The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Hunt

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 17, 2005, 07:55 AM   #26
Jack O'Conner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2005
Location: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,490
I have mixed feelings about baiting for hunting big game. But I'm not sure there is much difference between baiting and hunting mulies near mountain mahogany thickets. Both situations rely upon ambush techniques and preferred food.
Jack
Jack O'Conner is offline  
Old October 17, 2005, 08:13 AM   #27
stevelyn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 2004
Location: Fairbanksan in exile to Aleutian Hell
Posts: 2,618
How about food plots?

Every outdoor retailer sells seed and planting equipment for food plots. Two things are going to happen. The target species is going to get healthier due to the nutrition. As a result the population will increase and hunters are going to hunt over the food plot that has been carefully cultivated.

Do you find that unethical?
__________________
Herman Cain '12

Squished bugs on a windshield is proof the slow/heavy bullet theory works.
stevelyn is offline  
Old October 17, 2005, 09:31 AM   #28
Bravo25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 19, 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 432
Quote:
I personally have no problem with baiting, but it is harvesting...not hunting.
+1 - Just like driving them.

Why don't we just go ahead and allow dynamite fishing, and gatling gun hunting? We could even approve night vision gear, and scopes. Oh and infared might be an option. But this isn't sport, and it isn't hunting. It is gathering, and harvesting. Even if you are one who needs to fill the freezer (which really is far, and few in between these days) this is still harvesting, it is not hunting. Not by definition. But somehow if we alter the meaning of the word it becomes ethical? I don't agree, and that is JMO.
__________________
If more laws restricting our rights will make us free from harm, why aren't we safe yet? We are only less free.

When faced with impossible overwhelming odds, prudance would dictate the only thing left is to figure out what is possible, and to do it.

Punishment for all crimes should increase until the recitivism rate approaches zero.
Bravo25 is offline  
Old October 17, 2005, 12:03 PM   #29
Jack O'Conner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2005
Location: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,490
I'm in agreement with stevelyn. Food plots whether planted by the hand of God or man attract animals. Mountain mahagony thickets always produce good shots at mule deer during the mid November rut cycle. Does are hungry for this plant and bucks are, well you know. Same situation with antelope and short budding winter wheat fields. A magnet for game.

In Texas and other places they hunt near corn and other grains. For many years, Michigan farmers sold Deer Bait legally at roadside stands. These large bags contained corn, carrots, beets, and apples.

I'm of the opinion that each state has the authority to govern itself in this matter of baiting. If you dis-believe me, read the 10th Amendment sometime soon. I'm certain that it should be decided by the resident voting citizens of each state to allow or forbid the practise of baiting big game animals.
Jack
Jack O'Conner is offline  
Old October 17, 2005, 12:54 PM   #30
butch50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 15, 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
Food plots whether planted by the hand of God or man attract animals. Mountain mahagony thickets always produce good shots at mule deer during the mid November rut cycle.
The difference I see between hunting over food plots and automatic feeders is in the timer, and the small area of corn dispersal. The timed feeder "trains" deer to be at a pinpoint spot at a specific time.

Food plots tend to be some area in size where the deer can approach from different locations, and the food plot is there 24/7 so the deer can feed at night if they want to.

The closer analogy would be huting over the only water hole within miles in the desert, and for sport hunting I wouldn't do that either. Not quite the same, but closer in analogy.
__________________
‘‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.’’ ~ Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography", page 446

‘‘The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.’’ ~ Patrick Henry
butch50 is offline  
Old October 18, 2005, 01:58 PM   #31
Jack O'Conner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2005
Location: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,490
Although I've not ever been involved with baiting I have given this subject much thought today. I'm wondering when Hunting Ethics began?

Certainly was not a concern when USA was founded. Early colonial hunters took game any way they could and typically easier the better! Jacklighting was a common practise for collecting venison. Dan'l Boone thought nothing of shooting every single deer he could. Davy Crockett never passed up a shot at any bear.

Plains Indians were not concerned about hunting ethics. They commonly lit large prairie fires to drive game. They also used various traps and snares for big game.

During the era of 1870-1905 American big game populations were decimated by Market Hunters. This was a legitimate occupation until state laws protecting game were established.

Please do not mis-understand me. I am in favor of hunting ethics. I'm questioning where they originated simply because I do not know.
Jack
Jack O'Conner is offline  
Old October 18, 2005, 02:21 PM   #32
capnrik
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 29, 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 474
Deja Vu

I've posted this before, but...

Reading this thread takes me back about 20 years when I was a young hunting guide on the Texas/Mexico border. I have sat and listened to clients vilify everything from timed feeders to smokeless powder.

One gentleman hunted with a single shot, open sighted rifle and was generally derisive of any hunter with a repeating rifle, even a bolt action. Repeaters weren't "fair".

Another refused to let me take him to a draw in the jeep.
Vehicles weren't "fair".

We had no feeders on the property, but sometimes I would bait a road with corn in the morning, hoping to get a shot in the afternoon. My father hated the practice, and said it wasn't "fair".

So here's the deal. Get out of bed in the morning and go hunting naked.
No boots; deer don't have them.
No drawers, not even a jockstrap.
No gun, no rifle, no knife, nothing.

Because the minute you manufacture cloth for those undies, or pick up a rock and start chipping at flint, you are using human intelligence, and beginning the long path up that leads to GPS, night vision, timed feeders, game cameras, and those horrible sacks of corn.

So, skivvies ain't "fair".
__________________
All rights reserved.
capnrik is offline  
Old October 18, 2005, 02:55 PM   #33
kjm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 1999
Location: College Station, Texas
Posts: 1,871
Management tools

For myself, a landowner, hunting isn't about sport. It is about management of a resource. By having folks hunt, they reduce the population that the biologist prescribes for us. I don't care if they're killed by a bowhunter in a tree or underneath a feeder. What I care about is: 1. They are killed humanely, 2. The correct number of does are removed, and 3. They don't kill anything the biologist proscribes (young bucks etc...).

They may use any legal means, I only care about the end result. I leave sport to sportsmen.

When I fish in my tanks, I like sport too, but I don't go fishing for sport. Very little of the fish I catch ever get thrown back in unless they are outside the slot limit. I either eat them or I throw them on the bank. Ultimately, I have to live with the results of my management. So long as the bucks and the bass keep getting bigger and the overall population is healthier, I don't care how the end result is achieved.

There are two perspectives: Those who hunt for sport and those who manage the resource.
__________________
COME AND TAKE IT!!!
kjm is offline  
Old October 18, 2005, 04:04 PM   #34
Bravo25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 19, 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 432
Quote:
Certainly was not a concern when USA was founded. Early colonial hunters took game any way they could and typically easier the better! Jacklighting was a common practise for collecting venison. Dan'l Boone thought nothing of shooting every single deer he could. Davy Crockett never passed up a shot at any bear.

Plains Indians were not concerned about hunting ethics. They commonly lit large prairie fires to drive game. They also used various traps and snares for big game.
Most of these were hunting for survival.


Quote:
So here's the deal. Get out of bed in the morning and go hunting naked.
No boots; deer don't have them.
No drawers, not even a jockstrap.
No gun, no rifle, no knife, nothing.
There is nothing wrong with using to tools to equate the situation. Animals have hides to keep them warm. Keener senses, faster moving, and generally more athletic. But when you train an animal to walk up to your rifle, and stand there while you drop it, you are harvesting. Not hunting.
__________________
If more laws restricting our rights will make us free from harm, why aren't we safe yet? We are only less free.

When faced with impossible overwhelming odds, prudance would dictate the only thing left is to figure out what is possible, and to do it.

Punishment for all crimes should increase until the recitivism rate approaches zero.
Bravo25 is offline  
Old October 18, 2005, 07:16 PM   #35
rangefodder
Member
 
Join Date: September 10, 2005
Posts: 22
IMO it's very unethical.

1. because the TV Show wasn't doing it for sport or meat. They were doing it for a TV Show

2. It wasn't a hunt. It was just sitting around filming and waiting for the innevitable.

3. they killed a deer that could've been taken by a real hunter.

Now there's a lot of people who have said that its ok if hunting for meat.

But how is standing around a feeding station "hunting" Don't call it "Hunting", because it's not.


Now the difference in fishing with bait and hook and the above is, 99% of the time the fish is eaten or released. Also, you really can't see the fish. You kinda' sit and hope, not sit and wait.
rangefodder is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 12:49 AM   #36
Big Yac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 23, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 422
Honestly, I never knew there were feed stations that dropped a load of food at a prescribed time. This to me doesnt feel like hunting. That being said I do hunt over a stream thats close to an area where deer feed (not man made ). I dont feel that there is anything wrong with this because the deer has free will, he can get a drink here or go up stream or whatever, I'm not 'training' him to come to my exact location at a certain time. I found this spot after a good bit of preparation, scouting. That to me is using one's intelligence. Feed stations are wonderful technoloy (for a photo op possibly?) and I'm all for advancing technology but it doesnt take much intelligence or hard work(read skill) to be at a certain place at a certain time. Now in an extreme case like for somebody, like a poor person to feed their family, I'd say then go for the feeding station.

This year deer hunting may be a bit more challenging to me because I'm going to use a handgun. A Ruger Super Redhawk in .454 Casull. Since I got the gun several months ago I've put numerous rounds through it so I could find what my limits were and to fine tune loads so I can make a clean humane kill. I've decided on not shooting over about 75 yards even though I"m shooting pretty well out to 100. I think its going to be more fun getting a deer with my revolver than it is with my shotgun (with slugs).
__________________
"...and that's the bottom line, because Big Yac said so."
Big Yac is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 08:42 AM   #37
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX, USA
Posts: 22,540
Aw, yeah, Big Yac, they have feeder rigs now that are solar powered and computer chipped. And, a barrel about as big as you'd ever want. You can set up to six feeding times per day, and control the length of time the wheel spins.

During the season, generally, you'll see does and little bucks feeding. Usually, any "real" buck won't come out in the open, but hang around in the brush and wait for Sweet Thing to get done with eating and then come play. A smart fella won't put the stand right at the feeder, but find scrapes and rubs near where he's set up the feeder (on account of those scrapes and rubs). Put the stand somewhere in sight of the scrape area.

I've always felt that this is a good method for novices, cripples and Old Farts (Me? ) who can't really get out and either walk miles across country, or play Sneaky Snake in the thick stuff. (I can still do the Sneaky Snake thing.) It also works for those whose time is limited. (Ah, Modern America!) And it's a great thing, a feeder, if you want to cut down on the number of does on the ranch.

Different strokes for different folks. I've always liked open country walking, kicking Bambi out of bed and then busting his little old neck...

, Art
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 09:01 AM   #38
clt46910
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 3, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 149
I think it is more of a matter of perspective.

I enjoy the stalk, trying to get close, watching my chosen game proceeding with their daily habits not knowing I am anywhere around. Just being outdoors enjoying the movement of wind and wildlife around me. Rain or shine I would be out there, stalking my game. I don't really enjoy the kill and hard work processing the game myself afterwards as much, but it is part of the hunting experience. At least to me. I also have the time to pursuse this type hunting the way I enjoy.

My father who run a business, was in rather poor health, had little time, little knowledge of processing game, and few outdoorsman skills enjoyed the hunt also. He would go out the one morning he could work in the time, walk the short distance from his car to the blind, sit over a planted cornfield, shoot his deer, come back get me to help him clean it and take it to the processor to have it cut up and packaged.

He enjoyed the way he hunted as much as I enjoyed the way I hunted. Does that make him any less of a hunter then me? Does the fact someone will not hunt accept when the weather is good make them less a hunter then I was? How many times you not gone hunting because it was raining or snowing to hard? Does that mean you are not a true hunter? What about if someone takes his game in to have someone else process it for them, less of a hunter?

A hunter is a hunter, just as a rose is a rose. We all have different skills and abilities. Just because someone does not have the same skills or abilities as we do does not mean they can not have the same joy in the art as we do.

I have hunted over a feeder, personally it was boring and not really enjoyable to me. But to someone that has little time to enjoy the outdoors, has few outdoorsmen skills or little or no experience it is a good way to maybe start them on the way to being a more involved hunter. Maybe they will never go pass that point or learn anything else, but I believe they are still a hunter.
__________________
Chuck in Indiana
clt46910 is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 11:03 AM   #39
Bravo25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 19, 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 432
Per Encarta

Quote:
Hunting, sport of pursuing and killing wild game animals in order to provide food, or simply for the thrill of the chase, or for the enjoyment of outdoor life. People have been hunting since prehistoric times to provide themselves and their families with food, fur and leather clothing, and hides for shelter. With the development of agriculture, animal husbandry, and, eventually, manufacturing, hunting gradually diminished in importance as a means of survival. Because of its challenge and pleasure as a sport, however, hunting has remained a popular activity even in modern times.
I don't see how a feeder applies to the definition.
__________________
If more laws restricting our rights will make us free from harm, why aren't we safe yet? We are only less free.

When faced with impossible overwhelming odds, prudance would dictate the only thing left is to figure out what is possible, and to do it.

Punishment for all crimes should increase until the recitivism rate approaches zero.
Bravo25 is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 11:12 AM   #40
Jack O'Conner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2005
Location: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,490
I feel that so-called hunting ethics can sometimes go a little too far. For example, Pennsylvania outlaws all muzzle-loaders except flintlocks. Only V notch sights. Seems like a handicap to success in this era of modern muzzle loaders.

Crossbows are being looked at closely by the Legislature simply because the urban deer herds are way out of control. Clearly something must be done. The feeling in Harrisburgh is that it takes too much practise time to consider traditional archery equipment as the sole alternative. It is also believed crossbows would be more appealing to females and older hunter. True or not will be decided by license sales.

Pennsylvania also outlaws use of semi-automatic rifles for big game and small game hunting. From what I've learned, this goes back to the days of unrestricted market hunting.

California has many obstacles to success in the field. Seems that this state doesn't really want hunting but goes along with our sport because their jobs in the Legislature depend on widespread support. Not enough bambi-ites to support their campaigns.

I still think that baiting by mechanical devices or otherwise should be left up to each state to decide. Power to the Voting Booth!
Jack
Jack O'Conner is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 11:45 AM   #41
dave_in_delaware
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 22, 2005
Location: Newark, DE
Posts: 257
Let's look at some basic definitions, shall we?

Main Entry: hunt·ing
Function: noun
1 : the act of one that hunts; specifically : the pursuit of game

Main Entry: hunt
Function: verb
1 a : to pursue for food or in sport <hunt buffalo>

Main Entry: pur·sue
1 : to follow in order to overtake, capture, kill, or defeat

Hmmm, so to me, it sounds like hunting involves the hunter to actually follow the animal. Track it. Stalk it. Follow the tracks. Use his/her brain to figure out where the animal went, or where it might go.

Now, sitting at a deer feeder in a tree stand waiting for an animal to come along to eat is NOT hunting. It's not even close to hunting. It's waiting for an animal to walk in front of your sights on its way to a FEEDER! Holy crap. What an idiot to call himself a hunter. Seems like we've forgotten the true meaning and definition of "hunting."

So, maybe this "wonderful" hunter :barf: would think I'm hunting HIM if I sit across the street behind cover w/ a sniper rifle and shoot him while he's sitting at the dining room table eating dinner?
__________________
Dave -=|=- Please visit my Gun Stuff page (my tiny speck on the 'Net)

1. Springfield Armory XD-9 sub-compact (1110 rnds as of 06/18/05)
2. Springfield Armory XD-9 sub-compact (w/ blue & silver GK, gift for fiancee)
3. Ithaca Gun Company Model 37 12ga shotgun (from Grandfather)
4. Future: AR-15 build
dave_in_delaware is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 01:03 PM   #42
Foxman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 13, 2005
Posts: 466
Dave in delaware +1.
I think they already named this guy " The Deer Slayer" no need to mention hunting thats for hunters, but whatever lights your candle, its a free world our side anyway.
Foxman is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 06:10 PM   #43
kingudaroad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2005
Location: austin
Posts: 735
Hunting ,harvesting ,sniping,call it what you will but the fact of the matter is ,in central Texas the deer population is way out of hand due to the fact that we have eliminated all of the deers natural predators except hunters and cars. They have resorted to baiting deer and netting them in Sun City near Georgetown. In my opinion the ethics of fair chase mean nothing compared to the ethics of saving the whitetail species from the results of overpopulation because of our development into their habitat. Squeezing their range and at the same time eliminating their natural predators. I would rather see 10,000 deer get shot from under a feeder than 2 million at the hands of chronic wasting disease. This is why each State should be able to make their own laws. Texas is in a unique situation and has adapted its hunting laws accordingly.
kingudaroad is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 06:37 PM   #44
Lonestar.45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2004
Posts: 261
I agree 100% kinudaroad. I grew up hunting over feeders on deer leases in San Saba, Lampasas, and Llano counties. Lots of deer.

After about 10 years of that, I took up bowhunting for more of a challenge. I am here to tell everyone, if you think that bowhunting over a feeder is easy pickings, then you've never bowhunted where I hunt. You get 8-10 deer under the feeder, with 8-10 sets of eyes, ears, and noses, looking around, and you will be LUCKY to draw back once in 15 hunts. And you'll learn more about deer behavior and herd dynamics by watching 8-10 wild deer at 20 yds up close and personal than you will in a decade of stalking and seeing their tails bounding out of sight.

Gun hunting over a feeder is not really a challenge, but it will put meet in the freezer, and that is a good thing when you're talking about the numbers of deer I've seen on some of my leases. You can run around and chase them all you want and stay on your high ethical ground, but unless you're putting 5 deer in the freezer each season like I am off of these overpopulated places, then you aren't doing the deer any good. It has it's place. It's not for everyone, and it's not for every region or situation, but outlawing it in some areas would be a very bad thing.
Lonestar.45 is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 06:48 PM   #45
Bravo25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 19, 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 432
Quote:
It's not for everyone, and it's not for every region or situation, but outlawing it in some areas would be a very bad thing.
I don't think anyone is talking about outlawing it. We are just saying that you can't call that "hunting".

If deer over population is of great concern why are only a limited number of tags sold each year? I am not trying to be cute here, I am looking for an honest reply.
__________________
If more laws restricting our rights will make us free from harm, why aren't we safe yet? We are only less free.

When faced with impossible overwhelming odds, prudance would dictate the only thing left is to figure out what is possible, and to do it.

Punishment for all crimes should increase until the recitivism rate approaches zero.
Bravo25 is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 07:31 PM   #46
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX, USA
Posts: 22,540
Bravo25, it's mostly emotion. My opinion, but even the wildlife biologists of the Parks & Wildlife Commission are a bit too conservative on this. Some central Texas areas, there oughta be a bounty on does.

However, a lot of that area has been broken up from fairly large ranches to "ranchettes". The new people tend to want to watch deer, not shoot them. Since they know nothing of the population dynamics, nor of carrying capacity of the land, they assume that quantity is just as good as quality--and they don't know much about quality deer, either.

There was at time, back maybe forty years ago, when whitetail deer in central Texas would have a really good buck dressing out in the 125- to 150-pound range. By the late 1970s/early 1980s, figure down to 100 pounds, if you're lucky. I've seen 14-inch spread ten-pointers that wouldn't dress out at 75 pounds.

Back in the late '60s at my old family ranch outside of Austin (now covered by houses and shopping centers), I did a serious herd-reduction program. I took about five times as many does off the place as the law allowed, and killed off every mature spike and "scraggle-horn" buck I saw. I did this for about three years. By the end of that time, average body weight was up by around 30%, and I was getting decent racks.

Art
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 09:00 PM   #47
impact
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2005
Location: the great state of Texas
Posts: 854
You know after going through and reading all the replys I can tell who hunts and who reads and think they know how to hunt.

We have 10 feeders on my lease in east Texas. I can tell you that the deer are not trained to come to the sound of the feeder. I have never! Ever! seen a big buck at a feeder! . When One of my feeders goes off the treerats and coons come running . To tell you the truth I don't even know why we set up feeders. They don't work! As long as there are acorns on the ground the feeders don't do anything.

Butch I want you to come to my lease this year. You don't live to far. I want you to show me how to stalk a deer in brush that you can't see more than 20 yards. We have lots of deer because of the brush. They just don't show themselves.

I did find a nice rub line that goes for about 300 yards in thick woods at the top of a hill. Thats where me and my tree lounge will be setup this next weekend for bow. Stalk a deer with a bow! You would have to be an indian and I think even the indians used dogs. My Catahoula has a blood line that goes back to being used by indians.
impact is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 10:12 PM   #48
rangefodder
Member
 
Join Date: September 10, 2005
Posts: 22
KEY WORD is "HUNT"

Stop using "hunt" "hunting" "hunted" in sentences which refer to waiting over a feeding station.

They contradict one another.

I personally have followed tracks (rubbings, scrapes, poop, hoof prints, etc..)

And come across more than 20 deer this way, and have never had one run off until it had been hit.

This is what I consider hunting.

No matter where you live or for what reasons you are killing the deer, if you are sitting over a feeder station it is not "hunting.
rangefodder is offline  
Old October 19, 2005, 10:40 PM   #49
impact
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2005
Location: the great state of Texas
Posts: 854
Ok rangefodder say I have a feeder set at a location. Say I shoot a deer thats 150 yards from the feeder. This deer never even comes to the feeder. This deer is eating acorns at a big oak tree. Now I will say thats hunting over a feeder. Now say that same deer comes to the same oak tree eating acorns and I don't have a feeder. I would say that not hunting over a feeder. Even though the feeder did not do a damn thing but bring in squirrls, coons and crows and I don't know how many birds. Well thats what it is like where I hunt. Deer could give a less about corn. The only time they eat corn is when all the acorns are gone and we have lots of oak trees.

Like I said I don't even know why we set up feeders. All we do is feed the varmints. Where I hunt is nothing like you see on TV.
impact is offline  
Old October 20, 2005, 12:49 PM   #50
kjm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 1999
Location: College Station, Texas
Posts: 1,871
Impact: Good point.

Feeders aren't just for deer. I haven't studied it in depth, but from my observations, I'd say the squirrels take about 1/3 the feed, Coons, rabbits, and misc. birds take another third, and then the balance is taken by hogs and deer. Still, the squirrels taste better when they're corn-fed and the hogs do too.

I don't know how I'd ever see hogs without the aid of a feeder. With a feeder, I can kill at least one a month and sometimes two. I leave my feeders going all year around and hunt pigs likewise.
__________________
COME AND TAKE IT!!!
kjm is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13743 seconds with 7 queries