NRA and Hunting

>The country was founded on private
>property rights not on the
>basis of the federal government
>owning as much land as
>possible. So I don't
>consider selling public land as
>"tyranny".

REALLY? Who bought the Lousianna purchase? Private entities? How about Alaska? How did the Texas come into being? Was it a private transaction?

For that matter, if its unconstitutional for the feds to "own land" who the heck did the homesteaders get deeds from? They didn't buy it from Mexico, or France, or the Utes. How did that happen if the feds can't "own land"

BTW Tri, YOU OWN IT. That's how you, a Texan can cone to Utah and wander around chasing critters. You didn't ask Utah for permission. You didn't ask the feds. It was YOUR LAND.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Feb-28-18
>AT 07:58?AM (MST)
>
>As I first stated, I didn't
>read all of this. What
>I read was posters worried
>about rifles to deer hunt
>with, when 2A has nothing
>to do with deer hunting.
>
>
>The Feds have been stealing private
>and public land. WE, WE
>let that happen. Here where
>I live, they stole a
>small piece of a friend's
>farm. There was no public
>outcry, because it did not
>affect them. In new London,
>the gvt used eminent domain
>to steal private property, to
>sell to a large pharmaceutical.
>Again, no public outcry because
>it did not affect them.
>
>Houndsman Bear hunters in NY pleaded
>for help, and received none
> from other hunters
>because it did not affect
>them.
>
>We let it happen.
>
>We are going to loose gun
>rights , because as this
>post show, we are divided.
>In the end we get
>the gvt we deserve because
>we let it happen.

Utah lost/is losing 31,000 acres because the state sold/is selling currently. That WAS land YOU OWNED. Gone.

The NRA funded the hacks that sold it. They weren't even just "neutral".

Send me a link to pro public land gun group, I'm in.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
I've been away for a bit, but catching up, I noticed a recent trend...

Several guys said, "I didn't read the thread, but..." and then regurgitated the NRA's talking points while forgetting that it was a Democrat, Harry Reid, that largely prevented gun control while Dems had both Chambers of Congress.

Also, hoss is spot-on with his posts about public land and all the pro-gun groups that support public land. NRA donates to the most anti-public-land politicians there are. To me, that's a donation to an anti-hunter.

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
You didn't pay attention to what I wrote Hossblur. I didn't say the government can't or shouldn't own land. I just said it isn't "tyranny" for them to sell it.
 
Again i say show where the NRA donates to anti public land. They do support Politicians that support gun rights that is there platform get off of the public vs private land issue when you post on gun issues about public land it is not the same issue. You have points to be made about public vs private land but do not use the NRA as your hammer.
 
Here is what they used to email back if you asked their position on public lands transfer, this was near the end of 114th congress:


Thank you for contacting the NRA-ILA.

The NRA does not have a position on this issue, but is certainly well aware of the concerns over the impact this would have on hunting and public access on federal public lands if a significant percentage of federal lands were transferred to the states. Currently federal lands can be identified for sale or transfer through the land management planning process which is a decision making process open to public participation via public comments and is governed by the National Environmental Policy Act.

There are hundreds of issues at the state and Congressional level that could potentially hurt hunting and access to hunting as well as be a threat to scientific wildlife management. The NRA does not take positions on all these issues, unless we believe there is a real, imminent threat. We do not believe the land transfer issue will gain any significant traction in Congress. Certainly, not in this Congress as it is on its way to adjournment. It remains to be seen whether this issue will surface in the new Congress and if it does, we can determine then what our position will be. I hope you find this helpful to you.

Carlin A

NRA-ILA Grassroots
800-392-8683
www.NRAILA.org
[email protected]
 
It is not NRA's job to fight for public land. They exist to fight for the right to keep and bear arms. Full stop. Sometimes they will issue an opinion on public land issues, but they don't have the mandate to spend money or time on it. If they waded into the fracas on politicians selling off our public land, they would be in violation of their mission. Ditto for hunting. They really ought to be less involved in hunting issues than they are, but there is a certain segment that figures the only reason to own guns is for hunting (which is a position the antigunners absolutely LOVE), so it's a demographic decision.

The Sierra Club is the big hammer on public land issues. I don't agree with a lot of their positions on hunting, but they are pretty solid on public land.

For hunting issues, Ducks Unlimited, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Pheasants Forever, and the Wild Turkey Federation are among the biggest supporters. I don't agree with everything they do, and I really wish they would get along better between themselves, but they do good work.

I can't afford to belong to all of these organizations, but I support them whenever I can.

Life Member, National Rifle Association.
Life Member, North Dakota State Shooting Sports Association.
 
>Again i say show where the
>NRA donates to anti public
>land. They do support Politicians
>that support gun rights that
>is there platform get off
>of the public vs private
>land issue when you post
>on gun issues about public
>land it is not the
>same issue. You have points
>to be made about public
>vs private land but do
>not use the NRA as
>your hammer.

Words matter, notdonhunting. It would be impossible for NRA to donate to "anti public land" as that is an idea, not an entity. However, it is irrefutable that NRA donates to "anti-public-land politicians" as I stated.

As post 97 illustrates, there are plenty of pro-gun organizations that are also pro-public-land. NRA isn't one of them so I'll take my money elsewhere.

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
>This is like watching a person
>saying he hates KFC because
>they don't sell pizza too.

WRONG!

It's like saying, "Because KFC promotes the privatization of public land, I'll buy my chicken from Buffalo Wild Wings."

Grizzly
 
Grizz and Hoss you guys have that right to support who ever you like i will defend your rights there but the NRA supports POLITICIANS THAT SUPPORT GUN RIGHTS PERIOD.....
I do think we need to keep on top of the public land issue but do not divide on the gun issue we will all lose. Support anyway you can support with a pro gun group but respect those that support another pro gun group.
Thanks Nemont i do think that was helpful on the NRA response. I know you i see very different on most all issues but we can be Seville.
 
>It is not NRA's job to
>fight for public land. They
>exist to fight for the
>right to keep and bear
>arms. Full stop. Sometimes they
>will issue an opinion on
>public land issues, but they
>don't have the mandate to
>spend money or time on
>it. If they waded into
>the fracas on politicians selling
>off our public land, they
>would be in violation of
>their mission. Ditto for hunting.
>They really ought to be
>less involved in hunting issues
>than they are, but there
>is a certain segment that
>figures the only reason to
>own guns is for hunting
>(which is a position the
>antigunners absolutely LOVE), so it's
>a demographic decision.
>
>The Sierra Club is the big
>hammer on public land issues.
>I don't agree with a
>lot of their positions on
>hunting, but they are pretty
>solid on public land.
>
>For hunting issues, Ducks Unlimited, Rocky
>Mountain Elk Foundation, Pheasants Forever,
>and the Wild Turkey Federation
>are among the biggest supporters.
>I don't agree with everything
>they do, and I really
>wish they would get along
>better between themselves, but they
>do good work.
>
>I can't afford to belong to
>all of these organizations, but
>I support them whenever I
>can.
>
>Life Member, National Rifle Association.
>Life Member, North Dakota State Shooting
>Sports Association.

Spot on
You beat me to it
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-28-18 AT 11:46AM (MST)[p]Obviously, NRA is willing to fight for hunting rights too... when they want to.

For years, the NRA has been working to ensure that sound wildlife management practices implemented by the states, and not federal politics, govern the control of wolf populations in the United States.

The NRA is pleased to see this long-running controversy resolved favorably and is proud to have played a role in ensuring that radical attempts to eliminate hunting and diminish state authority over wildlife management were defeated.

I am very grateful that NRA, RMEF, & SCI worked to delist wolves. But that also makes their silence on public lands even more deafening.

Grizzly
 
The NRA hasn't taken a stand against abortion, deer breeding, publicly funded radio, and term limits. They must be a bunch of scumbags. :eek:
 
https://www.nrahunting.com/we-are-hunters/

The NRA?s dedication to the preservation of the Second Amendment and the protection of our right to keep and bear arms is very simply what we do. However, that is not all we do, or have done. The privilege to hunt with those arms has also been a dedicated cause for the NRA for a very long time; but in a relatively quiet way. With the launch of the NRA Hunters? Leadership Forum the NRA?s support of the hunting sports and all that relates to hunting is no longer in the background. You see one facet of that here, and the sheer magnificence of it all speaks volumes; not only about the NRA?s greatly enhanced effort, but also about the spectrum and grandeur that is Hunting.

Grizzly
 
A lot of NRA members are hunters. Just because you don't take a side on the public land debate doesn't mean you don't support hunting.

Just out of curiosity Grizzly do you think more hunters in the USA hunt on private land or public land?

Hey Grizzly what is your church's position on the public land debate? How about Your grocery store's position? Do they care whether you get cheep hunting on public land? How about your HOA? Have they come out hard against selling public property?
 
^ 480 277, spot on! That's what I've been trying to get across. We are all in this together no matter which of these two issues is most important to us.
Hey Grizz, I didn't read the link to your last post, but I read your quote. Does that mean the NRA is going to start taking more a proactive stance on our hunting rights, and possibly land conservation? I'm not trying to stir anything up, just asking your opinion.
As I've stated before , I support both sides of this "debate". I belong to organizations that support both the preservation of our 2A and our public lands. However, when I read the corporate mission statements of these groups, I struggle to find where either overlap into the other. I hope that maybe the NRA is breaking that mold, and I said I HOPE.
heywouldya
 
Hundreds of organizations and businesses across the nation ? including many that are long-time antagonists ? have joined forces to lobbying against transfer proposals under the #KeepItPublic and #PublicLandsProud banners.
They include: The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TRCP), Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF), the Sportsmen?s Alliance, Outdoor Industry Association (OIA), Outdoor Alliance, National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), Backcountry Hunters & Anglers (BHA), Simms, Trout Unlimited, Quail Forever, Sitka, Old Milwaukee, the National Wildlife Federation, Kimber, Pheasants Forever, National Wild Turkey Federation, Remington, Powderhook, the Wilderness Society, Center for Western Priorities (CWP), National Bowhunters Association, and the Sierra Club, the nation's largest grassroots conservation organization with more than 2 million members.

OUTDOOR LIFE

Seems NSSF, the trade group for gun companies DISAGREES with the NRA.

As does Kimber, Remington., to name a few.

I can't help notice another post where you all want to boycott an outdoors store because of their action, but its ridiculous to treat the NRA the same?

Aren't you same guys complaining about companies dropping ties with the NRA now commenting?

What does a rental car company have to do with guns? Yet you all will go after companies that dropped ties.

All we needed from the NRA was ONE sentence. ONE.

"The NRA stands with the millions of gun owners who hunt, shoot on public land"

No money, no lawyers, a simple sentence.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
You going to tel me all them groups take a proactive stance in gun issues not a chance.To include the Sierra club is a joke you cant support the NRA for not releasing a statement in support for public land but you know all the good they do for gun rights but you list the Sierra club when they support the public land issue and then openly go against all other issues on hunting and land use. I think for some on this private land issue it goes a little more in line against Repubs.
 
All we needed from the NRA was ONE sentence. ONE.

"The NRA stands with the millions of gun owners who hunt, shoot on public land"

I'll ask you the same thing I asked Grizzly. Has your church given you that sentence? How about your mechanic? How about your grocer? Has the guy that sold you guns or bows given you that sentence? You don't want to join someone. You want them to be your b*+ch. Good luck with that philosophy.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-28-18 AT 04:30PM (MST)[p]>You going to tel me all
>them groups take a proactive
>stance in gun issues not
>a chance.To include the Sierra
>club is a joke you
>cant support the NRA for
>not releasing a statement in
>support for public land but
>you know all the good
>they do for gun rights
>but you list the Sierra
>club when they support the
>public land issue and then
>openly go against all other
>issues on hunting and land
>use. I think for some
>on this private land issue
>it goes a little more
>in line against Repubs.

Ya think? Is there a libertarian plank calling for transfer(a cute name for selling)?

Is there one in the dem party?

The REPUBLICAN President is not only going against the NRA, he's PUBLICALLY mocking them.

NOT the Sierra Club, not RMEF.

THE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT is bashing the NRA.

I am tired of the "we all need to stick together" line. Why didn't WE ALL NEED TO STICK TOGETHER on land?

ANSWER: BECAUSE THE REPUBS WANT IT.

NOT, because gun owners want it. Not because a government that can grab 28% of the country and sell it to their contributors isn't the definition of gov tyranny.
They didn't want to upset the money train.

They made ZERO attempt to cultivate pro gun dems or independents. They wrote off HALF of the country(I'm not a repub, I'm pro gun) in order to curry favor with the Repubs.

NOW THOSE SAME REPUBS ARE SELLING THEM OUT, and NOW we are all supposed to come together, all be on the same team?

They weren't reaching out a month ago.


But you bet. UNLIKE the NRA, the #keepitpublic folks haven't decided to pigeon hole themselves into an R or D hole. They have realized it isn't about political party, its about the goal. An enemy of my enemy is my friend.

With the NRA its become a friend of anyone not GOP is my enemy.

THe proof is there are 60 million gun owners. 1/12 of them are NRA.

From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
>All we needed from the NRA
>was ONE sentence. ONE.
>
>"The NRA stands with the millions
>of gun owners who hunt,
>shoot on public land"
>
>I'll ask you the same thing
>I asked Grizzly. Has
>your church given you that
>sentence? How about your
>mechanic? How about your
>grocer? Has the guy
>that sold you guns or
>bows given you that sentence?
> You don't want to
>join someone. You want
>them to be your b*+ch.
> Good luck with that
>philosophy.

I do not know if you meant this post for me but i am with you on this issue Tri [not all issues]. I am sorry if i did not make myself clear but i meant that for [Hoss] i stand with the NRA they are a 2nd amendment right protector organization not a defender of public land. I can not understand anyone getting in bed with the Sierra club that organization has done more harm to the west and the way most westerners believe than the Repubs will ever do.
 
A bit off topic, but if any of you "property" owners actually believe you own your property stop paying taxes that you are forced to pay on it and see how long it takes the alphabet boys to come a call'n. We lost private land ownership long ago when they began the public indoctrination system. The feds control all.

Back on topic;
The only voice that fights for the 2A that the government, media, and other socialists recognize is the NRA. It is the only organization that has the clout to non-violently defend our Right.
This argument between fellow gun owners is beyond ridiculous!


Norkal

"One can take my life but not my faith or my
confidence. I fear none and respect all."
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-28-18 AT 05:05PM (MST)[p]>All we needed from the NRA
>was ONE sentence. ONE.
>
>"The NRA stands with the millions
>of gun owners who hunt,
>shoot on public land"
>
>I'll ask you the same thing
>I asked Grizzly. Has
>your church given you that
>sentence? How about your
>mechanic? How about your
>grocer? Has the guy
>that sold you guns or
>bows given you that sentence?
> You don't want to
>join someone. You want
>them to be your b*+ch.
> Good luck with that
>philosophy.

Tri. Ya. I try to support companies with my dollars that support me. Isn't that why you all want to boycott? Did I miss something?

My biatch? You mean like regardless of how the NRA treats all gun owners?
"Shut up, sit down, do what your told!"

Like I've posted twice already, the gun manufacturers trade group, as well as a majority of gun companies seem to have no problem supporting land. Is NSSF a bunch of gun hating commie pinkos?

Isn't the NSSF a GUN group? Not a land group? Not a grocer? Not a mechanic? A gun group?
How is it they were able to lend support, yet the NRA couldn't even just add their name?

But, lets be real, the NRA HAS lent their name to hunting. You can't swing a dead cat without hitting an NRA logo on hunting shows, trade shows, events.

Yet they were just too busy to do so for 640,000,000 acres that their membership both hunts and target shoots.

It had NOTHING to do with maintaining clout with the political party that supports transfer.

They were just too busy.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Hoss you still have not answered if you support the Sierra club of which supports stopping Grizzly hunts in Wyoming, Montana and Idaho where the Grizzly has been removed from the endanger list also they support urban Coyotes improving human and wild-canid coexisting, stopping the wall on the Mexican border all for made up story's of how animals including birds will not be ably to migrate freely, and we all know the damage they have done to close coal fire power plants when the coal plants have improved there emissions to better counts than the electric cars that the environmentalists drive. All the info i got on the Sierra club is on there Web page check it out. You support the Sierra club just because they support public lands and you cant support the NRA because they have not issued a statement on behalf of the public lands YET and let me say it again YET. You keep labeling everyone that supports Republicans as anti public land so i take it anyone that supports public land is in bed with the Sierra club that is how you justify not me.
 
>Hoss you still have not answered
>if you support the Sierra
>club of which supports stopping
>Grizzly hunts in Wyoming, Montana
>and Idaho where the Grizzly
>has been removed from the
>endanger list also they support
>urban Coyotes improving human and
>wild-canid coexisting, stopping the wall
>on the Mexican border all
>for made up story's of
>how animals including birds will
>not be ably to migrate
>freely, and we all know
>the damage they have done
>to close coal fire power
>plants when the coal plants
>have improved there emissions to
>better counts than the electric
>cars that the environmentalists drive.
>All the info i got
>on the Sierra club is
>on there Web page check
>it out. You support the
>Sierra club just because they
>support public lands and you
>cant support the NRA because
>they have not issued a
>statement on behalf of the
>public lands YET and let
>me say it again YET.
>You keep labeling everyone that
>supports Republicans as anti public
>land so i take
>it anyone that supports public
>land is in bed with
>the Sierra club that is
>how you justify not me.
>

Here's a little secret. REPUBLICANS ARE ROLLING OVER ON THE NRA.

So.....are repubs good or bad? I'm confused. Because the NRA has taught us that ALL gun grabbers need to be defeated. Yet, there's Trump, Cornyn, Ryan, grabbing guns.

Soooooo? Now what? Repubs are good, until they cross the NRA? Or are repubs right the NRA is wrong?

BTW, how many gun owners are in the Sierra Club? So are they now enemies because they are in the Sierra Club?

I support #keepitpublic.

Same as dozens of other hunting, gun, fishing, outdoors companies.

What a bunch of commies huh? I mean doesn't Sitka get that they support the Sierra club who supports ending hunting? First Lite is on board with no bear hunting?

What's next? Are they all green decoys?

Or just possibly, maybe, THEY get what "we are all in this together means"?

Common enemy makes interesting friends.

I can't help but wonder, who are the NRA enemies now, THEIR CANDIDATE IS MOCKING THEM.





From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Hoss you keep saying the Republicans are for gun controll some are but not enough and when you refer to Trump as a Republican he is not he ran as one and the media promoted him as one when he ran in the primary and then he ran against the worst candidate in the history of politics and won. If the Republicans vote for a ban on Assult weapons it will destroy the Republican party for a decade or more.
Hoss with the way you lump everyone together I guess every Republican is anti gun and every public land supporter is now a Sierra club supporter. That is not the way I see it I am using the language that you have used in past posts and when asked to clarify including the Sierra club you just go on another rant against the NRA and Republicans.
 
>Hoss you keep saying the Republicans
>are for gun controll some
>are but not enough and
>when you refer to Trump
>as a Republican he is
>not he ran as one
>and the media promoted him
>as one when he ran
>in the primary and then
>he ran against the worst
>candidate in the history of
>politics and won. If the
>Republicans vote for a ban
>on Assult weapons it will
>destroy the Republican party for
>a decade or more.
>Hoss with the way you lump
>everyone together I guess every
>Republican is anti gun and
>every public land supporter is
>now a Sierra club supporter.
>That is not the way
>I see it I am
>using the language that you
>have used in past posts
>and when asked to clarify
>including the Sierra club you
>just go on another rant
>against the NRA and Republicans.
>

There is a plank on the Republican party platform calling for land transfer.

I didn't put it there.

I'm not Rob Bishop(R)
Jason Chaffetz(R)
Chris Stewart(R)
John Curtis(R)
Gary Herbert(R)

I'm not lumping them, they did that by themselves.

I also haven't spent the last decade going scorched earth on anyone not in lockstep. The NRA did.

I'm a gun owner, right of center, America first, Utahn. They lost me. Sounds like they lost Grizz. How?

They forgot who their friends were. They assumed that my fear of losing my AR was greater than my fear of losing those mtns out my window. A smart org wouldn't have made a natural constituent like me, make that choice.
I prefer not give up either, but the Republican party drew that line in the sand, I didn't. Somehow the NRA couldn't see they were on the wrong side. They are standing with land grabbers and gun grabbers. Funny thing, in this case, both are the "good" republicans the NRA sold its alegence to.

Be nice if we could get a pro gun, pro public land party.

Founder asked what this will do to hunting? If we are smart, very little. But we need to remember where are fight is, and what its about.





From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
So you do stand with the Sierra club.

I was talking about the Republicans on gun controll you are the one lumping them all in as one.
 
Yup. I stand with the Sierra Club. I'm a green decoy.
I voted for Hillary. Drive a Subaru.

You got me!

Me, Remington, Kimber, Federal, Vortex, Sitka, First lite. All just a bunch of gun hating, libs.

Gotta go now, got a drum circle to attend.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Hoss I hear you about public vs private land issue I have a 17 year old boy that likes to hunt more than anything and I do not make the money to ever hunt private and I don't have the time (full time volunteer fire chief after my full time job) right now in my life to hunt out of state. My boy just joined the National Guard and is going to basic training this summer and planning on going full time special forces when he graduate high school after next year. So yes the lost of public property would destroy me mentally but I don't see the NRA as against public land just because they use the Republicans to protect the 2nd Amendment I don't see all Republicans are for gun controll either I don't see all of this anymore than I believe you stand with the Sierra club I was just trying to make my point maybe not a good one. We need to find something to agree with each other or nothing will ever get fixed. Have a good night and I am sure we can pick it back up tomorrow.
 
Maybe I missed it Hossblur but I don't think you ever answered my question. Do you think more hunters in the USA hunt on private land or public land?
 
Do you think most gun owners are NRA members or do most believe in the 2nd Amendment and never gave ole Wayne the only voice of gun owners?

Nemont
 
I'm standing here wearing carhardts, and durango red, white, blue, cowboy boots. Ill be wearing a tool belt in a bit. My company hats are camo(I own it). I drive a crew cab truck(no window stickers). I own a toyhauler, wheelers, sxs. I listen to podcasts about hunting, and Joe Rogan, Ben Shapiro. 11am I catch Dana Loescth(spelling sucks). I carry a gun.
I got an AR after my son bought his. He's 12, he worked all summer for the money. My gun safe got too small so I built a room. My business discounts military, cops, firefighters 10%. I'm 44, but I hunt deer with mostly 70 yr olds. 30 yrs of drywall stops backpacking, don't have shoulders or back. We do a lot of riding with those old guys. Elk we trek in a couple miles on foot.

Point is this. I joined BHA after hearing Newberg say it. "There isn't a gray area"

Amazingly enough it was something I had read for a decade in my NRA literature. The NRA doesn't believe in "gray area".

So, I bought in. In with other hunters. In with cowboys, construction trash, hippies. Public lands are that important that there couldn't be "grey area"

Then one day I'm reading around and read a email from NRA-ILA answering WHY they aren't taking a stand. In short it said they didn't believe it would pass in THIS CONGRESS. Not "we only do 2A". It was we believe in "gray area" on public land. Followed by a chance to donate to fight(the same republican congress) to save the 2A.

There is no gray area, gun companies are in, optics, ammo, dudes like me, refined dudes like Grizzly.

At some point this blind party allegence to the R is going to burn US. They are burning the NRA right now.

At the very least, make them work for it. Change your registration to I.

Long story to get to this.

The NRA has taken in hundreds of millions from western land hunters. 72% of them are on public land. THESE GUYS ARE OWED LOYALTY by the NRA, god only knows those guys have been loyal to them.

We are either all in it together, or we aren't.

THERE IS NO GRAY AREA ON THIS ONE.



From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Why is it that every time the Second Amendment issue comes up the politicians always talk about the NRA? Can you imagine how much respect they would wield if every gun owner was a member? Politicians fear large voting blocs.



#livelikezac
 
I think you dodged the question Hossblur. Maybe it's a "gray area" for you.

Second question. What is your church's stance on public land? It better not be "gray", right?
 
>Hossblur,
>I think it's good you mentioned
>no window stickers. That's
>important to me too.



Used to include no flat brims but I have kids?


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-01-18 AT 09:10AM (MST)[p]

Then maybe the NRA should attempt to reach out to guys who believe in the 2nd Amendment but aren't interested in Funding Ole Wayne's retirement Villa in the Bahamas and his 4th home in Virginia.

Imagine if they actually believe half of their hype. It would be a different world. But they can't appeal to the "AR's guarantee my freedom" crowd who will buy every Trucker hat they offer and to guys who actually have to live with what is happening. So the NRA has decided it doesn't need my money or money from 90% of other gun owners in America.

At least the guy the threw in with has the answers to gun violence.

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/pol...ll-call-us-background-check-bill-not-fix-nics

Quote:

WASHINGTON - President Trump called Wednesday for confiscating guns from people who are mentally ill without waiting for a court order -- a startling stance reflecting impatience for quick action after a rash of mass shootings.

"I don't want mentally ill people to be having guns," he said at a freewheeling White House meeting on school safety. "Take the guns first, go through due process second."

Quote:
At one point he pointedly asked Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., if a bill he's sponsoring with Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W. Va., would raise the age to buy assault-style weapons. No, came the answer.

"You know why, because you're afraid of the NRA," Trump said. "Some of you people are petrified of the NRA. You can't be petrified."


Seems odd that the Leader of the world is calling out the NRA in public.

If Obama has said such a thing the threads about Tyranny was just minutes away would have lit up this board like the 4th of July. When Trump says it nobody much cares. Weird bunch the NRA supporters.

Nemont
 
>I think you dodged the question
>Hossblur. Maybe it's a
>"gray area" for you.
>
>Second question. What is your
>church's stance on public land?
> It better not be
>"gray", right?


I'm not religious.

The NRA has a outfitting place. A hunting mag, hunter page on their website

Their not a single issue org. Stop pretending Tri.

Like I said they didn't say "we only do 2A". That would be different.


The date on this was 2013.
Chaffetz bill was 2016.

emailed the NRA a few weeks ago concerning public lands, and this is the response I got:

Thank you for contacting the NRA-ILA.

The NRA does not have a position on this issue, but is certainly well aware of the concerns over the impact this would have on hunting and public access on federal public lands if a significant percentage of federal lands were transferred to the states. Currently federal lands can be identified for sale or transfer through the land management planning process which is a decision making process open to public participation via public comments and is governed by the National Environmental Policy Act.

There are hundreds of issues at the state and Congressional level that could potentially hurt hunting and access to hunting as well as be a threat to scientific wildlife management. The NRA does not take positions on all these issues, unless we believe there is a real, imminent threat. We do not believe the land transfer issue will gain any significant traction in Congress. Certainly, not in this Congress as it is on its way to adjournment. It remains to be seen whether this issue will surface in the new Congress and if it does, we can determine then what our position will be. I hope you find this helpful to you.

Carlin A

NRA-ILA Grassroots
800-392-8683
www.NRAILA.org
[email protected]



From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
They "determined their position", they supported Chaffetz. And Bishop.

And stop with the 've support R. ITS UTAH, all of our congress are R.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-01-18 AT 09:40AM (MST)[p]In 2010, the NRA gave money and endorsements to 65 Democrats in the House alone. By 2014, just 12 Democrats received endorsements and contributions. In 2016, it was 99% Republican.

Grizzly
 
The NRA doesn't support all Republicans. They support some Independents and some Democrats, based on their voting and support records on RKBA issues. They also support some unknowns and mediocre types, running against known anti-freedom incumbents. Don't you think they would back almost anyone who had a chance against Schumer or Feinstein? By the same token, it would be foolish to spend a lot of money on someone who had no chance at all. They will back people with lousy records on public land issues, because they have good RKBA records, or are running against someone much worse. Again, public land issues are not the NRA's mission.

The NRA supported the Cheeto for President, because the Democrats ran the one person in the country that he could beat. He's a bad cartoon, a total tool, but literally anyone would be better than the alternative. Imagine her reaction as President to Parkland. Personally, I'm not too disturbed (or surprised) to hear him backstabbing the NRA and flip-flopping like a beached carp. He has all the mental stability of Gary Busey. He is likely the worst President in the history of our country, but he is completely incapable of working with anyone else, so it is almost certain that he will be one term and out. That will mean a Democrat President in 2020, because it is beyond the GOP's limited intelligence to drop him in favor of an actual candidate, but hopefully the Democrats will have learned from this fiasco and will run someone that doesn't foam at the mouth.

Life Member, National Rifle Association.
Life Member, North Dakota State Shooting Sports Association.
 
I agree with you Hoss on the Republican party has gone astray and all politics is broken including local. When congress cant even agree on a time frame of how long to extend the budget before reviewing the extension Repubs said 3 weeks so the Dems said 2 weeks
relay is it that hard to say 2.5 weeks. But it not just the politicians it is the public look at the fight everyone has over daylight savings or not half of the country says stay at daylight savings half says stay with no daylight savings move the clock why cant we move the clock half an hour forward this spring and leave it there it is not that hard to come up with ideas and work with others. Hoss if i dont support the Repubs who at least hold some of the same values as me who should i support. i get make them work but when we have no rel choice then who
 
> Hoss if
>i dont support the Repubs
>who at least hold some
>of the same values as
>me who should i support.
>i get make them work
>but when we have no
>rel choice then who


If you have no real choice on who you vote for, then how can you claim to be free? They don't have much of a choice in China either.

If the parties know that you will vote for who ever they run on their ticket, who do you blame, them or the guy voting?

Nemont
 
All that typing and you still are dodging my question. Do more Americans hunt on private land or public?


This public land thing is looking more and more like people screaming for welfare outdoors and a lot less push for a noble cause.
 
Tri,

Private. Thanks in no small part to our Texas friends.

Eventually, by 1900, Texas had disposed of about 216,000,000 acres of public land, placing it into private ownership.

Tri. Texas is the model NO ONE WANTS.

Don't want high fence, don't want whitetail ranching, don't want any of it.

And lets be honest TRISTATE, you hunting in public land states, on public land, only endorses the position im taking.

Shall we discuss how the NRA backed USO outfitters? Was that a position on hunting?

Shall we discuss their biggest contributors and how those same contributors are the exact same ones bankrolling "transfer"?

Should we all play dumb and pretend the NRA has nothing to do with hunting, especially in public land states?

Tri, somehow your the only NRA supporter on this thread trying to PRETEND the NRA only talks 2A.



Notdon. I'm curious as to what beliefs you have the repubs haven't stomped on? Small gov? Gun control? Abortion(they have done zero to end it), immigration, obamacare? Notice I didn't say go lib, but lets get real, wtf are the R doing today?

Hunters got lazy, myself included. We stuck with the NRA, because we hated Clinton. Not because the NRA was with us.




From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
scubohuntr said, "The NRA doesn't support all Republicans. They support some Independents and some Democrats.."

I guess that is technically correct because, as of March 31st in the last election cycle, NRA had given campaign support to one Democrat. A guy named Henry Cuellar, a Democrat from Laredo, Texas that endorsed GWB in 2000 and is pro-life and a hardline on immigration.

Grizzly
 
>scubohuntr said, "The NRA doesn't support
>all Republicans. They support some
>Independents and some Democrats.."
>
>I guess that is technically correct
>because, as of March 31st
>in the last election cycle,
>NRA had given campaign support
>to one Democrat. A guy
>named Henry Cuellar, a
>Democrat from Laredo, Texas that
>endorsed GWB in 2000 and
>is pro-life and a hardline
>on immigration.
>
>Grizzly

I enjoyed this one a bit more:

He is likely the worst President in the history of our country, but he is completely incapable of working with anyone else, so it is almost certain that he will be one term and out. That will mean a Democrat President in 2020, because it is beyond the GOP's limited intelligence to drop him in favor of an actual candidate, but hopefully the Democrats will have learned from this fiasco and will run someone that doesn't foam at the mouth.

Have you been asleep for the past nine years scubohuntr?


#livelikezac
 
IMHO those of our population that have any interest in how we are governed fall into two very distinct camps, Constitutionalist and socialist. We also have those in our population that are "sheeple" that just exist.
Again,JMHO.
I quit believing in our "two party" system long ago.

Norkal

"One can take my life but not my faith or my
confidence. I fear none and respect all."
 
If private ownership is the model "no one wants" then you have no reason logically to be scared of loosing public land.

Face it Hossblur, this isn't some crusade against tyranny or the difference between right and wrong. Your public land fight is a difference of opinion. Just because you are passionate about it doesn't somehow mean it is a world shaking issue. THAT IS THE TRUTH. Just because you don't like something doesn't suddenly mean "no one wants" it. If no one wanted it then it never would have been an issue to begin with. Your argument is becoming so childish its like you are screaming for vanilla ice cream to be outlawed because you like chocolate.

Specifically YOU and GRIZZLY have both stated hunting ends if the public land is switched to private. I ASKED BOTH OF YOU A QUESTION WHICH NEITHER OF YOU ANSWERED. The FACT is there is more hunting all over the US on private lands than hunting on public. A lot more. And not just in Texas but all over the USA. And its not just high fenced either. THIS IS THE FACT THAT YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW BECAUSE THEN YOU CAN'T SCARE PEOPLE INTO BELIEVING THE END OF THE HUNTING WORLD IS COMING.

Look at you. You are reducing yourself to hijacking threads about gun control. If your cause was so noble you wouldn't have to be so full of sh!+ to support it.
 
I supposed Nemont,Hoss,Noka you guys are right hate everyone because there is no one out there that fits perfectly in with my opinion and agenda the way you guys think support idea and do not worry about what you might lose while you turn a blind eye. That was my point about we cant even agree on the simplest of decisions like time length of time is a issue with one side or the other.
Yes right now i do support the Repubs at least they have stood for gun control until maybe now. They maybe have not repealed abortion but they are stopping it from going to late term abortion. They maybe have not fixed the budget problems but they are keeping the Dems from spending us into believing. The Repubs do get us into wars we do not seem to get out of but if it was up to the Dems they would tear are Military down to lower levels than the French.The Dems would allow the enviro groups to take are public land and lock it up so no one except scientists from the Liberal higher education would be allowed to enjoy it. Tes i know as long as i support the ones that seem to be doing the right job i am supporting the the ones that are slowly taking the things i care about away. So please give me some names some group we can start supporting because all i hear is support a Independent but they get to Washington and they fall in line with one of the party's and is not normally the Repubs. So yes i do agree we have a two party system the Socialists and what use to be the Traditionalists and right now i have hope we can find are way back to being a country of high morals and honor.
 
>I supposed Nemont,Hoss,Noka you guys are
>right hate everyone because there
>is no one out there
>that fits perfectly in with
>my opinion and agenda the
>way you guys think support
>idea and do not worry
>about what you might lose
>while you turn a blind
>eye. That was my point
>about we cant even agree
>on the simplest of decisions
>like time length of time
>is a issue with one
>side or the other.
>Yes right now i do support
>the Repubs at least they
>have stood for gun control
>until maybe now. They maybe
>have not repealed abortion but
>they are stopping it from
>going to late term abortion.
>They maybe have not fixed
>the budget problems but they
>are keeping the Dems from
>spending us into believing. The
>Repubs do get us into
>wars we do not seem
>to get out of but
>if it was up to
>the Dems they would tear
>are Military down to lower
>levels than the French.The Dems
>would allow the enviro groups
>to take are public land
>and lock it up so
>no one except scientists from
>the Liberal higher education would
>be allowed to enjoy it.
>Tes i know as long
>as i support the ones
>that seem to be doing
>the right job i am
>supporting the the ones that
>are slowly taking the things
>i care about away. So
>please give me some names
>some group we can start
>supporting because all i hear
>is support a Independent but
>they get to Washington and
>they fall in line with
>one of the party's and
>is not normally the Repubs.
>So yes i do agree
>we have a two party
>system the Socialists and what
>use to be the Traditionalists
>and right now i have
>hope we can find are
>way back to being a
>country of high morals and
>honor.

Yes but they have no position on rainbow sherbert so how can I get behind them?


#livelikezac
 
>I enjoyed this one a bit
>more:
>
>He is likely the worst President
>in the history of our
>country, but he is completely
>incapable of working with anyone
>else, so it is almost
>certain that he will be
>one term and out. That
>will mean a Democrat President
>in 2020, because it is
>beyond the GOP's limited intelligence
>to drop him in favor
>of an actual candidate, but
>hopefully the Democrats will have
>learned from this fiasco and
>will run someone that doesn't
>foam at the mouth.
>
>Have you been asleep for the
>past nine years scubohuntr?
>
>
>#livelikezac

Nope, I haven't been asleep. I was living in Canada for most of it (because they actually had an economy and jobs), but I did keep up a bit. Just because somebody claims to support some things I believe in does not make him a good President. I never said the previous guy was good. He was mediocre at best. However, at least he was consistent. He never claimed to be anything but what he was.

The thing is, nobody in Congress, and especially nobody running for President, is a friend of freedom. They all claim to be, and they will pretend to support whoever gives them the best chance at getting elected, but if they really cared about freedom they would never run for office. Nobody can run successfully for national office without completely abandoning their principles. Definitely anyone who can get the blessing of either party is nobody to turn your back on. There is essentially no moral difference between Party A and Party B. They are all crooks. The only real difference is which liberties they want to destroy first.

I'll be happy if we can get through the current administration without a major war, and without losing too much. We will never gain anything from Congress, and especially not from any President. All we can hope for is to not lose too much ground. The reason the current President is the lesser of two evils is that he has very few political connections, and his bloated ego won't let him work with anyone in Congress. He'd rather try to steamroller them with Executive Orders. The alternative had too many political connections, knew the system far too well, and would have been entrenched for eight years rather than four. She also would be doing much more to damage liberty at every level, rather than obsessing about a moronic border wall and Twitter.

If only the Libertarians would run someone who wasn't a complete barking lunatic...

Life Member, National Rifle Association.
Life Member, North Dakota State Shooting Sports Association.
 
>If private ownership is the model
>"no one wants" then you
>have no reason logically to
>be scared of loosing public
>land.
>
>Face it Hossblur, this isn't some
>crusade against tyranny or the
>difference between right and wrong.
> Your public land fight
>is a difference of opinion.
> Just because you are
>passionate about it doesn't somehow
>mean it is a world
>shaking issue. THAT IS
>THE TRUTH. Just because
>you don't like something doesn't
>suddenly mean "no one wants"
>it. If no one
>wanted it then it never
>would have been an issue
>to begin with. Your
>argument is becoming so childish
>its like you are screaming
>for vanilla ice cream to
>be outlawed because you like
>chocolate.
>
>Specifically YOU and GRIZZLY have both
>stated hunting ends if the
>public land is switched to
>private. I ASKED BOTH
>OF YOU A QUESTION WHICH
>NEITHER OF YOU ANSWERED.
>The FACT is there is
>more hunting all over the
>US on private lands than
>hunting on public. A
>lot more. And not
>just in Texas but all
>over the USA. And
>its not just high fenced
>either. THIS IS THE
>FACT THAT YOU DON'T WANT
>PEOPLE TO KNOW BECAUSE THEN
>YOU CAN'T SCARE PEOPLE INTO
>BELIEVING THE END OF THE
>HUNTING WORLD IS COMING.
>
>Look at you. You are reducing
>yourself to hijacking threads about
>gun control. If your
>cause was so noble you
>wouldn't have to be so
>full of sh!+ to support
>it.

Because apparently you don't read too well

Tri,

Private. Thanks in no small part to our Texas friends.

That was the previous post

The Original was what would the NRA being hit mean FOR HUNTING.

1.9% of Texas is public. Of course you have zero concept of what we are talking about.



Don

Not sure where you live. In Utah we are a one party state(minus SLC mayor).

This session.

.05% is now our DUI limit.

Bill to trade more state land to a private developed to dredge Utah lake

There was a bill barring ANYONE opposed to transfer who is employed by the state from commenting.

$300k to "stop wolves"

$4 million to sue the feds for "transfer"

Its daily, continuous, never ending.

Because they attend the right church, and have an R, in this state there is just blind obedience.

Truth is, the R in this state Don't even have to try to earn a vote.

Theres a reason Utah politicians are the group pushing this crap, they have no fear.

I agree there is no perfect, but man at some point, results matter.


TRISTATE.

The NRA getting hit won't hurt Utah hunting at all, they haven't been our friends for a while.

In sure its different in Texas, it always is.

Feel free to answer the OP question at any time. Or just do your usual.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
So you just admitted lots of people do want what you previously stated no man wants.

Thanks.

We are making progress.
 
I really don't understand what the big gripe about the age thing is, other than we always fear change. No one has screamed 2nd amendment violations over the handgun laws being 21.
As far as the military thing goes, the "kid's" are issued 1911's in the military when they aren't old enough to purchase them as civilians.
And the 2nd amendment says absolutely nothing about any rights to purchase a gun at any age, it only gives us the right to "keep and bear arm's.
If you want your 18 year old to have a firearm, go buy him one. My dad was buying me gun's at 12 years old and I was going on cub scout rabbit hunts at that age perfectly legal to posses.
No one is trying to take away gun's from anyone, only to restrict the age to purchase.....which we all know won't keep a weapon out of a criminals hand's, regardless of age.
 
So, I've read through this whole thread. I spend a lot of time on hunting and fishing forums and it's always the same thing. There?s a reason 10% of the hunters kill 90% of the game...because the other 90 % aren't too bright. I see the public land issue brought up, the NRA, Republicans, Crooked killary, Obama,
Don?t tread on me, etc, etc. There is a much bigger and complex picture. Republicans always run on god and guns. Trump starts quoting the Bible, interviews with Field and stream, sends his son to hunt with KUIU, hugs the NRA, and the Republicans first priority after the election is a 22 million dollar tax break for Trump. It's a pattern that repeats itself. Ronald Reagan did the same.
...here?s the thing I wanted to point out. If you don't believe me research the ?sage brush rebellion? and think about the pattern. This rebellion of anti- government, Bundy type, ?don't tread on me?, i?m Going to fight the government led to the loss of thousands of acres of prime Muley habitat in Colorado and many other areas. I had the blessing of hunting the Book Cliffs in Utah this year. It was the best hunt ever for me. Right across from the book cliffs in Colorado is the same habitat in the Piceance area. This area was sold to Shell energy by the Reagan administration. Shell made billions, stole Americans land forever, and received a gorgeous tax break. I realize there has to be a balance, but it is very scary how dumbed down the average American is. So, let's give everyone an AR-15, bankrupt the country, give all our land to Trump?s kids, billionaires, and energy companies....then when our tags cost $10,000, and there are only 3 tags left per state...we can all sit at home with our ?don't tread on me flags? and
watch ole Don Jr. shoot elk on his private ranch in Utah. If we are lucky, maybe some executives from the NRA will join him. Everytime there is a mass shooting, we can all line up at the local gun store and fight over the gun that was just used to shoot a bunch of kids trying to learn some algebra.
 
Let me summarize that last post.

"I had a great hunt on public land. I don't like wealthy people or companies that own stuff. I like tags that are cheap and only allow people to hunt once or twice in their life. If you use an AR15 you support baby murders"
 
>Let me summarize that last post.
>
>
>"I had a great hunt on
>public land. I don't
>like wealthy people or companies
>that own stuff. I
>like tags that are cheap
>and only allow people to
>hunt once or twice in
>their life. If you
>use an AR15 you support
>baby murders"


Not really. I don't like wealthy presidents who make laws that benefit him and screw Joe Average.
 
>Let me summarize that last post.
>
>
>"I had a great hunt on
>public land. I don't
>like wealthy people or companies
>that own stuff. I
>like tags that are cheap
>and only allow people to
>hunt once or twice in
>their life. If you
>use an AR15 you support
>baby murders"

You truly struggle with reading don't you.


Here's the point.

NO ONE WANTS TEXAS. Including YOU, which is why you hunt western states.

We don't want a 1.9% of our land open.

We don't want energy companies setting gov policy

We don't want high fence

We don't want whitetail ranching

We don't want ANY of what you are trying to sell Tri.

NONE OF US WANT TEXAS hunting policy, land management, wildlife policy.

What you call hunting, the rest of us call livestock slaughtering. Shooting tame animals, genetically modified, in a high fence, paying by the lb(inch).

If we wanted to do that we would start mobile slaughtering businesses.

Here in the west we like FREEDOM. Which means we can wander hundreds of miles in whatever direction we please.

We don't want to schedule a date, get a hotel, jump in the BADBOY, or high rack, load up the corn feeder, climb into the heated, Wi-Fi "blind", call the coral and have them open the gate to let out the pre bought, GPS ear chipped genetically modified, steroided, whitetail, exotic, or whatever.

We don't want any of it.

And you can keep uncle Ted too.

Perhaps you should TRY hunting, not ranching, before you give any opinion of what it is?

Or, call your local outfitter and he can tell you what to think.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
I'm pretty sure muley just admitted he is more than one character on these threads.

Hossblur and muley, Texas has more low fence hunting opportunity than Utah and Colorado's combined public ground and you can get tags every single year right over the counter.

I literally have more free range hunting than I can take advantage of. I I am scheduled for three turkey hunts in the next five weeks. I have to turn down two there invites. I have to turn down several free deer hunts every year.
 
>I'm pretty sure muley just admitted
>he is more than one
>character on these threads.
>
>Hossblur and muley, Texas has more
>low fence hunting opportunity than
>Utah and Colorado's combined public
>ground and you can get
>tags every single year right
>over the counter.
>
>I literally have more free range
>hunting than I can take
>advantage of. I I
>am scheduled for three turkey
>hunts in the next five
>weeks. I have to
>turn down two there invites.
> I have to turn
>down several free deer hunts
>every year.

Not sure what you mean by more than one character. Where's my contradiction?

How's the elk hunting in Texas?
 
>
>How's the elk hunting in Texas?
>

Down there, they call them Blackbucks, Mouflon Sheep and Fallow Deer... real sneaky creatures.

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
>I'm pretty sure muley just admitted
>he is more than one
>character on these threads.
>
>Hossblur and muley, Texas has more
>low fence hunting opportunity than
>Utah and Colorado's combined public
>ground and you can get
>tags every single year right
>over the counter.
>
>I literally have more free range
>hunting than I can take
>advantage of. I I
>am scheduled for three turkey
>hunts in the next five
>weeks. I have to
>turn down two there invites.
> I have to turn
>down several free deer hunts
>every year.

TRI. I'm headed turkey hunting as well. And I DIDNT HAVE TO SCHEDULE.

You might be right, you have more LOW FENCE.

But I got Waaaaayyyyy more NO FENCE. NO FENCE, NOT LEASE, NO FEE.

And I've had a deer tag every year for 30 years. Elk every year. Turkey every year.


There's a reason Texas guys come to the west TO HUNT and westerners go to Texas to shoot stuff.

We don't grow enough corn to fill the feeders, we HAVE TO HUNT
From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Well I'm glad you don't have to schedule. But some people work for a living and have kids that are being educated.
As for your no fence claim that's bull. All the public land I have hunted in Utah had fences on it.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-03-18 AT 01:30PM (MST)[p]Elk hunting is pretty dam good and getting better every year. There are a couple of places that would have better elk if the state would quit smacking them to mannage desert sheep.

By the way you can elk hunt year round using any method you want and you can kill 100 if you want.
 
>Well I'm glad you don't have
>to schedule. But some
>people work for a living
>and have kids that are
>being educated.
> As for your no
>fence claim that's bull.
>All the public land I
>have hunted in Utah had
>fences on it.

Buisness owner same as you. Kids in school same as you. Difference is, 10 min we are in PUBLIC waterfowl land. 20 min on PUBLIC big game land.

Within an hour I can see every waterfowl, EVERY big game species in the state. Every upland except maybe ptarmigan. Same in Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, Colorado. Mostly the same for Nevada, Arizona, new Mexico as well.

And my "schedule" is simply, " I feel like going". No outfitter, guide, booking agent, fee, lease. And THATS FREE FOR EVERY PERSON IN THIS COUNTRY TO DO.

THAT IS FREEDOM.
You have no clue.

So ya your "team, gang, crew, clique" NRA means something to you. Because YOU DONT HAVE ACTUAL FREEDOM. Those that do have it, won't trade it for a lobby group.






From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Mar-03-18
>AT 01:30?PM (MST)
>
>Elk hunting is pretty dam good
>and getting better every year.
> There are a couple
>of places that would have
>better elk if the state
>would quit smacking them to
>mannage desert sheep.
>
>By the way you can elk
>hunt year round using any
>method you want and you
>can kill 100 if you
>want.

How about answering all of my post to you.
 
Maybe one day I will have a job like you that I'm not expected to be at during hunting seasons. I can drive 20 minutes and hunt birds. I can hunt deer and hour away. It's not free but neither is yours.

If this is some pissing match about who's life is more blessed awesome, you win. Everybody wants to live in Utah and be hossblur. Meanwhile I have proven private ownership doesn't end hunting like you believe. Whether you like it or not we are still doing piles and piles of great hunting here. Do you realize one big game species here is hunted and kill 10 times as much as every tag your state offers.

Do you want bird hunting? We have 3000 miles of coastline loaded with ducks and geese. All for you to hunt. You just gotta by a license. How much coastline does Utah have.

You keep trying to turn this into an argument of how great you are. We believe you. I'm just showing the hunter's spirit doesn't die with your public land issues.
 
That's because you have 10 times more deer, but they're the size of our fawns. So you need a lot of them to make a meal.
 
Tri.

We kill a lot of livestock in Utah too. We just don't call it hunting.

Not a matter of "job", simply a matter of not having "schedule" to hunt.

Not having to ask another soul if its ok to pull a trigger. Not having to fill the feeders.

You telling anyone about "hunting" sitting in a high fence, farm raised state, is like me telling you how to hunt exotics.

Sad thing is even when you do leave Texas, you still have to hire it done.

That ain't freedom.

So sure. Your allegiance to the NRA makes sense. They were HUGE supporters of USO. They support the hunting you do.

But, like I said, no one in the west wants what Texas has. You can't speak to what you don't know. And I'm sure you'd gladly trade your 1.9% public for an AR. I would also.

But not for 28% of the United States. And not for 72% of the west.

But, I've been around long enough to know when it gets to back and forth with you, the thread is dead.

Don't you got some more pics from Robyn to post?

BLAAAAAAMMMM!



From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
You keep talking trash and praying no one noticed hunting does just fine on private land. It makes your public land argument look childish and needy.

How many big game tags did you get last year? You don't think all those bonus points you have symbolize years of begging .
 
>You keep talking trash and praying
>no one noticed hunting does
>just fine on private land.
> It makes your public
>land argument look childish and
>needy.
>
>How many big game tags did
>you get last year?
>You don't think all those
>bonus points you have symbolize
>years of begging .


Not sure about Hoss, but I get a buck, bull, and bear tag every year with no points for public land. No OTC units either.
 
Nope. Tri would have me there. I don't get a bear tag every year.

And hes right. Those 17 moose points I have must be begging, haven't got one of those yet.

But my 2% chance is 100% better than his, I'm not aware of moose farming ranches in Texas.

Hey Tri. Its Sunday morning. Snow falling, good day to head out on the mtn. I'm sure you can call and schedule a few hours somewhere. But check the ratings, some of those places don't have a full time chef, it could be the partime chef. Oh well huh, I guess a guy might just have to rough it. But you book it, drive over, be assigned a "keeper"(guide), have some lunch and a glass of wine and sit around talking about how the NRA is the ONLY thing keeping you free.

The rest of us in the west will just GO BE FREE. Despite the NRA trying to make it the other way.





From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-04-18 AT 08:57AM (MST)[p]>Let me summarize that last post.
>
>
>"I had a great hunt on
>public land. I don't
>like wealthy people or companies
>that own stuff. I
>like tags that are cheap
>and only allow people to
>hunt once or twice in
>their life. If you
>use an AR15 you support
>baby murders"


Pretty good summary, all but the baby murderer part...you showed your ignorance on that part of your summary. It's amazing to me, that you're on a site called ?Monster Muleys?, and then try to tell everyone how great a state like Texas is. You are right, limited tags are great ( I killed a monster muley and didn't spend $10,000)...I also hunt every year, either myself or my sons, with archery or Muzzleloader, and see several nice muleys each time. We live in West Virginia...each trip I tell my kids, this is your land...as an American, you own this... if you don't understand the significance of that, then I feel sorry for you. As for rich people and energy companies buying that land, if you agree with that...I hope you fall of a cliff in Texas sometime soon, or at least hook your testicles on a high fence whitetail hunt.
With that being said ...will the NRA effect hunting? Now that I've read through this entire thread...yes, sadly...the people are too naive to realize.
 
>The only growing muley herd in
>the USA is in Texas.
> :D

I have a poor friend that I give the mule deer meat. He likes it. Otherwise, I wouldn't hunt them all. I think they taste like crapola.

I prefer elk meat.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-04-18 AT 10:42AM (MST)[p]>LAST EDITED ON Mar-04-18
>AT 08:57?AM (MST)
>
>>Let me summarize that last post.
>>
>>
>>"I had a great hunt on
>>public land. I don't
>>like wealthy people or companies
>>that own stuff. I
>>like tags that are cheap
>>and only allow people to
>>hunt once or twice in
>>their life. If you
>>use an AR15 you support
>>baby murders"
>
>
>Pretty good summary, all but the
>baby murderer part...you showed your
>ignorance on that part of
>your summary. It's amazing
>to me, that you're on
>a site called ?Monster Muleys?,
>and then try to tell
>everyone how great a state
>like Texas is. You
>are right, limited tags are
>great ( I killed a
>monster muley and didn't spend
>$10,000)...I also hunt every year,
>either myself or my sons,
>with archery or Muzzleloader, and
>see several nice muleys each
>time. We live
>in West Virginia...each trip I
>tell my kids, this is
>your land...as an American, you
>own this... if you
>don't understand the significance of
>that, then I feel sorry
>for you. As for
>rich people and energy companies
>buying that land, if you
>agree with that...I hope you
>fall of a cliff in
>Texas sometime soon, or at
>least hook your testicles on
>a high fence whitetail hunt.
>
>With that being said ...will the
>NRA effect hunting? Now that
>I've read through this entire
>thread...yes, sadly...the people are too
>naive to realize.
>

This is the fact that we hope all the hunters realize. THIS IS YOUR LAND.

Ain't Trumps, Andarkos, Utah's. ITS YOURS.


Of course the population is growing in Texas. It grows in zoos also. Thats what happens when you high fence stuff in and ranch it. My dairy farm friends cow population grows too. But when they come kill the "dries" in the summer for meat, no one calls that hunting.

If you'd like Tri I can get you a spot and you can camo up, ride out on the tractor and "hunt" one of those as well.

Looking forward to that BLAAAAAAMMMMM! pic.

Does one put a Texas flag sticker on ones gun for the grip and grin with a dairy cow(I mean Utah exotic)?


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Everybody knows hunting still thrives on private land.

Who owns land doesn't define the hunter's spirit. The deer don't know who holds title or right. I've hunted and killed big game on both and both were good experiences and not all that different. I never sat and thought about how much I should or shouldn't love the NRA while hunting either.
 
Every one of these threads you guys do nothing but talk past one another.

Texas and the western states cannot be compared - they are different in almost every respect as it relates to hunting.

Yet both sides constantly try to constantly fit square pegs into round holes by comparing them. It's a fool?s game - yet y?all continue to play it - over and over and over again.
 
>Every one of these threads you
>guys do nothing but talk
>past one another.
>
>Texas and the western states cannot
>be compared - they are
>different in almost every respect
>as it relates to hunting.
>
>
>Yet both sides constantly try to
>constantly fit square pegs into
>round holes by comparing them.
>It's a fool?s game -
>yet y?all continue to play
>it - over and over
>and over again.

Just fooling around. Which you haven't figured out. All in good fun.
 
Coulda fooled me. Seems like every thread on just about every subject devolves into a pissing match about public vs. private hunting.

Kinda throws a monkey wrench into the whole forum. Oh well......have fun. :)
 
Not on my side CBEARD. I am all for public hunting if that's what people want. I am all for private to. However when people start trying to influence politics by saying hunting will die if public land turns private I argue that. There is no need to engage in dishonesty if your position is virtuous.
 
47790cruztexasmorons56a753e15f9b58b7d0e93693.jpg
 
A lot of hunting for a lot of folks would die if the public lands out west were sold and turned into private land.

Anyone who doesn't understand that doesn't understand much about the reality of western hunting.

Still not sure how this thread (once again) turned into that debate. But, whatever....
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-05-18 AT 02:13PM (MST)[p]Cbeard,

My point is the guy that only wants to hunt public quits hunting. That's his problem. Not a hunting problem. Because right behind him are plenty of hunters ready to hunt private land.
 
As always, you simply refuse to accept the complexities/differences of the situations.

If you don't think all of the western public lands going private would hurt access to those lands compared to what exists today, you are either: 1)not very bright, 2)hard-headed, or 3) both.

BTW I'm a 53 year old native Texan (and never been a city boy either). I own and hunt my own land. I know how it works down here. So keep that in mind before you let too much more condescension creep in to your responses.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Mar-05-18
>AT 02:13?PM (MST)
>
>Cbeard,
>
>My point is the guy that
>only wants to hunt public
>quits hunting. That's his
>problem. Not a hunting
>problem. Because right behind
>him are plenty of hunters
>ready to hunt private land.
>

I doubt it. Landowners don't let you hunt their land for free. Residents here just wouldn't pay for it and just go to City Market for meat.
 
Some land owners do. Plus they let their kids and their grand kids hunt it. But maybe all those people don't count to you.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-05-18 AT 03:56PM (MST)[p]CBeard,

I don't care if you are 75, my next door neighbor, banging the rose bowl queen. I give you the facts and if you don't like it you can wash the sand out of your vaj and keep hiking. I didn't treat you with any disrespect up until you just pulled your high and mighty stunt, boy.

Keep that in mind.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

UT Deer 2.jpg
Screenshot_20211109-225404_Video Player.jpg
19375.jpeg
54EA1051-3813-4CC9-83CF-B97A999D1E51.png
IMG_6652.jpeg
D5DA2302-215F-40FD-9491-6F7EA15B1C23.jpeg
1278802F-3DF1-4CAA-9E4F-477D1245B801.jpeg
20210425_173539.jpg
1688579901026.png
IMG_0068.jpeg
Rose Valley 4x3 1 - Copy.jpg
E36097D6-45AB-45BE-BA1D-1AC47EBB3211.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom