[Ithaca37]

I just got done reading several articles from several puplications on the subject of hunter replacement ratios (i.e. for every one hunter who passes on, how many replace him). Ideally you want a 1:1 ratio or better. The articles essentially described how the states who have the most stringent youth hunting guidelines in the nation also have the lowest hunter replacement ratio. That is, the states with the highest minimum age for hunting, have the fewest number of new hunters. There are six states in the nation who do not have minimum age limits, allof which have replacement ratios of 1:1 or better. Hmmmmm......maybe we should start teaching kids about responsibility and decision making at the ages at which we used to and not coddle them until they are 18.

For any of you skeptics consider this:
The Humane Society of The U.S. (HSUS) has proposed that a federal law be enacted to make 18 the minimum age to hunt, declaring that those under 18 lack the maturity to handle a firearm safely. Why would they seek to place such restrictions on hunting unless it was beneficial to their anti-hunting/anti-gun agenda they so unceasingly cram down our throats. Beware the HSUS and further limitations on hunting.

 

[kenton6]

That's absolutely right Ithaca. And many of these same states that have a low ratio are instituting youth hunt days.
If something isn't done right away about this problem, more and more states will be facing even more serious problems with overpopulation of wild game, disease, etc.
HSUS knows that the total number of hunters in the US is dropping and have discovered that targeting age limits is a good way to go.
Kids, especially in states rich in hunting tradition need to tell the education gurus to go to hell and we need to bring back hunter education in our schools at a very young age.

 

[Ithaca37]

They believe that by eliminating hunting they can eliminate gun ownership. They may very well be right. With the NRA and the like focusing on some "Hunting heritage" BS as the justification for the 2nd ammendment, they will have nothing to justify private ownership of firearms with if hunting is gone. They should instead focus on the fact that the 2nd ammend. is there to provide the populous with a means to overthrow the govt should it no longer represent their best interests.......this is why I will never join the NRA, sadly they are actually facilitating the anti-gunners efforts.

 

[kenton6]

I agree that with the elimination of hunting, some people, even hunters past, will think there is no need to keep a gun. This is clearly a minority. The vast majority of gun owners, keep them because of the reasons you state and more.

Although the NRA is not perfect and I am not attempting to sell anyone on the NRA, they are a powerful voice and can do alot for gun owners.

You stated in another post that HSUS is targeting age groups and they are. If the NRA has enough people on the ball, they will go with the changes that those opposed to gun ownership are instituting and make the changes as well.

The NRA seems to be more of a reactionary entity - in that when an event occurs they go fight it if they deem it so. As was the case in LA when police began disarming the law abiding citizens.

Once Florida reaffirmed its position on self defense and the use of deadly force, the NRA has stepped in to help overturn a law in Florida that prohibits an individual to bringing a weapon in their car to work and leave it locked and secured.

With an opening like this in the Florida Legislature and the citizenry as a whole, the NRA becomes opportunistic.

But with all this said, I think we are a long, long way from having Americans stripped of their right to keep and bear arms. There are just too many of us that will fight it.

But that doesn't mean we can sit idly by. We need to become proactive and do what we can to teach our children about the importance of gun rights, hunting and good family traditions.

The next time any of us are going hunting or fishing and can't decide whether to take one of the kids, don't think about it. Take them with you. It will be the best choice you can make in the long haul. Introduce them to guns and teach them the respect and safety and responsibility that goes with it.

Enough preaching - to the choir!

 

[Lil John]

With the NRA and the like focusing on some "Hunting heritage" BS as the justification for the 2nd ammendment, they will have nothing to justify private ownership of firearms with if hunting is gone. They should instead focus on the fact that the 2nd ammend.

As a life member of the NRA, I feel I must defend it here.
The NRA is fighting for all gun rights, not just for those who hunt.
The rite to keep and bear arms has little to do with hunting, but everything to do with self defense and our rite to do so.

I have and will continue to support any groups that will fight for my rite to defend myself, not to support them is just what those who want to take our rites away want to see.

I will stand and fight with my face forward, those who oppose me will see in my eyes the true meaning of freedom.

 

[kenton6]

There are still millions of people in this country who feel the way Lil John does about the right to keep and bear arms.
These same people know that the only way they can protect themselves from would be intruders etc. and to make sure we never have a government run by some ruthless dictator et. al is to make sure the masses remain armed.

 

[Ithaca37]

The right to defend the nation and yourself/your propety is definately what the 2nd ammendment exists for. However, when the NRA talk about hunting heritage being a reason for gun ownership, they miss the mark completely. This allows antis to target a specific passtime, to erode the 2nd ammendment. In fact I believe that the 2nd ammendement has been erroded to the point to which it is time to :

"dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation." -Declaration of Independence

That is not to say that members of the NRA have somehow betrayed america, just the NRA needs to take a hardline stance of gun rights and why the 2nd ammendment is so important.

I agree with you Lil John no one will get my guns except bullets first.

 

[sremington]

I support the NRA as an organization. But like anything that I have ever encountered in my lifetime I cannot agree 100% on how a person or organization operates.

The NRA supports the fact that I can go out and bear arms and my kids can go out and do the same - good enough for me... :wink:

 

[Ithaca37]

My beef with the NRA is this, they refuse to push for the repeal of the National Firearms Act, the Assault Weapons Ban, etc. All of these are unconstitutional and grounds for rebellion. The NRA chooses instead to defend ownership of "assault weapons" by satating that they "no different from other semi-auto weapons" , well oh boy that really helps. They take the easy way out and don't address that these weapons, which we all know were designed for killing, are able to be posessed per the 2nd ammend. They say well, "these are not machine guns", who the hell cares, I should be able to posess a machine gun if I want to, hell if I want a cruise missle and have money for it, why the hell shouldn't I have one:

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

It clearly says arms, not guns, not long guns, not anything but machine guns, ARMS. That includes nuclear weapons, tanks, missiles, explosives, howitzers, etc. The NRA chooses to ignore this fact, they a spineless like the rest of the politicians.[/b]

 

[kenton6]

Understanding the history of how we got to this point helps. There was time when the battles being waged over gun rights were fierce and at times when more advocates for control were in power, these rights began to erode to the point they are at today. Actually, they have turned a corner and more gun rights are coming back to us ie. the allowing of the assault weapons ban to expire.

75 million Americans own guns in America. The vast majority of them believe as passionately as you do about retaining your Constitutional right. Rome wasn't built in a day and sometimes if you bite off more than you can chew, swallow and digest, you get ill and things go sour.

NRA is not the perfect entity but it is one in which we should work with to get back our rights - one bite at a time.

The politicials have unofficially declared gun rights a dead issue. This is good for all Americans. We can slowly but surely win back all our 2nd Amendment rights and all our other rights one chunk at a time being smart, educated and wise and utilize all the tools available to us - including the NRA.

As the old saying goes, "You don't have to fight with me but don't fight against me."

 

[Ithaca37]

I am not anti-NRA per se.....I am just sick of sitting around, Thomas jeffson said "God Forbid this country go twenty years without a Revolution"......I ambeginning to thin khe was right, perhaps it is getting to be time....it is after all the spirit in which this nation was founded.

 

[kenton6]

I love your passion. This is something that is lacking in many people in this country today.
I don't think there is anything wrong with thinking like TJ.

When the founding fathers put together our Constitution and Bill of Rights, I personally believe they were guided by a power bigger than just plain intelligence.

These two documents are the two greatest political documents written in the this world and we are forever trying to rip it apart - go figure!

 

[Ithaca37]

I hope I have not offended anybody here, I know I don't take anything you say personally.

To all of you NRA members, I am sorry if I offended you, but.....the truth hurts sometimes. :lol: :lol: :lol: Just kidding.

 

[kenton6]

This article I found sounds like something you would like to read Ithaca. It talks about restoring our liberties - all of them.

http://www.therealitycheck.org/GuestColumnist/dhagin011805.htm

 

[Ithaca37]

Interesting piece, although I do not agree with preventing felons from posessing guns.....either they are safe to admit back into society with full rights restored, or they need to remain locked up, no more of this "let's let them out, but they are still too daangerous to let them have a gun", what is that?

 

[kenton6]

Good point

 

[Ithaca37]

I have found difficulty in being able to articulate my reason for dissaproval of the NRA however, I have found the perfect explanation:

"But to answer the question directly the 2nd amendment was not instituted so folks could have arms for defense against burglars. That was so presumed that enumeration of it was not necessary any more than today it would be necessary to write out that you have the Right to think what you wish. The 2nd amendment sought to prevent the government from taking away martial arms from the people so that the people would not be outmatched by a soldier of any government that sought to oppress them.

If a soldier came to your house to commit some heinous act then would you wish to be armed almost as well as he is or just as well as he is? If some evil conservative came into power & wanted to stifle dissent in your home town & sent in troops to do so, would you want your bolt action hunting rifle or an M14?

The framers didn't see automatic firearms coming just like they didn't see home computers with printers. What they did see was a very simple premise: if a person is armed just as well as a soldier, then that person not only stands a fighting chance against the soldier, but may in fact deter the soldier from acting against him.

If a battalion of soldiers are armed with flintlock muskets, then the people should have flintlock muskets. If those soldiers have select fire rifles, then the people should have select fire rifles. Upsetting that balance of power is a very dangerous thing.

A twist has been thrown into things since the 18th century. Back then the military served martial & police roles. Now we have a military force separate from the police force. So not only does a Marine boot being issued an M16A4 justify a citizen having an M14, but the cop down the street having an M4 carbine in his trunk necessitates that the citizen should have an M14 in his trunk as well. Doing otherwise would upset the balance of power; the ultimate check & balance system that the framers set in place. "

Th NRA fears offending its police and military suppoters, so it refuses to acknowledge this fact. The ability to counter the government's goons is the largest single reason for the second ammendment, there are just a whole buch of perks that come along with it.

Credit where credit is due. The quote came from:

http://publicola.mu.nu/archives/2005/10/03/guns_arent_evil_except_for_those_damned_machine_guns.html