If this forum is a true reflection of what is going on in the hunting fraternity, I am sad to admit that we as hunters that share a common passion for guns, rifles, handguns and bows as well as the use of the weapons and the hunting of game are losing the battle against the anti-hunters.
We love what we do but we are not a team. We are each his own individual with his own ideas, opinions and believes. We also try and force our own will on everyone with bad results.

Case in point:

Look at the thread "Safari Times-SCI-Hunt report a joke"

I shared something that happened to me. I did not bad-mouth or insult anyone. The response was a lot of stabbing, sarcasm, bad-insinuations, and infighting.
This is a sure way of losing the battle. The Anti's do not even need to fight us. We fight ourselves and they just need to sit on the sidelines and laugh.
I have never seen any of the Anti-hunters fight amongst them selves for their cause. They might be completely wrong about most things but they are winning because they fight as a team.
Not us. No. We call each other liars and bull shitters etc.
This type of behaviour happens in most of the threads and posts on AR. We are so against the Anti-hunting groups that want to take away what we do and love that we fight amongst ourselves. We are our own biggest enemy.

Why can we not be more like them and stick together without pitting ourselves against ourselves. I am sure that they (the anti's) are all reading these posts and smiling.

Come on people!!!
Stop behaving like two 6 year old boys that are arguing about who's dad is the strongest.

I am a PH for the past 20 years. I have enough hunts booked every year to fill up my season. I do not need to impress others to get more clients. I do not need to bad mouth a fellow PH to force him to think like I do or to conduct a hunt the way that I do. There is enough space for all of us. Africa is big. The world is bigger. There are many more people that knows more about rifles or bows or any other topic than I do for that matter. Still, I am booked fully and I enjoy my way of life. Most of my clients are repeats and referals. That says enough.
Yes, I have also fallen into the trap of becoming part of an argument. I have realized what is happening and want no more part in it. For those that can not keep them selves in check, maybe you should think about how you are helping them that want to ruin what you love.

Fritz,
I enjoy your posts and I'm glad you post here.
You must be new to the internet as this is quite common behaviour. But relax it's not a hunting forum problem or a AR-forum problem.
Some people just go crazy when they join a (anonym) forum, I can't explain you why but it happens all the time.

Dennis

I agree and appreciate your input, Fritz.

quote:

Originally posted by Caracal:
Fritz,
I enjoy your posts and I'm glad you post here.
You must be new to the internet as this is quite common behaviour. But relax it's not a hunting forum problem or a AR-forum problem.
Some people just go crazy when they join a (anonym) forum, I can't explain you why but it happens all the time.

Dennis

Let me see if I have this straight:

Some people took issue with a post you made on a thread (I have not read it) and now anti hunters are winning?

I believe the reference to Anti-Hunters winning, comes from the FACT, that even though Hunters as a group enjoy the same thing, Hunting, as a Group, we can not put aside our own personal feelings tpoward the sport and find it easier to rip each other apart on these forums.

All the Anti"s have to do i a little copying and pasting from here on to their sites and it really makes hunters look bad.

Hunters should be joining together to save our sport and we are not. The anti's all agree and act with one goal in mind, stop hunting.

I don't know Fritz at all but have enjoyed his contributions on several topics.

I've also noticed above average internet goonery in relation to some of his posts (but certainly not isolated to them).

Unfortunately, I guess it's part of the price we all pay for freedom of information and internet usage. I do tend to agree that we should cut fellow hunters more slack. The poor dude who deleted his hunt report a few months back comes to mind ....

Fritz,
You have a real point. I've gone back and forth between bowhunting and rifle hunting over a number of years -- depending upon what I'm hunting. But bowhunters are quick to criticize rifle hunters for not being sporting enough, and rifle hunters are quick to criticize bowhunters for not being humane enough. This needs to stop.

PETA people just pose naked, smoke pot, screw long hairs and God knows what else, but I'm sure that like a bunch of 1960's hippies, they enjoy themselves. (God, I sound like my Dad -- how did that happen?). They don't have enough sense to actually form an independent thought --or therefore -- disagree with the party line.

I will tell you that a proper arrow from an adequate bow is every bit as lethal as a bullet on non-dangerous game at reasonable ranges, if not more so.

I don't want to get into the dangerous game/archery debate; My lovely wife sweetly suggested that I might want to refrain from sticking something that might kill me with a sharp stick until my children were out of college and I've bowed to that request. Accordingly, I cannot comment on a bow's efficiency with dangerous game.

However, I do agree that we should be more united and less critical of other hunters who are supporting the sport and operating legally. Just my two cents.

I respectfully disagree. An enemy wins when he inspires so much fear in his rivals that he stifles them from discussing anything that might cause them to disagree with each other.

And yes, IMHO that especially includes legal and ethical matters. If we, as hunters, aren't strong enough to deal with the anti-hunters despite reasoned disagreements among ourselves, then we deserve to lose the fight.

I don't like it either when the disagreements turn into personal attacks.

But the internet, and more particularly the anonymity it affords, unfortunately encourages some people to engage in that kind of despicable behavior.

quote:

If we, as hunters, aren't strong enough to deal with the anti-hunters despite reasoned disagreements among ourselves, then we deserve to lose the fight.

Very few of what might be considered disagreements amomg hunters could be considered "Reasoned" even under the most liberal of definitions.

In the case of hunters versus anti-hunters, the enemy is winning without really doing anything more than using the ammunition we continue to give them.

A a group, hunters simply can not put aside our differences and support each other or our sport.

The anti's do not/can not inspire fear simply because they base everything purely on emotional messages that have no factual basis.

That comes acros clearly when they have to actually speak. By continually pointing out that hunters cannot agree on hunting as a group, it lets the folks they are trying to persuade to join their ranks, see hunters in the worst possible light, while hiding the anti's own misguided, emotional, uninformed mis-information.

If hunters could reasonably and rationally debate issues that would be one thing, but as is evidenced on the pages of AR and other hunting sites, we can't do that.

Crazy- What do you suggest just sitting back and saying nothing? I don't think that would help anything either.

quote:

I respectfully disagree. An enemy wins when he inspires so much fear in his rivals that he stifles them from discussing anything that might cause them to disagree with each other.

And yes, IMHO that especially includes legal and ethical matters. If we, as hunters, aren't strong enough to deal with the anti-hunters despite reasoned disagreements among ourselves, then we deserve to lose the fight.

I have to agree with this sentiment myself.


.

Two minutes later and the in-fighting begins. Point proven Mr Rabe. I belong to a group that battles anti-hunting, ranching, wildlife and human haters each day. I see this exact action only much more vile 24/7 and yes, they unite while we that love the outdoors, wildlife, hunting, guns and the way of our forefathers can't keep from slitting each others throats. It amazes me. Opinions are like assholes: everybody has one, but why be one? Thanks for your post, point well taken. LDK

David-I don't see any in fighting here, just discussion. Do you recomend we don't discuss the issues. Or do you think there is a more appropriate place for the discussion?

We need a place to discuss these matters, I just don't know a better place for that. Any ideas?

.

quote:

David-I don't see any in fighting here, just discussion.

If you do not see the in-fighting, you are part of the problem.

The issues are not being discussed, people are being accused of being unethical, people are stating that poaching is not that big of a deal, people are not posting pictures from their hunts or making hunt reports because they want to remember their hunts in a good way, not how the hunt they saved for and went on is viewed as beneath contempt by a few individuals that claim a higher ethical or moral standard.

If things were being discussed, it woould not be a problem. There is no real meaningfull discussion taking place, just internet bullying and anonymity combined with a lot of accusation and innuendo.

Discussions are fine, I'm speaking of the battering of others just because one doesn't agree with someones view. That's when discussion is no longer about learning but rather Internet head hunting, and for some, just for entertainment. We are under worldwide attack from those who hate us; would love to murder us and our families and stop the very way of life we love. When discussion goes out the door and the Trolls take over...I have no time or patience for that. Now, to make my simple point clear: I'm 100% behind discussion and sharing ideas, experiences and thoughts. But attacks against a person because one might not like baiting deer; hunting from a blind; using dogs to hunt game; this cartridge vs that cartridge, all in the name of bullying or fun at anothers expense, is just plain bullshit and in no way should be associated with sportsmanship. That my friends is just my humble two cents worth. If I'm now a target over that, fire away. LDK

Fritz has some good points.

Let me try an analyse some of the issues.

There a BIG differnce between hunters and shooters on the one hand and the Anti-hunting lobby on the other. The very nature of our sport is diverse and varied. We hunt wilderness and we hunt pen raised birds. We hunt in blizards and storm and we hunt in 5 star lodges behind high fense. We hunt mountain game from fly camps and we hunt canned lions that look like they are doped. We like modern high powered rifles with the latest technology and we like to hunt with primitive weapons. All these variable inherrantly mean that we have differnt view points and preferences. We can never agree on them and sometimes we will disagree passionately. The Anti-hunting lobby on the other hand has one agenda - which is to oppose ALL our varied interests. That is why they are united - against us. They have ONE common objective while we have a huge variety.

We hunters & shooters on the other hand are not opposed to anyone in particular. We just unite with our friends and let others be. We are passionate about our sport and not about oposing someone else. THAT is the BIG difference.

The other BIG diffence is that in any club, association etc., the key objective is to preserve OUR way of thinking and OUR interest. Hunters, apart from being so diverse as already mentioned, are also a fair reflection of society at large. Some tend to be quite exclusive and aloof. Others may be very gragarious and extroverted. So we may not really like the "other" style or attitude. We see this all the time on AR debates - where personal egos and prejudices overtake human courtesy. The anti-hunting lobby on the other hand have an over riding prejudice against us and so it is far easier to unite with that single prejudice and put aside the other personal aspects for a short while.

Only when hunters stop personal attacks and name calling each other and secondly extend respect and human courtesy to all other hunters will we head towards some form of unity.

BUT we will always be differnt since we have our own unique passions.

Some of you guys need to dry your eyes and wipe your runny nose on your shirt sleeve. Go and give Mommy a hug, if you still feel upset.

Thanks Matt. It took just 2 hours & 38 minutes for you to prove my point!

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:
I respectfully disagree. An enemy wins when he inspires so much fear in his rivals that he stifles them from discussing anything that might cause them to disagree with each other.

And yes, IMHO that especially includes legal and ethical matters. If we, as hunters, aren't strong enough to deal with the anti-hunters despite reasoned disagreements among ourselves, then we deserve to lose the fight.

I don't like it either when the disagreements turn into personal attacks.

But the internet, and more particularly the anonymity it affords, unfortunately encourages some people to engage in that kind of despicable behavior.

I agree with Mike's comments above.
From a historical perspective, the same issues were of concern for Christianity in the 1st to 3rd centuries, the dark ages, the Reformation in the 1500's, the time of the Enlightenment in the last 1600's, the discovery of the New World and on an on to the 1960's "God is Dead" movement to the New Age Movement to the present day of Gen Y and others.Baptists and Catholics may not agree on some things but both believe in God and Christ and the basic foundational beliefs of our faith and will stand together against attacks on that faith.

According to the intellectuals of the day, Christianity was dead due to us humans now being so much wiser and able to control so much of our lives.

Practical observation proved otherwise and Christianity thrives because it is "truth".

On the Anti vs Pro Hunting debate, we only "lose" when we decide the other side is correct. That will not be the case because the other side is not "right" and we as hunters will not likely give up the fight. Look at the NRA. When Reagan was shot, that should have been the call for repeal of the 2nd Amendment. It did not happen nor will it happen as long as we stand firm on what is "right".

We fight among ourselves in the hunting community. That is ok and healthy as it distills what we truly believe. When attacked from the outside, we band together. I do not like bow hunting for a variety of reasons. However, I will support the bowhunter in his efforts to be able to hunt. I do not support high fenced hunting, I believe we as a hunting community should not support it - but I will defend our efforts to do it when attacked from the outside.

I criticize SCI but am a member and support the mission.

I criticize NRA but am a member and support the mission.

We will not lose. We are united regardless of how it looks.

Stand firm, shoulder to shoulder and fight the good fight.

If you quit, you lose.

Unite against the common opponent but it is ok to wrestle internal issues. Brothers can fight but get up as friends. Brothers will unite against the outside evil when needed.

Here is what I mean -

Never quit - never give up - fight the common enemy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUdB8gCMcXI

Some great points and ideas.

Question though, going to Fritz's point, dont we really lose when the undecided middle goes to the anti's and supports them really? If so, infighting does not sell our "side" much, which i beleive was part of Fritz's point.

I think it is totally healthy to have discussions and to disagree with each other as hunters.

But I really dislike it when people start with personal attacks and call others liars without bringing proof about it.

We should show each other respect as fellow hunters and members on AR in my opinion.

quote:

I think it is totally healthy to have discussions and to disagree with each other as hunters.

But I really dislike it when people start with personal attacks and call others liars without bringing proof about it.

We should show each other respect as fellow hunters and members on AR in my opinion.

The above is just exactly WHERE we are losing the fight. Too many of our "Dicussions"(???????) turn into blatant attacks, with people making unfounded accusations concerning practically all aspects of another members life and character.

For some reason we do not seem to be able to show each other respect. Unless you have actually met a person and have verifiable proof that they are lying about something, it accomplishes nothing for no one to call them one during a "Discussion".

Insulting a person's intelligence or experience level during a "Discussion" when you have no real personal knowledge about that person, again, does no one any good.

Closing our eyes and pretending that as a group, hunters are united and supportive of each other and each others choices of how to enjoy the sport is pure fantacy.

One thought that keeps surfacing over and over again that some seem to want to ignore or believe does not exist, is that anti-hunters, in spite of their Personal differences as a group, are of one mind set as a group, and that mind set is to get hunting stopped.

Hunters on the other hand cannot look beyond their Personal differences and develope a united front to present their cause effectively to those folks that are in the middle.

quote:

Two minutes later and the in-fighting begins. Point proven Mr Rabe.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Thanks Matt. It took just 2 hours & 38 minutes for you to prove my point!

Well perhaps if people lightened-up a little and didnt take every post so seriously and on face value alone .... discussions wouldnt lead to 'shit-fights'.

Shhhhhh . . . .

Mustn't incite the opposition.

Discussions lead to shit fights when people start using foul language, personal attacks and insults. We also have some people emailing their friends to join in the argumnet & attacks.

Back to the topic - the very nature and principle of a "Pro" group and an "Anti" group are so differnt. The pros have a huge variety of interests and goals that do not converge among most members but the Antis have a limited few negative objectives that are easier to get consensus on.

Ganging up on a common enemy is easy while getting a group excited and motivated about a friend in not easy unless that friend is in trouble.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Thanks Matt. It took just 2 hours & 38 minutes for you to prove my point!

Well perhaps if people lightened-up a little and didnt take every post so seriously and on face value alone .... discussions wouldnt lead to 'shit-fights'.

[quote]Ganging up on a common enemy is easy while getting a group excited and Ganging up on a common enemy is easy while getting a group excited and motivated about a friend in not easy unless that friend is in trouble.quote]

Strange, very strange, Anti Hunters are a common enemy to All Hunters, and All Hunters are in danger of losing the ability to partake in the sport they love.

Isn't it about time to sort of get folks focused on fighting our common enemy???????

I think it is a mistake to say or group all Anti-hunters as the same. They are no more united than we are. They are humans so honestly do you believe they can agree on any significant amount of anything?
And we do not need to persuade them all. We only need to persuade enough of the population to keep hunting open.
I have the misfortune of being saddled with several anti-hunting relatives. Even this small sample does not agree on the basics.
What I have learned is that various hunting activitys are ranked in order of offensiveness. The hot buttons for these individuals are:

1. Unfair/easy hunting methods. Basically the hunt is most offensive when any fat slob can do it. I think if the anti in question couldn't do it, then it's easier to accept.
2. Perceived hunting of a species to extinction. Since they are almost gone/closed, I better go get one. Hell I've personally heard this one from 2 hunters.
3. Perceived lack of interest in helping preserve wild places as truly wild. Apparently they believe too many of us are in this mostly for the competition, bragging rights of saying we killed this or that. They believe they have us on this because of the competitive nature of hunting as expressed by hunting organizations and TV programming, plus the expanding world semi domesticated killing on various Texas style properties in the US and elsewhere.
4. Some have a few animals they do not tolerate any hunting of. My latest run in has to do with my planned Elephant hunt.

This is a sample (not a complete list by any means) of what I have gathered. I note that there is a trend of us supplying the ammo to these people. So I think we need to continue studying these people and find ways to split a significant enough number of them off so that hunting can continue to exist indefinitely.

quote:

I think it is a mistake to say or group all Anti-hunters as the same. They are no more united than we are. They are humans so honestly do you believe they can agree on any significant amount of anything?
And we do not need to persuade them all. We only need to persuade enough of the population to keep hunting open.
I have the misfortune of being saddled with several anti-hunting relatives. Even this small sample does not agree on the basics.
What I have learned is that various hunting activitys are ranked in order of offensiveness. The hot buttons for these individuals are:

Sorry SG, respectfully, I have to disagree with you all the way round.


1. Unfair/easy hunting methods. Basically the hunt is most offensive when any fat slob can do it. I think if the anti in question couldn't do it, then it's easier to accept.
2. Perceived hunting of a species to extinction. Since they are almost gone/closed, I better go get one. Hell I've personally heard this one from 2 hunters.
3. Perceived lack of interest in helping preserve wild places as truly wild. Apparently they believe too many of us are in this mostly for the competition, bragging rights of saying we killed this or that. They believe they have us on this because of the competitive nature of hunting as expressed by hunting organizations and TV programming, plus the expanding world semi domesticated killing on various Texas style properties in the US and elsewhere.
4. Some have a few animals they do not tolerate any hunting of. My latest run in has to do with my planned Elephant hunt.

See all of the stuff you listed are statements HUNTERS themselves make, including yourself. Not ALL hunting in Texas is done as you stated, that is a prejudice on YOUR part.


This is a sample (not a complete list by any means) of what I have gathered. I note that there is a trend of us supplying the ammo to these people. So I think we need to continue studying these people and find ways to split a significant enough number of them off so that hunting can continue to exist indefinitely.

You are not dealing with Anti hunters by any means if they are making comments like the 4 you listed. As I said, the comments you listed are made regularly by Hunter's. anti hunters make no such comments, EVERYTHING they say or do is geared toward stopping hunting.

If anyone tells you that hunting deer is okay but hunting elephants isn't, that does not mean they are an Anti-Hunter, it just means they do not see any reasonm to hunt elephants. anti-Hunter do npot want you/me or ANYONE else hunting ANYTHING.

There is a really big difference between people that do not hunt, people that don't believe some species should be hunted,and real honest to goodness Anti-Hunters.

Not meaning to take you to task on this, but from my perspective of your post, you need to re-evaluate your own perceptions about hunting and Anti-Hunters.

Just like your comments about Texas, have you ever hunted in Texas? Your comment about your upcoming elephant hunt, I see no real sense in killing an elephant with tusks, let alone a tuskless animal.

Do I want to see it stopped, NO. I see no sense in shooting male African lions, regardless of their age. Do I want it stopped, or do I not want it done in a manner that will help the long term ssurvival/conservation of the species so thar future generations can have the chance to hunt them, NO!

Anti-hunters, not non-hunters, people that don't hunt but don't have any problem with those of us that do, want ALL hunting of anything stopped PERIOD. that is their goal. Studying them, trying to reason with them, trying to present them with factual proof about the effects of hunting as a tool to help maintain the health of wild animal population, is about as much use as trying to get the sun to rise in the west and set in the east.

So we disagree.

I define anti hunter as someone who will vote against or take affirmative action against hunting anything. If all we have to concern ourselves with is those who are opposed to every hunt ever, well then I wouldnt be as concerned. You speak as if people are born anti hunters and nothing can be done to change them. They started somewhere short of being your definition of anti hunter.

Why yes I have hunted Texas. (Hill Country) I have also hunted South Africa a couple times.

I never said anything about what every Texan does or did. Maybe a quick re-read and easing up on the sensitivity might help. After all wasn't it your position to support all hunters? Even us evil elephant hunters?

First as for sensitivity, I did not say elephant hunters were evil, you said that. I just said I don't want to shoot one, but if I did it would be a tusked bull, but I don't give an FRA how many elephants of any kind someone else wants to shoot, I support them if that is their thing.

quote:

If all we have to concern ourselves with is those who are opposed to every hunt ever, well then nothing can be done to change them, And We Should Be concerned

There, fixed that for you! Maybe a little bit of reading on the other threads concerning anti-hunters and what their goal is will open your eyes and mind. Try the one about Jolouburn and see how successful people on here were about changing her attitude.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Isn't it about time to sort of get folks focused on fighting our common enemy???????

And exactly how are you accomplishing this goal today, CHC?

Well let see, today, I am trying my best to convince people on this site that trying to reason with the anti hunting forces is not going to accomplish anything.

How about you, what are you doing today to show your support for hunting?

Quote from original poster:We are each his own individual with his own ideas, opinions and believes. We also try and force our own will on everyone with bad results.



Even though you didn't ask....

What I see you doing is tearing apart a community with your holier-than-thou, my way is the only way attitude. You live in an area where you are not exposed to anti-hunters on a frequent basis....I have seen you state such. Yet you are an expert on how everyone else should deal with them. I am sure you are very good at your chosen profession. Dealing with people is not one of your strong suits.

One post you are saying we need to stop the bickering amongst ourselves; and in the next you are all over another member telling him his observations with his own family are wrong.

I know you are very passionate about huntng. I think all of us here are that way.

But you are not winning any hearts and minds.

Me? Well, today I messed up. I responded to your postings and therefore contributed to the in-fighting that you rail against.

Trust me, it won't happen again.

(and why is this in Hunting Reports?)

Good. As for your observations, you are welcome to them as is everyone else on this site.

As for SGOLDS, I merely pointed out that just because someone does not see why a person wants to shoot an elephant, that does not make them an Anti-Hunter.

I do not have a Holier than anyone attitude, and I do have some knowledge about the anti-Hunting movement and the way it thinks, even if I am Texan. Just because the Anti-Hunting movement is not all that strong where I live, does not mean that I am not aware of how thoe folks think and the measures they take to reach their goal.

At no point did I say elephant hunters were evil, those were SGOLD words, not mine.

I do maintain that hunters, that think that the Anti-Hunting element can be reasoned with are misguided and do not really comprehend the situation, just like hunters thinking that anyone that does not hunt is an Anti-Hunter, that i simply not true.

Also, unlike you, who seems to think they speak for everyone, I am only giving my opinions on the subject.

I am not asking anyone to agree with me or even read them and never have. Unlike some folks I do not need or require a support group.

Your accusations are a prime example of why hunters are losing the war. Instead of simply disagreeing with my observations, you go on the attack and make accusations about me, my knowledge of the subject and claim you speak for the membership of AR, which you, nor me, nor anyone including the Moderators and even Saeed can claim to speak for everyone participating on this site. everyone just gives their opinion as they see fit.

That is all I do. Exercise your freedom to ignore me or whatever you choose to do. The fact still remains, anti-Hunter and their goals need to be taken seriously and anyone that thinks those people can be reasoned with are delusional.

Crazy- I think discussion, debate and not hiding our hand in the sand is the only way to go.

In this thread you have criticcized myself and others who think the way I do.

Let's hear your idea, you have told us we are wrong. Let's hear what you do right. Hopefully without profanity............


.

quote:

You are not dealing with Anti hunters by any means if they are making comments like the 4 you listed. As I said, the comments you listed are made regularly by Hunter's. anti hunters make no such comments, EVERYTHING they say or do is geared toward stopping hunting.

quote:

Maybe a little bit of reading on the other threads concerning anti-hunters and what their goal is will open your eyes and mind. Try the one about Jolouburn and see how successful people on here were about changing her attitude.

No point looking at threads i've been in Crazyhorseconsulting as according to your definition i'm not a true anti-hunter since i just want hunting of endangered animals such as the lion stopped!!

And there we go again........

quote:

Crazy- I think discussion, debate and not hiding our hand in the sand is the only way to go.

In this thread you have criticcized myself and others who think the way I do.

Let's hear your idea, you have told us we are wrong. Let's hear what you do right. Hopefully without profanity............

First, show me just exactly where I have criticized you by name J Tex, You can't because I haven't, and not everyone thinks like you or me.

Second, in looking back at the responses I have made in this thread, with the exception of the FRA reference I have not used any profanity and don't intend to.

The only thing I have said and keep saying is for hunters to believe that the anti-hunting forces can be reasoned, is basically pure fantacy. Those folks have a common goal, and that is to stop hunting of any kind. As for disagreeing with yours or anyone else's opinion goes, I am trying to not make it a personal attack.

My reponse to SGOLDS was not an attack. I merely do not agree with his assessment of the situation, and he doe not agree with mine. You and JJBull are the ones trying to make this personal and in doing so only confirm the concept that hunters cannot work together on a common cause.

quote:

No point looking at threads i've been in Crazyhorseconsulting as according to your definition i'm not a true anti-hunter since i just want hunting of endangered animals such as the lion stopped!!

Jolouburn, you are a Classic Anti-Hunter. In fact you are the epitome of the Anti-Hunter at the highest level of the whole concept. You come on here offering an Olive Branch in the guise of only being interested in doing what is best for the Lions, and making statements about not being against ALL Lion Hunting, just Trophy hunting. As has been proven, Trophy hunting for certain age class male lions is beneficial to the continued health of the population if the species is to survive. But that does not matter to you and your kind. You get lion hunting stopped, you will move on to Leopards or Elephant, and unlike the radical element of your movement, you and those like you will continue to peck away, one species at a time.

Jolouburn, you were on here long enough to expose yourself for what you are, so trying to continue to pass yourself off as a "Truly Concerned Individual", has ran its course on this site.

J Tex, your just another example of a hunter that simply cannot set their personal feelings aside and think of the common good. You have some sort of personal problem toward me, and it is your problem, not mine. Put me on ignore or whatever is neccessary to not cause you so much mental anguish.

I am not going to change my opinions because of you or the people like you. I am just as entitled to my opinion as you or anyone else. At least I am realistic enough to state that these are just my opinions, I do not try to convince anyone that I am talking for the entire membership of this site.

Also, nothing changes the fact that hunters cannot set aside personal differences toward fellow hunters they have never even met, long enough to try and combat the anti-forces.