For all of you who think being nice to anti's well get you any where.

AG Holder annonced plans for a new Assault weapons ban.

If this thread was moved to the politcal forum I wouldn't mind that

There ain't been one person I don't think that has made one remark about Being Nice to Anti's, but there is such a thing as Tact, and Intelligence.

If you can tell or think a person is an Anti, Don't Fucking Talk To Them.

If it is someone your not sure about, Don't Try To Rub Their nose In It Like You Would A Puppy In A Pile Of Shit!

P Dog, you have not proved anywhere, in any of your posts on this subject that the guy you had that lengthy 90 second conversation with, was in fact an Anti Hunter.

Your running under an ASSUMPTION, the problem is Your Assumption Does Not Just Make You Look Like An Ass, To The Guy You Had The Talk With, You Made ALL HUNTERS LOOK LIKE ASSES.

I don't think a single person that has posted or read this thread thinks even in their wildest dream that a true Anti Hunter can be converted, most aresmart enough to not even attempt it or even get into a conversation with one of those folks.

The point most folks are trying to get across is that just because some one does not hunt or does not really care for a particular form of hunting, That Does Not Make Them An ENEMY, but getting into their face about it damn sure can turn them into one.

Guys, I think CH has made some valid points. A lot of folks are anti-hunting or more properly pro bambi because of their eastern, cliff-dwelling, Disneyesque upbringing. And they're not so much anti hunting as they are fence sitters perhaps. To counter their position or questions with raw aggression and overt hatred (yes, I chose those words deliberatly) is only reinforcing everything they've heard and read about hunters, shooters, and outdoorsmen in general.

PDS:
Crazyhorse is only talking about being tactful to the "fence sitters". I'd agree in that from your description of the situation, you jumped the so called anti's "case". No way in about 90 seconds could you know whether or not the guy was a true anti. Being polite & tactful could have gotten you much further with the guy.
We sportsmen/women, gun owners, hunters are, in many cases our own worst enemies. If one of us disagrees in any way about anything on the subject, then that indiviual is often labelled a blithering liberal, commie pinko fag. Well, guess what? I personally don't care to own one of the "spray & pray" auto rifles. BUT, as far as I'm concerned, an individual who follows the law should be able to own one. Also, I happen to think that the wolf situation (at least here in AK.) is such that I would not want to see them eradicated. My position is that wolves are a part of the wilderness experience. Would I shoot one if it were legal & the opportunity arose? You, bet. Guess that since I don't believe in the eradication of the wolf in AK., I'm a liberal, commie, pinko fag in some quarters. If so then so be it.
Again, as far as I'm concerned, too many times we are our own worst enemies. Rant off.
Bear in Fairbanks

P.S. Outdoor writer:
Very good piece. B.I.F.

quote:

For all of you who think being nice to anti's well get you any where

That seem's a better approach than rudeness and beligerance, which seems to be your only response to a legitimate challenge!
God help us all if yours becomes the voice of hunting, as you seem to have a complete and utter intolerance for any viewpoint that doesn't directly correspond with your own. In this case you're acting just like an "anti".
Let's try to exercise a little diplomacy, huh?

CH- You're fighting the good fight and I applaud you

It seems Ironic that those who are preaching to be the most tolerant are to first to go on attack.

Starting with personal attacks, name calling swearing ect.

Can some point out to me where I attacked someone, swore at them ect.

Vanderhoef would you please andswer the question what have we gained by being tolerant.

I have listed a lot that we have lost in previous posts.

Can you list any gains we have gotten by working with the Anti's.

Can you name somethings the anti's are offering that we are willing to trade are rights and heritage for.


Bear in fairbanks where to you see I jump on his case you have no idea the tone of the conversation.

He asked I told him just as you say I jumped on his case I could say he jumped on my case.

I open the conversation up about running in cold weather one runner to another. When he asked I told him that we were out running coyotes with hounds. When he ask what we do with them I told him that we shoot them and sell the hides. How is that jumping on his case.
He is the one that started out with how coyotes have a family life, a unique language and that he would rather not see them killed.

Telling him that I plan to shoot the next one we chased out was just a fact of the hunt. I surppose I could have told him I would take into account that the coyotes have a family and unique language as I pull the trigger.

So how would you have andswers his questions I willing to listen to the proper responses.

If you read the posts you well see that I make distintion between hard core anti's and fence sitters. Fence sitters and those who just don't know better can be delt with with facts and reason.

Hard core anti's be they anti hunting anti gun can not be delt with by being nice them they hate what we do and what we stand for.

P Dog Shooter, you still ain't getting the point.

You state that you have listed a lot that we have lost to the anti's, care to re-list something verifiable.

No one has said a damn word about working with the anti's but You.

Everyone else has been talking about dealing with Non-Hunters, or possibly even hunters that just don't see things Your Way.

Anti's are not offering anyone anything, they are dictating how they want things to be, there is no offer to trade anything here.

You say you make a difference between Hard Core anti's and fence sitters, yet you labeled the guy you had the conversation with a Hard core anti, Simply Because Of What He Said.

You have no real idea as to whether the guy was an anti, a non hunter, or a hunter that has a soft spot for coyotes, Now do You, No, You Have An Assumption, and that is all you have.

Here is a good one right here:

quote:

So how would you have andswers his questions I willing to listen to the proper responses.

What leads any of us to believe that our idea of a Proper Response, and what YOU consider a "Proper Response, are even any where in the same hemisphere?

Is your real name Ted Nugent??????

That is what your posts sound like, you want to do, "In Your Face Discussions With Folks That You Have No Real Idea How They Feel About Hunting".

Your also willingh to tell us that have gotten into this conversation with you how much you know about dealing with Anti's and how some of us are willing to give up our rights to placate the Anti's.

Again, you are making judgement calls on peoples character, fellow hunters I might add, with extremely lmited knowledge about any of us.

No one is promoting trying to deal with anti-hunters/gun ownership, and convince them our way is the best way.

As you said yourself in your latest post:

quote:

Fence sitters and those who just don't know better can be delt with with facts and reason.

What folks are trying to point out, it is the manner in how you present the facts and reason, and for many people, hunters included, In Your Face, is not a good way to do it.

quote:

Can you list any gains we have gotten by working with the Anti's.

You first have to identify who "the anti's" are and are not.

Because there are many groups and individuals whom some here would lump together and label "the anti's" who really are not.

And some who are real anti's who'd get a free pass from some here.

About three years back I took a friend out on a hunt here in New Zealand where he shoot his very first deer. As one could imagine he was one happy camper.

As we were hanging it up back at the hut a couple of trampers came through, spotted the deer and said

"Have you had a good slaughter today?"

Didnt need to be a brain surgeon to work out that he may have a been a tad anti.

Anyway they obviously did not want to stay in the hut with us slaughterers so decided to camp over in the next valley. There was one hell of a storm later that night, good enough to shake the shit out of the hut plus very heavy rain.

That made my night

Gun Control act of 1934 gun, gun control act of 1968 the fullauto ban of 1986. Lead shot and lead bullet bans.

Crazy there are a few or don't you count them as a lost. I think that the first ones are verifiable just go out and try and buy a new fullauto, Just try and buy firearm through the mail without a ffl. Just try and buy a hand gun from a dealer if your only 18.

chor3r according to some here how would you know he was a anti. He might just wanted some of your meat inquring if you slaughtered him in the proper manner.

quote:

Gun Control act of 1934 gun, gun control act of 1968 the fullauto ban of 1986.

Not a single one of those have a damn thing to do with hunting.

quote:

Lead shot and lead bullet bans.

The lead shot ban was brought about before the anti's ever really got to rolling.

That had more to do with enviromental concerns than anti-hunting.

We are still able to hunt waterfowl, we just can't use lead, P.S. dove hunting is fixing to be limited to non-toxic shot also.

Again, it is over enviromental concerns, Just Like Banning The Use Of Lead Based Paint Or Lead In Kids Toys.

Did the anti's jump up and claim victories, Yes, but they were not even minor players in ay of the decisions concerning the ban on lead shot.

As for the banning of lead in Rifle bullets, I have heard everyone up to and including the owners of Barnes Bullets blamed for that one.

Your grabbing at straws.

One question since your in a semi answering mood, do you or any of your family contribute money to the Humane Societies Of The United States??????

Again with the personally attacks

Andswer the question what have the antis given up compared to hunters and gun owners.

Who The Hell Ever Said The Anti's Gave Up Anything????

What The Hell Do The Anti's Have To Give Up?????

The Anti's don't hunt, so they can't give that up, now can they????

They don't own guns, so they can't give those up, now can they???????

Is there one damn thing the anti's have that you would want them to give up, other than to leave hunters and gun owners alone??????

News Flash, they ain't gonna do that!

Do you think all hunters should feel the way you do????

Do you believe that everyone is either a hunter or an anti-hunter and there is no middle ground?????

Your whining about personal attacks, well look back up thru all your posts ad notice how many times you accused those of us that like to hunt probably as much or maybe even more than you do, of being fence sitters or traitors, simply because we do ot agree with you on this issue.

quote:

chor3r according to some here how would you know he was a anti. He might just wanted some of your meat inquring if you slaughtered him in the proper manner.

I take it that it was a "Tounge in cheek"
remark?
We have the occassional "anti,s" in NZ as well, anti firearms, anti hunting etc, but they dont worry me all that much as they normally have no idea and what happens in the bush.

I also am an anti im my own right, anti 1080, the green death that get dropped everywhere

chop3r Yes it was very tounge in cheek.

Crazy your are so right they have nothing to give up but they sure want us to give up things.

So a compromize is when both partys give something up to come up with solution that is agreeable to both partys.

So that they have nothing to give up means compromizeing with them it all take and no giving on their part. We lose all the time.

You go ahead and keep giving them a little bit a death by a thousand cuts still means you are dead in the end.

I think you're missing the point. While I can't speak for others, I can tell you that I do not suggest giving up anything. We need to fight against every anti-hunting action, just like we need to fight against every anti-2nd amendment action.

Give no ground because the anti's want to completely ban hunting and gun ownership.

However, here is the main point you miss. While we agree on the above, we seem to disagree on how to go about defending hunting from the anti's.

You seem to prefer an antagonistic, in your face approach with everyone who disagrees with you.

I on the other hand, believe in a more tailored approach. A "bite me" response might be appropriate for the die-hard kool-aid drinking anti-hunting nutcase, but for someone who might be a reasonable person and who doesn't have a set in stone agenda, then a reasoned respone might be the better approach.

I believe we are better served if we can be persuasive in our defense as opposed to rightous. By that I mean, we must present a well-reasoned argument on why hunting must continue instead of the tired cliche, it's our right. Unlike the right to bear arms, there is no Constitutional protection for hunting.

I am sure there are many people who do not support hunting, but who are apathetic to the issue. Apathy, when it is the opposing side is a good thing, but when you get in their face with your side, then you may stir them to action.

Again, no one is saying to give in to the anti's, but what we are saying is use tactics that have the best chance of winning when dealing with them.

We may agree on the same goal, but we disagree on the methods of achieving that goal. You will put your dead deer on the hood of your car and drive through town. I prefer putting mine in the bed of my truck and covering it if I know I am going to be in an area where there will be non-hunting people.

I have learned that it doesn't matter if you're right if you can't get people to follow you. To protect hunting we need to have people follow us or at least not follow the anti's.

Good point of view CVC.

P Dog Shooter, take just a second and look at this:

quote:

So a compromize is when both partys give something up to come up with solution that is agreeable to both partys.

quote:

So that they have nothing to give up means compromizeing with them it all take and no giving on their part. We lose all the time.

quote:

You go ahead and keep giving them a little bit a death by a thousand cuts still means you are dead in the end.

Now, after you re-read what you posted, go back up thru all the responses, and point out where ANY OF US, that are disagreeing with the MANNER you are using to get your message across to someone that may not even be an anti-hunter, have said anything about giving anything away or giving up any of our rights.

No One Has Done That.

Some of us just believe that there are better ways to get a message across, especially to someone that we really Do Not know what their stance toward hunting is, than the antagonistic, In-Your-Face, Everyone-That-Don't-Believe-Exactly-The-Way-You-Do-Is-The-Enemy approach you seem to favor.

You accuse me of making personal attacks, I feel that when you make statements like the last one of yours quoted above you are attacking me, simply because I think the message can be got across to the folks that really matter without possibly alienating them and turning them against.

One question I asked you early on and I do ot believe you have answered it, in fact I believe it was two questions, so let me re-ask them and see if you can give an answer.

Do You Believe that All Non-Hunters are Anti-Hunters, and are therefore our enemy?

Do You Believe That Everyone, Even If They Are A Hunter, Does Not Think Or Believe The Way You Do On This Issue Is your Enemy And An Anti-Hunting Suppoter?

quote:

It seems Ironic that those who are preaching to be the most tolerant are to first to go on attack.

P Dog I'm very tolerant of your viewpoint: go ahead and lump everyone into categories and make your assumptions, that's fine. What I take offense to are your actions, ie. this statement-

quote:

I just smile at him and politely told him I plan to shoot the next one that we chase out and that he should have a good day.

Come on now, the only reason you said that was to antogonize him, and you know it! You may have had an opportunity to educate someone but instead you chose to, most likely, offend him. What a shame. The result may well be that the antis have now increased their ranks by 1. Good job-way to go!!

As far as being personally attacked:
Well, I probably wouldn't post on an open internet forum then, if I were you, since it seems to offend you so much

quote:

Vanderhoef would you please andswer the question what have we gained by being tolerant.

I'm fairly certain you've gained nothing from tolerance, as it doesn't seem that you possess any, as I stated previously.
For myself, I hope that I've gained a small amount of respect (probably not, but I try) from my "opponents" by attempting to communicate effectively and in a civil manner (which I'm sure I usually fail at miserably), and also by not dismissing their thoughts and beliefs in an outright manner, but instead attempting to educate and enlighten them. In short, I try to dispell their stereotypes and leave them with a positive impression. I've also gained the self-respect of knowing that I haven't stooped to their level, which it appears to me you have and makes me wonder why I'm even participating in this conversation. (Note to self: Can't reason with antis or P Dog Shooters)

In closing, let me please ask that, on behalf of all hunters and outdoorsmen, that you choose your words a little more carefully the next time someone engages you. Remember that old saw about "first impressions..."?

(By the way, running coyotes with dogs is a hoot!! My ex-wife had a Russian Wolfhound that was hell on 'em. Used to live in E. Washington where we'd spot them from sometimes a half mile away and then turn her loose. By the time they figured out what was happening it was too late but she would be going so fast that the first two or three times she'd make contact with the target she'd just knock them down until the circle would get small enough that she could make the kill. Sounds quite a bit different than the way you do it, but fun nonetheless!!)

Regards,
Vanderhoef

quote:

Originally posted by Vanderhoef:

quote:

It seems Ironic that those who are preaching to be the most tolerant are to first to go on attack.

P Dog I'm very tolerant of your viewpoint:

No. you are simply arguing with PDS and all the points you think you are making are totally, completely 100% wrong.

quote:

quote:

I just smile at him and politely told him I plan to shoot the next one that we chase out and that he should have a good day.

Come on now, the only reason you said that was to antogonize him, and you know it!

And wrong again. Since PDS sensed he was an anti, he should have said, "and if you don't like it - !

quote:

You may have had an opportunity to educate someone but instead you chose to, most likely, offend him. What a shame. The result may well be that the antis have now increased their ranks by 1. Good job-way to go!!

Your Disney mentality, concepts and sermon indicate you are totally clueless about how the antis think.

quote:

quote:

Vanderhoef would you please andswer the question what have we gained by being tolerant.

I'm fairly certain you've gained nothing from tolerance,

Nor does anyone else when dealing with antis. My NRA had to toss Warren Cassady out long ago because he thought "compromise with the antis"(similar to your tolerance) was a good thing. He compromised, the antis gave up nothing, and we tossed Cassady out.

quote:

For myself, I hope that I've gained a small amount of respect (probably not, but I try) from my "opponents" by attempting to communicate effectively and in a civil manner (which I'm sure I usually fail at miserably), and also by not dismissing their thoughts and beliefs in an outright manner, but instead attempting to educate and enlighten them.

Nope, they are laughing at you all the way. I'm certainly not laughing at you, because it is pitiful that you live in a nonsensical dream world. Reminds me of the fool Democrats that believe, "If we do them no harm, then they will love us!" How stupid is that!

quote:

(Note to self: Can't reason with antis or P Dog Shooters)

You got that half correct. Just because you are totally wrong and can't get PDS to agree does not mean you are not communicating with him.

quote:

... let me please ask that, on behalf of all hunters and outdoorsmen, that you choose your words a little more carefully the next time someone engages you.

And totally WRONG again - you sure are NOT speaking for me nor anywhere close to all the Hunters and Outdoorsmen of the world.

quote:

Remember that old saw about "first impressions..."?

Yes I do and I must say it seems you have a lot to learn when it comes to dealing with antis.

Oh and to quote PDS - have a nice day.

Hot Core-
My comments were directed at P Dog but since you appear to have appointed yourself as his spokesperson....I'll play!
Just a word of warning though-parts of this do ramble a bit but I WAS TRYING TO BE VERY CLEAR for you

I'm going to address your statements in descending order:

quote:

No. you are simply arguing with PDS and all the points you think you are making are totally, completely 100% wrong.

I am arguing against his actions. I cannot see where, during the course of this discussion, that he identified his rationale behind labeling the jogger as an "anti". P Dog treated him as though he was yet fails to explain how he came to that conclusion.

quote:

And wrong again. Since PDS sensed he was an anti, he should have said, "and if you don't like it - !

Let me get this straight: He wasn't antagonistic but should have been!! BTW, how the hell do you know what his intentions were?-oh that's right you're his spokesperson, I forgot...

quote:

Your Disney mentality, concepts and sermon indicate you are totally clueless about how the antis think.

A little background:
I grew up in a family that was grossly divided on the issue of hunting and conservation. Paternal grandparents were die-hard bowhunters that spent their free time pursuing their passion throughout N. America for four decades into the 90s. They had two sons, one of which followed in their footsteps and my father, who abhorred any thought of killing or the outdoors, for that matter.
I split my time as a youngster between father and grandparents and quickly became fairly well versed in the mentality possessed by both. The bow they bought for me when I was five had to be kept at their house, same as the BB gun and subsequent .22 etc...I'm sure you get the point.

Years later I graduated with a B.S. in Wildlife Biology (dad wasn't too pleased) and moved to West Yellowstone just in time to witness the Wolf Reintroduction Program and the subsequent broohaha. My position at the time required me to, among other things, speak to and educate large groups of visitors regarding the regional fauna, primarily predators and their role in the ecosystem. I'm sure I've not heard every ridiculous misconception about wildlife but I assure you I've heard more than my share

Apparently, I didn't feel as though I was paying enough of my dues so my wife at the time (a well-respected wildlife vet) and I moved outside of town to a place called Horse Butte. About twenty miles north of town, it is a natural wintering ground for Bison and if you've been following the drama in Montana regarding the American Bison and Brucellosis then maybe you've heard of it. The "bison protectors" have declared this area as ground-zero for the battle to protect their beloved "buffalo" from the more pragmatic folks such as myself who would just as soon shoot them the instant they step out of the park. "Can't even haze the creatures" say the protectors as you'll then stress them and jeopardize their ability to survive the winter. These folks now reside throughout the area in Teepees and all sorts of other temporary structures on public land, of course, and believe me they are something to behold: 'hippees' is too kind a word. Anyway, from the moment I let my shepherd out in the mornings to get the bison up and out of the driveway/yard/garden until we'd repeat the process in reverse every evening I had to deal with these "folks". Fist fights, name calling, rational discussion and door slamming: I tried them all and none worked (only the fist fight made me feel a hell of a lot better!!)

Oh, I almost forgot. I had a sideline business during this time wherein I specialized in transporting bears and wolves between zoos/facilities. I travelled to Alaska and Canada several times to pickup problem bears and cris-crossed the lower 48 with my horse trailer full of God-only-knows-what and not a few times did I encounter the general public and be forced to utilize that part of my brain that requires rational and intelligent thought (it's a very, very small part, unfortunately )


Now my background may not mean that I'm not totally clueless but I at least hope that I possess a relatively uncommon perspective regarding the thought processes of your average run-of-the-mill "anti".

quote:

Nor does anyone else when dealing with antis. My NRA had to toss Warren Cassady out long ago because he thought "compromise with the antis"(similar to your tolerance) was a good thing. He compromised, the antis gave up nothing, and we tossed Cassady out.

Not sure what this means but just to be clear I've never stated that compromise is an option..

quote:

Nope, they are laughing at you all the way. I'm certainly not laughing at you, because it is pitiful that you live in a nonsensical dream world. Reminds me of the fool Democrats that believe, "If we do them no harm, then they will love us!" How stupid is that!

Well, at least they think I have a good sense of humor Seriously though, Hot Core, I have to ask you something- Do people laugh at you a lot and therefore you think it must happen to everyone else, too?
Oh, and BTW I'm a registered Republican, FWIW.

quote:

You got that half correct. Just because you are totally wrong and can't get PDS to agree does not mean you are not communicating with him.

There is a difference between reasoning and communicating... You understood that right?

quote:

And totally WRONG again - you sure are NOT speaking for me nor anywhere close to all the Hunters and Outdoorsmen of the world.

Of all the things I said, I would think that everyone would agree that it is important to choose your words carefully. You apparently don't and it shows.

quote:

Yes I do and I must say it seems you have a lot to learn when it comes to dealing with antis.

Finally, we have something we can agree upon.


Regards,
Vanderhoef

As Vanderhoef is demonstrating rather well, the difficulty associated with having a rational and intelligent discussion with an anti-hunter can only be matched by the difficulty of having a similar conversation with some folks within the hunting community.

Some folks out there should really be ashamed about the lack of thought that goes through their brain sometimes.

quote:

One thing or concept that seems to have eluded some of you somehow, is that about 10% of the population are hunters and 10% are total whacked out Anti-Hunters, while 80% of the population are basically neutral with no real leanings either way.

The public remains easily impressionable, and its the seemingly small portion of smart ass &/or whackjob hunters that give the antis all the ammunition they need to recruit more support.
A little bit of bad easily undoes alot of good.

quote:

Hunting is a priveldge, not a right

thank God for montana!

quote:

Originally posted by Trax:
...its the seemingly small portion of smart ass &/or whackjob hunters that give the antis all the ammunition they need to recruit more support.
A little bit of bad easily undoes alot of good.

Ah yes, like the people who post Human Wound Studies as if they are relevant to Killing Game.

"Hunting is a privilege"

"thank God for montana!"

Hunting is a privilege, even in Montana. An individual has no legal 'right' to hunt in MT (or anywhere else.)

The last time I hunted in the great state of Montana I had to obtain a license. A license is a document that allows a person to do something that would otherwise be illegal. In other words, hunting is illegal unless you first obtain official permission from the state in the form of a license.

You have no absolute, civil right to a hunting license. The state grants this permission at their own whim and pleasure. The state can decide to sell you a license or not. There have been several years when the state of Montana decided not to sell me a license because my name did not come up in the draw.

Driving is also a privilege, not a right. It is strictly illegal to operate a vehicle if you don't have a license. The funny thing is that Montana recognizes my Wisconsin driver's license. I am welcome to drive my WI-registered vehicle on Monatana's roads. But my Wisconsin hunting license is no good in Montana. As I said, at the whim and pleasure of the state.

Yes, I know that Montana has a "right to hunt" clause in the state constitution. (So does my state.) This is clearly a collective right, not a individual right.

try new mexico next time?

This has been interesting. We face the same issues on the other side of the world as well.
If I head to a public hut on public land for a hunt, then theres a good chance I'll be sharing it with non hunters and a good portion of the time you can see on their face as you walk in, that they don't know how to react to you.
I don't consider them antis, just i'll informed and they will come out with comments like "we'll be wearing bright clothing so you don't shoot us."or " I couldn't kill anything."
If I take their comments as insults and reply with anger, then i've created an anti. Instead I usually let it slide, then at the end of the day bring out a small bottle of whiskey, offer it round and have a more freindly chat once the ice is broken. If I've shot an animal I'll also cut up the backsteaks fine and fry them up, then sit the pan amoungst them and tell them to help themselves, it usually beats the noodles the're eating and no one yet has turned it down. In this way i hope they go away thinking " those guys wern't too bad and next time they share a hut with a hunter they will be more at ease.

quote:

try new mexico next time?

Funny you should mention it. That's exactly what I did!

Please understand that I wasn't bashing Montana. In fact I love your state and it's people. I just wish I could get tag every now and then.

Apoligies for the attempted thread hijack.

quote:

Originally posted by tasunkawitko:
try new mexico next time?

Ha Ha Thats a good one. I agree hunting is a an inalienable right here in Montana, a birthright if you will. But, you out of state boys probably don't understand that, not living up here. If you guys don't want to offend the anti-hunters then maybe you should start hunting New Mexico or even better, how about Colorado since they helped put obama in the White House. Anyway sorry got off track, I just wanted to ask a question. So I shouldn't tell the anti-hunters to fuck off?

Another day another chat I was chating with a person about the recent mt lion seen in Wis. He tells me he move out into the country from the city. He starts lots of critters around. I tell him lions bears and wolves and things. He states don't forget the coyotes Iam afraid to let my dog out I hear them all the time.

I tell them they are not protected and if the cause him trouble just shoot them. He says I don't own a gun and I don't hunt. He jumps right in as says if you want to shoot them come on over there are way to many of them.

In about 2min I had a invite to shoot some coyotes and another place to hunt. It must of been my toxic manner that got me that invite.

There is a huge differants in dealing with anti's then others that just don't hunt or care too.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
This has been interesting. We face the same issues on the other side of the world as well.
If I head to a public hut on public land for a hunt, then theres a good chance I'll be sharing it with non hunters and a good portion of the time you can see on their face as you walk in, that they don't know how to react to you.
I don't consider them antis, just i'll informed and they will come out with comments like "we'll be wearing bright clothing so you don't shoot us."or " I couldn't kill anything."
If I take their comments as insults and reply with anger, then i've created an anti. Instead I usually let it slide, then at the end of the day bring out a small bottle of whiskey, offer it round and have a more freindly chat once the ice is broken. If I've shot an animal I'll also cut up the backsteaks fine and fry them up, then sit the pan amoungst them and tell them to help themselves, it usually beats the noodles the're eating and no one yet has turned it down. In this way i hope they go away thinking " those guys wern't too bad and next time they share a hut with a hunter they will be more at ease.

Very well handled.

Although I'll bet that there are alot who wouldn't "waste" their hard earned meat on "antis". Alas, they miss the point.