Not hypocritical in the least. You`re spewing the uncle ted rhetoric again-you know, hunt the way YOU like, mind your own business, and leave everyone else alone. Problem with that line of thinking is, there ARE absolute right and wrong, and we only leave our ranks open to justified attack and scrutiny when we don`t police ourselves.
It`s a ridiculous argument to say we must suffer anything and everything to appear unified against the anti`s. It`s also absurd to attempt to portray the distancing of ourselves from shams, such as, "hunting" enclosures with abbetting them.
I`ve said many times before, and I`ll keep spouting it-legal doesn`t make ethical. And my ethics are not going to be held hostage to a form of political correctness, in an effort to shame me into accepting hunting practices that aren`t consistent with Fair Chase ethics.
Sorry man-no buyers here.
First of all, my words are my own, not those of Ted Nugent or anyone else.
Second. It appears to me that in using the term "sham" to describe "high fence" indicates that you have formed an opinion on such facilities.
May I ask if you have ever hunted such a facility ?, or are you simply accepting how ever the hsus portrays it as, as being factual ?
In the so called process of "policing ourselves" we need to weed out those whose actions reflect negatively upon us. Such an effort is best achieved however not by banning the specific hunting related tactic, but rather by dealing with those who employ the tactic in such a way that it is their actions and not the tactic itself which reflects negatively upon us.
In recent years baseball has had some issues with performance enhancing substances. In dealing with such they have focused on those specific individuals who violated the trust of the fans. We didn't ban baseball because of a few who "cheated".
Perhaps we should look at hunting in a similar way. Deal with the slob who litters the woods with empty corn bags or other "food" containers instead of banning baiting. Deal with the person who places a tame and/or drugged deer in a 30 by 50 ft. pen for some yahoo to shoot instead of banning all high fence facilities.
If one looks they may discover that most of the negative rhetoric as it pertains to tactics which we argue over is usually based upon the negative actions of a few, which anti hunting factions capitalize on in an attempt to publicly present such tactics to the public in a negative perspective.
And remember that buffoons, jerks, slobs, and others whose actions reflect negatively on us as a whole are not limited to those tactics which we argue over. Right now there are bowhunters whose actions reflect negatively upon every hunter who pursues game with stick and string and I'm not talking about bowhunters using bait, dogs, or hunting within the confines of a fence.