|
Post by GlennD on Oct 17, 2014 7:21:44 GMT -5
From Senator Alloway's FaceBook Page: This is in no way a slippery slope toward eliminating legitimate hunting opportunities, but rather a personal decision I have made regarding this individual activity. To me, hunting is about sport, and there is no sport in violating the fair-chase laws that we hold in such high esteem in the Commonwealth. Here is the issue with most politicians.. they forget they represent a constituency. Not their own "personal" druthers. If he really believes what he said on his FB post about the majority of his constituents agreeing with him, then he needs to show proof and say his vote is based on his constituency, not what his personal opinions are. I am really growing tired of being treated like a "subject" in lieu of a "constituent" by politicians. :/
|
|
|
Post by dennyf on Oct 20, 2014 20:57:18 GMT -5
Apparently the Senate version sent over to the House for concurrence, never made it out of the Rules Committee today?
So for all intents and purposes, the live bird shoot ban is history for this session.
Pre-emption bill passed, so did the WCO body cam bill.
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Oct 21, 2014 4:52:42 GMT -5
Here is what irks the heck out of me.
Alloway is rated highly by the NRA, but the NRA rates these guys soley on "gun" issues.
BUT, the guy can put out an anti-hunting bill and forcefully support it, and his NRA rating stays the same.
Now, pigeon shooting is not hunting, but banning it could lead to more in the future.
The NRA is a special interest group that does not always work for hunters, like in the case of the poaching bill a few years back.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2014 6:53:41 GMT -5
Perhaps we need to support an organization that focuses on hunting, with gun control as a secondary issue? I will continue to pay dues to the NRA, even though they are not perfect in every way because they are the most effective organization out there that opposes more infringement on my second amendment rights. I also belong to Safari Club International because they do focus primarily on hunting. They also tend to fight against more gun control. SCI is more of an international organization than it is a single country one. On the state level, PFSC steps in and opposes anti hunting issues. There is not one single organization out there that I agree with every single one of their positions. I don't demand perfection.
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Oct 21, 2014 8:11:37 GMT -5
The NRA is a special interest group that does not always work for hunters, like in the case of the poaching bill a few years back. There were quite a few that believed the poaching bill was a bad bill for hunters. Many hunters opposed it as it was written.
|
|
|
Post by dennyf on Oct 21, 2014 9:14:04 GMT -5
And many hunters supported a ban on pigeon/live bird shoots.
Most cannot make the distinction that opposing HSUS is not supporting pigeon shoots, as much as it is opposing the primary foe of all hunters.
Most of their reasoning for that support seemed to run along the lines of shooting released pigeons "made hunters look bad", while also stating that shooting pigeons isn't hunting, etc.
The major flaw in that reasoning, is that the group pushing for the pigeon shoot ban, HSUS, also has as its primary goal, the end to all recreational shooting/trapping of animals.
Many of us recognize the peril in supporting HSUS on any level, since they want to eventually ban all sport hunting.
I had no problem with stiffer penalties for serial poachers, which was the primary focus of the changes with the laws on those issues. NRA's stated objections had to do with the possibility of a convicted poacher losing the right to own firearms.
Far as I'm concerned, anyone that makes a habit of killing big game animals illegally, doesn't really need to own firearms for the same reason that habitual drunk drivers don't need to be able to legally drive?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2014 9:47:29 GMT -5
And many hunters cannot make the distinction that opposing pigeon shoots is not supporting HSUS, as some like to spin this issue. Just sayin.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Oct 21, 2014 9:57:40 GMT -5
I don't think it's a good idea for hunters to publicly oppose these pigeon shoots.I also don't think it's a good idea for hunters to defend them either.They have nothing to do with hunting.Me personally,I support or oppose issues.I don't necessarily support the organizations that are pushing the issues.For example,I like dogs and I support most legislation that ensures dogs are treated in a humane manner.It doesn't mean I support the HSUS.As far as the pigeon issue is concerned,I don't care what anyone does with a pigeon.However,it's not a popular activity with the general public.Since it has nothing to do with hunting,I find it best to just distance myself from the entire issue.I can defend the need to hunt and trap.I can't find one logical rebuttal to defend pigeon shoots that the general public would understand.
|
|
|
Post by dennyf on Oct 21, 2014 10:08:19 GMT -5
Supporting HSUS' long efforts to ban pigeons in PA actually is support for HSUS and always has been. No spin involved, things are what they are. The major players at HSUS have been at this for a very long time.
Friends of Animals, Fund For Animals, PETA and other predecessor groups to HSUS, are well-funded and dedicated to eventually ending what many of us cherish. They are not going to give up because of yet another set back here.
Every legislative session over the past 10-15 years has seen them garner more support in our PA General Assembly. That alone should raise some red flags among hunters. Fewer and fewer hunters now make up the elected representatives in PA government. and is a trend that will likely increase?
So the day is coming when hunters will have little, if any, support on The Hill.
If a group worked to ban pigeon shoots, supported legislation to ban the consumption of cats/dogs and actually spent money on pet shelters - but did not have a long record of working to end all recreational hunting, that would fit your position better.
How anyone can read the position statements of HSUS and still not realize the threat they continue to pose to hunters, escapes me.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Oct 21, 2014 10:15:32 GMT -5
We are all aware that the HSUS opposes all form of hunting.We also realize that for the most part,they're a bunch of extreme wackos.I think the general public realizes that as well,for the most part.
|
|
|
Post by dennyf on Oct 21, 2014 10:35:43 GMT -5
Let's see how the general public in Maine goes on the issue of bear baiting, since it's on the ballot up there this fall? And here's the CEO of HSUS debating the issue. Note that he pretends hunting bears is okay, just not with bait. Years ago, long before he was the head doofus at HSUS, watched him in a similar debate about whether or not MD needed a bear season back then. In that debate he was very emotional and over the top about protecting bears. The years have seasoned him since then. www.pressherald.com/2014/10/14/televised-debate-shows-deep-divide-on-bear-baiting-referendum/
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Oct 21, 2014 11:20:04 GMT -5
I realize that they're wackos and they use emotion to get their point across Denny.Bear hunting is easily defendable and from what I've heard,it probably won't be a very close vote in Maine.It's one more reason why we're lucky to have an independent agency.Bear hunting with bait has nothing to do with pigeon shoots.People see the need to manage bears because bears cause problems.They don't see the need to raise pigeons for shoots.It's two entirely different things.Regardless of who's pushing the agenda,one is worth fighting for and one wasn't in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Oct 21, 2014 11:43:35 GMT -5
Denny,I have a fair amount of experience dealing non-hunters and anti-hunters as it relates to the need to manage wildlife.You'll never win over the anti-hunters.They'll lie and spread mistruths to further they're cause and they'll be as emotional as they possibly can.However,if you use facts that can't be disputed,you'll get most of the people in the middle on your side.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2014 11:46:53 GMT -5
We are all aware that the HSUS opposes all form of hunting.We also realize that for the most part,they're a bunch of extreme wackos.I think the general public realizes that as well,for the most part. I don't agree, Doug. It is easy to dismiss HSUS/PETA as whackos, but if you ask many in the "general public" what the Humane Society does and they will tell you they run animal shelters. If pressed for more, they say that the Humane Society works to prevent cruelty to animals, which nobody really opposes. Not one of them will tell you that HSUS is campaigning to prohibit the use of animals for food or is working to prevent pet ownership. Not only are they well-funded, but they have spokespersons with high recognition and who are held in high esteem by that same general public, such as Bob Barker, Barbara Streisand, and Mary Tyler Moore. Their treasury is in excess of $100 million, almost none of which is spent on animal shelters. In opposition, we hunters have exactly who? I'll submit that you and Denny are not in the same league as those folks.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Oct 21, 2014 12:03:08 GMT -5
I agree with your points Mutt.However,the majority of "normal"people realize that those animal rights organizations are pretty extreme.The oppose the use of worms for bait.I still feel that the best way to win over the non-hunters is to present them with facts in a professional manner.I dealt with all three sides trying to get an organized hunt established.This crusade lasted about 4 years before a hunt was approved and I got to hear the testimony from all sides.Anti-hunters are anti-hunters and you'll rarely win them over.They'll lie and make nonsense up to further their cause.However,if you have facts and present them in a professional manner,it's easy to make them look like fools.Let's face it.most of those people are dumber than a box of rocks or they wouldn't oppose hunting in the first place.The majority of people are non-hunters.These people recognize the need to manage wildlife but many either fear or have a low opinion of hunters in general.These are the people we need to win over and they need to see facts.It also doesn't help if hunters act like a bunch of blood thirsty,dumb rednecks.Sometimes you have to pick your battles and pigeon shoots was one that I felt wasn't worth fighting for.How often to you argue with your wife,know you're right but never really win the argument?Same thing.I see your points and I see Denny's points.I just feel that this issue was one that would never be accepted by the general public.
Should be be concerned with these animal rights activists?Sure but we have to fight smarter,not harder.
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Oct 21, 2014 12:05:32 GMT -5
Mutt, SCI defended hunting in Minnesota when the anti's tried to ban wold hunting.
I think SCI is a great org, here in the states. They sided with hunters in the SH issue down in Virginia, but then, NRA did as well.
NRA here in PA was lukewarm to the SH issue......
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Oct 21, 2014 12:15:01 GMT -5
It was my job to sell hunting as a solution to our deer problems in TL.Hunting was banned there since the 1960's so most people just laughed at me and said it would never happen.It took time,it took facts and it took answering a lot of questions truthfully.I was hated by a small group of anti-hunters.For a while,they threw all kinds of nonsense at me.Each time,I rebutted them with facts,made them look stupid in front of dozens of people so they eventually shut up.I heard the concerns from non-hunters.Many wanted less deer but they were afraid of letting people hunt.Wounded deer were going to be attacking people.Kids and old ladies would need thearapy because wounded deer would be dying in people's lawns.People would hear the screams of dying deer from their houses.That's just a few but I heard it all.In the end,we put some simple rules in place to appease the non-hunter's concerns.To date,there have been very few issues and the community has accepted and endorsed the hunt.My point is,I have a fair amount of experience dealing with both anti-hunters and non-hunters.If you want the approval of non-hunters,you have to approach the situation differently and you have to defend your position with facts,not emotion.I just didn't see any facts about these pigeon shoots that would win over most non-hunters.
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Oct 21, 2014 13:16:13 GMT -5
We are all aware that the HSUS opposes all form of hunting.We also realize that for the most part,they're a bunch of extreme wackos.I think the general public realizes that as well,for the most part. I would disagree. IMO, most people associate HSUS with your local animal shelters. Many hunters also do not realize they are different organizations.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Oct 21, 2014 13:30:51 GMT -5
We'll have to agree to disagree.Perhaps it's just that I'M lumping HSUS in with the likes of PETA because I consider them all one in the same.I will agree that many people probably think of shelters when the HSUS is brought up.I'm just talking about these organizations as a whole.If you bring PETA up,most people realize that they're just nuts for the most part.Maybe that's why our opinions are getting confused.
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Oct 21, 2014 14:11:53 GMT -5
We'll have to agree to disagree.Perhaps it's just that I'M lumping HSUS in with the likes of PETA because I consider them all one in the same.I will agree that many people probably think of shelters when the HSUS is brought up.I'm just talking about these organizations as a whole.If you bring PETA up,most people realize that they're just nuts for the most part.Maybe that's why our opinions are getting confused. Yes, many folks recognize PETA for what it is, a bunch of tree huggers. But, HSUS is the main player and they cleverly chose their name to deceive and it has worked well. They are all one in the same but the general public does not have the same perception of HSUS as they do PETA. And many hunters do not realize they are identical in their missions. HSUS is the main player.
|
|
|
Post by dennyf on Oct 21, 2014 14:46:07 GMT -5
They didn't "choose the name".
Former activists with other orgs, like Wayne Pacelle and Heidi Prescott, co-opted the HSUS entity some years ago and have combined forces under that banner.
Worst part, much of their funding comes from a duped public responding to their TV ads pleading for funds and showing abandoned cats and dogs, when in reality, HSUS does little in the way of funding actual animal shelters.
The vast majority of their donations go towards anti-hunting campaigns like the one they've been conducting here in PA and in Maine, via well-paid lobbyists.
In other words, they are a sham organization that relies on ill-informed donors to pay for what they're really all about.
It is why the Harrisburg Humane Society includes a disclaimer in their printed materials, that they are not affiliated in any way with HSUS and have done so for years.
BTW, our state office is now receiving nasty/profane emails for helping to stall this legislation. One is from the state of Washington.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Oct 21, 2014 16:11:57 GMT -5
I think we can all agree that the HSUS,PETA and the rest of those organizations are all a bunch of crazed,ill-informed lunatics.While I would never turn my back on any of them,I don't think they pose as much of a threat as some of you guys think.They'll keep spreading their nonsense but the mainstream will never take them serious.I still say that we need to focus our efforts by portraying hunters as the conservationists that we are and we need to do it in a professional manner.Just a little off subject but what the non-hunters get to see on hunting programs turns my stomach.
By the way.Bob Barker doesn't scare me in the least.Given the opportunity,I'd drop him like an unwanted step-child.
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Oct 21, 2014 16:31:24 GMT -5
I think we can all agree that the HSUS,PETA and the rest of those organizations are all a bunch of crazed,ill-informed lunatics. It has been a few years, but if my memory is correct, the PGC was meeting with HSUS on the poaching bill. They may be crazy and ill informed but they certainly get the ears of many people, even our own PGC.
|
|
|
Post by dennyf on Oct 21, 2014 17:02:11 GMT -5
Dismiss them as you wish, but remember that they bring in millions of dollars a year, with which to work their charms on the public and elected officials across the nation.
HSUS and groups like them, impact us every day. They also have a record of "wins" in many arenas, such as pushing for wolf introductions and bans on the hunting of certain species in several states.
I never underestimate the impact that zealots and moonbats can have on otherwise fairly rational people, given the chance and enough funding to push their agendas.
Some of HSUS' "mystique" is now coming under scrutiny, with several groups/agencies looking into their funding campaigns, their actual spending on abandoned pets and their charity status. Do a Google on HSUS for further info.
|
|
|
Post by bushmaster on Oct 21, 2014 17:04:59 GMT -5
Here is what irks the heck out of me. Alloway is rated highly by the NRA, but the NRA rates these guys soley on "gun" issues. BUT, the guy can put out an anti-hunting bill and forcefully support it, and his NRA rating stays the same. Now, pigeon shooting is not hunting, but banning it could lead to more in the future. The NRA is a special interest group that does not always work for hunters, like in the case of the poaching bill a few years back. Trouble viewing this email? Read it online? 1-800-392-8683 | www.nraila.com Pennsylvania: 2014 Legislative Session Ends With Victory After four years of effort, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives finally passed critical firearms preemption legislation. Yesterday, the state House voted to concur on the Senate amendments to House Bill 80 by an overwhelming 138 to 56 vote. HB 80, when signed into law, will strengthen the state firearms preemption statute to further ensure that firearm and ammunition laws are consistent throughout Pennsylvania. State firearms preemption was originally enacted by the Pennsylvania Legislature to avoid the possibility of 2,639 separate firearm laws across the Commonwealth. However, over recent years, more than fifty localities have enacted gun control ordinances in violation of the current state firearms preemption law, creating a myriad of local gun laws that make compliance difficult for responsible gun owners. HB 80 will provide a way for responsible gun owners to hold these municipalities responsible for infringing on our Second Amendment rights. We are also pleased to report that after much hard work, House Bill 1750, misguided legislation being pushed by the Humane Society of the United States, died in the House Rules Committee and is no longer a threat this year to the age-old tradition of organized bird shoots.We would like to give a special thanks to our local sportsmen’s groups, Firearm Owners Against Crime, Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania and our NRA members who tirelessly contacted their state legislators throughout the process. We appreciate all of the hard work that went into yesterday’s success. HB 80 will now be sent to Governor Tom Corbett (R) for his expected signature. Using the contact information provided below, please contact Governor Corbett and politely encourage him to sign HB 80 into law. Governor Tom Corbett Phone: (717) 787-2500 E-mail: Governor@pa.gov Write your Reps Get Involved Register to Vote Contibute Please do not reply to this email as you will not receive a response. This email is a broadcast email generated by an automated system. To contact NRA-ILA call 800-392-8683. Address: 11250 Waples Mill Road Fairfax, Virginia 22030 In order to ensure you receive NRA-ILA email alerts in a timely manner, please adjust your SPAM settings to accept bulk emails from admin@nramedia.org and NRA_ILA@nramedia.org domains. Otherwise, there is a possibility that our email alerts will not make it to your inbox. National Rifle Association - Institute for Legislative Action * 11250 Waples Mill Road * Fairfax, VA 22030 Please do not reply to this email. If you no longer want to receive NRA-ILA email notifications, please click here, and you will be removed immediately! Thank you!
|
|