The Attack on the 2nd Amendment Continues


I wonder if anyone there on the city council has access to Wikipedia and can search McDonald vs Chicago and DC vs Heller?

EDIT: Just looked at the resolution itself, and all the resolution does is urge the state legislature to take action, and states that the city council "supports" banning all semi-auto firearms.


Looky:
http://council.providenceri.com/efile/138
 
Sorry, but being from the south, I know that it's BS that all hunters eat what they kill. I know guys that go out hunting birds and kill dozens in a single trip. And they sure as hell ain't eating that much quail. It's nothing but sport to them, and it's disgusting.
 
It depends. There are places where deer and other animals are so prevalent due to lack of traditional predation that you almost have to kill them to keep down the numbers. It's just good husbandry.

That said, I don't like to hunt and don't do it either -- I'll leave it for people that enjoy it.
 
Sorry, but being from the south, I know that it's BS that all hunters eat what they kill. I know guys that go out hunting birds and kill dozens in a single trip. And they sure as hell ain't eating that much quail. It's nothing but sport to them, and it's disgusting.

I agree. Quail are not rare or exotic. It is disgusting. I want to kill something and have my personal chef prepare it for us and be able to announce to my family "This is the last (whatever it is) on the face of the earth. And I killed it so we can eat it. Because of love and stuff. Bon appetite."
 
Sorry, but being from the south, I know that it's BS that all hunters eat what they kill. I know guys that go out hunting birds and kill dozens in a single trip. And they sure as hell ain't eating that much quail. It's nothing but sport to them, and it's disgusting.
I shot 10 dove in Sept, and my family ate every one. Other than ferral hogs, I can't think of a single hunter who would leave an animal on the field.
 
I agree. Quail are not rare or exotic. It is disgusting. I want to kill something and have my personal chef prepare it for us and be able to announce to my family "This is the last (whatever it is) on the face of the earth. And I killed it so we can eat it. Because of love and stuff. Bon appetite."
This sounds familiar

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099615/plotsummary

Clark Kellogg is a young man starting his first year at film school in New York City. After a small time crook steals all his belongings, Clark meets Carmine "Jimmy the Toucan" Sabatini, an "importer" bearing a startling resemblance to a certain cinematic godfather. When Sabatini makes Clark an offer he can't refuse, he finds himself caught up in a caper involving endangered species and fine dining.
 
Watch Dick Cheney. He does it quite often.

Come again?

Sure he probably is part of guided hunts where the guides do all the work, but that doesn't mean that the meat goes to waste.

The only reason Quail are not on the endangered species list is due to hunters. The fields that are held open for game hunting also support uncountable numbers of wild animals.

Fire Ants are the most pressing danger to Quail, not hunters.
 
Sorry, but being from the south, I know that it's BS that all hunters eat what they kill. I know guys that go out hunting birds and kill dozens in a single trip. And they sure as hell ain't eating that much quail. It's nothing but sport to them, and it's disgusting.

See there you go again. I'm not trying to change your belief system. I'm not testing your "man card." I am however, requesting that you use the proper terms where they apply. I don't believe your story in the least... but if that happens to be true, that makes them poachers not hunters. What's hard about that?
 
Cheyenne, I've never heard that definition of poacher before. Here, poaching is taking game illegally, not shooting game and then leaving it behind.. Shoot, I've known some people back in the day that worked real hard at poaching deer, and they all did it for the meat.
 
Cheyenne, I've never heard that definition of poacher before. Here, poaching is taking game illegally, not shooting game and then leaving it behind.. Shoot, I've known some people back in the day that worked real hard at poaching deer, and they all did it for the meat.

Yeah, when you review the "Want and Waist" laws it'll make sense;)
 
Nevermind, I've got a couple minutes to use the Google.

1. "Wanton", not "want and"
2. "Waste", not "waist"
3. While some poachers may wantonly waste game, that is not the definition of poaching
4. Poaching is "illegally taking game", not "taking game and not harvesting it".
 
Wanton Waste Law & Legal Definition


Wanton waste means, “to intentionally waste something negligently or inappropriately.” This term is used in relation to hunting. Most states have laws to the effect that a person may not wantonly waste or destroy a usable part of a protected wild animal unless authorized. No person shall waste a wild bird or wild animal that has been wounded or killed while hunting. Any act that results in wanton or needless waste of the animal or otherwise intentionally allows it or an edible portion thereof to be wantonly or needlessly wasted or fails to dispose it in a reasonable and sanitary manner amounts to an offense that is punishable.
The following are examples of Federal and State (Maine) Statute on Wanton Waste:
50 CFR 20.25 Wanton waste of migratory game birds.
No person shall kill or cripple any migratory game bird pursuant to this part without making a reasonable effort to retrieve the bird, and retain it in his actual custody, at the place where taken or between that place and either (a) his automobile or principal means of land transportation; or (b) his personal abode or temporary or transient place of lodging; or (c) a migratory bird preservation facility; or (d) a post office; or (e) a common carrier facility.
According to 12 M.R.S. § 11224, a person may not waste a wild bird or wild animal that has been wounded or killed by that person while hunting. For purposes of this section, "waste" means to intentionally leave a wounded or killed animal in the field or forest without making a reasonable effort to retrieve and render it for consumption or use. A person who violates this section commits a Class E crime.
source: http://definitions.uslegal.com/w/wanton-waste/

Doesn't say anything about "poacher" or "poaching" there.

Poaching Law & Legal Definition


Poaching is illegal hunting, killing, capturing or taking of wildlife violating local or international wildlife conservation laws. This can occur in a number of ways. For example, illegal shooting or trapping of an animal from a private or public property amounts to poaching.
Activities that are otherwise legal may amount to poaching if they are done violating wildlife laws. For example, harvests made without complying with the regulations for legal harvest result in the illegal taking of wildlife and come under poaching. Only wildlife can be poached. Stealing or killing domestic animals is theft.
In the U.S., poaching was not considered a serious problem before the twentieth century because there was vast area of undeveloped land with abundant sources of fish and game. But the rapid growth of town and cities and increased cultivation of land lead to reduced wildlife habitats in the twentieth century. These changing circumstances necessitated restrictions on hunting and fishing. Consequently, state and federal wildlife laws were framed to preserve wildlife.
In the U.S., animal poaching is usually done for commercial profit or as a sport. Poaching laws are enforced by game wardens. They patrol state and national parks and respond to violations on private property. Plant poaching is also on the rise, and is done mainly for commercial gains. Removal of ginseng growing in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park is a good example of plant poaching.
Following are examples of some activities that amount to poaching:
Taking wild animals or plants without a license or permit.
Hunting and trapping animal with prohibited weapon or trap.
Taking animals from a gazzetted wildlife sanctuary such as a national park, game reserve, or zoo. Taking animal or plant from restricted land is illegal.
Taking plants/animals tagged by a researcher.

source: http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/poaching/

I can see where the "wanton waste" of animals could come under the broader description of poaching, but as I said earlier I've never heard poaching defined as killing animals and then not using the meat. Again, every poacher that I'm familiar with is poaching specifically to get and USE the meat.
 
You can use whatever term you want, but they certainly call themselves hunters. I don't care what term you use. It's just wrong.
I'm not sure who "they" are, but I've never even heard of hunters leaving an animal to waste.

The ONLY exception to my knowledge is feral pigs. Feral pigs are a serious threat to the environment and do unbelievable amounts of damage. They have no predators, and are breeding much faster than we can kill them. Even then, the meat from adult hogs is saved and usually donated to food banks.
 
Nevermind, I've got a couple minutes to use the Google.

1. "Wanton", not "want and"
2. "Waste", not "waist"
3. While some poachers may wantonly waste game, that is not the definition of poaching
4. Poaching is "illegally taking game", not "taking game and not harvesting it".

Very good sir and well played.

But I must say that my error doesn't mean much when you consider that my point is that people claiming an illegal activity and a legal activity are the same. I could argue that my WANT* and waste argument is an illegal activity and so is the classic poacher activity... so my point remains. I accept your point and will do my best to type pure hard facts in the future. Leaving no dots to be connected by the reader;)

*I'm from a place where the game cops and even reporters call it "Want" :)
 
Back
Top