Durbin's Reply

What's the hunt looking like this year in your area? Share!
User avatar
kellory
 
Posts: 2673
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:01 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby kellory » Tue Feb 05, 2013 5:31 pm

The only real difference between a good tracker and a bad tracker is observation. All the same data is present for both. The rest is understanding what you are seeing.

User avatar
Woods Walker
 
Posts: 4950
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:21 am
Location: Northern Illinois

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby Woods Walker » Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:42 pm

He nails it!!!!

Look at this one too....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 584p5kJL-U
Hunt Hard,

Kill Swiftly,

Waste Nothing,

Offer No Apologies.....

>>>--------------------------------->
NRA Endowment Life Member

huntingaddict1984
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2012 7:23 pm
Location: huntsville ontario canada

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby huntingaddict1984 » Wed Feb 06, 2013 8:41 am

Just wanted to weigh in on this briefly.... I am canadian so it really doesn't really effect me but we have gun laws in place and quit stringent ones ) lowered mag capacities wepons classified as follows non restricted( long guns for hunting etc) restricted ( handguns and.some ar syle guns ) and prohibited ( assult rifles and full auto or military stylenguns) and we are perfectly fine with it ... we used to have a firwarms regestry that required all gun owners to register all their firearms which has been recently abolished.but we still have the clasifications in place. Only allowing people with proper lisenceing and training to own certain types of firearms I feel it is safer for not only the general public but offers protection for gun owners... just a thought... but I may be beneficial to americans to embrace a bit of change so as to protect the general public... obviously there is a problem that needs to be addressed
In every hunt there is a trophy not always of the physical nature but in the experience....

Huntingaddict1984

User avatar
rthomas4
 
Posts: 659
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 1:07 pm
Location: Hampton, SC

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby rthomas4 » Wed Feb 06, 2013 9:32 am

We already have more than enough gun laws and restrictions than are needed. All of them are already a violation of the Second Amendment. When we study crime in this country, especially crime involving the use of guns, we can see one glaringly obvious problem. The fact that Canadians don't seem to grasp is that the majority of those crimes are committed in the densely populated urban centers where gun laws are the strictest, and gang activity and black on black crimes are the number one source of the criminal activity! If homicide rates in this country, excluded major metropolitan areas such as NYC, Chicago, Detroit, Washington, and Los Angeles; you would find that our crime rates are actually very similar to those of Canada. Go a step further and eliminate Boston, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Atlanta, and Miami, and I'd be willing to bet that then you'd see Canadian numbers are probably higher than ours on a per capita basis and including gun ownership numbers! The current debates over gun violence in this country are purely being driven by emotion which has been promoted through the main stream media, and gun control advocates while at the same time ignoring the fact that the overall factor contributing to gun violence isn't even mental issues or moral decline. The truth (and this may offend some liberal views) is that we have become a nation of low class, dependent on the Government teat, worthless individuals who don't believe they should be held accountable for their actions. If there was actually a means to round up the inner city youth and gangs that are the true source of the majority of gun violence, and segregate them from society, we'd see a major drop in all crime in this nation. There is no need for restricting AR style weapons, magazine capacities, or instituting stronger background checks, when all that is required is the enforcement of the 22,000 gun laws that are already on the books!

BTW, I find it interesting that on every forum I visit, those who believe that we should relinquish any of our gun rights, all tend to be either from blue states or Canada!
NRA LM, NAHC LM, Buckmasters LM, The Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, NAGR, Palmetto Gun Rights, QDMA, DU, NWTF, ASAdisabled sportsmens' alliance, EDH, and Proud SC redneck REBEL for life.

huntingaddict1984
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2012 7:23 pm
Location: huntsville ontario canada

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby huntingaddict1984 » Wed Feb 06, 2013 3:14 pm

As a hunter and gun owner I by no means support having to relinquish any rights to firearms.. but I do agree with safety. And although I as a canadian gun owner am jealous of your Second Amendment rights " To keep and bare arms" can't help but wonder if it presents part of the problem with any and all gun violence in the U.S. here we are allowed to own hand guns ( with proper lisencing and training) but can't carry it around and walk into a mall with it on our hip .long guns must be incased and locked while in transport to or from the field or range . The AR style weapons are out of the question and as for mag capacities why do you need more than 5 rounds in a handgun.at the range or 4 in a rifle and 3 in a shotgun for hunting ?..the idea being that if you don't have constant access to a firearm you are less likely to use it. I think that in todays society it is nescesairy ... gone are the days where people respected eachother enough to use their brains before they use violence. Why do you need to cary a firearm with you every day if you don't intend to use it?
In every hunt there is a trophy not always of the physical nature but in the experience....

Huntingaddict1984

unclebuck
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby unclebuck » Wed Feb 06, 2013 3:25 pm

huntingaddict1984 wrote:As a hunter and gun owner I by no means support having to relinquish any rights to firearms.. but I do agree with safety. And although I as a canadian gun owner am jealous of your Second Amendment rights " To keep and bare arms" can't help but wonder if it presents part of the problem with any and all gun violence in the U.S. here we are allowed to own hand guns ( with proper lisencing and training) but can't carry it around and walk into a mall with it on our hip .long guns must be incased and locked while in transport to or from the field or range . The AR style weapons are out of the question and as for mag capacities why do you need more than 5 rounds in a handgun.at the range or 4 in a rifle and 3 in a shotgun for hunting ?..the idea being that if you don't have constant access to a firearm you are less likely to use it. I think that in todays society it is nescesairy ... gone are the days where people respected eachother enough to use their brains before they use violence. Why do you need to cary a firearm with you every day if you don't intend to use it?

I agree with you huntingaddict, but people here wont answer your questions so, dont bother. They will just say the Gov. cant tell me what to do or something of the sort. As if not being able to carry a fully automatic machine gun with a 30 round clip into a mall, or bar, or library, or gas station, or whatever is a violation of thier 2nd amendment rights. Good luck though.

unclebuck
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby unclebuck » Wed Feb 06, 2013 3:32 pm

rthomas4 wrote:We already have more than enough gun laws and restrictions than are needed. All of them are already a violation of the Second Amendment. When we study crime in this country, especially crime involving the use of guns, we can see one glaringly obvious problem. The fact that Canadians don't seem to grasp is that the majority of those crimes are committed in the densely populated urban centers where gun laws are the strictest, and gang activity and black on black crimes are the number one source of the criminal activity! If homicide rates in this country, excluded major metropolitan areas such as NYC, Chicago, Detroit, Washington, and Los Angeles; you would find that our crime rates are actually very similar to those of Canada. Go a step further and eliminate Boston, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Atlanta, and Miami, and I'd be willing to bet that then you'd see Canadian numbers are probably higher than ours on a per capita basis and including gun ownership numbers! The current debates over gun violence in this country are purely being driven by emotion which has been promoted through the main stream media, and gun control advocates while at the same time ignoring the fact that the overall factor contributing to gun violence isn't even mental issues or moral decline. The truth (and this may offend some liberal views) is that we have become a nation of low class, dependent on the Government teat, worthless individuals who don't believe they should be held accountable for their actions. If there was actually a means to round up the inner city youth and gangs that are the true source of the majority of gun violence, and segregate them from society, we'd see a major drop in all crime in this nation. There is no need for restricting AR style weapons, magazine capacities, or instituting stronger background checks, when all that is required is the enforcement of the 22,000 gun laws that are already on the books!

BTW, I find it interesting that on every forum I visit, those who believe that we should relinquish any of our gun rights, all tend to be either from blue states or Canada!


This is the best argument I've heard so far. Basically get rid of anyone of color and all major cities and our gun crimes will be better than Canada's. Classic.

User avatar
Woods Walker
 
Posts: 4950
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:21 am
Location: Northern Illinois

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby Woods Walker » Wed Feb 06, 2013 3:58 pm

huntingaddict: Please see the following as I don't want to have to type it yet again.......

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=39000

It addresses many of your points.

Also please consider this......

in·alien·able adjective \(ˌ)i-ˈnāl-yə-nə-bəl, -ˈnā-lē-ə-nə-\
Definition of INALIENABLE
: incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred <inalienable rights>
— in·alien·abil·i·ty \-ˌnāl-yə-nə-ˈbi-lə-tē, -ˌnā-lē-ə-nə-\ noun
— in·alien·ably \-ˈnāl-yə-nə-blē, -ˈnā-lē-ə-nə-\ adverb

Our 2A right is an inalieable right. I hope that explains it.
Hunt Hard,

Kill Swiftly,

Waste Nothing,

Offer No Apologies.....

>>>--------------------------------->
NRA Endowment Life Member

User avatar
JPH
 
Posts: 3419
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:28 am

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby JPH » Wed Feb 06, 2013 4:25 pm

unclebuck wrote:
rthomas4 wrote: The fact that Canadians don't seem to grasp is that the majority of those crimes are committed in the densely populated urban centers where gun laws are the strictest, and gang activity and black on black crimes are the number one source of the criminal activity! If homicide rates in this country, excluded major metropolitan areas such as NYC, Chicago, Detroit, Washington, and Los Angeles; you would find that our crime rates are actually very similar to those of Canada. Go a step further and eliminate Boston, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Atlanta, and Miami, and I'd be willing to bet that then you'd see Canadian numbers are probably higher than ours on a per capita basis and including gun ownership numbers! The current debates over gun violence in this country are purely being driven by emotion which has been promoted through the main stream media, and gun control advocates while at the same time ignoring the fact that the overall factor contributing to gun violence isn't even mental issues or moral decline. The truth (and this may offend some liberal views) is that we have become a nation of low class, dependent on the Government teat, worthless individuals who don't believe they should be held accountable for their actions. If there was actually a means to round up the inner city youth and gangs that are the true source of the majority of gun violence, and segregate them from society, we'd see a major drop in all crime in this nation.


This is the best argument I've heard so far. Basically get rid of anyone of color and all major cities and our gun crimes will be better than Canada's. Classic.


Yeah, this seems to be the company we keep. Sickening.

User avatar
kellory
 
Posts: 2673
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:01 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby kellory » Wed Feb 06, 2013 7:10 pm

The only real difference between a good tracker and a bad tracker is observation. All the same data is present for both. The rest is understanding what you are seeing.

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests