The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Hunting American Big Game Hunting Massive bighorn sheep killed by tribal member snubbed for Idaho state recordGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Massive bighorn sheep killed by tribal member snubbed for Idaho state record | Login/Join |
| One of Us |
I think the native people of Africa should be able to take Elephant,Rhino whatever they want and any amount of numbers as the land was stolen from them.  | |||
|
| Administrator |
The natives of Africa still have their own countries and they still rule them. The invaders were kicked out, unlike America!  | |||
|
| One of Us |
The only places in Africa, that have animals left to hunt, are where the "invaders" are still in control. Andy#3 | |||
|
| Administrator |
Bullshit! We have been hunting many African countries for 40 years, and every country has been taken back from the colonialists! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Now, for rocky mountain sheep hunting in Idaho....by the numbers. We have 27 hunts this year (separate, relatively small areas) available, with a total of 99 tags through the draw process. 1 tag is auctioned off each year....its good for all units, with the exception of unit 11. This unit has the biggest rams, and only 1 tag available through the draw. The auction tag is good for unit 11 every other year....those years the auction tag brings much more. For example: when unit 11 was included the tags brought, 2005: $180K, 2013: $150K, 2017: $130K. The years that didn't include unit 11, they brought: 2014: $80K, 2016: $90K. Big money for Big Rams! It's no stretch to say that tribal member, alone, has killed a MILLION dollars+++ worth of sheep! The unit that the Indian killed the biggest ram does not have an open season yet, and shares the same canyon as unit 11. Idaho fish and game has been trying to bring the populations up there, to provide another hunt. That was a major set back for the management program. Domestic sheep and goats spread disease through the wild sheep populations and its' a constant struggle to keep a few surplus sheep, to be offered through Idaho fish and game. An expensive struggle, that is paid for through sportman's dollars. These hunts occur during the fall (6 week season, on average), when the sheep are up high, and hard to get to. It's not hard to kill a sheep, but finding a trophy ram is. Big country. The Indians typically kill their sheep in the winter, when the snows push them down to the highways, and concentrated. It is common to see lots of sheep, while chukar hunting along the salmon river, that time of year....on public land, along the highway. Now.....guess what happens when there are not enough sheep to hunt, by those that pay into it? I've said it before, the Indian and the wolf are truly blood brothers... Andy#3 | |||
|
| One of Us |
Saeed....I don't see many natives running the guide and outfitting in Africa. When you leave the hunting concessions, and drive through where the blacks live, you see NO wildlife. This is first hand, south of Makuti, all the way to Harare. NOT BULLSHIT. Andy#3 | |||
|
| Administrator |
Still, the countries have been reclaimed by their rightful owners - not necessarily for the better. But they did. With the help of the hypocrites in America, who still keep the original owners in concentration camps! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Well, the game in Idaho is for sale to the highest bidder. Trophy game, anyway. If I had paid the state $100K to kill this sheep, would that be OK? Taking one sheep (or ten) from the population... how much does it matter overall. This would not be an argument if the sheep bagged was a ewe, a lamb, or died of winter kill. This is simply a matter of entitlement and it seems that the Native Americans have some legal, previous right to hunt as this man did. Or is it all about money? I think that most people on this BBS would do the same thing, if allowed. And without compunction. | |||
|
| One of Us |
+1 It should be recorded as represents data. In my opinion it shouldn’t matter who the hunter is , how was it hunted/poached/killed etc. Would love to see a record book one day without the names of hunters/poachers/killers etc. Just the measurements of the animals and locations! | |||
|
| One of Us |
The auction is for 1 tag/year. The other 99 are in the yearly lottery. Everyone has the same chance to draw one. No points here. Andy#3 | |||
|
| One of Us |
Concentration camps......really? Casinos, free housing, free health care, monthly gov't checks, monthly gas/oil royalties, loans co-signed by the gov't, free year round hunting and fishing (on and off the reservation), with no fees or limits. That's not what I saw when I visited Dachau. Andy#3 | |||
|
| One of Us |
If that is the case why are there so many native americans living in poverty? | |||
|
One of Us |
Because living in (equal) poverty is EXACTLY what depending on government handouts for your livelihood produces. There is a lesson in there for those not too blind to see it. Thanks for setting the ball up on the Tee with your comment! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yep, they are an incredibly sad representation of what happens to individualism and human nature when one becomes reliant on welfare policies. It robs humans of purpose and dignity. | |||
|
| One of Us |
It has been suggested here that Native American People did not "own" land. I agree that they did not "own" land in the sense that they had a deed that was passed down from some government entity. Nevertheless, the U. S. Supreme Court's opinions seem to suggest that these people did, in some sense, own the land they inhabited. They do so in a number of places in a number of cases. Here is just one quote, from Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa. "The 1855 Treaty was designed primarily to transfer Chippewa land to the United States, not to terminate Chippewa usufructuary rights. It was negotiated under the authority of the Act of December 19, 1854. This Act authorized treaty negotiations with the Chippewa “for the extinguishment of their title to all the lands owned and claimed by them in the Territory of Minnesota and State of Wisconsin.” Ch. 7, 10 Stat. 598." | |||
|
| One of Us |
You are correct... I also think that a great many of us, if legally entitled to hunt on these areas would also take advantage ourselves...(and we would undoubtedly perhaps feel entitled to do so based on these above mentioned treaties) It is incumbent upon the states to now prove that these limited resources and the native Americans access need to fall under the states rights to set management policies and quotas that ALL people fall under. That will end this problem and not until then. | |||
|
| One of Us |
In the early 80's, as a 1st year plumber's apprentice, we plumbed about 12-15 new/free Indian houses, on the Mescalero apache reservation, in New Mexico. Part of the contract was that 10% of the payment was held back, for 1 year, at which time we would go back and do a "punch list" of anything that needed work (dripping faucets, slow drains, etc), and then get paid the remainder of money owed. One of the homes, that had a female artist living in it, was beautiful. Decorated with all kinds of her artwork. Very neat and very clean, and a pleasant person to talk to. All the others were a different story. EVERY house had the copper tubing torn out, and sold for scrap I assume, along with the water heater. The bathtub was sitting in the yard, used as a horse trough. One bedroom had the window knocked out, and pine limbs were hung from the walls......used for a chicken coop! Again, this was the case with ALL the other houses. One of the homes appeared to be used as a meeting lodge. The vaulted ceiling, in the living room, had about a 3' diameter hole cut in it, along with the roof, open to the sky....and an elevated fire pit, sitting on the floor, below it.....teepee style, the ceiling black from smoke. The walls were covered in murals, and were very creepy. Human sacrifices, satan, other images of hell, all the way around what was the living room. But it was the smell I'll never forget, other than the artist's home, all the rest of the houses smelled the same, rotten cooking grease and body odor. The stench was overwhelming....and this coming from a plumber!  And...quite the opposite of the artist lady, NONE of other indians would talk to us, or make eye contact. Most sat on the floor, staring at their feet. Others would leave the house, and go walk into the woods. This event left quite the impression on me....I remember it very clearly, even though it was over 35 years ago! It was the first time I worked on a reservation, and did so several more times in my career, over the next 35+ years. I have more examples of similar reservation behavior....Navajo, Hopi, and Nez Perce here in Idaho....all first hand. Much of what I learned was from Indians that worked on my crews. A couple became very good friends of mine. That's were I really got the "inside" story, on how things worked (or don't work) on the res, and the greed and corruption of the tribal elders. Most of these reservations were responsible for keeping their own people poor, withholding payments due to them, from the US government. So....all you Indian experts feel free to explain this to the rest of us. How the white man is responsible for this behavior. How the white man is to blame for this poverty, and the "concentration camp" environment. I think most people form their opinions from what they see on TV, or the bleeding heart types that cry for more money, using scenes like I described, above, to make their point. This is my last post on this subject, as I doubt I'll change anyone's preconceived opinions with my first hand experiences. It will be interesting to read the responses though.... Andy#3 | |||
|
| One of Us |
That has NOT been my experience over the last 20 years. I have been inside a whole bunch of Indian homes and never seen anything like you describe. I have shared many meals and holidays with my friends on the reservation and have been treated with respect by the vast majority of Indians I have encountered. Have I met Indians who clearly do not like whites? You betcha.....but they were few and far between. The single biggest change I have noticed in my time spent there is the increased standard of living. I am sure my first hand experience over many months if not years has no bearing because it does not fit your world view. | |||
|
One of Us |
If you have lot's of experience with the Indian Reservation life over a say 50 year time frame, you will know that everything written above has been true about living conditions as there is some of everything. I can confirm new houses, entire subdivisions, being treated as scrap and Square hogans / Tepee's and Sheep pens. Holes in Ceilings and floors. I can also confirm in our Urban Reservations, called Slums by some, I have seen the exact same conditions. Where progress, initiative, self reliance, thus hope, dies, these conditions result. I can also relate that I have been treated very well by the very poor and very affluent and very poorly by the same groups. I have been hated by Indians, persons of other colors, persons of same color of all walks of life. It's a person thing not a group thing. I think the plans that lead to Indian Reservations, and Urban Slums on Government checks are tantamount to Slavery, condemning people to high percentage chance of life failure. I can't comment on why this was done, just the result of it being done. I have also seen people on both Reservation land and Urban land choose to fight their way out and become very successful. Nice houses, Jobs, Helping others. All because of their choice to do so. America is not alone in this as these same things can be found almost everywhere these tactics are deployed. As to the Massive Sheep record; I'm not much on record books but since these are private organizations, they have a right to set their own rules. As far as "wasting" game, I'm against it. I remember back in the Heyday of Colorado Mule deer hunting, you could drive to the New Mexico border on the highway back to TX and other points south after hunting season and see carcass after carcass with the head cut off and dumped. Killed by licensed hunters in legal manner, but once clear of the State line, simply thrown away what was not wanted. Waste comes in many forms. Here's hoping for a better future! "The liberty enjoyed by the people of these states of worshiping Almighty God agreeably to their conscience, is not only among the choicest of their blessings, but also of their rights." ~George Washington - 1789 | |||
|
one of us |
Man, there's a lot of "broad-brush painting" going on in this thread when it should be more like "your mileage may vary." I killed my first Merriam's gobbler and a 375-lb. black bear on a DIY spring hunt on the White Mt. Apache Res.(WM) when game management was still under control of the AGFD in the 1960s. Since then, I've hunted the WM, San Carlos (SC)and Hualapai Reservations (HR), all after the tribes took control of the game management. For the most part, all three have done an excellent job. The Navajo Res. also has some good hunting and it's own GF Dept. but I haven't hunted it. Ask any hunter in AZ where they would like to hunt elk and don't be surprised at the answer for most of them. At one time, the SC even had Amanda Moors, the gal who runs coueswhitetail.com as its head biologist, and the WM had John Caid as a biologist and later as HEAD of its game dept. They are both white. Caid later wrote "The Golden Age of Elk Hunting" and served as the Chairman of the Board at RMEF in 2010. Besides personally hunting the reservations, I've had lots of interactions with many of the residents and the GF depts. on the WM & SC over the past 35 years or so. For 10 years, I put together a javelina hunt for 8-10 guys most of whom were NRs. Because the cost was lower and the permits easier to get, we always hunted either one of those two reservations. So as soon as I had all the stuff I needed for the permits, I would send it to one of my contacts and have all of the permits mailed to me. And when the seasons coincided they all always bought small game licenses for the excellent quail hunting on both reservations. PS: I completed my turkey slam with an Osceola on the Seminole Res. in FL. I wrote the article below for the National Shooting Sports Foundation in 2013 so some of the $ figures are dated. _____________________________________________ Reservations to Hunt Native American lands might provide excellent opportunities Copyright By Tony Mandile Legal court cases have established the basis for every tribe in the U.S. to have sovereignty to regulate consensual activity between tribes and non-tribal members, including on tribal lands. It set a precedent for the more than 300 reservations in America, and in the decades since the court decisions, many of the tribes have formed their own game departments and initiated their own list of hunting fees. For nontribal members, the outcome kind of fits the good news/bad news scenario. In general, the tribes have done an excellent job of managing the reservation wildlife. In fact many of the most sought after hunts in the West now occur on the reservations. For example, when it comes to elk hunting, few places under control of the state agencies can compare to the trophy quality and success rates on the San Carlos and White Mountain reservations in Arizona or the Mescalero and Jicarilla in New Mexico. All four are controlled by the Apache tribes. The Navajo Nation in Arizona also offers trophy hunts for mule deer and elk. That’s the good news. The bad news as far as the guided trophy bull elk hunt packages on those listed above is the cost; they start at $13,500 and top $25,000 in some cases, depending on the added fees tacked on according to trophy size. Yet, despite the high costs of these hunts, each tribe has a waiting list every year for one of the coveted and limited openings. In fact, about 90 percent of the package hunts on the White Mountain Apache Reservation each fall are booked by repeat customers, and the waiting list for new clients is now so long that the tribe is no longer taking names. But there’s other good news, too. Reservations all across the country offer multiple options that are affordable for the common man. Even those above dole out reasonably priced cow elk permits for self-guided hunts that are usually in the neighborhood of $500 to $600. A management bull permit can be purchased for $5,000. On other reservations across the country, nontribal members have other big-game options. They can hunt pronghorn antelope, both white-tailed and mule deer, bear, bighorn sheep and even bison. For example, in Montana, the Fort Belknap has an extensive program offering substantial numbers of deer and antelope permits. This 700,000-acre reservation, located in Montana’s high plains about 50 miles east of the town of Havre, offers about 80 buck antelope permits at $750 each and an unlimited number of doe permits for $100 each. Hunter success on pronghorn is nearly 100 percent, with a good percentage of bucks over 14 inches taken each year. Fort Belknap also sells a small number of whitetail and mule deer permits each year at nominal costs. The application process for both deer and antelope is the same — first-come, first-served by telephone beginning the first working day of January. In South Dakota, the Lower Brule, Standing Rock, Rosebud and Pine Ridge reservations all have both whitetail and mule deer hunts for nontribal members. Only the Pine Ridge requires a guide. One of the newer options for bear hunting is the Quinault Nation in Washington. This reservation only opened these hunts to nontribal members a couple years ago, and the bear population has been compared to British Columbia and southeast Alaska. A permit costs $250, but you must hire one of the approved guiding services. Although this adds to the cost, the rates are not exorbitant. The javelina has always been a quarry that interests hunters, particularly if they hail from states other than Arizona and Texas, where these collared peccary are native. Both the San Carlos and White Mountain reservations in Arizona sell permits on a first-come, first-served basis to hunt the sometimes maligned little peccaries. Of course, the Arizona Game and Fish Department also sells javelina permits, but here’s where the good news applies again. A nonresident of Arizona can buy one of the tribal permits on first-come-first-served basis for $75 to $175, depending on the reservation and hunting area, and no guide is required. Comparatively, the cost to hunt off reservation with a state-issued nonresident permit would currently be $151.25 for a license and $7.70 to apply through the lottery draw. If successful, the hunter pays an additional $105.00 for the permit for a grand total of $263.75. Small-game hunting is another area where reservation hunts make the best option for a nonresident of the state they want to hunt. A small-game permit to hunt quail on the White Mountain Reservation is $10 per day or $50 annually. The state cost is $61.25 for three consecutive days or $151.25 annually. A similar comparison exists for fall turkey. Arizona’s San Carlos tribe offers 100 permits at $100 each. A state permit would run a total of $236.50. In 2012, the Rosebud Sioux Reservation had 600 turkey permits each available for nontribal members through a drawing. The $150 permit cost includes two gobblers but also requires a $3 hunting license, a $10 habitat stamp and a $15 application fee. For hunters looking to complete their American grand slam, guided hunts for the Osceola subspecies are available on Florida’s Seminole Reservation. Want to shoot a few prairie dogs? No problem. On the Rosebud $80 for an annual license allows you to kill up to 2,500, or you can buy a three-day license with no limit. The $3 hunting license and $10 habitat stamp are also needed. So if you live in a state with few big-game species to hunt or you can’t get drawn for a permit, be sure to investigate what’s available on the reservations. Same goes for some of the smaller critters. The cost and quality of the hunting and game might surprise you. To get started, let your mouse do the walking by searching the web for the game species you want to hunt with something such as, “turkey (or insert any other game species) hunting on American Indian reservations.” From there it’s easy to narrow down the search so you can contact the agency that regulates the hunting on a specific reservation. Tony Mandile - Author "How To Hunt Coues Deer" | |||
|
| one of us |
AND...were it not for the cooperation of the White Mt. tribe the once endangered Apache trout would likely have been extinct 20 years ago. Instead, there are now thriving fisheries all thru the White Mts., including many on non-tribal land. In fact, the WM Res. has many of the best trout fisheries in AZ for any species. This is the result from Christmas Tree Lake on the WM reservation.  Tony Mandile - Author "How To Hunt Coues Deer" | |||
|
| One of Us |
as there is some of everything. There is my broad brush sir, in case you did not have the time to read the entire post. Best, "The liberty enjoyed by the people of these states of worshiping Almighty God agreeably to their conscience, is not only among the choicest of their blessings, but also of their rights." ~George Washington - 1789 | |||
|
| one of us |
That's more in the realm of "your mileage will vary."  Tony Mandile - Author "How To Hunt Coues Deer" | |||
|
| One of Us |
I will add to this post that I probably should not have used the word "stole" when I was talking about how many native tribes lost their land. It probably is true that some of the land was stolen in the sense that no remuneration was given for it, but the truth of the matter is that large parts of Indian lands were, as the Supreme Court says, "ceded" in various treaties and that remuneration was provided. And that of course is what we are talking about here. Whether parts of the remuneration given at the time of the treaty should no longer be applicable today. I think that most of these tribes would have preferred that they did not have to "cede" their lands to the federal government, so instead of using the word "stole" I should have used the words "forcibly removed" or "removed against their will". Or, if they were allowed to stay, perhaps they had certain freedoms taken away. All in all, I think its accurate to say that the encroachment of the white man in effect drastically changed the native people's way of life. And of course many of us, as white people, will say that it was for the better, but as has been demonstrated so often by native people, maybe not. The philosophical question could be asked of anyone. If you could live two different types of life - one being a life with lots of money and things - and the other a very simple life, without knowing anything about the way of life you didn't have, which would be better. I think a lot of native people prefer the life of their ancestors, but are forced to live in a mixed society just as we all are. I still think that a treaty is a contract. And if these treaties that grant unlimited hunting and fishing rights are not feasible anymore, then certainly some other type of remuneration should be granted rather than just unilaterally taking away what has been contracted for. If one cannot trust the American Government to hold up a contract, then who can one trust? | |||
|
| One of Us |
I think your viewpoints are getting push back primarily due to your refusal to address the fact that a certain tribe only "possessed" or "occupied" certain lands for as long as they were strong enough to do so and most often, occupied said lands by pushing off other tribes of inferior war making capabilities, who themselves, pushed off other tribes of inferior war making capabilities, and on and on. In this regard, the treaties with the US Government whereby these tribes were pushed off "their lands" simply codified, though the rule of "white mans' law", similar actions they and their ancestors had done to other native tribes in the past. In other words, the treaties are agreements between the Fed and simply the latest greatest tribe currently in occupation at the time of the treaty. A large difference being that when one tribe pushed off another, there were no considerations given to retain any rights. Lindy, you are arguing from the standpoint that whatever tribe occupied the lands at treaty time, did so from the beginning of time. Certainly not the case. That's not to say "white mans' law" didn't give Native American's a short end of the stick, but to ignore the fact that tribes did the same to other tribes over history is being disingenuous. In this regard, neither the US Government or the "Indians" are without sin. Admit that point and you'll have a better foundation from which to debate the issue. As to my opinion on the "native fellow" taking his 10th ram using treaties to skirt current game laws, I say he didn't break the letter of the law. That said, in today's environment of wildlife management, it's probably time changes are made to those laws. Changes to law happens all the time so it's not a new precedent. That doesn't have to mean vacating treaty allowances for native hunting rights, but more reasonably, adding current game management considerations into those rights. As an example, they still get to hunt their "traditional lands" but have to obtain a tag to do so (tags only available to Native Americans) with the tag system having some reasonable restrictions on numbers of overall tags and timing of when the hunts can take place (for instance, not during the dead of winter when sheep have been driven from the high country). Those are not meant as absolutes, but rather some form of a starting point to better manage the more scarce wildlife species. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I did not mean to give that impression. To me it matters not how many times the land was turned over by the native people between themselves. The reason being that no matter how many times it had been turned over by the native people, those times had nothing to do with the U. S. Government making a treaty. I am talking about the fairness or unfairness of the treaties, not how many times the land was fought over by the native people. All that matters to me is the actions of the U. S. Government with those tribes who held the land when these treaties were made and the granting of unlimited hunting and fishing rights. That is what I understood this whole thread to be about. I my understanding of what this thread was about is incorrect, or if I left an impression that I was talking about something else I apologize. Once again, and using different language, my point is that the U. S. Government basically forced the native people into a different way of life, sometimes also forcing people from the land they occupied. In exchange the U. S. Government gave these people certain rights in exchange for their lands, or certain rights to use those lands. And all I am saying is that those contracts should continue to be honored. | |||
|
| one of us |
I'm not sure about every tribe here in AZ, but both the WM and SC have tag systems in place even for tribal members. With some species or seasons, they also must go through a lottery draw. Now, this is pure speculation on my part, but...I'm guessing most treaties differ in one way or another in regards to off-reservation hunting and fishing. Nothing like this bit with the sheep has ever happened for the 60 yrs I've lived here. Actually, I can't recall any major clashes between our state GFD and any one of the tribes. So though I don't know this as fact, I do not believe tribes here have free rein to hunt where and when they want as part of whatever treaties might exist -- if there actually are any. Of course, in the case of the WM & SC, why would a tribal member hunt somewhere else when they have the best habitat and wildlife populations in the state.  Tony Mandile - Author "How To Hunt Coues Deer" | |||
|
| One of Us |
Right. That sounds like a reasonable plan. | |||
|
| One of Us |
it's quite obvious you have no idea what you are talking about most Native people (who's ancestry dates back 600+ years)were forced to assimilate into white culture stripped of their language and forced to abandon their religion and somehow money is supposed to take care of that fat chance why should you care how many sheep get killed after all it was the white hunter who killed off the buffalo and decimated and took advantage of what has been given | |||
|
| One of Us |
To have a better understanding of how many Native Americans were treated in history, all one has to do is look at the history of Oklahoma. From at least 1890 until statehood in 1907 it was known as Indian Territory with the panhandle area known as No Man's Land. In the mid to late 1800's a number of tribes were rounded up and driven from their tribal land to their "new home" in Oklahoma. Many tribes have areas in the state where they still maintain some form of legal jurisdiction. If I'm not mistaken, I believe we have 30+ tribes in the state today. I am not a Native American and I don't want to get into the politics nor render judgement as to what happened in past history. Over the years, I have hunted in many areas of my state and count it as a privilege to share their land with them. As such, IMHO, I think Idaho should have recognized the new record. Outdoor Writer, I believe a guide is required to hunt the Rosebud Sioux reservation in S. Dakota. My hunting buddy and I have hunted the reservation for over 10 years now (non-members must be drawn) and we have always had to have a guide. They don't have to be with you while hunting but, if stopped by tribal authorities, you are required to identify your guide. Some of the guides work together to limit the number of hunters in an area. Our guide gives us a business card for ID purposes. Start young, hunt hard, and enjoy God's bounty. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Native Americans have a beautiful and proud culture. At some point, however, you have to stop being victims and stop enabling a culture of alcoholism, poverty, and hopelessness. Obviously not every place by Any means is like this,but these are huge issues. Native Americans are now given virtually unlimited opportunities, tax breaks, funding etc...there's zero reason to just continue to perpetuate a culture of victimhood. Native Americans also conveniently leave out the fact that you did plenty of killing one another. The Comanches ruled massive areas all across the Central US all the way down to Mexico. They killed who knows how many other tribes and assimilated and enslaved countless thousands. The Spanish retreated because of their strength. Do you blame them? Why not ? Same thing.... Pull yourselves up by the bootstraps and be proud and lift your people out of a culture of victimhood.. | |||
|
| one of us |
You are correct. I was remiss in the way I worded it -- i.e. a guide to hold your hand rather than the way you explained it. Thanks for clarifying. Tony Mandile - Author "How To Hunt Coues Deer" | |||
|
| one of us |
This does bring up a point I made with some of my liberal friends: have you ever noticed Native Americans from Mexico don't have the same issues? They may not be rich, but they seem to be doing better. Could it be due to lack of reservations or is it something else? | |||
|
| One of Us |
This! They lost, what did they do to other Indians they conquered? | |||
|
| One of Us |
nothing to do with being a victim stating facts I bet your a Democrat too with your broad brush of generalizations you paint with | |||
|
| One of Us |
Choices exist after ANY set of facts are posited. Today and tomorrow are a choice. We each are the result of our choices. "The liberty enjoyed by the people of these states of worshiping Almighty God agreeably to their conscience, is not only among the choicest of their blessings, but also of their rights." ~George Washington - 1789 | |||
|
| One of Us |
Snort! If I ever need a lawyer again, Detorre is my man! Lindy, you need to lay down the shovel and step back while you can still see daylight.....maybe...... . | |||
|
| One of Us |
Very well said, nO one with any sense can even attempt to argue that logic! . | |||
|
| One of Us |
Wow! Are those natives allowed to hunt? Can they own guns? Please......... How many indigenous outfitters have you hunted with? why do you hunt with those evil ex colonialist? . | |||
|
| One of Us |
Why do you say such silly thing? Any redskin in this country can move anywhere they want have any job they are qualified for go to any school any of us terrible invaders can...... They do not have any requirement at all to STAY on any reservation. But we U.S. Citizens know this...... | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Hunting American Big Game Hunting Massive bighorn sheep killed by tribal member snubbed for Idaho state record
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia
