THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM AMERICAN BIG GAME HUNTING FORUMS

Page 1 2 3 

Moderators: Canuck
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Goddamn Corperations!!!
 Login/Join
 
<Paleohunter>
posted
Has this happen to anyone else? I know 14 hunters here in TX who lost their leases to Corperations! Some of these guys have had these leases for over ten yaers. They have not faced price hicks from the ranchers but then these corp come in and one guy who got kick off told me the rancher was getting 15.000$ a year from some business in Kalfornication for 800 acers in Mills county.
You know they say hunting is dying here in the good ol US of A the reason is not because people are not intressed in hunting anymore its because we are being priced out!! No public or very little hunting in TX or OK (the two states I know) and the land owners want blue sky money for a lease.
 
Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Paleohunter:
Has this happen to anyone else? I know 14 hunters here in TX who lost their leases to Corperations! Some of these guys have had these leases for over ten yaers. They have not faced price hicks from the ranchers but then these corp come in and one guy who got kick off told me the rancher was getting 15.000$ a year from some business in Kalfornication for 800 acers in Mills county.
You know they say hunting is dying here in the good ol US of A the reason is not because people are not intressed in hunting anymore its because we are being priced out!! No public or very little hunting in TX or OK (the two states I know) and the land owners want blue sky money for a lease.

Welcome to the world of the free market.

I love corporations. They pay me enough for what I do to keep my family in style, build up a retirement, and afford some hobbies (like hunting and shooting).
 
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of fredj338
posted Hide Post
I am not one to support "big corporations" but it is really the land owner selling/leasing the land that you should be pissed at. [Mad]
 
Posts: 7752 | Location: kalif.,usa | Registered: 08 March 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of TXPO
posted Hide Post
The world revolves around the 'AllMighty Dollar'. A friend of mine just lost his lease on the King Ranch in S. Texas to the same thing. The lease he had was actually one of the last remaining private leases on the King Ranch. From what I understand, they haven't leased to private groups for sometime now. They kinda weed out the small guys by not allowing mobile homes and trailers to be placed on the lease. They now require, as part of the contract, permanent structures built to 'King Ranch' specs. This is the 'down and dirty'/'Readers Digest' version, but it gives you an idea of what happened.

It's too bad to....I loved going to that place....LOTS of HUGE deer....and all were free ranging animals.
 
Posts: 700 | Location: Wallis, Texas | Registered: 14 October 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of fla3006
posted Hide Post
My lease payment on land near Huntsville doubled a year ago and a good friend lost his long-held lease near Sonora due to higher prices. Supply and demand and a free market. Corporations actually have less to do with driving up prices now than a few years ago since deductability of entertainment costs from taxable income is now limited. Many companies haven't given up their leases but they can no longer deduct all the costs. And more and more landowners around the country are starting to lease land for hunting where it wasn't leased before.

[ 06-28-2003, 00:20: Message edited by: fla3006 ]
 
Posts: 9487 | Location: Texas Hill Country | Registered: 11 January 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I wouldn't fault big corporations so much as I lay the blame on the individual hunter and his acquiesscence to this Southwestern style of game pimping - forgive me - "ranching/farming" that's been going on for over a century.

"Priced out" of the market?

WE created the market in the first place... and what did we really expect?

We made a real whore of our beloved pasttime, huh?

Shame
 
Posts: 6545 | Location: Pennsylvania | Registered: 28 August 2001Reply With Quote
<Paleohunter>
posted
I guess the I did not make my self very clear it is the land owner who is really to blame not the corp although when I see them at the S&K cafe with there Japaness(sp) cliants or some body else that they bring to get there $ thats what pisses me off. Phippips ordanary workers dont get to use the company lease it is reserved for upper managment and rich mid easterns and asians. I dont condon the "SW type" of hunting, when I was a kid in OK all I did was go up to the land owner and ask for his leave to hunt in TX forget it. I still have my lease and am fortunate enough to be a partner with the guy who has had it for 12 yr and the price has not gone up but it is samll only 180 + or - acers and not very atractive to the more affluant but its better than nothing.

Orion 1 I wouldnt be so uptuse about the sugject when hunting; dies so does your gun rights die.
 
Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of OldFart
posted Hide Post
I feel that this will be what eventually kills hunting in America. A young kid will have no place to hunt. He/she will face either huge trespass fees, or no trespassing signs. The kid will decide its not worth the bother, his kids will be brainwashed by the disney/liberal media and turns anti-hunter. Eventually they will get the votes and bye bye hunting. We will blame the anti-hunters but it will be our own selfish greed that will be the root cause.
If you chrge the huge fees or post your land, like it or not, your part of the problem.
 
Posts: 700 | Registered: 18 May 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Gatehouse
posted Hide Post
What's a "hunting lease?" [Wink]
 
Posts: 3082 | Location: Pemberton BC Canada | Registered: 08 March 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Gatehouse,
This is something that is almost unique to Texas I think. The landowner leases you the right to hunt on his property. Since a large percentage of Texas is privately owned it limits hunting opportunities. I don't know if some of the "hunting leases" are let on leased rangeland or not.
I'm a little torn on the whole issue. First, I've always kind of felt that the landowner has the right to do as he pleases with what is, after all, his property. It possibly helps to ensure the survival of wildlife on land where it would otherwise have been eradicated. On the other hand, I am totally opposed to the control of leased rangeland. To me this is public land which is leased for the ranging of cattle only.
There may be a move toward the same sort of "leasing" of hunting land in Wyoming. It may already be fact. I don't know.
I do know that many large ranch owners in Alberta wanted the right to sell hunts on their property but so far they are not officially able to do so unless things have changed in the last ten years. I did hunt one 7 section ranch where I was about the only one allowed to hunt so I guess it amount to the same thing. Sure was peaceful!
I recall one large landowner who really tried to establish his holding as a private hunting preserve. There must have been a couple dozen guys who dedicated themselves to poaching his place! He would have been better off to open it up a bit. Regards, Bill.
 
Posts: 3857 | Location: Elko, B.C. Canada | Registered: 19 June 2000Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I cowboyed for a ranch (100,000 acres) here in Alberta that holds the nonresident alien mule deer tags for their area. So they guide American hunters for a substantial fee, but I don't know if they could charge me for the same hunt.

Chuck
 
Posts: 2659 | Location: Southwestern Alberta | Registered: 08 March 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of HunterJim
posted Hide Post
The Texas experience is unique, and is part of their unique history -- notice no big national forests, just 254 counties of (mostly) private land?

Some Western states have pay to hunt provisions (big $ licenses), and they also have draw licenses in parallel that local (and sometimes non-residents) can apply for at a small price. Of course you are not guaranteed a license in the draw.

Texas has created its own system. Most California corporations are run by people who are not interested in hunting, your "corporations" are probably home grown.

jim dodd
 
Posts: 4166 | Location: San Diego, CA USA | Registered: 14 November 2001Reply With Quote
Moderator
posted Hide Post
I feel sorry for all of the folks who are put out by the high cost of hunting leases, but one must look at both sides of the issue before placing blame.
Since I am involved in the agricultural community, I can tell you first hand that the past ten or fifteen years haven't exactly been a financial windfall for most of us. Low crop and cattle prices, high expenses, rising property taxes...the list goes on and on. Many of us are multi generation farmers and ranchers that are having a hard time keeping the operation intact. Leasing out hunting rights has been a God-send to many, it's an extra income that costs nothing and requires little if any expense or effort. I'm sure there are other situations that are totally different, Texas has many wealthy ranch owners thanks to the oil business! But, why should they take a substantial cut in ROI?
IF I had property to lease for hunting I would certainly look at the highest bidders for my land, but I would not base my choice solely on the money. It's pretty much the same thing when a farmer retires and wants to rent out his acres to another farmer, you look for good and honest folks that will treat the land with respect and take care of it, while paying a competitive rate. Maybe not the highest, but something both sides can live with. And herein lies the problem. Too many are only seeing the dollar signs, not worrying about or thinking of what a corporate lease will hold for their property. It might be Heaven, and then again it might be Hell! [Wink]
 
Posts: 1148 | Location: The Hunting Fields | Registered: 22 May 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I haven't sold off the hunting rights on my land and don't intend to, unless something was to happen that it was the only way to keep my property. I prefer to control the hunters/numbers that come on my land and not leave it up to some hunting club or business secretary. I do know of a couple of land owners that had to sell off the hunting rights to keep their land and for what they did and why they did it I don't fault at all. Yeah, MONEY RULES and that’s the shame of it. Lawdog
 
Posts: 1254 | Location: Northern California | Registered: 22 December 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I have lived in TX for over 5 years now and never hunted deer in the state until 2 years ago invited me to his 1,000 acres. I had always found it much cheaper to hunt out of state, I do dity hunts every other year to Alaska for less than the cost of a lease.

Doug
 
Posts: 696 | Location: Texas, Wash, DC | Registered: 24 April 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Leeper:
Gatehouse,
This is something that is almost unique to Texas I think.

Nope. The agricultural part of North Carolina is pretty much leased up, even areas the state thinks it has leased for public use.

There are parts of Wyoming that have gone that way also, sadly enough. I guess the landowners have to make a living, I dunno.

I would have thought that pimping land to oil companies would have been enough; I am not too happy about oil companies closing off the roads to their "multi-use" public land leases.

Tom
 
Posts: 14808 | Location: Moreno Valley CA USA | Registered: 20 November 2000Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Well, if their Property taxes went up like mine did. I have 90 acres in Connecticut. They did a revaluation and well mine doubled over what I paided last year. I shoot an occasional deer on it. And let a few friends hunt.My guess is that the Leases are going up in Texas for much of the same reason. Ifound hunting in texas not to be all that expensive. Yea It cost me a buck or two, but so dose the hunting in CT or in Alaska. Most Farmers and Ranchers just want to hold on, Selling Leases or hunting rights is just one way. 800 or a 1000 acres where my property is would set you back a good 12,000 to 15,000 in taxes so if a guy was selling a lease to 10 guys, the year before they may have had to pay 600 apiece, now its up to 1,200 to 1,500. So the land owner is a no good sob. The problem is spending by local goverment that is out of control. I keep mind as it is, I could log it or build condo's on it. At some point Taxation will force me to sell. And when I do, the guys that I let hunt will figuire I became a greedy no good SOB.
 
Posts: 1070 | Location: East Haddam, CT | Registered: 16 July 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
If it was your land, and if you could make $15,000 leasing it to a new customer vs. $1,500 leasing it to an old customer, who would you lease it to? My wife doesn't like me to pass out $10,000 bills to people, does yours?

I'm actually very pleased that ranch owners hold out for top dollar rather than let out their land for whatever the locals can afford or are accustomed to. I would have no hope of ever hunting in Africa if land owners over there did what you want land owners in Texas to do, i. e. run their private ranch as a charity farm for the natives.

Please don't construe anything I say as an endorsement of ranchers marking up the rental on government owned land. I figure those land deals go to them that has improper political connections, and the best fix is for the government not to own the land.

H. C.
 
Posts: 3691 | Location: West Virginia | Registered: 23 May 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
George,

Don't get me wrong and sorry I did not say so in my post. I have no problems with the landowner doing what he needs to do, it is his land! In regards to TX hunting. It is not bad for the out of state hunter, but for the cost conscious TX resident that wants to do both it gets costly. For myself and two sons we are looking at appx 5-6k a year for a lease.

Doug
 
Posts: 696 | Location: Texas, Wash, DC | Registered: 24 April 2003Reply With Quote
<Doc in Texas>
posted
ok,as a Wildlife Biologist,I manage a ranch in the Texas hill counrty,that is 1500 acs. and we are trying to keep it reasonable rate but the corp.money looks good and everything but in my experience,this guys come in and want to kill everything they see.my wildlife plan has a set number of deer to be taken,and the corp. yahoo's don't think they have to follow the rules of the ranch.I have worked ranches that have had corp.cleints,that where very helpful,but on themost part they come in for aweekend and shoot not hunt. I think the common man,should have a place that the Family group can come out and hunt and have agood time for a reasonable amount of money. That is my opinion,and please no flames.

Doc in Texas
 
Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
The taxes on my ranch in TEXAS last year were about $13,000. If I chose, I could possibly lease it for hunting for that, or just a bit more if I got lucky. Let's see, so I break even on the hunting while having to put up with quantities of people running around my place for 4 or 5 months, and that is not counting insurance and THEN I've got to make a living raising cattle. What a fun deal, why don't you try it before you tell us how greedy the landowner/ranchers are? And, with cows if I have a good year, I would be extremely LUCKY to clear 5% on the value of the land, and that is only because it is paid for. Have a bad year and you don't clear anything or go in the hole. So, why don't all you complainers, save your money, quit leasing other people's property, and buy your own and then tell those of us who own the land how damn greedy we are for DARING to lease it to someone to hunt. Let's see, if you financial geniuses decide to sell a gun, do you take the lowest offer? I could say more, but I'll stop before I raise my blood pressure.
 
Posts: 17099 | Location: Texas USA | Registered: 07 May 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Paleohunter:
ordanary workers dont get to use the company lease it is reserved for upper managment and rich mid easterns and asians.

Orion 1 I wouldnt be so uptuse about the sugject when hunting; dies so does your gun rights die.

First of all, the Second Amendment defines our right to keep and bear arms and is INDEPENDENT of any hunting. In fact, it has NOTHING to do with hunting. Read the Federalist Papers, especially #46, to get a clue what the Second is all about.

Second, you sound like an envious loser, whining about rich clients and upper management. When your job calls for making decisions that can make or break an entire business, you can come talk to me.
 
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I had a big ol' speech typed out but erased it all because all it was gonna do is make a bunch of people mad and not do a damn bit of good anyway. All I have to say about this is give 'em hell, Gatogordo. I'm right there with ya.
 
Posts: 72 | Location: House, NM | Registered: 03 March 2003Reply With Quote
<Harry>
posted
Gatogordo...
As a fellow ranch owner raising cattle and sheep on three west Texas ranches all I can say is....say it again! You get my vote.
I have all three ranches leased and I have yet to note anyone wanting off or bitching about what I charge or what they get for their money. They range from bankers, teachers to old retired farts.
It damn sure was not lease money that paid for the two excavators clearing 2,000 acres of mesquite and cedar this year using GPS plots so the deer would have nice little parks to come out in and feed on the improved grassland.
Then there is the water, electric and septic tanks I put in for the hunters and thier trailers.
Oh, the helicopter that flies survey with the game biologist each season...wonder where that money comes from?
Nothing is inexpensive these days when it comes to hunting and the same can damn sure be said about ranching in Texas.
Did I mention I do all this without the aid of any oil or gas wells?
And folks wonder why I want lots of money to hunt 13,000 acres.It is so I can stay in the sheep and cattle business long enough that my children can inherit something besides a 80 x 125 foot lot in some traffic choked city.
I am still trying to figure out how in hell my parents and grandparents made it and paid for it all.
I am having a bitch of a time and it was all paid for when I got it! [Razz]
 
Reply With Quote
<heavy varmint>
posted
Orion, Paleohunter is right! WHEN HUNTING DIES SO DOES YOUR GUN RIGHTS. Surely someone intrusted to make decisions that could make or break an entire business can make the connection. [Roll Eyes]
 
Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I think we all see the things that are coming down the road for all of us and our kids. Options are there, someone already mentioned buying in with friends or family to buy land or leasing your own property. This is why I keep posted on issues that effect federal and state land that relate to hunting. Right now a proposed bill will stop bear baiting on federal land and this is something everyone needs to weigh in on regardless of how you feel. We need to keep our politicians aware of the fact that we are out there and watching them in numbers. Those Federal and State lands might be a last hunting ground for some of our kids in 20 years from a financial perspective.

Doug

[ 06-26-2003, 15:04: Message edited by: dwhunter ]
 
Posts: 696 | Location: Texas, Wash, DC | Registered: 24 April 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
It is easy to see why the problems outlined in this thread exist...a product of the huge American population.

Like everything else in life the huge population brings certain advantages and of course certain negatives.

Having said that, I think if I moved to America tomorrow then the opportunities available would end up allowig me to shoot as freely as I can in Australia.

The bigger the opportunity the more it will be disguised.

Mike
 
Posts: 7206 | Location: Sydney, Australia | Registered: 22 May 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Somebody tell me what is the difference between a private ranch owner charging people to hunt and the owner of a golf course charging green fees? The real culprit in the situation is the founding fathers of Texas that didn't see fit to set aside public lands for their citizens.

Jeff
 
Posts: 784 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 18 December 2000Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I must be missing something but from what I've seen of Texas I wouldn't pay ten cents to hunt there.
 
Posts: 3174 | Location: Warren, PA | Registered: 08 August 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of HunterJim
posted Hide Post
The real issue in Texas is over ownership of the game resource. In the US federal law says the game animals belong to the states, re-afirmed by a Supreme Court in 1897 or so. In Texas the State alleges that it does in fact own the game animals.

I can see hunting exotics for pay on a Texas ranch, but I agree with a hunting friend who has lived there: "why should the Texas landowner steal the game from the public to sell to hunters?".

That should give some of you posters something to chew on. [Wink]

jim
 
Posts: 4166 | Location: San Diego, CA USA | Registered: 14 November 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Hunter Jim - The state of Texas and the "public" may own the deer, but landowner still feeds them....
 
Posts: 258 | Location: Houston, Texas, USA | Registered: 18 March 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
HunterJim:

Actually, it is NOT US federal law that the game is owned by the states, that concept is based on some flawed earlier Supreme Court decisions that are mostly in disrepute now having been reversed by later decisions. It is widely recognized and so stated by the Supreme Court that the various states DO NOT in legal fact own the game, but the system is left in place because they don't have a good substitute. Texas, of course, because of the revenue and control issues subscribes to the "state ownership of game" false theory.

BTW, this is not to say that I disapprove of the current system, but I can tell you that factually, it is legal fiction. Well, "legal fiction" might be a bit strong, it could probably be better described as a legal house of cards based on an extremely poor foundation that has since collapsed, but the cards are still in place, however haphazardly.

[ 06-26-2003, 17:11: Message edited by: Gatogordo ]
 
Posts: 17099 | Location: Texas USA | Registered: 07 May 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Yeah , I've always wondered why if the state owns the game animals , they provide little or nothing to feed them ..........
 
Posts: 1660 | Location: Gary , SD | Registered: 05 March 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Hunter Jim,

When you say feed, are you referring to natural browse or a choice to put out supplemental feed?

Doug

[ 06-26-2003, 17:17: Message edited by: dwhunter ]
 
Posts: 696 | Location: Texas, Wash, DC | Registered: 24 April 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Dutch
posted Hide Post
While I agre that paid hunting and tresspass fees will be the death of hunting for the common man and kids, I certainly can see the ranchers side.

Here in Idaho, "pay to hunt" is relatively new. Take for example, my landlord. A semi retired cow farmer, raised a bunch of kids, still sells about 20 calves a year. Now, a Salt Lake outfitter offers him 4,000 a year to lease his river front from him. In his case, it's the difference between being able to stay on the ranch, or having to move off.

What am I going to say? Don't take the money and move to town?

The ones that REALLY get my blood worked up is what you see in a lot of places like Colorado: some guy sitting in his pickup collecting "tresspass fees" to cross an inholding to access public land. That just burns me. Especially when they would not be able to have a ranch unless they got the (too cheap) public lease to begin with. But, that's a different story altogether. FWIW, Dutch.
 
Posts: 4564 | Location: Idaho Falls, ID, USA | Registered: 21 September 2000Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
What would happen if we all quit deer hunting for a season or two and did not buy a license or a lease? Think about that one. How long do you think the states or the federal govt.would just sit on that? Perhaps tax incentives or handouts for landowners who allow hunting to keep populations in check? I feel that with so little public land in TX it is a business for the fish and game dept. The landowners do everything and in most cases they (Fish and Game)sit back and watch.

Doug
 
Posts: 696 | Location: Texas, Wash, DC | Registered: 24 April 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
[ I can see hunting exotics for pay on a Texas ranch, but I agree with a hunting friend who has lived there: "why should the Texas landowner steal the game from the public to sell to hunters?".

[/QUOTE]

Actually the landowner isn't selling the game to hunters. He's just charging them a fee to hunt on his property. So what is different compared to a golf course?

Jeff
 
Posts: 784 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 18 December 2000Reply With Quote
<Paleohunter>
posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gatogordo:
The taxes on my ranch in TEXAS last year were about $13,000. If I chose, I could possibly lease it for hunting for that, or just a bit more if I got lucky. Let's see, so I break even on the hunting while having to put up with quantities of people running around my place for 4 or 5 months, and that is not counting insurance and THEN I've got to make a living raising cattle. What a fun deal, why don't you try it before you tell us how greedy the landowner/ranchers are? And, with cows if I have a good year, I would be extremely LUCKY to clear 5% on the value of the land, and that is only because it is paid for. Have a bad year and you don't clear anything or go in the hole. So, why don't all you complainers, save your money, quit leasing other people's property, and buy your own and then tell those of us who own the land how damn greedy we are for DARING to lease it to someone to hunt. Let's see, if you financial geniuses decide to sell a gun, do you take the lowest offer? I could say more, but I'll stop before I raise my blood pressure.

If you make so little (5%) then sell the land. I have offered to by land from some ranchers in central TX but even though they barly get by they were not intressed. You do have the right to do what ever you want with your land; but when does one stop being a rancher and start being a whore?
Two hunters have a lease that backs up to ours they have only 47 acers yet the owner/rancher leases it to them for the low sum of 4.500$ a year. He does not run cattle on it,does not plant anything on it,does not even play on it; but I know something that the guys that lease it dont. The owner/rancher lets his kids and his kids friends hunt on it when the guys who lease it are not there. So is this a rancher or whore??

Orion1 what color is the sky in your world??
 
Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Orion 1:
quote:
Originally posted by Paleohunter:
ordanary workers dont get to use the company lease it is reserved for upper managment and rich mid easterns and asians.

Orion 1 I wouldnt be so uptuse about the sugject when hunting; dies so does your gun rights die.

First of all, the Second Amendment defines our right to keep and bear arms and is INDEPENDENT of any hunting. In fact, it has NOTHING to do with hunting. Read the Federalist Papers, especially #46, to get a clue what the Second is all about.

Second, you sound like an envious loser, whining about rich clients and upper management. When your job calls for making decisions that can make or break an entire business, you can come talk to me.

Ditto what Orion said. Half the homes in America have guns in them. Way less than half the homes have hunters in them.

H. C.
 
Posts: 3691 | Location: West Virginia | Registered: 23 May 2001Reply With Quote
<Paleohunter>
posted
quote:
Originally posted by HenryC470:
quote:
Originally posted by Orion 1:
quote:
Originally posted by Paleohunter:
ordanary workers dont get to use the company lease it is reserved for upper managment and rich mid easterns and asians.

Orion 1 I wouldnt be so uptuse about the sugject when hunting; dies so does your gun rights die.

First of all, the Second Amendment defines our right to keep and bear arms and is INDEPENDENT of any hunting. In fact, it has NOTHING to do with hunting. Read the Federalist Papers, especially #46, to get a clue what the Second is all about.

Second, you sound like an envious loser, whining about rich clients and upper management. When your job calls for making decisions that can make or break an entire business, you can come talk to me.

Ditto what Orion said. Half the homes in America have guns in them. Way less than half the homes have hunters in them.

H. C.

H.C. and thats is suppose to mean what? If 3/4 of everbody who drives gave up their cars say for some envrio shit and you did not and then they want to pass a law outlawing them and it was put to the ballet; who do you think would win. 2nd Amendment will not save our ass forever, they could just pass another Amendment or repel the old one. Regaurdless what Orion1 thinks it can be done.
 
Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia