba terms I think I'm pretty darned neutral."
> >-JOF
>
> Absolutely. It's all relative.
>
> >I think I'm fairly open minded. -JOF
>
> So convince me that I'm wrong. I'm open to compelling arguments.

You haven't as yet made an argument.

You've innaccurately pontificated in in a smugly superior fashion.

You've certainly, if semi-cleverly, cast specific aspersions on the
hunting crowd (while claiming to be open minded).

I did give you two good questions in another post, though.

> >I'm open to rational argument. -JOF
>
> As above. Note the qualifier "rational".

Then make one.

You haven't yet.


--
One million Marines cannot seize Tarawa in a thousand years.
Admiral Keiji Shibasaki, 4 days before his death.

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 10:36:27 -0500, "Dennis \(Icarus\)"
<nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote:


>Uhmm...John. The law doesn;t prohibit the possiession, operation, et cof the
>remote controlled weapons
>Have as many as you like.
>Just prohibits hunting with 'em.
>
Good point. Mebbe I over reacted.

JF

I've learned that life is tough, but I'm tougher.
But I've also learned that under everyone's hard
shell is someone who wants to be appreciated and loved.

"JOF" wrote

> I don't hunt period, so I suppose in that sense you could say I have a
> problem with hunting of any kind.

I have a problem with the fact that you presume that your choice not to hunt
should lead to a problem with hunting in general.

> It's not that I'm against hunting in> principle, just that I guess I had
> enough killing when I worked a few
> summers in a slaughterhouse killing pigs, cattle and sheep because the
> idea of killing for sport holds no appeal for me.

Fair enough. I'm not overly in love with it either. I do enjoy hunting,
but I don't do a lot of killing.

> Kind of unmanly I know, but it's just the way it is.

I find no meaninful relationship between manly and hunting.

> Seems to me that using a remotely operated killing device isn't very
> sporting. . .

For Texas, it's probably more sporting that going there yourself. Last time
I drove through the area, there were Bucks in the median of the highway. If
you were there, you could kill a deer. If you're not there, you have to
wait for a deer to come into the area controled by your weapon. It's
probably not a lot harder, but it's a little harder.

Let's also remember that the remote hunting makes it possible for those that
can't get out into the woods to enjoy some of what you or I might, if we
both enjoyed hunting. You had your turn killing, why not let the wheelchair
bound have their turn?

> I'd like to see some of our great white hunter types go up against a
> Kodiak, or even a little
> bitty Grizzly, mano a mano, or even armed with knives.

Do you also think that the way to stop a speeding vehicle is by sticking
your foot out Flintstone style? You use the right tool for the right job.
The bears you describe were born with weapons. I wasn't. I was born with a
mind that allowed me to even the score and even gain the advantage.

> Methinks many of our fine camo-bedecked hunters' cojones would shrivel to
> peas and
> their feet would be blistered from the pace they set scootin' in
> retreat. But that's another story.

One of my friends killed a bear with a bow a couple of years ago.

Lee

"JOF" <johnfrancis@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:8o3g515tbhp4eq3lardnnpikk0dgl4klef@4ax.com...
<snip>
>
> I don't know much about bows. I've heard of crossbows that can drive a
> bolt with at least as much force as a lot of guns. A long bow on the
> other hand probably puts a little more pressure on the hunter,
> although he can still stand off at a distance and plunk a few shots
> before the bear can get to him. Then there's the whole deal of hiding
> in a blind or up a tree, or better yet, using a remotely operated gun
> so there's no danger at all. Why not just drift some kind of gas
> downwind into the trees and then go take inventory of what falls down?
> It would be a lot more efficient.

Think of the remote-controlled hunt as a means of maing hunting compliant
with the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act)
Helps provide "equal access" to hunting.
IIRC, that was how the thing got started.

<snip>

Dennis
>
> JF
>
> I've learned that life is tough, but I'm tougher.
> But I've also learned that under everyone's hard
> shell is someone who wants to be appreciated and loved.

"Dennis (Icarus)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote in message
news:856e9$42584954$45010e17$6527@KNOLOGY.NET...
> "Scott" <pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:D3T5e.3$hT3.80@news.uswest.net...
> > "Dennis (Icarus)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote in message
> > news:a0e41$4257f1a1$45010e17$20325@KNOLOGY.NET...
> >
> > > I have a problem with hunters wo kill just for the sake of killing.
> > > Fortunatley this is a very small, darned near miniscule, minority.
> >
> > Out here in the west, varmint shooting is big business.
> >
> > Various wildlife control agencies regularly remove limits and license
> > requirements in area's that are experiencing extreme overpopulation
> cycles,
> > such as the nutria in Louisiana. In the riparian deserts of the west,
> > populations of jackrabbits and various ground squirrels cyclically
become
> > destructive not only to themselves, but to the entire ecosystem.
> >
>
> So that wouldn't fall into the "killing for the sake of killing" right?
>
> "The purpose-driven hunter"
>

We don't call it hunting, we call it killing.

=