quote:

Its Dutch not German. Der alt Jäger would be what you are looking for. Not your fault. Public education is to blame.

Eigentlich, der alte Jäger..

Not that it matters.

But, how about this. Show displeasure nationwide by doing something or not doing something the state as a whole would feel. Skip purchasing any state or local municipal bonds. Don't buy stock in any of their publicly held companies. Switch convention sites to another state. Don't buy products made there. And any other "creative" tactics we here are capable of conjuring up.

What other ideas come to mind?

I'd probably still hunt CO if that was my plan, but I'm happier in WY.

Me? When I head back up to WY next fall I'll be sure to stay at a hotel and fuel up in Raton, then limp all the way across CO without stopping for fuel, snacks, etc. Cheyenne works for me.

I sent emails to all of our legislators, several of them. These "laws" were voted in on a party line vote. The democraps in office took no heed of their constituents. Funny how that has become so prevalent with the current administration we have in office.
The time has come for civil disobedience. What's to be done when the populace refuses unconstitutional laws en mass?
One thing to remember about Colorado though, the front range is full of liberal transplants that support this shit. They would rather make tough guy feel good statements about how gun restrictions are really gonna disable criminals from accessing guns and doing violence, than take real action. I wonder how they feel when they have been mugged, raped, or their family members felled by criminals who don't give a damn about their rhetoric. I'll bet they would pay dearly for a gun in a moment of dire need.
Those who won't defend their rights and freedoms don't deserve them, but unfortunately they don't believe we do either.

It amazes me how any one supporting the second ammendment could ever vote Democrate.

quote:

It amazes me how any one supporting the second ammendment could ever vote Democrate.

That is really simple to answer and understand.

Not EVERYONE that supports the Second Amendment shares the exact same interpretation of what it means.

Not everyone can keep it in their head, that the Second Amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting.

Just because someone is a gun owner and supports the Second Amendment, that does not automatically denote that they are a Republican none more than it automatically denotes they are a Methodist.

I support the Second Amendment, and the right of the individual to own the firearm of their choice. On the other hand however I really do not see the actual NEED for the average citizen to own one of the so-labeled "Assault" rifles and 30 round clips/magazines.

If a person WANTS to own one or one dozen of the things that is their business, none of mine. Personally I do not want one and that is my business.

There are gun owners and Second Amendment supporters around the U.S. that do not view things that way, they do not feel the Second Amendment translates into a private citizen owning military style semi automatic firearms with high capacity clips/magazines.

As a long-time Colorado resident (not a native, unfortunately), I believe that there are other ways than a complete boycott of my adopted state. Cancellation of conferences, reunions, large-scale shows, etc., in Denver and other front-range cities is a good one. Most of these events are money-makers for those who are city-dwelling anti-gun/anti-hunting liberals. Contact the organizations that promote Colorado in the big cities and tell them why you will not hold events there.

Note where products are made and notify those mfgs in Colorado you will not be buy their product in the future. Now, if it is a gun product that you like, buy that. No sense cutting off your nose to spite your fate. These companies hate the laws too.

My son is a police officer in Denver and despises the governor (note small g) and his entourage.

Now boycotting hunting in the state if you never have used an outfitter...Good! More available game for me.

quote:

It amazes me how any one supporting the second ammendment could ever vote Democrate.

There are a number on the AR political forum who claim to do both. Most of them have disappeared with the election now over and were only there to show the Red flag.

The rest of us do NOT believe those who say they are pro gun owner and at the same time also vote for America's Demagogue Socialist Party.

quote:

I really do not see the actual NEED for the average citizen to own one of the so-labeled "Assault" rifles and 30 round clips/magazines.

We have to NEED it? Well, what happens to me after I'm too old to go hunting but still get a lot of enjoyment and pride of ownership in my Weatherby Mark V. And what happens to me when I'll never get to Africa but still like to admire, handle, point and aim and otherwise fondle my Searcy 450/.400 Nitro Express. And what happens when I can no longer find ammo for my Colt Frontier Six Shooter, 44-40.

Are you gonna tell Hiliary on me?

...I was once at the range (a public range that's since been shut down due to complaints by anti gun owners and media) shooting the Mark V and the guys next to me were shooting an AK semi. We got to talking and volunteered to let each shoot the others' guns. Now I own no "black guns" simply because they aren't my style. I prefer fine walnut and blue steel. And they didn't seem too interested in mine. But what I said to them was, I fully support your right to own yours, because I know the Commies who want to seize yours ain't gonna stop there. And one of them says, "yeah, Teddy Kennedy (he was still operational then) would think that gun of yours is a sniper rifle".

Like they say, think about this long enough, and you'll eventually figure it out...

Yes you can stay and fight or you can just leave.
We saw "The Empire State" going to hell starting in the 70s. We were "locked in" by our jobs and elderly family. As soon as those conditions changed ...... ZOOM, we were gone. Look at it now !

The Jews who stayed in Poland and fought did not do too well, those who came to America did very well. Extreme comparision ? Wait till Hickendickhead get his allocation of drones from Obama.......

As for "more game", the last time I hunted in CO, I rode my horse way up high in the Routt Natl forest, in the dark. Tied him up and picked a spot to glass from. When the sun rose, every place I looked there was an "orange dot". Then there were the "locals" who put up posted signs on BLM land. Problems we don't have in WY......

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
It amazes me how any one supporting the second ammendment could ever vote Democrate.

It amazes me to think that people believe everyone in the state of CO voted for the Democrats!

If you think that you are so far off base it isn't even funny! That's about like saying everyone in the U.S. Voted for Obama. Please!!!

The second ammendment has nothing to do with hunting or protecting one from the "bad guys" it has to do with protecting the citizenery from the "bad guys in Washington D C". I only suggested the boycott here because this site is designed for the hunting and shooting community at large. I thought it would be a way for the posters here to expess their suport of the second ammendment. Personally I am planning to never enter Co land as I might have to fly oved their airf space. I will not go there as a tourist for any reason. I have family there and only hope they out live me as I would not go to their funeral in they predecease me.

quote:

Originally posted by Shack:

quote:

I really do not see the actual NEED for the average citizen to own one of the so-labeled "Assault" rifles and 30 round clips/magazines.

We have to NEED it?

What idiot said that? God almighty people don't get it. Doesn't matter if you see a "need" for it, it's our constitutional right to be able to own them.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

It amazes me how any one supporting the second ammendment could ever vote Democrate.

That is really simple to answer and understand.

Not EVERYONE that supports the Second Amendment shares the exact same interpretation of what it means.

Not everyone can keep it in their head, that the Second Amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting.

Just because someone is a gun owner and supports the Second Amendment, that does not automatically denote that they are a Republican none more than it automatically denotes they are a Methodist.

I support the Second Amendment, and the right of the individual to own the firearm of their choice. On the other hand however I really do not see the actual NEED for the average citizen to own one of the so-labeled "Assault" rifles and 30 round clips/magazines.

If a person WANTS to own one or one dozen of the things that is their business, none of mine. Personally I do not want one and that is my business.

There are gun owners and Second Amendment supporters around the U.S. that do not view things that way, they do not feel the Second Amendment translates into a private citizen owning military style semi automatic firearms with high capacity clips/magazines.

Please, let's not define our RIGHTS with the term NEED . As you said, there are different interpretations of what the 2nd amendment means. No where in the 2nd amendment does it define a person's RIGHT to bear arms based on what that person NEEDS. If we are going to define our RIGHT to bear arms in terms of NEED, why do you NEED more than a handgun, a 12 gage shotgun, a 22LR rifle, a 30-06, and a 375 H&H. Everything you NEED to hunt or defend against can be taken care of with those guns. So you don't NEED anything else.

However, I NEED to be free to exercise my 2nd amendment RIGHTS in whatever manner that I see fit. As long as I don't break any laws with my weapons, why should I be restricted from owning whatever I want? If my owning a particular type of weapon does not in any way infringe upon you and your rights, why does it make any difference to you what I own?

I've never been one of the "Tacti-Cool" types. I own a 12 gage in the Winchester 1300 Defender. Also an AK-47. Those for home defense as well as several handguns. But as soon as I heard that the Federal Government was contemplating banning certain guns, I made a point of going out and securing at least one of each type I could get my hands on, in addition to as much ammo as I could find and afford. Not to mention, the means to reload those tactical calibers on a large scale with a progressive press. Do I need those items. I hope not. But the point is that it is my RIGHT to own them and therefore I will own them. So yes, I do need AR's and AK's. If for no other reason than I NEED to do whatever I can to preserve my RIGHTS as a lawful gun owner!

quote:

Originally posted by drummondlindsey:

quote:

Originally posted by Shack:

quote:

I really do not see the actual NEED for the average citizen to own one of the so-labeled "Assault" rifles and 30 round clips/magazines.

We have to NEED it?

What idiot said that? God almighty people don't get it. Doesn't matter if you see a "need" for it, it's our constitutional right to be able to own them.

Just fer shitz n giggles,

http://www.kc3.com/editorial/quotes.htm

http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndpur.html


Although not the ARPF, good discussion.

Best

GWB

I read your shitz n giggles and never once did I see our founding fathers say we, the citizens, needed our arms to slay a squirel, deer or bear for the pot, nor did they say as defence against a trespassing neighbor. It is all about protection from a tyranical government. In my opinion we are dangerously close to the latter both on the federal level and in come cases the state level. This right is preserved to the citizen not to any form of government.

Guys,

You know this reminds me a lot of the talk in the past of boycotting Zimbabwe because people don't like Mugabe's regime. Different reasons but same result. A boycott will only put Colorado outfitters in dire straights the same as it would do to Zim safari operators. Righteous indignation might feel good but I think if it manifests itself in a hunter boycott it is misplaced.

Mark

Mark Young is correct. This is not a local fight- it rages shore to shore. I for one put my hard earned money where it does the most good through the NRA legislative fund as ultimately this fight will end up at the federal level before the supreme court. When you hammer one locality based on the current political climate you should stand beside your brothers and sisters, not abandon them.

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
Guys,

You know this reminds me a lot of the talk in the past of boycotting Zimbabwe because people don't like Mugabe's regime. Different reasons but same result. A boycott will only put Colorado outfitters in dire straights the same as it would do to Zim safari operators. Righteous indignation might feel good but I think if it manifests itself in a hunter boycott it is misplaced.

Mark

Absolutely Mark! Using their rationale Die Ou Jäger and SG Olds should boycott everything American because America elected Barack Hussein Obama as president.

I can understand being pissed about what has happened but turning your back on the people that are here fighting this injustice is ridiculous and quite frankly I find it unamerican to take a stance like that.

quote:

Originally posted by SG Olds:
Its Dutch not German. Der alt Jäger would be what you are looking for. Not your fault. Public education is to blame.

SG, you disappoint me. Is this the very best you could come up with? Yeah, blame a mix up between a similar Dutch and German phrase on "public education". Your arguing semantics and its so trivial and childish I'm shocked you didn't drop a "nanny nanny boo boo" on me just to drive your point home.

You understand the message that was made I'm sure

Bias is everything, so in the interest of full disclosure:

I can ski elsewhere, I can hunt elsewhere. It is only an inconvenience for me. I do not work for a booking agent that would loose business if a boycott occurred. I do not make a penny from hunting, guns or anything coming out of Colorado.

Zimbabwe is an incomplete comparison. The perceived threat was that if we foreigners didn't support hunting in Zim, then the blacks in power, now along with National Park hunting South Africans, would consume all the wildlife. Although there is no unique commonly hunted wildlife in Zimbabwe, if we lost everything at some point it would have to be replanted. That was viewed as more expensive than holding our nose and hunting in Zimbabwe, which is an acceptable (to most off us) form of bribery. If Mugabe and Company do not wipe out the wildlife, we will allow him to skim off our hard currency, and we get cheap hunts. A win for us, a win for Mugabe, and a win for wildlife ( or at least a stay of execution for wildlife).

So again, how is Colorado like Zimbabwe? If we don't spend will Colorado wipe out their wildlife? I think it's more of a comparison between Colorado and California, two states racing to the same finish line, but one started 2 decades ahead of the other. It's demographics. That is why I recommended those pro-constitution people get out and concentrate in those states where we can maintain and grow a majority vote.
This may or may not be a good tactic, but I will not make a penny either way.

Sorry Drummond. An attempt at humor. And you can see I got the spelling wrong. And yes I am a public school victim just like you.

quote:

Originally posted by SG Olds:
Sorry Drummond. An attempt at humor. And you can see I got the spelling wrong. And yes I am a public school victim just like you.

I just wanted to write a post that had a nanny nanny boo boo in it so all is good

I will still suport Colorado and hope to for years to come

I do wish and want support on a North Missouri deer season boycot for Kansas and Iowa hunters

Now that I have been burned at the stake again, let me remind you gentleman that NEED is the exact terminology the anti-gun crowd approaches these discussions with.

As I tried to say, I do NOT see the NEED for such firearms, but I DO SUPPORT ANYONES RIGHT TO OWN ONE.

Wake your asses up, or is that totally above your heads. I support anyone's right to own the gun of their choice, whether I want one myself or that anyone else actually NEEDS one!

Some of you people need to back up and realize that just because an individual, ANY INDIVIDUAL, may not see the need, as long as they support YOUR RIGHT to own such firearms, THEY ARE NOT YOUR GOD DAMN ENEMY!!!!!!!

How about some of you folks opening your eyes and minds to the fact that some folks are willing to support your right to own what and however many of something they do not see an actual need for!!!!!

Why do some of you people see the need to make enemies of people that support you even though they do not agree with you 100%, answer that.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

Why do some of you people see the need to make enemies of people that support you even though they do not agree with you 100%, answer that.

Maybe it's because it is so much fun to imagine them jumping up and down, screaming at their computer and turning red in the face.

Or Maybe because with some people it's just SO easy....especially when they haven't made themselves center of attention for a week or so.

I am not speaking for anyone else; am sure each has their own personal reason.

Sorry about what you guys in CO are going through. Good luck.

Well Dude, I ain't jumping up and down or red in the face. I am just curious why people want to demonize anyone that supports them, even though they don't agree completely.

Now, if you can give a reasonable, non Smart Ass answer, I would like to see it.

Bottom line however, is that not EVERY gun owner believes that people should be able to own whatever in the hell they want to.

While I do not want to own such guns myself, I support other folks right to own such firearms if that is what they want, WHY does that make me the enemy????????

quote:

However, I NEED to be free to exercise my 2nd amendment RIGHTS in whatever manner that I see fit. As long as I don't break any laws with my weapons, why should I be restricted from owning whatever I want? If my owning a particular type of weapon does not in any way infringe upon you and your rights, why does it make any difference to you what I own?

Todd if you could take a minute and drop your prejudice against me personally, and actually READ what I said. Whether a person has a REAL NEED to own a certain type firearm, DOES NOT MATTER TO ME, if it is something they WANT TO DO< I SUPPORT THEM.

You really need to let go of your prejudice and actually READ what is being said. I never NEEDED A .458 Win. Mag., yet I owned two of them!

At what point did someone saying that even though they may not agree with a persons choice, they support their choice make the person an enemy?????

Well, CHC, since we are both past the age to use "Dude" in legitimate conversation, you can call me Bull or Jeff, whichever you prefer.

My comment was phrased in a smart-ass manner but it does ring of truth.

Don't you think you are made sport of? I feel almost certain of it. And it is because you make yourself an easy target. Phrases like 'whippin'-boy' and 'burned at the stake' can only lead people to have fun...at your expense. You bring it on yourself.

Hell, I was a world-class troll-baiter at one time...could poke and prod anyone into an argument and they would always end up suspended/banned from a site and I barely got a slap on the wrist. Or I could just bait them into making emotional responses thet showed them to be a jerk. It was my 2nd favorite indoor sport. (Ask TopGun for references) And NO, I am not calling you a troll...it's a figure of speech i use whether correct or not.

Again, you bring it all on yourself. No one here set out to be your enemy. You made them enemies.

Lighten up and have fun. And if always getting into arguments is your idea of fun, well...I don't know what to say.

Have a nice evening!



Oh look

SOMETHING SHINY!!!

Jeff, I can't or won't have fun on an issue like this one, because I really do support the Second Amendment and the right for a person to own whatever type of firearm they choose too, even though I personally do not want to own one.

So I provide some folks or a lot of folks with a lot of light entertainment, I am glad.

I have been watching what has been happening to hunting and gun ownership for 45 years, but that does not matter to anyone but me.

I just have a really hard time figuring out how to support gun ownership when folks seem to believe that if a person does not think exactly
the same way they do is an enemy.

I just do not understand the higher level intelligence involved in separating supporters versus enemies that some folks seem to want to use.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:


I have been watching what has been happening to hunting and gun ownership for 45 years, but that does not matter to anyone but me.

Well, Narcissistichorseconsulting, has spoken. I'm glad I am not him, all alone on the peak of the intellectual pyramid looking down at us who disagree with the premise of his life, that "My view would solve all problems if only listened to and accepted".

I thought only people in Minnesota and parts North could walk on water in the winter. Apparently there is a Texan that can do it year round.

Again, another person that turns a discussion about support for the Second Amendment and concern over what is happening in Colorado into a personal attack. How pathetic.

This whole discussion started with recent legislation concerning firearms in Colorado, moved to the concept of Non-Resident hunters boycotting Colorado because of this legislation, and has broken down into personal attacks because of a persons point of view.

No small wonder why Saeed and other non-Americans find us so funny and ignorant.

Instead of finding points of agreement, we find reasons to attack each other.

Hey

I still want all of Kansas and Iowa and Illinois to boycot North Missouri's rifle season

Yes, CHC, people disagreeing with you will cause us to all lose our rights, will stampede women & children and rape the cattle.

You are the know-all, be-all.....maybe you should change your screen-name to OZ.

Ted, get over yourself! If I could get rid of all the MN and WI license plates here, I could invite you up for deer season. As it stands, I don't feel I can offer a good enough opportunity.

Hint: the 'wink' should be a clue this is tongue-in-cheek.

PS: I am leaving this thread to a discussion of CO new disruptive and unconstitutional gun laws. Y'all have fun with the banter.

All I know is that I am not boycotting Colorado, because not all Coloradans voted Hickenlooper into office. Everyone else can do as they damn well please.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

However, I NEED to be free to exercise my 2nd amendment RIGHTS in whatever manner that I see fit. As long as I don't break any laws with my weapons, why should I be restricted from owning whatever I want? If my owning a particular type of weapon does not in any way infringe upon you and your rights, why does it make any difference to you what I own?

Todd if you could take a minute and drop your prejudice against me personally, and actually READ what I said. Whether a person has a REAL NEED to own a certain type firearm, DOES NOT MATTER TO ME, if it is something they WANT TO DO< I SUPPORT THEM.

You really need to let go of your prejudice and actually READ what is being said. I never NEEDED A .458 Win. Mag., yet I owned two of them!

At what point did someone saying that even though they may not agree with a persons choice, they support their choice make the person an enemy?????

Crazy, I simply fail to see why everything anyone writes is always taken so personally by you. You get your feelings hurt so easily, I just don't understand it. You continually espouse that everyone has the right to express their opinion, then get furious when someone posts in response to your post; even when they are not in disagreement with you. Simply stated, you believe you have the right to your opinion, but no one else does. You get so upset when others disagree with you. Hell, you get upset when others AGREE with you. To put a fine point on it, you get upset whenever anyone makes a post in response to your post, regardless of the position taken. Enough already. Can you not just discuss a topic without becoming defensive? Taking a different position on a subject is not a slam on your person. The only thing I can figure is that you must suffer from a severe case of personal insecurity and you evidently have a poor sense of self worth. Otherwise, you would be able to discuss topics, making rational and well thought out points, without becoming offended so easily and constantly making mention of how you feel others are disrespecting you.

The point of my post was to point out that the term NEED is constantly used by the liberal gun grabbers in their attempts to limit or abolish our 2nd amendment rights. By stating that you don't understand why people NEED tactical weapons with large capacity magazines, whether or not you support 2nd amendment rights of all law abiding and qualified (meaning not mentally unstable) individuals, you are falling into the same narrative of the gun grabbers yourself. Actually, this goes beyond the gun control issue. It goes to the heart of the "collective" minded liberals in which all things involving distribution of resources is defined in terms of need without recognizing the individual's right to wants or right to enjoy the fruits of their labor. Examples would be, "why do you NEED that much money?"; "why do you NEED that big diesel truck when a little smart car works for me", etc, etc. It never dawns on the liberal that not everyone sees the world in terms of the NEEDS of the many outweighing the WANTS of the few! I may have a ranch that requires me to haul cattle or horses, necessitating a large trailer for which a diesel truck is the best tool for the job. Or, I simply may just WANT that diesel truck because I WANT it without any specific NEED and as long as this country retains a certain amount of freedom, if I can afford to purchase said truck and afford to operate it, my desire to own it, expressed as my WANT vs my NEED is simply "good enough"!!

I care about the INDIVIDUAL's rights and liberties more than the COLLECTIVE. One of the main reasons being that the masses are often mis-informed on subjects of great consequence and going along with the crowd based on what the "low information voter" has deemed to be the NEEDS of the many, more often than not results in nothing more than a restriction of individual rights without providing any realistic value in terms of improving society.

Now, back to the point of my post in response to your statement, I was not taking issue with you personally. I was making a statement at large, advising against falling into the trap of justifying and defining our lives, actions, and possessions, etc., in terms of NEEDS, which to me smacks of collectivism. Needs certainly should come before wants in terms of personal responsibility, but once personal responsibility is assured, wants (individualism) do not require justification. Again, to put a fine point on my post, let's not define our 2nd amendment rights in terms of NEEDS. To do so is falling right in line with the gun grabbers' plan to incrementally take away our rights. How? By getting people to agree that you don't NEED that AR-15, or you don't NEED that high capacity magazine, or that society NEEDS universal background checks before issuing a gun license, and the list goes on, the liberals are actually taking our rights incrementally by brainwashing us into agreeing that their actions are "reasonable" and any reasonable person surely would support the NEEDS of the many over personal wants, right?

Crazy, what is the old saying? Small minds speak of people, average minds speak of events, great minds speak of ideas. Can we at least speak of events and ideas without making each and every discussion about you personally? Frankly, constantly having to address how your perceive every single post in terms of how bad you are personally insulted is quite boring and it never advances the discussion.

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
It amazes me how any one supporting the second ammendment could ever vote Democrate.

Amen Ed! Until things get a little better (if they ever do) I check the 'R' box in the upper left corner. Even if I don't like a particular Republican...right now anyone that associates with the democratic party IS the ENEMY.

Sorry Drum...for the most part I agree with you.

What are all these anti boycott types going to do about the call for a boycott because there is movement to stop Easter Egg Hunts for the kids, now it will be the Spring Egg Hunt.

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
What are all these anti boycott types going to do about the call for a boycott because there is movement to stop Easter Egg Hunts for the kids, now it will be the Spring Egg Hunt.

What??? No Easter??? I take personal offense to that!

Personally...just like the 2nd Amendment does infer...I believe that every able bodied person has a DUTY to own a good military type rifle and a stock of all the ammunition they can afford to store.

For as DOJ (agree with his boycott or not) pointed out...the 2nd Amendment is to protect us from DC...it is not about hunting.

And...as my buddy knows already...if Aaron needs me to come fight beside him...I will already be there!

Davy Crockett came to the aid of Texas and I would never abandon the head waters of the Rio Grande!

quote:

Frankly, constantly having to address how your perceive every single post in terms of how bad you are personally insulted is quite boring and it never advances the discussion.

Todd, if I took everything as personally as you and some others believe, I would not still a member of this site.

If I got my feelings hurt as much as you and some others believe, I would not still be a member of this site.

The fact that you and some others believe that anyone that does not see things or think about things exactly as you/they do, should not offer up their opinions or be willing to defend their opinions.

This discussion started out about the gun bans in Colorado, turned into a discussion about boycotting Colorado and no longer hunting there, then devolved into a discussion about the Second Amendment, who does or doesn't support it, how people view the Second Amendment which caused the whole discussion to turn into a chit slinging contest, all over the concept between Wanting versus Needing.

I still stand by my opinion, I support the Second Amendment, not All Coloradans voted for Hickenlooper, not All gun owners/supporters of the Second Amendment are Republicans and lastly not ALL gun owners in America that support the Second Amendment believe that private citizens NEED military styled semi-auto rifles with high capacity magazines nor are ALL American gun owners supporters of the NRA.