The Daily Skunk

9 responses so far ↓

• 1 william // Aug 8, 2008 at 8:39 am

  As far as I can tell the actual hunting won’t be changed much at all unless after the study they put a recomendation /restriction as to how an animal must be harvested if it is going to be donated to a local food pantry.

  The potential recomendations would be:
  1) specific type of bullet required
  2) specific areas of the body the donated animal has to be shot for example the head or any area that isn’t generally consumed.

  I have talked to quite a few people about this and nobody, not a single person is concerned about this “problem”. People have been harvesting venison by the 10’s of thousands around here for the past 50 years - and eating them.

  It obviously has little to no effect on the population and as a matter of fact a good buddy of mine eats nothing but venison that he shoots every year and has done so since he was a kid.

  I have attached a link to his picture and as you will clearly see it is obvious that any bit of lead in the meat should be of no concern.

  http://thenehrings.com/funny/hillbillyfaceinbreed.jpg

• 2 Jonathan P. Figdor // Aug 8, 2008 at 10:05 am

  The obvious solution is a complete and total ban of soft-lead and FMJ rounds. These are both dangerous and obsolete. We need to mandate that the only legal rounds to fire from a rifle are explosive-tipped so-called “cookie-cutter” rounds, and depleted-uranium armor-piercing rounds. This will ensure that not only will you bag that 23 point buck, but you also drill the rabbit and squirrel standing behind it. 3 for 1, that’s called efficiency ladies and gents. Hopefully this irresponsible Democratic Congress will take the necessary actions to remedy the abysmally ineffcient and immoral situation we are currently in. God speed Senator Kennedy, we pray you might restore some sense of dignity, and superior firepower, to the American hunter.

• 3 william // Aug 8, 2008 at 10:35 am

  Oh yes, that would be fantastic if the Dems. kept up their great work concerning firearms.
  It’s always a pleasure to have a large group of people who are oblivious to the fact that the majority of guns and ammo are used responsibly.
  What we need is more laws and more restrictions mandated so that the law abiding citizens cannot use or even look ata firearms or the ammunition to carry out a time honored tradition. Never mind the fact that it is good game management or that legal gun ownership can actually decrease the likelihood of crime.
  So again, it is always a pleaseure when one group of people who cannot relate to another try to regulate and mandate based on their ridiculous, uneducated, arrogant fears.

• 4 william // Aug 8, 2008 at 10:38 am

  And no, I don’t consider myself a Republican and I don’t think Democrats as a whole are the problem.

  Hilarious comment by the way.

• 5 oddnoteccentric // Aug 8, 2008 at 3:10 pm

  I believe this is a great avenue for the antis to use for their cause, and nothing else. Chicken Little used the sky, and the Greenies use climate change. Now the antis are using lead, because Bambi didn’t work. Aarghh.
  I am sure some copper bullet maker is going great guns because of this, but we hunters/ammo makers need to realize the motives behind this and not allow ourselves to be divided. Remember the idea of divide and conquer? Now read the previous sentence.
  And refer to the silliness of the plastic bag arguement.
  Next, the omnipotent FDA will give us safe lead levels for our game. And we will have to pay for that “service.” Oh goodie!
  Oh, and I only take my Ted with Nugent!

• 6 Jonathan P. Figdor // Aug 9, 2008 at 2:23 am

  Oh and by the way, in case you thought I was being sarcastic, I am a strong proponent of the vigilant defense of the 2nd Amendment and do not follow the Dems’ idiotic party line. I like to think of myself as being on the reasonable side of libertarianism, the left-libertarian movement.

• 7 Jonathan P. Figdor // Aug 9, 2008 at 2:26 am

  Also, this guy ODDNOTECCENTRIC actually hit the nail on the head when he wrote that he thinks that the anti-gun movement is simply using this as a divide and conquer tactic.

• 8 william // Aug 9, 2008 at 3:02 pm

  I kind of figured you were being sarcastic, but wasn’t entirely sure. It enabled me to go off on a diatribe of generalization though. I thought that would generate some crossfire, I’m still waiting.

  Also, I think you are giving the antis’ too much credit. That is if you are referring to the lead fragmentation in deer debacle.

  I have personally talked with the guy that basically is responsible for this and he is a hunter. I really don’t think he intended for what has happened to have happened.

  But, he is also a Dr. so my guess is that he felt ethically obligated to bring this up.

  Just my 2.5379 cents on the issue.

• 9 oddnoteccentric // Aug 12, 2008 at 2:48 pm

  Maybe he should be in the running for f’tard of the year. Takers?

Leave a Comment