PDA

View Full Version : Eh, anti hunters, when they are a "friend"...


FrontSight
November 20, 2008, 12:45 PM
What do you do when a friend from Europe tells you that you're a murderer for hunting? That guns are horrible, that you're a redneck (!!), that it's wrong to be pro-bush, that teaching children to hunt is sick, etc etc etc?

Here's our conversation....any thoughts? Obviously the "redneck" thing is WAY outta line...


(Read from top down)



-----Original Message-----
From: Anti Hunter friend, "L"
To: Me

I only now understand why you were PRO-BUSH... And no one I know could believe it with you. Its like Im talking to a redneck with your opinions and views. You think going out with a child shooting at animals is healthy teaching a child how to A. use a gun B. how to kill????
A child should be protected from seeing things like that. My God.




-----Original Message-----
From: Me
To: Anti hunter friend, "L"

Oh L, "redneck" is a derogatory term the way you are using it, and that's not very nice.

Teaching children to hunt is one of the most honorable and noble things a parent can do, L. It teaches them respect for Nature. Yes, respect. I know that is hard to believe, but no one respects Nature more than hunters, for we are the ones who live in it...we are the protectors of it. Nothing teaches you respect for it more than being there, seeing what occurs in nature, and being a part of it. See my other e-mail to get an understanding of what I mean.

Let me try to explain in a different way. You like cheese burgers, right? What effort does it take you to get one?

You walk into McDonalds, sit down, order one, and soon you're going "mmmmmm, how delicious.", pay your money, and go on your way.


A true hunter, on the other hand, trains for years to learn the habits of a deer. He studies it, learns what makes it take one travel route versus another, what food it prefers, where it will be when it is cold, where the does are that it will look for when mating season arrives, learns how to conceal himself from its senses, how to move quietly thru the forest to find it, practices marksmanship for years in order to make a humane, respectful shot, spends countless hours waiting for an opportunity, and during these countless hours he sees nature as it is: a hawk landing 10 feet in front of him in all it's magesty, a beaver building its dam, a snake hunting mice, an owl attacking a squirrel...after many weeks or months or years of learning and seeing such things, he may be finally given the opportunity to make that human, respectful shot, and is given the sacred gift of harvest by nature. He holds the gift in his hands, and thanks God & Nature for this moment & this sacred gift. He labors intensely to clean the gift quickly so the meat does not spoil, he transports the heavy gift by hand, sometimes for several miles and steep hills, labors further to skin and package and freeze the meat, still taking great care to not let it spoil. One day, he defrosts a package, grinds the meat by hand to form burgers, grills it on his barbeque, sits down to dinner with his friends and family, and they, together, thank the Lord for the opportunity to enjoy the gift that nature has permitted them.


Oh L, can you think of anything that teaches greater respect, appreciation and humbleness than that?


You can't sit in a chair and watch Bambi and have ANY idea what nature is about, although Disney sure tries to make you think you do...that is a fantasy land, L.

Doyle
November 20, 2008, 12:54 PM
Tell him to stop bitchin with his mouth full of beef. That normally shuts them up.

Brian Pfleuger
November 20, 2008, 01:02 PM
I don't have that conversation. You won't change their mind. They won't change yours. It nothing but a fight and potential for loss of friendship. If they are belligerent and insistent, I would end the friendship.

FrontSight
November 20, 2008, 01:08 PM
oh, and maybe I should mention that L is woman...

XLT
November 20, 2008, 01:17 PM
I assume she's a vegan...or just a major hypocrite?:barf:

FrontSight
November 20, 2008, 01:17 PM
-----Original Message-----
From: Anti
To: Me

We can keep our talk to just normal stuff because you're views are fairly sickening in my world. Guns, shooting, killing, murdering - being good for CHILDREN to hunt & kill... Sorry... but, they are... think of the faces of the girls that night at dinner in Diep le skaker when they heard you were hunting... thats what most people think... Im saying think of all they were arguing with you about & the look of disguist on their faces.




-----Original Message-----
From: Me
To: Anti

L, I feel sorry for people who think that way.

People who are putting forkfuls of beef, pork, chicken & shrimp into their own mouths at the very same moment that they are looking at me with disgust for hunting...? Seems to me that I'm not the abnormal one in that situation, if you think about it.

Tell me, when you order your food, or buy food from a store, do you look for the label that says it was grown on farms that are free from killing any animals?


And I don’t agree with your calling hunting murder.

FrontSight
November 20, 2008, 01:18 PM
XLT: No, not a Vegan by any stretch of the imagination....just warped in the head. What is wrong with these people???

XLT
November 20, 2008, 01:22 PM
I have eight year old twins...by the time they turned six, they had "helped" me hunt two whitetail, field dress a red deer (they held the legs apart while I was working, no hoist to get that size of animal off the ground)...

When they were two years old, they wen to Opa's house and watched the chickens running around...and said "Meat, meat!!"....

They're terribly screwed up I'm afraid.... eight years old, and don't like beef that much... :D

bclark1
November 20, 2008, 01:36 PM
I'm with peetza. They're incorrigible. I honestly can't keep company with people that extreme. There are others who know it's best to stay away from contentious topics in order to preserve a relationship. The gender difference is only significant if you've got a reason to tell a few lies ;). Me, I would say: "You and the rest of the world are welcome for the backbone. You can talk to me when you get us back in full with interest for the Marshall Plan. See you then." That's about as productive as things will get.

Pahoo
November 20, 2008, 01:37 PM
First off, I do have Anti-Gun and Anti-Hunting friends and respect their feelings. I am clear on their position and make it perfectly clear what mine is and how important it is that these issues do not get in the way of our valued friendship. If they continue to press the issue, I let it be known that it is getting in our way. I will terminate the friendship when it costs to much to support it. :(

As far as teaching kids, whenever they come to our station, right off I tell them that they do not have to like guns or shooting. I also tell them they don't have to hunt or shoot any animals. It's strictly their choice and not mine to make for them. Then I tell them what we are offering at this station, is a discipline and a skill and hopefull we can address their needs. What they do with this information, is strickly their choice. I have taught groups of adult women and quite few are negative toward guns and when we get through the session, they are comfortable enough to actually shoot that big, bad M/L.
I do my best to "Dehorn the Devils" !!! ;)

Be Safe !!!

Kreyzhorse
November 20, 2008, 02:15 PM
They won't change your mind and you won't change theirs. Each of you can you make your case, and stop it there. As long as both of you can respect each others position or, in the very least, make them off limits for conversation, I'm sure a friendship can exist.

Otherwise, I'd find a new friend.

FrontSight
November 20, 2008, 02:29 PM
Well, what I really mean is, it's on thing to hear of them in magazines or see them on TV, but when you know one personally, and know thew to be "normal" and then to have them say such crazy things it's shocking.

Actually, when I think about it, she's always been kind of unstable, so actually this explains a lot...

jdscholer
November 20, 2008, 03:27 PM
You might remind her that Europe was saved from untold evil by a bunch of children who were taught to use guns. Be gentle and civilized in all your dealings with these people. They are just itching to have you prove their point. jd

MeekAndMild
November 20, 2008, 03:42 PM
Just be kind. Necessity sometimes changes preference. People grow up.

Or sometimes not, as in HG Well's Time Machine story.

Brian Pfleuger
November 20, 2008, 03:54 PM
...when a friend from Europe...


There's your problem right there.;) Those two words together form what's known as an oxymoron.:D;)

FrontSight
November 20, 2008, 04:36 PM
Last 3 posts were spot on!

VaFisher
November 20, 2008, 05:56 PM
It's simple, you can't be a true friend to a anti so why try. Keep your friendship where it belongs and that's with folks that think like yourself instead of someone from mars or venus.

Buzzcook
November 20, 2008, 06:23 PM
I very rarely have arguments with my liberal friends that don't hunt. Perhaps because we spend more time agreeing about how horrible the current administration is.

When people do question hunting I just point out the environmental record of hunters over that of other types of out door enthusiasts. Being a hunter means (or should mean) being knowledgeable about land and animal management. Hunters are also a very important group when it comes to maintaining animal habitats and even reclaiming land for animal habitat. We frequently are involved in returning threatened animals to a healthy population. Hunters also are often closely involved in such issues as new forestry regulations, such as the recent reduction in clear cut logging.

The money I give the state for a hunting license, does more for the environment than anyone wearing a turtle suit does by marching in the streets.
The money saved by the state, by having sportsmen cull herds and reduce predator populations, instead of often having state employees do it, is a big chunk of change.

Finally no one tells me to stop hunting after they've had some venison or duck or goose.

Double Naught Spy
November 20, 2008, 07:24 PM
Scrap, tell the "friend" that when you hunt, you have to kill the animals in order to eat them. Trying to eat them without killing them is cruel to the animal and likely very dangerous for you as well. The same goes for trying to cook live animals. Have you ever tried to put a live deer in your oven?

guntotin_fool
November 21, 2008, 05:29 AM
what country are they in?

if they are in a country that we bailed out during either of the world wars, explain in harsh terms why we were able to do that. that we understood what life and death was about, and yet we decided it was worth sending out sons over to perhaps die in the struggle to set them free.

Remind them that the only two people who have ever offered to die for them and their freedom are Jesus Christ, and the American GI. and if they don't like, consider what it would be like spending the rest of their life speaking either german or russian....being slaves to some dictators who would have felt nothing to feed them or their parents into the ovens.
'
The short memories of Europeans makes me sick.

Daryl
November 21, 2008, 07:30 AM
Have you ever tried to put a live deer in your oven?


Yep, putting that live deer in the oven was a chore, for sure, but it weren't nuthin' compared to that bear!

He was an ornery one, no doubt! Mighty tasty, though. ;)

Just tell her that you're proud, redneck self doesn't deserve the honor of her misguided company.

Some folks act and react on pure emotion, and facts mean nothing to them. Other's can be reasoned with, but most of those don't need to be; they already understand.

Trying to reason with an anti-gun/hunting individual is sorta like trying to teach a pig to sing. It'll frustrate you, and annoy the pig.

Don't get too attached to that female friend, mi amigo. She sounds like she lacks sense, and her looks ain't gonna make up for it.

;)

Daryl

kraigwy
November 21, 2008, 08:29 AM
What do you do when a friend from Europe tells you that you're a murderer for hunting?

Nothing, a FRIEND wouldnt have said that.

fisherman66
November 21, 2008, 08:44 AM
So, she hires someone to kill her meat for her? You are just cutting out the middle man (and the antibiotics, and domesticated fat, and hormones, and all the crud picked up at the slaughter house.)

No wonder the cows are so mad over there. Let them eat cake.

vanguard_anon
November 21, 2008, 09:09 AM
I'm not a hunter but I think you're doing a really good job with your replies.

Art Eatman
November 21, 2008, 09:56 AM
Pahoo, I know folks who are anti-gun and anti-hunting. While I may not openly comment about their views, I certainly have no respect for such ignorant opinions. 'Cause that's what it is: Ignorance, coupled with emotion. "My mind is made up; don't confuse me with facts."

Picture the scene: Four couples, enjoying steaks at a nice restaurant. I made some comment about the next day being "Deer Season Eve", and one gal got all over my case about the horrors of hunting. IOW, able to hold two opposite thoughts at the same time: Restaurant steak good, do-it-yourself venison bad.

It's all emotion based, like the gal on a National Geographic program about elephants. She believes that it were better for the elephant to become extinct than to have a controlled hunting system where the license fees help preserve the health of the species.

Ricky
November 21, 2008, 10:31 AM
Her wording to you is a bit disrespectful. Friendship starts with mutual respect.
I think your response to her was very well put. If she doesn't understand that and can't accept you for who you are then maybe you just can't be friends.
It's too bad, I think that having friends around the world is good to give us all a perspective on the bigger picture.

Ricky

ƒORTE
November 21, 2008, 12:50 PM
In this particular case, your definition/view of "friend" must be skewed. As Rick stated above she is showing zero respect towards you. It is time to cycle this acquaintance out of your life.

Also Pahoo and jdscholer are right on in their assessments.

Scorch
November 21, 2008, 01:49 PM
I feel for you and the feeling that your "friend" has turned on you. Many antis have the misconception that hunting equates murder, but they live in a fairy-tale world where man is the only killer and animals live together in harmony. They also equate guns with violence. If they understood reality and were observers of the world around them, they would hardly feel that way.

Next time you are accused of being a killer, simply smile and ask them where they get their food. If they are meat-eaters, someone has to kill the animals for them, so they are complicit in the crime. If they are vegetarians, they are complicit in the poisoning and starving of untold thousands of animals due to farming practices. If they are vegetarians and they use animal products, they are wasteful, because the only way to get leather or stearate (found in cosmetics and lotions) is to kill the animal they came from. Instead of pointing fingers at everyone else, let them examine their own lives and they will find they are just as guilty of killing as someone who pulls a trigger.

Judge not, that ye be not judged.

FrontSight
November 21, 2008, 02:41 PM
Hi everyone,

Thanks for all of your great points; they are all excellent...

Oh, and I don't really feel betrayed or anything; more along the lines of shocked, b/c you think you know someone & think that they have some sense, but then they show you how nutty they are! That they have no grasp of reality, and live in a fantasy land, and are convinced that YOU are the one who is crazy. And to top it off, they do it while shoving meat dinners in their mouths at that very same moment!!

Just goes to show that if someone you are close to can be this crazy, this unopen to logic, no matter how many scientific facts & examples you give them, then there is probably no hope for the millions of p.e.t.a. strangers that are even crazier than this girl is!

RLFD5415
November 21, 2008, 06:03 PM
Are you guys serious? Between work and family, I really don't have sufficient time to spend with my hunting buddies and shooting friends. Why the hell waste time trying having "liberal" friends. Strap on a set, tell her to go to hell, call your buds and go to the range !:D

hogdogs
November 21, 2008, 06:12 PM
Or send them pictures of your 16 year old daughter proudly displaying a .22 rifle and a head shot bunny...:D Or your 17 year old son posing with 3 others and their dogs with a 200 pound sow hog on top of the dog box...
Least I would... I have relatives that were raised in heavily hunting oriented families and some how turned into vile tree hugging dead cow eaters!:rolleyes:
Brent

ojibweindian
November 21, 2008, 06:19 PM
You have much more patience than me. I've lost a few "friends" because of discussions just like that.

dragonfire
November 21, 2008, 06:33 PM
I personally treat it like a discussion about religion,everybody has and is entitled to their beliefs ,opinions and theories.Just don't disrespect mine and I wont yours.

rem870hunter
November 21, 2008, 07:23 PM
i would give them 5 minutes of my time after that if they still don't comprehend the situation i'd break off the friendship,sorry thats me.

i'd explain as nicely as possible, that guns are not evil, they have the ability to enslave and free people alike. good people do good things with them but bad people do bad things with them. that does not make all guns bad. its not the tool its how it is used. misuse a carjack and see what happens,or a cordless drill or an air compressor.

hunting is not murder, how do you think that slab of beef got on your plate? did the cow just fall over dead from a heart attack? do you think the chickens run to the axe neck first? what about that thanksgiving turkey, did that just fall over dead of natural causes?

another thing that hunting does besides being out and one with nature enjoying the peace of the mountains or the fields or woods and streams. its animal population control, if there are too many animals and not enough food,you have animals going in peoples gardens and farms eating the food they grow for themselves,families or customers. orwould you rather have them dying of starvation,crossing roads in front of you get food, if they don't make it they get hit and damage your car.

do you want that kind of hassle? how would you feel if your garden was being eaten by the animals because there were too many and there was no control, too many states have towns where the people/township banned hunting. cars are hitting them left and right,people are b@#$#^%$ because their farms and gardens are being eaten,they have damage they can't regrow the crops quickly. they are hitting the animals particulary deer with their cars,trucks and causing thousands of dollars in damage to them. if one comes up into and through the windshield you could get killed. or you swerve to try an avoid the collision you hit a tele pole or another vehicle, and kill another driver or their family.

so would you rather have you or your best friend die from an animal coming through the windshield or your car, or would you rather a hunter keep them under control to prevent that from happening?

if after that they are still hellbent on their ways of anti gun/anti hunting. i would tell them to take a long walk on a short pier,or something similar :D.

jimbo_4
November 21, 2008, 07:41 PM
I'll second that Rem! Nature looks great until they're over run by critters! Then the tune changes a bit. Two other benefits hunting and trapping provide is an accurate assessment on disease in the area among animals that may effect domestic animals. Also keeps their numbers in check, without people taking game, the numbers get too high and you have animals dying of famine. Or worse, you have predators begin looking fit joggers in the woods as a tasty meal! And all the money the states generate through hunting and trapping goes towards enforcement of poaching and provides a safe and rewarding experience for anyone who wants to participate. I wouldn't say you can't change anyone's mind, I have a friend, she wont eat any red meat.... I guess chickens aren't really animals or something.... anyway, she thought hunting or trapping especially trapping was cruel. After a number of calm conversations, she's begun to see that you don't just wonder out and shoot something. Or set a trap and any ol thing just walks by and gets it's leg broke and stays out there for days. She now understands there is much effort we put into taking wildlife, and most take a great deal of pride in doing it the right way. She also understands there are many misnomers out there that misrepresent what we do. Of course she still will not eat red meat, or go hunting herself, but does have a new respect for what it is. I think in the end, you handled you conversation well, it's when you let your emotions get in the way, all the facts are then lost. Good job keep you cool and sticking with facts!

FrontSight
November 21, 2008, 08:17 PM
Thanks, here's more, most of which I learned form that book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Hunting:

And as far a hunting being murder & evil, oh my god, where have you learned such a thing??

No one, and I mean no one, cares about and has done more for Nature than hunters. The money that we spend on licenses and in taxes on equipment has gone to buy, conserve, patrol, and protect millions of acres that would probably be gone if not for that money that we have given. Dozens of species have been managed as a renewable resource that would be extinct today if not for hunters and the money and insistence we contribute to study them...how much land they require, what their reproductive rates are, what dangers do they face from industry, encroachment, pollution, invasive species, etc.

When nature is in trouble, we are the first to sound the alarm and push for legistation to protect it. When species are in trouble, we are the first to protect them, to call for lower harvest limits, and to spread the word of the prtection that is needed.

Dozens of animals have been brought back from enadangered and threatened status by the money we give to help protect them and the land they need.

No one is a greater steward of nature than hunters.


Apart from all of that, certain animals MUST be preyed upon, such as deer. They have been designed by nature to be prey animals, and therefore they have very high reproductive rates. If not preyed upon, they destroy the environment by overgrazing (which kills off other species too) and then starving, and they cause hundreds of car accidents where lots of people actually die from the collisions, and they spread lyme disease. So since they MUST be preyed upon, it's either you let wolves and bears and moutain lions roam around free in the suburbs (where A LOT of deer live now because of so much development) next to your children, or you pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to professional snipers to kill them and waste the meat, or you have hunters pay hundreds of thousands of dollars and then use the meat. The right choice is pretty clear.

Even vegitarians need to thank hunters, because all of the crops in the fields would be eaten if not protected by hunters. OR you'd have to spend millions on fences, and then food would cost 5 times as much, and small farms would not be able to survive financially.


We don’t live in a Disney Land world, and things have to be managed in order to keep them healthy and balanced and protected. Hunters fill that role, and we should be thanked, not cursed.

MeekAndMild
November 21, 2008, 08:21 PM
Just goes to show that if someone you are close to can be this crazy, this unopen to logic, no matter how many scientific facts & examples you give them, then there is probably no hope for the millions of p.e.t.a. strangers that are even crazier than this girl is!

An even more startling truth is that this type of mistake in logic may doom them. This is unsettling but true. The first time I recall hearing of this problem was in the mid 1960's reading Richard Bach's Stranger to the Ground where I was introduced to this two part concept that sometimes people die because of a combination of their own wishful thinking and the harsh external word ... and all anybody, even their best friend can do is merely watch them fall off the radar and mark the spot so somebody can come recover the body.

Now the chances of the external world "going bad" so that an individual bambi hugger dies or is badly hurt from wishful thinking are very low, much lower than the chance of death for a 1961 F-84 pilot like Bach, so they have no real incentive to change. The problem comes once in a generation or once in a century when something "goes really bad", like what is happening now to all those peace loving farmers in The Congo or Haiti or all those peaceful ship crews off the east coast of Africa.

rbb50
November 21, 2008, 08:42 PM
As a person that has studied medicine a lot I should tell you to inform your friend that she may have Mad Cow Disease of which she probably contracted from eating at McDonalds.

Symptoms include delirious statements frequent head aches and believing anything a liberal anti gun politician says without question.

It also gives people delusions about what is real or not and makes them start thinking the animal they had contracted the disease from is somehow related to them and can talk to them through telepathy.

They find themselves all of a sudden talking to dogs, cats, fish, cows, sheep and any wildlife that comes along including birds as if they were people.

The last known person to die from the disease was a man that thought he could talk to grizzly bears in Alaska and the bears actually put up with him for a while until one day they tore him to shreds and ate him.

She should seek medical help at once before the bears eat her also.

zahnzieh
November 21, 2008, 10:51 PM
I am a second generation German-American (folks came over) and I have most of my extended relations in Europe. My grandfather and several of my uncles were avid hunters in Germany as I am here in the States. The older and more rural people have high respect for hunters - they see them as a vital animal management force ( like keeping wild boar out of a farmers potatoes or wheat). In fact hunters have to lease their land(to hunt) and are fined if they are not doing their job (crop damage)! It is the younger, metropolitan generation that oftentimes have these kooky ideas. The Green Party is particularly extreme - vegan,PETA ideas taken to the extreme. When you want to cut down a tree in your yard you must first a. get a permit and b. purchase and plant two other trees in its place! These people, in espousing their love for nature with these extreme ideas want to lord over everybody their little warped ideas about how Nature should work. They are laughable in their ignorance - so , just laugh at them!:D

joab
November 21, 2008, 11:09 PM
nature has dictated that meat eaters fall into one of two categories
Predator or scavenger
Would you rather be compared to a Wolf or a Possum
An Eagle or a Buzzard, a Shark or a Crab?

MeekAndMild
November 22, 2008, 08:19 PM
I had a lot of time to think about this today, out in the field looking for Bambi.

Europe has a long tradition of hunting, but only among the landed aristocracy and a few longtime associates. In the last few hundred years the masses of urban commoners had no access to hunting land, no access to guns and no incentive to hunt. So naturally they grew up making excuses, told them to their children, grandchildren et cetera. The ones who could leave did, in the millions. The ones who couldn't leave made up more excuses.

Since the time our US GIs liberated Europe the unwashed masses have had the opportunity to gather the pretense of wealth. But all the fast cars, fancy dresses, government approved dope and aged liquor haven't given them any more hunting land nor any more rights of self defense. There are still a few rich folk who own the land and make sure only a few wealthy friends share it.

So naturally Europeans look askance at their American friends who can buy access to thousands of acres of public hunting lands for less than their fellow Europeans can buy a dinner and drinks. (FYI, my access fee for 50,000+ game management acres is $16.00US, probably enough to buy a waffle in Belgium but not the butter nor syrup.) Its not that they don't understand hunting, they don't understand the freedom to hunt. :(

So if you want to win this friend over ignore all our advice to argue. Appeal to her eurosocialist sentiment and class envy. Commiserate with her how difficult life must be when you have to color within the lines that some rich son of a banker drew for you. :D

relee
November 22, 2008, 11:04 PM
The Europeans are coming from a mindset that diverged from ours hundreds of years ago when our country was colonized. We are indeed like people from different planets in this instance. Our path mirrored the course of humans from the last 10,000 years or so on this continent where hunting to eat was the norm. Her attitude until somewhat recently would have resulted in the natural selection device called starvation. Civilization and domestication are good at hiding the actual mechanism by which live. It is still life in the food chain when you strip away all the smoke and mirrors. Europeans have been at this civilization thing much longer than we have and are thus further down the rabbit hole than we are. I get a perspective on the food chain thing every time I start a dive. Suddenly you aren't the top predator anymore, just another slow moving source of protein...a humbling experience indeed.

FrontSight
November 22, 2008, 11:44 PM
Meek: You make a good point, but the things she said are verbatim what the antis say here in America, so I think there is some kind of related mental disease all these people share...

phil mcwilliam
November 23, 2008, 04:26 AM
These people are not just confined to Europe, which comprises of nearly 50 different countries. In some countries in Europe hunting deer & hogs is common, but England has just banned the traditional fox hunt using beagles & horses. A lot of fringe special interest groups originate in Europe, that are anti-anything, but hunting is still alive & well in parts of Europe. I have a friend that is working on a mining exploration drilling rig in Slovenia in Europe. He e-mailed his uncle & myself last week saying he had passed 6 Fallow Deer, a mob of wild boar, & 3 Red Deer on his way to work, & asked when we were coming over, as he new all the locals that could easily organise a deer hunt for us

stevelyn
November 23, 2008, 04:48 AM
.........................you're a murderer for hunting?

No, I'm a killer. There are no innocent animals.

JSHunter
November 23, 2008, 04:18 PM
Trust me buddy, I understand. My girlfriend of several months decided to tell me how I am a killer. She was not too happy about me hunting. I told her she needed to get used to it because it is not going to change. She asked me not to talk to her about it. I happily agreed and we have been fine ever since.:) I just treat it like religion and politics. It doesn't hlep that she is a political science major!

Adrian
November 23, 2008, 04:46 PM
Here's my liberal-flavored take on it:

I've never gone hunting before in my life.

For a while now I've been making plans to do it, sometime in 2009. It's my New Year's Resolution, as it were. I'm saving for a rifle, and I'll be taking the hunter's safety course once it comes in. I think I can plan arrangements once I get there.

People ask me why I'm doing this. I sit a little to the political left, where this kind of project is generally unfashionable. I don't come from a hunting family. I'm the first person in my family, at least three generations back, to own a gun.

My answer, in short form, is that I think it's my moral obligation. I have to take moral responsibility for my life.

I eat meat. Meat is muscle; meat is flesh. Whether I'm eating a hot dog or coq au vin, bacon or steak, something has to die for my pleasure. It's not necessary; human beings can survive pretty well as vegetarians. As much as we all like to have a good laugh at PeTA's expense, meat is murder, to a certain degree: we don't eat carrion, so meat necessarily involves the selfish, premeditated destruction of life. A living, breathing, feeling animal, not quite like any other before or any other since, has to be snuffed off of the face of the earth... not so that I may live, not even so that I may eat, but only so that I may enjoy my meal.

Most people would like to forget that, I think, and we live in a time where it's very easy. If you live in a reasonably large city, it's possible to go your entire life without ever seeing the animals that die for you. Take a look at the supermarket, and all the rows of skinless, boneless, meaningless meat, all shrink-wrapped for your convenience. You literally never have to bloody your hands.

I'm not really comfortable with that brand of morality, with the idea of unthinking murder-by-proxy. I think it's important to own up to your sins. Is it ever right to eat meat without remembering the animals that died for it? If killing animals for your dining pleasure is wrong, then why is it right to pay someone else to do it?

As a human being, I think it's my responsibility to to look reality in the face, once in a while, to understand it on that visceral kind of level. Animals die for my eating pleasure. If I can't accept that, personally - stare down the scope at a boar and pull the trigger, draw the knife across a chicken's throat, throw a lobster into the pot, gut and clean a fish on my own, whatever - if I can't bring myself to bloody my hands, if the idea of killing my own dinner is that morally repugnant, then vegetarianism becomes my only ethical option.

At the end of the day, it's about self-inspection. I thought that was a liberal value.

hogdogs
November 23, 2008, 05:22 PM
Adrian, I agree with your take on it even though I have no memory of a gun free home nor do I know of a time when the "roast beast" was just that... us kids never questioned what the beast was when alive. While my wife would rather not try most game... she knows we won't ever starve for want of meat...
Brent

Desertfox
November 23, 2008, 05:27 PM
It's a good thing our predecessors didn't think it was immoral to kill and eat.
Way back to rock and stick hunters in caves, we have hunted and eaten.

Morality isn't a hunting issue. Allowing this diseased thinking spread thru television and theatre that animals have the same conscious thought and relationships as humans do, is the foundation.
If you believe that deer think about how their "family" is dealing with the loss of cousin backstrap, who just got "murdered" by that terrible hunter, you are part of the problem.
Deer think about a couple of things, 1) I hunger 2) I thirst 3) I must breed

4-7) What was that noise, Run Away, Run Away Fast!, Sleep, Deficate, Urinate, Urinate on self, These antlers itch, Urinate to mark territory, etc.

This coincides with every animal in the woods to different degrees.\
Hunt, Harvest your kill, Cook it and say a blessing before eating it.
Be sure to thank your god for providing the beast and thank him for giving you the frontal lobe and opposable thumbs. Also thank him for not dropping you in France.

Bambi's Daddy chased other does too, and didn't help rear the little backstrapper! Don't personalize animals. Silly crap!

MeekAndMild
November 23, 2008, 06:50 PM
the things she said are verbatim what the antis say here in America That's true and I think you'll find some places here where the same social dynamics apply. Boston for instance has gone a long way since the tea party and you'd have to travel a long way from Boston to find an open place to hunt. :(

Daryl
November 23, 2008, 08:01 PM
The title of this thread is confusing.

1. The anti's are not your friends.

2. If an anti IS your friend, refer back to rule #1.

Daryl

freakintoguns
November 23, 2008, 08:40 PM
Tell you r Friend Bambi ended up in some hunter's wife's Cooking pot. and God Gave us Dominon over beasts to make sure they didnt get out of hand. ever met a liberal bear? i havent

VaFisher
November 24, 2008, 06:57 AM
Like I said before,
It's simple, you can't be a true friend to a anti so why try. Keep your friendship where it belongs and that's with folks that think like yourself instead of someone from mars or venus.

I will take it a step more, a true freind would not tell you how wrong you are for killing or hunting.
Instead they would ask why and give you a chance to explain so they would understand, some it up for you.

It's simple, you can't be a true friend to a anti so why try. Keep your friendship where it belongs and that's with folks that think like yourself instead of someone from mars or venus.

shortwave
November 24, 2008, 09:54 AM
As previously stated this line of thought is not isolated to Europe. We have an increasing anti sentiment right here in the "good ole US of A". Pahoo`s acts(thoughts) of education sure beats just cutting someone off. Isn`t educating people about guns a tool we all use to show them our views on guns. Granted alot will never change but if you can convert one, its worth it. PS, I`ve fed my none hunting, killing a deer is terrible in-laws venison whenever I get a chance. They`ve eaten more than they know;).

Musketeer
November 24, 2008, 10:12 AM
Those who think all Europeans are anti gun and anti hunting are as ignorant of some of the Europeans who think all Americans are murderers for hunting and teaching their children to be bloodthirsty killers.

Stupidity is Stupidity, from the left or the right.

Personally I have been to Europe several times for work. I enjoy Switzerland in October and November as it is game season. I normally come back bloated from many meals featuring wild boar, pheasant, venison, and just about every other type of game which can be taken. Most of these are prepared in old restaurants where trophies are on display. One of my hotels in particular and more trophies from Africa than I could shake a stick at displayed along with the firearms and was also two doors down from the gun shop where the owner let me handle several arms. I bought several pocket knives from him as gifts for people at home.

On top of that experience our facility over there has an annual rifle shoot where plenty of full auto arms show up given they are all kept at home as part of their army.

Now there are certainly ignorant people in Europe with regards to shooting and hunting. I also would wager that in the "western" European nations the percentage of them is higher than it is here. It is outright ignorance though to claim that all in Europe are leftist, anti gun and anti hunting. The most conservative people I know there are actually in France and are pro gun, completely against the spread of Islamic Extremism and very anti-socialist...

MeekAndMild
November 24, 2008, 10:56 AM
Pahoo`s acts(thoughts) of education sure beats just cutting someone off. I don't know about that. At work I spend much of the day every day telling people the same old stuff. "Too much alcohol and street drugs and sitting at home watching Oprah and not exercising will make you stay depressed until you change. No you're not disabled but you have a problem with motivation and education so you need to develop a plan to get your GED and take training so you can get a better job or after 2 years of appeals the disability office will give you a final denial and you'll go back to flipping burgers. Et cetera". Then the next day there is a whole new crop of lazy assed dopers who need the same individually tailored but highly repetitive lecture. :barf:

The trouble is that when you get any sort of shared cultural delusion going, whether it is "we can stay high and sit on the couch all the time without consequences" or "the government owes us all a living" or "hunting is bad" you're only one person telling them the truth but they have a hundred or a million friends reinforcing the delusion. :(

Sorry, but the only thing which will change this mindset is going to be famine or flood or war or something else horrible. Pray that its not another holocaust.

Adrian
November 24, 2008, 04:55 PM
It's a good thing our predecessors didn't think it was immoral to kill and eat.
Way back to rock and stick hunters in caves, we have hunted and eaten.

Morality isn't a hunting issue.

I think that morality absolutely is an issue in hunting.

Many of our ancestors didn't think it was immoral to kill and eat, as you put it, but by no means all. The Jain religion believes that eating meat is an unecessary violence upon the world. Many Buddhists and Hindus agree. Even for those who ate meat, though, it had a lot more significance than the modern quick trip to McDonalds. It's custom in many Native American tribes, after a successful hunt, to give thanks to the animal for its sacrifice. Kosher and halal laws dictate that certain animals are unclean, and prohibit their consumption; those that are allowed must be killed in certain humane ways. It's important not to take food for granted; it's important to understand what it means.

Hunting is a return to that. Have you ever held off the trigger to let an animal grow, or do you just blast the first one you see? Would you shoot a wild sow trailing piglets, or would you leave it so there are more to hunt next year? The hunter necessarily recognizes the violence involved and decides upon its morality.

I don't know about you, but I think that's a more-ethical position than unthinking consumption.

MeekAndMild
November 24, 2008, 06:59 PM
The Jain religion believes that eating meat is an unecessary violence upon the world. Many Buddhists and Hindus agree.
Consider the case of two creeds in conflict. One strong belief against killing is found in Tibetan Buddhism. Another strong belief in killing first and fastest is found in Chinese Communism. Which side is thriving and which is dwindling in Tibet?

hogdogs
November 24, 2008, 07:16 PM
All's I know is our pilgrim ancestors were some starvin' sunz-a-bucks 'til them NATIVES showed up with some corn and wild turkey, likely venison too...
Brent

VaFisher
November 24, 2008, 07:32 PM
Personally I think every human when born has a natural urge to hunt but if not taught the right way they do not understand or cultivate their abilities to learn how to hunt right so they end up losing what was natural in the first place. I would guess they then turn into what we would call a anti if they end up around the wrong kind of people or they could end up in a much worst stage in life just simply wanting to control others like most Democrats that are elected.

FrontSight
November 25, 2008, 02:58 PM
I couldn't take it anymore, this was the last straw, when I kept pointing out that she ate meat & Foie Gras (where the geese are force fed till their livers bloat to 10x normal size):



-----Original Message-----
From: Anti
To: Me

can we agree to disagree...


Here was my response:

Oh come on. You want to just dismiss this all, like we never had these conversations?

I've sent you facts, scientific data, statistics and quotes from studies, proof of why hunting and guns are important for the ecosystem and human lives, and examples of how you yourself enjoy all the fruits of hunting and eating the meat of once living, breathing animals and are therefore being hypocritical.

In return all you've done is respond with calling me "murderer, redneck, blood thirsty, insane, mad, disgusting, bad father figure, brainwashed, etc etc etc."

You haven't given me one single fact, not one single scientific study citation, not one single follow up on the facts I have sent you, not one iota of research, etc. Just strict emotion, finger pointing, refusal to answer to any of my logical arguments with a logical response, and name calling from you.


And now, after all of your insulting name calling, finger pointing, failure to give one shred of logical support for your views, lack of admission & acknowledgment of your hypocrisy and emotion based rationalization and apology for your insults, you want to just drop this? You toss all that at me and don’t back up any of it or take a second to consider that it might be true and label me and my family with derogatory terms and then you just want to drop it?? How very convenient for you.


Hhmmm, if "redneck" means "someone who is ignorant, backwards, biased, closed minded, insulting, hypocritical, blind & dismissive of scientific facts and figures, resists learning at all costs, stubborn as a mule, rooted in emotion instead of scientific logic, condemns things without first personally experiencing and understanding them, unable to connect the relationship of their very own actions with those they condemn, dismissive of all facts and challenges when backed into a corner, unapologetic, self righteous and considers themselves to be better than others because they won't or can't even take the brain power necessary to see the flaws in their lack of logic and hypocritical actions", then I think it's pretty clear from our discourse who the "redneck" is, L.


If you're going to take a stance and insult me on mine then at least have the courtesy to both support your stance and disprove mine with more than just insults and dismissiveness when challenged.

hogdogs
November 25, 2008, 03:13 PM
I would love to be a fly on their wall when they dig into a smoked ham and halfway thru it they learn that the hog was run, stopped, bayed by currs and caught by bulldogs...
Brent

Brian Pfleuger
November 25, 2008, 03:28 PM
Here was my response:


Any reply?

FrontSight
November 25, 2008, 03:28 PM
hogdog, never mind being there when they carve into it...I wanna be there when that actual hunt is going on!! :D:D

peetzakilla: she is in Ireland, so she's gone for the night...won't be back till tomorrow. either way it doesn't really matter; I have realized she is just like all other animal rights nuts. I.E. she can't defend her position with a single scientific or logical point, she never answers a challenge to do so, she doesn't see her own actions as equivalent to or "worse" than hunting, and she brushes off science and logic and replaces it with emotion. In other words, she's mentally incapable of logical & rational thought, and thinks others are wrong for their logical views.

Scary, man....very scary.

Musketeer
November 25, 2008, 04:35 PM
In return all you've done is respond with calling me "murderer, redneck, blood thirsty, insane, mad, disgusting, bad father figure, brainwashed, etc etc etc."

Understand that those who base their decisions on primarily emotional criteria see no reason not to respond with emotion. In her eyes calling you all of those things was perfectly correct, left thinking play book 101.

I guarantee you the next response you get will be shock at how emotional you have gotten about this whole thing.

hogdogs
November 25, 2008, 04:47 PM
Musketeer has a valid point! Look at what peta has said to our kids in OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS about their parents who hunt!!! As a small boy I was a bit crass, not too PC and quick to speak my mind... ( I BET THAT IS A SHOCKER HUH:cool:) had them nut jobs come in there saying those things to my 2nd or 3rd grade class I would have burped a good venison belch and proceeded to give them my opinion of bambi, thumper and all the rest of them tasty critters. I may have even been a bit "acidic" as they are speaking of those who meant the most to me!
My Gramps may have been a drunk but my memories of that are minuscule compared to times in the ice shanty spearing pike, sitting next to him on the snow while he put the crosshairs on a buck and barked one off from that winny 94... Actually I still get a knot in my throat at those memories!:) They are whole heartedly invited to KMA and GTFO!!!
Brent

jammin1237
November 25, 2008, 06:19 PM
this may be slightly off key, but who is going to save the plants? can you imagine the pain that these living things go through when they are just plucked from there environment and brutally chopped up and devoured by some mindless human who has no respect for God or nature... i cant even fathom the amount sap and plant matter on the hands of those vegan killers...........

Desertfox
November 25, 2008, 10:42 PM
Adrian you confuse ethics with morals. I may choose to pass on a small buck to harvest him a few years later or pass on a sow with piglets in tow for similar reasons.
I may pass on a bad shot or shot angle etc. but it is due to my ethical thought process, not morals. Ethically, a bad shot causes me and other hunters a wasted harvest or worse a shot with questionable background.

A good clean shot on an animal, I wish to harvest is always my intent.
No, I don't blast everything that moves in the woods. Thanks for the implication, but wrong guy. Yes, I have and do pass on game more than I shoot due to choice. I choose to utilize my tag on a mature animal and may pass on lesser for that reason. Not because it is morally wrong to harvest a button buck or yearling, but because it is a choice to let them grow bigger to fill more pots.
I have taken 4 new hunters to the deer woods this year. Two 10 year old boys and their dad, and later a cousin. One boy shot a doe.(opening day of youth season) The other shot a 5 point.(2 days later in the same stand) Dad harvested a doe a few weeks later with me using a muzzleloader for the first hunt. (spot and stalk) I put him and his cousin (13) in a double man leaning stand 3 days ago. They watched does all morning waiting on a buck. No harvest yet, but he is hooked. Morally, I feel like I did a great thing.
I enjoy being in the woods on the hunt. If I pass early season shots, it may be for that reason also.

hogdogs
November 25, 2008, 11:00 PM
I do not shoot everything that walks... I never shoot a spotted fawn or a button buck as a buck. I will shoot a button as a doe during that portion. I rather not shoot a bruiser as it is likely to be harsher in flavor than a youngster.
As for a sow with piglets... If there is a sustained population in the area a nursing piglet can nurse on other mothers with milk. They routinely care for each other's young. Since a pig is a pig, my dogs have wiped out many young pigs when the adults give them the slip by running thru a gob of little ones. But My source of hunting permission is double edged as I am there to remove a nuisance anyway. we have cooked 12-20 pounders often and that is some tender tasty pork. As for deer, small is fine and I am after quantity to fill freezers and not just mine. But I don't care for tracking gut shot deer so I try for DRT shots. Clean, ethical kill but morals are, IMHO, something left 'tween humans or regarding obscene perversions...:rolleyes:
Brent

Adrian
November 26, 2008, 03:08 AM
Consider the case of two creeds in conflict. One strong belief against killing is found in Tibetan Buddhism. Another strong belief in killing first and fastest is found in Chinese Communism. Which side is thriving and which is dwindling in Tibet?

Are you suggesting that the Communist Chinese hold a morally superior position on the matter?

I'm not saying that violence is unnecessary, if you'll actually read my post, only that it should never be taken lightly. People can decide where they draw their lines of comfortable violence, but it's delusional (at best) to condemn something that you pay others to do for your pleasure. I think most people here can agree with that.

I'm not even sure what Desertfox is reading into my post anymore. I get the feeling that we're talking across each other, and if someone can explain to me what he thinks I'm saying, I'll be happy to address it.

Brian Pfleuger
November 26, 2008, 10:31 AM
Adrian you confuse ethics with morals.
Merriam-Webster

Ethics:
a: a set of moral principles : a theory or system of moral values


Morals:
a: moral practices or teachings : modes of conduct b: ethics


Same:
1 a: resembling in every relevant respect b: conforming in every respect —used with as
2 a: being one without addition, change, or discontinuance : identical b: being the one under discussion or already referred to
3: corresponding so closely as to be indistinguishable
:D;):confused::rolleyes:

Byron Quick
November 26, 2008, 05:48 PM
I've a number of friends from Europe. Many are gunnies. None are antis. I don't have friends who are anti-hunting or anti-firearms. Personally, if some woman said such to me and we were on a date, I'd take her home and she would never hear from me again.

I was on a first date with a young lady one night and the talk came to firearms.
She didn't know at the time just how strong my interest in guns was or that I carry. She made the remark early on that guns were not allowed in her home.

I immediately, politely, but flatly replied,"Then I will never cross the threshhold into your home."

She invited me inside at the end of the evening. I told her that I was carrying a pistol and that I would always be carrying a pistol. She told me to come in anyway and the issue was never raised again.

With many people remarks such as hers are merely kneejerk responses and are not deeply held principles.

Now she never became a shooter or hunter and the relationship eventually withered on the vine. But guns or hunting were never an issue again.

Sometimes a blunt 'I hunt and shoot, will always hunt and shoot...if you cannot accept this then we need to part ways' is the best way to handle these people. Let them know right at the beginning that your position is firm and unyielding.

FrontSight
November 26, 2008, 06:14 PM
She again tried to brush it off and said she was being diplocatic all along, and I let her have it again.

BUT that's nothing. She later told me that a black friend of hers from the UK said that I belong in the KKK!!



Check it out:


HER:
To be honest any of those emails I barely skimmed through I dont want to insult you by telling you what I think of people who hunt or who are pro-busy. Surely you can see what the rest of the world thinks? Can we leave it at this. Yes, I had detailed discussions with Matt and many of my other american friends about politics etc... but, unfortunately, as explained from that night at dinner could never have with you. Its never made me change what I think of you as a person. I just wouldnt agree with your values and Im getting very wound up reading this sh*t if Ive to be honest whilst trying to be diplomatic with you by not being insulting so, can we please leave this and as I said agree to disagree.



MY REPLY:
So there's a diplomatic way of calling a friend a murderer for hunting, even while you are eating meat at the same moment?

And there's a diplomatic way of calling a friend a redneck, while not even listening to their educated explanation of why their actions are scientifically proven to be sound & necessary for a healthy ecosystem?

And there's a diplomatic way of telling a friend that they are akin to being a Hitler supporter because they think it's a good idea to stand up and fight the terrorists that have killed thousands of their fellow americans over the past 30 years, while not ever once providing an idea of a better, counter solution instead of fighting? I'm still waiting to hear one from you, but it never comes...


Is that the way you act Diplomatic? You just toss out insults and denounce people as backwards and fascists but never consider the other person's sound, logical, scientific, valid points, nor provide any sound, logical, valid, scientific points of your own? And then you throw up your hands and just say that it's impossible to talk about these matters with them?


That makes sense to you?? That is how you debate?? That is how you come to "logical" conclusions in your life??


I would debate these matters with you in a logical, adult manner for decades, and I would listen to all of your points and rebut every single one in kind with logical points of my own as I have done so far, and it would never come between us.

But you don't or can't do the same...all you do is insult and replace logic with emotion and say "everyone else feels this way too" (as if that's a logical argument that holds any water; would you follow them off a bridge??) and then you are incredulous over being called out on it.


That is not being diplomatic by any stretch of the imagination. It's akin to a schoolground argument where one of the children yells "poopy-head!!" at another before running off to play hop-scotch.




Here is the kicker!!

HER:
I was telling Ben... lol... this is what he told me to tell you:
That you should 'join the KKK or combat18 although i hear they dont think people of italian ancestry are pure white'


AND THEN I LOST IT, AND I AM DONE WITH HER!

MY RESPONSE:
OH....MY...F*CKING...GOD...what the F*CK is that SH*T??!!

How the HELL do you two equate my support of our Founding Fathers' Original Bill of Rights that declared our God Given Rights, which they fought so valiantly for, that they sacredly compiled after being oppressed by a cruel British Govt and King for so many years & tried to peacefully resolve over & over & over to no avail, that they realized are the basic necessities for freedom, that formed the Greatest Nation That Has Ever Existed On This Planet, with a hate group like the KKK???!!!


The Bill of Rights is about FREEDOM and JUSTICE, and granting the people the TOOLS to BE FREE AND STAND UP AGAINST OPPRESSION!!


And you two mock it and align it with a racist, murderous, hateful group like the KKK??!! What the hell is wrong with you??!!


Jesus Almighty you two are seriously ignorant and don’t have a clue of anything that America stands for! You have NO IDEA how opressed you are. You are like lambs in a slaughter house & have been fooled onto thinking that it's ok to be that way.

You've been told you don’t have any rights to anything except what the govt deems you are fit to have, and you've been told this lie for so long that you think anyone who declares they have God Given rights is insane and a hate group member??!!


Jesus Christ, WAKE UP AND GET EDUCATED!!


Have you ever read the Declaration of Independence?? Have you ever read the Original Bill of Rights??


Here, why don't the two of you take a few minutes to get educated on what the God Given Rights of a Free Person are by reading the Original Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence...they lay out the rights you have been told that you don't deseve over there so many times that you actually believe it.



READ THIS, AND I MEAN REALLY, REALLY READ IT, AND THEN TELL ME THAT ALL HUMAN BEINGS DON'T DESERVE THESE GOD-GIVEN RIGHTS??!! THAT ANY OF THIS IS FOUNDED ON HATE??!! What the hell do they teach you in your schools??!!


"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

And you two equate my support of this and the Bill of Rights to being a KKK Member???!! Jesus Almighty God, what the hell have you been taught??



ORIGINAL BILL OF RIGHTS

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Amendment II

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.


Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.


Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures , shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue , but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.


Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.


Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.



DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE


IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people 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.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

— John Hancock

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Brian Pfleuger
November 26, 2008, 06:21 PM
She's crazy.


Though I do find your discussion of God-given rights interspersed with using said Gods name in profane ways to be interesting... but that's another topic.

FrontSight
November 26, 2008, 06:24 PM
peetzakilla: Eh, I'm from NY, what do you expect? :D:D

Brian Pfleuger
November 26, 2008, 06:31 PM
Eh, I'm from NY, what do you expect?


Hmm, I didn't realize that.... she may be right after all...;):D

FrontSight
November 26, 2008, 06:34 PM
I'm gonna go home now & get ready to cook some of my "murdered" turkey tomorrow! Lol

Musketeer
November 26, 2008, 07:08 PM
We waited around for that turkey to die for weeks. It got expensive, the vet bills, the life support, the medication. The hard part was getting the pet psychic who was able to confirm the turkey's giving us his permission to eat him after he died of natural causes.

Anybody ever read the Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy books. In one at the Restaurant at the End of the Universe they had bred cows who could talk and were looking forward to being eaten. They would walk out to your table and make suggestions regarding which portions would be best to order. They would become angry at suggestions of this being barbaric since they considered this their purpose in life.

MeekAndMild
November 26, 2008, 07:24 PM
Yea Scrap I'd say you lost it on that last post. Its better to say goodbye like a cat does.

Are you suggesting that the Communist Chinese hold a morally superior position on the matter?Nope. I'll let you figure out questions of moral superiority. I'm a Darwinian but I mourn whenever I see someone going the way of the dodo because they ain't gonna' study war no more. I'll even mourn the Irish (IIRC this wench is Irish) the next time they're conquered; my ancestors left to get away from the servitude business and we've fully integrated into the US, including its barbarian weapons customs.:D

sureshots
November 30, 2008, 07:40 AM
Its O.K. for them to believe what they want, America, Europe, or whatever. We are entitled to the same privilege. We can argue our points peaceably ,no hard feelings (as adults), or we can try to shove our opinions down each others throats and probably end up as enemies. Best to state your opinion, hear hers and then lay off the subject.

12GaugeShuggoth
November 30, 2008, 02:15 PM
All I'll say is I hope everyone who is so critical over people making "emotion" calls/plays aren't the same people who get so ****** off when their own religion and/or choices are threatened. It's easy to make anything sound stupid or incorrect, but that doesn't really make it so. So many are so focused on being "right" .....and who gets to make that choice?

redwing 40
November 30, 2008, 02:30 PM
A few years ago we were getting ready to depart Scotland for the US. Some fine folks we had got to know in Scotland ask us to stay awhile longer. That evening they ask us why were in a hurry to return to the states.
My wife said, we have late Elk Permits for Wyoming. The Scots like a shock wave said you engage in "Blood Sports"? We let them know in quick fashion we were deeply offended by their remarks regarding our life style.
They were fast to say they were sorry. My point is don't take it with your head down. When we are offended hit back fast. The anti-hunters can say they are sorry.:)

Art Eatman
December 1, 2008, 10:00 AM
Enuf wanderin'. :)