....

[Gener@l Motors]

.....

[This message was edited by «GéNé®@l MøTø®$» on Feb 02, 2001 at 08:12.]

[INF_Neo]

ehm...ya know, I should move this to off-topic. This is not a suggestion for infiltration.

heck, yes, I'll move it

http://members.tripod.de/Buscholl/work2.gif

[Pinky]

"Thought this was a cool gamers thing but is see a lot of creapy highschool shoot out typo's hangin'around this forum. "

And your post's full of them, mate /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
/me goes off to learn Dutch & stop being so ****y

[ThunderChunky]

It's nice that you are generalizing one of many single issue interest groups in the United States as a bunch of whakos. Why don't you start attacking every other opinion one might hold? You can start with me. I'm a pro-life, pro-NRA, anti-Big Government, Evil Right Wing conservative crazy person.

For your information, the NRA is one of the leading RESPONSIBLE AND EFFECTIVE groups when it comes to guns and gun safety. To let your children learn about guns through Hollywood and other fantasies is plain stupid, and the NRA provides a perfect opportunity to help children and adults develop a respect for guns as what they are: at tool which must be used properly.

Or maybe you are generalizing the fact that some people share their problems and joys online. Well, for your information, life does not revolve around the computer and the games you play on it. Why, then, should this message board? Behind each nickname is a real person, each with their own hopes, desires, fears, and pains. The internet, through message boards such as this one, provides a medium where people can discuss problems with relative anonymity. And by doing this, they can get opinions from many different parts of the world, many different religions and philosophies, and many different people they would never otherwise be able to confide in. And by doing this, they might see a solution to their problems they might otherwise never have seen, thereby ELIMINATING the need to go shoot somebody.

Why I wrote this little rant? It is not even half of your general slander of the NRA. It is how you treat people might not have the complete and utterly perfect social skills that you might. Often, I am referred to as anti-social because I choose with whom I associate myself very carefully. That doesn't mean I'm going to go shoot people.

If I just misunderstood you, just contact me, and I will simply reduce this entire post to a smiley face.

-------------------------------------------
Why I post, no one will ever know...

"The most costly of all follies is to believe passionately in the palpably not true. It is the chief occupation of mankind" -H.L. Mencken

http://www.geocities.com/thunderchunky42/thunder0000.jpg

[the real pacman]

So you think I'm a ****ing **** up?

http://www.planetunreal.com/redeemer/images/sig.gif
Sometimes I feel like you want me to fail...

Pacman@planetunreal.com

[Mojo.the.Red]

Quite right ThunderChunky. Let's face it, the only way you can get rid of stupidity is through education. You think the NRA supported Columbine, you twit? I don't think so. The NRA's platform is education and safety. This whole "out of site, out of mind" idea of the government to pretend guns don't exist and thus put the responsibility of blame on guns and not the twits who don't know what tools of great power are for is the most juvenile thing in the world. Should we sue car manufacturers and blame the AAA/CAA every time a drunk teenager kills somebody with their parents trendy SUV? That's apparently your platform.

But, then again, I'm not really suprised that some mis-educated, malformed twit comes along spouting his opinion without researching his topics

http://badmojojacket.homestead.com/files/bmj.gif

[Goat Fucker]

U said it bro, school kids are all evil, we must kill´em all.
First thing monday i´ll visit the local school and bring mister AK too.
ARE U ALL WITH ME!

Bah, wankers....dont have the balls huh!

http://baphometsplace.homestead.com/files/gfsig3.jpg
HEAD SLAYER GOAT of the Black Hand BMA tribe.

[ThunderChunky]

No. I am about as f'ked up as it comes, with my own set of problems. I just took a little bit of offense at the starter of the topic's attitude. I am sorry if I offended you, MegaMan, it was not the intent.

Otherwise... Nothing more to add.

-------------------------------------------
Why I post, no one will ever know...

"The most costly of all follies is to believe passionately in the palpably not true. It is the chief occupation of mankind" -H.L. Mencken

http://www.geocities.com/thunderchunky42/thunder0000.jpg

[Gryphon]

You know what guys? I heard there were as many deaths from high school football in 1999 as there were from school gun deaths in the same year (15). Since this incredible loss of life of our CHILDREN is unacceptable I propose the following recommendations:

- registration of all high school football players, and they must pass a competency test before they can play

- ban all footballs larger than 10", and make a law stating they must be made of a soft material

- all football must become non-contact to avoid injuries; any accidental contact will be treated as assault and the offender prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law

This is just the first step in banning high school football outright. This dangerous and pointless activity must be brought to a stop, for the CHILDREN.

You're all with me, right? /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

http://members.home.net/unrealtournament/forumsig.jpg

[the real pacman]

I hate football, the less jocks the better!

http://www.planetunreal.com/redeemer/images/sig.gif
Sometimes I feel like you want me to fail...

Pacman@planetunreal.com

[Gener@l Motors]

So, i see i kicked a few legs in my posting. Sorry folks, but i entirely dissagre with u that "education" is the key. Why do children have to come near firearms anyway ? U all feel so insecure that u have the need to carry a 357 ?

U prob. don't believe it, but i was like u guys once...(on the gun thing that is). During my military service i was in Busovaca, central Bosnia for 8 mnds. during the fall of Srebrenica i was on "iron bridge", the last bridge on the supply route. i was on mount Igman during the liberation of Sarajevo. My point is, i seen my share of horror, and believe me, there is no weapon that will save u when someone really wants to kill you. Only a government with weapons is capable of protecting you.

That's the main reason why we have different opinions. The U.S. is basicly not a democracy but a plutocracy. That's why the peeps feel the need to protect themselves. It's a sorry situation and a ticking timebomb for the american peeps. (Wow i typed timebomb, this message will probably be intercepted by your N.S.A. !!)

Sorry for the bad english folks, it is not my native language.

Mario /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[This message was edited by Gener@l Motors on Nov 04, 2000 at 05:02.]

[the real pacman]

I guess we are all stupid then...

http://www.planetunreal.com/redeemer/images/sig.gif
Sometimes I feel like you want me to fail...

Pacman@planetunreal.com

[Gryphon]

Only a government with weapons can protect me!? That has got to be the most naive thing I've ever read on this forum. Let me get this straight, according to you if a 6 foot 5, 350 lb. cocaine-spiked home invader fresh out on parole is trying to bust into my apartment, the government will be there with their M16's to protect me? I see. Whew, I feel much safer now. /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

You're right, if someone wants to kill me bad enough there's not much I can do to stop them. But does that mean I'm going to comply like a good little victim and go down without a fight? F*ck no. You go ahead and live your life without the protection of a firearm, but me, I'd prefer to be judged by twelve than be carried by six.

http://members.home.net/unrealtournament/forumsig.jpg

[DeadeyeDan[ToA]]

Amen, Gryphon... a few more things

"Why do children have to come near firearms anyway ?"

I don't know, but nobody has the power to stop that from happening altogether. Not governments, not parents, nobody. The only thing anyone can do is make sure they don't do any harm when dangerous situations arise.

"Sorry folks, but i entirely dissagre with u that "education" is the key."

I'm sorry, GM, but it's the only way. In 23 days I'll be 17 years old (I'm legally a minor). I know the difference between right and wrong, I know the cardinal rules of gun safety, and I know how guns work and what they are capable of. I also have access to a gun, and I could take it, and over 1,000 rounds of ammo out of the house and drive away with it in my jeep, and there's nothing my parents or anybody else could do about it. Even if guns were illegal and my parents didn't own any, I could still get them (and/or as much drugs as I could carry) illegally from gangs in the area (members of which I know by attending public schools). But, because of all those things my parents taught me, I will never, EVER kill or hurt an innocent person with a firearm- it's that simple.

"U all feel so insecure that u have the need to carry a 357 ?"

"Only a government with weapons is capable of protecting you."

Fact: People in the US use firearms to defend themselves over 2 million times a year.
Fact: Defending ones self with a firearm against an aggressor in the US is statistically safer than both using anything else (fists, pepper spray, a stun gun) for defense, and not resisting at all.
Fact: The average police response time to a 911 call in the US is over 30 minutes.

Oh yea, but you're right, even though the kids of those 2 million people have a better chance of choking do death on a plastic toy wrapping than killing themselves with a gun, we should force those 2,000,000 a year to just wait for the police while criminals rob/maim/rape/kill them.

_______________________
Shot four puppet governors in a line,
Shook all tha world bankers, who think they can rhyme,
Shot the landlords, who knew it was mine,
Yes, its a war from the depth of time!

[This message was edited by DeadeyeDan[ToA] on Nov 04, 2000 at 15:31.]

[Snakeye]

I agree that you don't have a chance to survive if an army comes along and you have only a .357 to protect you; but that's not what such weapons are for.
Sure, the government can protect you from an invading army(or not) with it's own army. Sure, the government can protect you from a murderer by arresting him, but then he already has killed someone.
In fact a weapon, in untrained hands, is more dangerous than helpful - but with training, it might be the item to save your life.
The main problem with guns - and especially with guns in the US - is, that many have no idea how to handle one.
Examples of careless handling of guns, that lead to accidents are masses - I especially like the one from that sucker, who left a loaded winchester in his bedroom, and then wondered why his son accidentially shot his daughter(she survived it..); then that stupid ******* blamed it on the gun.

In fact an organization like the NRA is more important than ever, since most people think that guns handle just like in movies, and that might prove lethal.

I might not be from the US, I might not have seen a war, but I still don't think banning guns helps anything. Except you want to end up in the 3rd Reich - there guns were banned.

Snakeye /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
(note: I don't say that countries that ban guns are like the 3rd, I just say they might become like..)

anything you do can get you killed, including doing nothing

[Mojo.the.Red]

The only point I agree with you on is that democracy does not exist in the United States and that it is, in fact, a plutocracy.

Otherwise, if we take away all the guns, what government will have the weapons to protect us? Should we solely rely on the government, just a mass propaganda machine, to actually lend us these weapons?

Will the governments care about a black family in white country, governed by WASP old money? 41 shots? Police raid wrong home? Rodney King? I don't trust that government anymore than I trust a pig to fly.

If we outlaw guns, we give them a rebel image -- kids will naturally gravitate to them more. And by outlawing them, we won't talk about them with our kids. Why would we feel the need? Do we honestly talk to them about drugs, or prostitution? Nope, not here anyways. But we do talk to them about drinking, sex, driving, and other legal things that can carry heavy, heavy risks. And it actually does help educate our children -- not all of them, but enough to save those smart enough to listen (and do we really care about the stupid ones who won't listen?)

If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns. I should be, and am, allowed to legally purchase a firearm. I believe firearms are tools of survival. They should be used to protect ones self, ones home, or to get one's food. They should never be touched or pointed in times of anger. They should be used with only enough force to do just the amount of damage needed. If you're hunting food, then you need to kill it. If a crazed man breaks into your house, then you can stop him without killing him. And that kind of knowledge comes only through proper education and respect for tools of great power.

Let's face it. People who want to commit criminal murder, commit criminal armed robbery, commit criminal kidnappings, commit criminal rape, will still be able to get weapons through criminal channels, whether the guns are outlawed or not. They will wantonly do so, as well, since what thief worth his salt would use a gun registered to him? Therefore, I want an even playing field. Its not paranoia. The chances of it happening to me are slim for sure, but they're not nil. Which is enough of a reason to be prepared for it in any event. Sure, a gun can't save my life in all circumstances, but if I'm going to die, I'd at least want to die knowing I fought to live than die quietly and complacently

http://badmojojacket.homestead.com/files/bmj.gif

[Snakeye]

As usual you summed up the feelings and thoughts of most in a very good way.

Though I have to disagree with you in one point:
Using a gun only to the necessairy extend is pure fiction. You might be able to disable someone without killing him, but doing that in real life is often enough impossible.

Snakeye /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

anything you do can get you killed, including doing nothing

[Goat Fucker]

Yeah, id rather kill the basterd so he doesent come back from jail with a hart full of hatred, and a mind for payback!

http://baphometsplace.homestead.com/files/gfsig3.jpg
HEAD SLAYER GOAT of the Black Hand BMA tribe.

[Hodag]

Adam Coleman---Life Member since 1984

Adam C.
--A good AMR can be
your best friend...--

[Mojo.the.Red]

I hope you never piss anybody off, Hodag, because you just posted your first and last name along with your city and state.

Shouldn't do that, man.

http://badmojojacket.homestead.com/files/bmj.gif

[Goat Fucker]

Yeah, with pcycos like me around, u can never be too carefull!

http://baphometsplace.homestead.com/files/gfsig3.jpg
HEAD SLAYER GOAT of the Black Hand BMA tribe.

[Gryphon]

At work, we carry guns for self-defense. A lot of people seem to think that we're trained to shoot for the kneecaps, the hands, the legs, or somewhere where we can incapacitate an attacker without killing him. Apparently all those people have NEVER fired a gun, and certainly not while simultaneously staring down the barrel of one.

In the middle of a gunfight, there is NO WAY you will be able to hit someone in the leg or arm intentionally, unless you're one HELL of a shot. Chances are you're not. When we're trained to defend ourselves with firearms, we're trained to KILL. If you want to be politically correct, we're trained to STOP. But since that usually means putting six 125 grain Gold Dot hollowpoints into someone's chest, I take that to mean killing.

Hopefully I never have to do that. Sure, it's sorta glamorous and exciting to dream about it, but something like that will be on your conscience FOREVER. I could probably justify it in my mind easily, since unless the person I killed wasn't putting my life or someone else's in immediate and serious danger, I wouldn't have fired. But also the legal process you have to go through is EXTREMELY distasteful; just ask anyone who's ever been through it. You WILL be charged with murder or manslaughter, and the onus is on YOU and your defense team to prove it otherwise.

Hopefully that clears up some misconceptions about 'shooting to wound'.

http://members.home.net/unrealtournament/forumsig.jpg

[Gener@l Motors]

[Gener@l Motors]

/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[shan]

<font color="#F9C700">In my opinion, education is the answer to solving the gun problems in school. The problem is that we should not just be teaching the kids, we should be teaching the parents as well. There were a lot of warning signs with all of those kid-shooters, the parents just did not recognize them or chose to ignore them.

In addition, I say we take all the money we are spending to investigate and enforce the banning of firearms and the money the NRA spends to campaign against it and invest in metal detectors and cops for schools.

And then we shoot make it a practice to prosecute parents who leave firearms unlocked and/or within easy reach of children. The parents should be charged for what the children commit if the children commit the crime with their parents weapon. There is no excuse for not keeping your guns out of your kids hands...unless they are using them WITH your supervision.

Bans suck because I, for one, will feel much more comfortable when I have my Glock next to my bed at night (have not bought it yet...soon). The world is not safe these days. /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Shan

<font color="#F9C700">Quit playing with yourself...come play with us.
Infiltration 2.8 Servers On-line soon.


<a href="http://www.sgservers.com"><img border="0" src="http://www.sgservers.com/images/title_sm.gif"></a></p>

[Snakeye]

Nonviolence..nice.
In fact I try to get into as few violent situations as possible - as do most of us, I suppose. We also have to admit, that nonviolence has achieved some great victories, as in India; but still there were many people killed until India was free, so I wouldn't totally call it a nonviolent process.

I think the main problem is, that violence is part of the human nature itself. Man was born as a partial hunter, and every hunter has some kind of instinc to kill. Of course one could claim that in the centuries gone by, this instinct has faded, but taking a look around I suppose it has not.

Most 'orthodox' nonviolent people make one mistake: they suppose since they won't hurt anyone, every other man could do the same. Since I believe I would hurt someone, if I'm in danger and had the possibility to defend myself, whether or not with firearms, I suppose anybody else in this world would do so - same generalization as before, but the other way round.

I guess violence will stay a problem for the next decades/centuries, and as long as it is, I guess I'll feel better with something to defend myself, hoping never to be in any situation, which brings up the need to do so.

Snakeye /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

anything you do can get you killed, including doing nothing

[Mojo.the.Red]

Gryphon, you'd be surprised how easy it is not to kill somebody with a gun. Of course you're not going to aim for the hands or knees (they're smaller targets then the head, which is small on its own) but you're going to go for the target's centre mass. To actually kill the target, you'd need a good heart shot, one good enough to collapse a valve or chamber, one to the liver, good enough to destroy the whole thing (have you ever seen what happens to blood if your liver gets destroyed, btw? Its sick, it turns almost black and oil like in thickness), or, you'd have to collapse both lungs, since the person can live long enough on one lung to get repaired, or sever the spinal column high enough to kill them, otherwise they'll just be paralyzed from x (where x is the region/region number down).

Of course, if you're a good shot, you should be shooting just under the sternum so the passes happily under the breastbone and travels into the best kill zone -- even then, there's a likelihood that the person may not die. And since you are trained to stop, you're going to have somebody call 911 at that point, and attempt to secure him and his weapon. You're NOT going to walk up to him and pump round after round into him

http://badmojojacket.homestead.com/files/bmj.gif

[Gryphon]

What? I'm not supposed to keep plugging his limp ass after it's bleeding all over the pavement? Damn. /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://members.home.net/unrealtournament/forumsig.jpg

[Mojo.the.Red]

DIE BIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATCH! DIE DIE DIE!

Yeah... your defence team would have a helluva time with that one.

http://badmojojacket.homestead.com/files/bmj.gif

[Zundfolge]

Ah yes, Mohatma Gandhi , the prince of non violent resistance.

He was indeed a great man, who did much for his people, and here's what he has to say...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Where the choice is between only violence and cowardice, I would advise violence. [/quote]

and this one too...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.
from "Gandhi, An Autobiography", M. K. Gandhi, page 446 [/quote]

Gener@l Motors, you are an ass.

Not for having anti-gun or pro-gun control beilefs, but for coming here with a piss poor excuse for an argument.

You basicaly said that if one has anti-guncontrol beliefs, and support the National Rifle Association, that they are defacto supporters of the sh.ts that shoot up schools. And furthermore that if you are under 18 and have these beliefs that you are predesposed to homicidal (or even masshomicidal) tendencies.

Who's the reactionary here?

Then you try to direct us to some page on non violence (and flutes??).
Jesus man, how freakin hard is UBB code?

So are you trying now; after irrationaly pointing fingers, calling names and resorting to hyperbole, to actualy attempt a real dialog?

Give me a fukcing break /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

http://home.kscable.com/biles/ZundSig2.gif

[Goat Fucker]

No, Gener@l Motors is right, the majority of us here are school shooters, we´ve astablished that ouerselves.

Yes indeed, alot of us were black clothes and even trenchcoats, most of us have only a small group of freinds with whome we are clouse, and yes, we like guns too.

We fit the bill exactly, ouer desciptiom hangs next to the emergance fire drills on most any school.

Now its up to the govenment to save the world from the evil that is us, how could we be anything but evil!

"BAH!"

http://baphometsplace.homestead.com/files/gfsig3.jpg
HEAD SLAYER GOAT of the Black Hand BMA tribe.

[Mojo.the.Red]

Flutes?

http://badmojojacket.homestead.com/files/bmj.gif

[Casull]

Why do we always assume that one owns a gun for self defense? There's an awful lot of hunting and target competition happening in the US.

Regarding hunting, Mojo - correct me if the news report was skewed - but I saw recently that `gun control' in Canada has reduced the number of licensed hunters from 500,000 odd to just over 100,000, and the increasing wildlife numbers are becoming a problem.

As for anything else, try this on for size: It's my right to own guns, and I want to. That's all. What's more, I don't want your approval, and I sure as hell don't need to justify myself.

http://glock.tiw.net/alex/casull_inf.jpg

[Mojo.the.Red]

That's the spirit, Casull.

Besides, I'm all for hunting. I love hunting. The idea of killing my own food (and killing it more humanely than slaughter house conditions, at that) is very appealing to me, and some of the meat from wild animals is just great. Bear meat is especially good. If you cook bear steaks, they come out like a mix of cow and jerked meat.

I think, however, killing animals for sport is just as vile as killing another animal for sport -- people.

Saying that a shooting competition is bad is like saying that ping pong is bad. Sure, you could accidentally shoot somebody with a gun during a competition, but the ping pong ball can get lodged down somebody's throat. There's always an idiot factor and a safety factor in any sport. That's just the risk you take when you manipulate the physical world for fun.

I'm not to sure where you saw this about hunters dropping from half a million to a hundred thousand... there's WAY more registered hunters in Ontario alone than half a million. And there's a helluva lot of bow hunters

http://badmojojacket.homestead.com/files/bmj.gif

[Casull]

I think it was a Peter Jennings report, and it's highly likely that I remembered the wrong number of zeros. But I think it was that ratio.

All that "I've seen the horrors of war, and so you shouldn't have guns" bollocks gets me all riled up. It's a good thing I'm on a fairly even keel, what with all the evil guns in my house. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Anyway, one of the meatiest pro-gun propaganda statements I've seen in a while was on a T-shirt I saw a woman wearing the other day. It said:

"I wasn't raped. I was armed."

I love that s.hit.

http://glock.tiw.net/alex/casull_inf.jpg

[Zundfolge]

Casull, you should go here, you'll dig it

http://www.a-human-right.com/

http://home.kscable.com/biles/ZundSig2.gif

[Doccers]

Where Gener@l Motors is coming from, tho.

He's in the Netherlands, a company that's been Steamrolled twice in the last century. Of course he's going to dislike weapons. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I wanna be an elven ranger, I want a life that's full of danger,

[robbc]

Being from the UK where gun control is not really an issue I sort of understand where Gernera@l Motors is coming from. But he should understand that without Gun’s people would just start using something else to obtain their goals, a la knives. Knives are easily concealed brutal and available over the counter in almost every country in the world. Sure they are also a very important tool in many trades (I own a few myself and do not want to see them banned) but people will always abuse whatever resources are at hand, there are crazy people everywhere not just in the US. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[the real pacman]

Hunting is fun, Fishing is boring, but use a bow. Then see how much you can kill. If you take a shotgun and unload it on a flock of geese, you are going to hit some, while if you use a bow, you will be lucky to hit anything. Its a matter of skill. There is no skill hunting geese with a shotgun.

http://www.planetunreal.com/redeemer/images/sig.gif
Sometimes I feel like you want me to fail...

Pacman@planetunreal.com

[Zundfolge]

Fishing is fun with a bow.

but regular old fishing has nothing to do with catching fish, it's about drinking beer and hanging out with your buds.

http://home.kscable.com/biles/ZundSig2.gif

[DeadeyeDan[ToA]]

"There is no skill hunting geese with a shotgun."

Hmm, well I've never hunted geese, but if they are anything like ducks (which I'm pretty sure they are), that's not true.

The ways I am challenged when hunting duck in Arizona are as follows:

1. Finding ducks: This can be a problem in Arizona when it doesn't get cold or wet enough during the season. Because I have almost 10 years of experience hunting the tanks (ponds with embankments) around Tombstone, I can usually find a few tanks to jump that have ducks on them, but there is no certainty. When it comes down to it, I am at the mercy of the weather.

2. Jumping the tanks: Even if you can locate a tank with ducks on it, they'll hear you and be scared off if you just drive up to the embankment. You have to park the vehicle a good distance back, get the shotgun(s) out of the back, and walk as quietly as you can to the tank. You have to listen as well, because you can hear the ducks lifting off of the water if they are spooked- if that happens you jump the tank then and hope to get a shot while they're still in range. When you reach the tank, you find good spots on the embankment that you can go up without slipping or finding your shot blocked by trees, coordinate the jump with anybody else you're hunting with, and then run up the slope (worrying about your gun safety, the ducks, and the ground beneath you all at the same time.

3. Assessing targets: You can't just start blasting away at anything that moves- you have to first assess that 1) It's a safe shot, 2) It's a duck, 3) It's in range, and 4) You have room for it on your liscences. Not only do you have a total duck limit per liscence per day, some of the individual types of duck have their limits (for instance, it's usually 2 mallards per liscence per day, only one of which can be female).

4. Shooting: On the average shot, the size of the spread is slightly larger than the duck's wingspan when it gets to him, and ducks are fairly tough- you're gonna have to put most of the pellets on him to take him down, esp. with mallards and such. Accuracy definately matters against duck. In order to shoot accurately, you have to take into account both the distance, speed, and angle of the duck's flight, and lead off (aim ahead of the target) accordingly. If you just aim directly at him the duck will probably be gone by the time the shot gets there, and you'll have missed by as many as 5 feet. You also need to control your breathing, learn to correctly hold off (wait until the duck comes to your point of aim) or track (move your gun with the duck as it flies), and squeeze the trigger evenly instead of jerking it. All things considered, doing this with a bow and arrow would be pretty damned impossible. You also can't legally hunt any birds in Arizona with a gun capable of holding more than 3 shells- if your gun does you need to get a plug to limit the magazine capacity to 2 (+1 in the chamber makes 3). And lastly, on the rare occasions that some dumbass teal stays on the water instead of flying, we wait or scare it up before we shoot- shooting a non-moving bird with a shotgun is like taking candy from a baby.

5. Recovering ducks: Sometimes you have a dog with you, which makes this step alot easier, but that's not always an option. Like I said, ducks are tough, and if you just wing them and they land on solid ground, they will give you a run for your money through the thickest brush available. We've spent as much as an hour searching for wounded ducks without a dog- it's kind of a downer to know you've ruined the duck's life but let it die a slow death, so we've never given up as of yet.

6. Tracking: The ducks that got away will be much too far to see by the time you get back to your vehicle, so you'll have to watch as the ducks fly off and guess where they're going (again, if you don't know the area you could have quite a bit of trouble here).

Well, that's it. There obviously are ways to hunt more sportingly (waiting for birds to fly, etc), and downright unfair ways to "hunt" (killing animals that are in fenced in areas of countryside and are practically domesticated), but generalizing all waterfowl shotgun hunting as requiring no skill isn't accurate.

(WHEW! *inhales slowly*)

_______________________
In Orwell's hell, a terror era comin through,
but this little brother, is watching you too.

[This message was edited by DeadeyeDan[ToA] on Nov 08, 2000 at 02:22.]

[Mojo.the.Red]

Indeed. I've done all sorts of hunting (note to any hunting enthusiasts in the United States: Canada has EXCELLENT game, should drive north, the bastards grow huge up here, especially in Quebec.)

I've gone deer hunting (my particular favorite, as it is very hard to do properly, deer can run damn fast, even when wounded... you actually feel that even though you're the one with the gun and the binocular vision, you're in for a real fight for your meat) as well as duck hunting. Its fair to say shooting fowl with a shotgun doesn't require as much skill as, say, knocking the bird out of the air with a rock, but its still a damn tough job. Hitting something with a spread weapon like a shotgun is harder than it seems. For obvious reasons, a shotgun SUCKS at long range. The pellets lose velocity fast, and are to spread out to cause serious damage. As a matter of fact, shooting at a duck (or any fowl) when they are in full flight and actually bagging it (with anything less than a flak gun) is nearly impossible... only one or two pellets may make contact, and in the event that they do, they'll have lost so much kinetic energy that they'll be the equivalent of somebody throwing a .50 BMG shell at your head. Big in relation to your body, sure, but its not going to do alot of damage. You may get some sort of small bruise if you're a hemophiliac.

I can't see why people whine and cry about hunting with guns. You see all these vegetarian idiots (when I say this I refer to people who don't eat meat because its murder, rather hypocritical considering they have no problem killing plants, which are living things, or swatting flies, which are also animals -- something they conveniently "forget" from biology class. People who don't eat meat cause they don't like the taste, that's fine by me.) Anyways, you see all these vegans going "but that's not fair." Well, there's two problems with that statement. One, man is a tool using animal. If they want "fair", they should go break all the thumbs on every chimpanzee they see, too. They use tools as well. Two, as a tool using animal, man is an omnivorous predator. Therefore, we prey on things with the advantage of ours tools. Every animal has a strength and weakness. Our strength is our ability to use advanced tools logically and intuitively. Our weakness is we're very frail if put toe-to-toe with another animal.

That, sir, is very fair.

Besides, hunting is the best form of conservation

http://badmojojacket.homestead.com/files/bmj.gif

[Goat Fucker]

I love hunting, i do i little fesan hunting now and then with my HUGE air rifle, but i only kill one fesan each time, and i allways eat what i catch (IMO, if u kill it and dont eat it, youre a frag).

The only way i can ever kill such an animal is fruw the use of tools, theres no way im gonna out run it, and im sertanly not gonna out fly it!
The only way is to use a gun/bow or traps (i hate traps so thats not an option for me).

I have yet to shame shoot an animal, and hope to never do so.

Imo, hunting is only bad if u do it for the rong purpose, hunting is a sport today, u could allways go down to the local supermarked and buy something to eat. But hunting is also more than a sport, its about reconecting youreself with youre roots, a real hunter respects his prey, and only takes that shot if he is sertain that it´ll kill it, its about moral, the hunter has meny moral codexes he lives by, and he will use half a day tracking a shame shot animal.
If u dont see any of thease things in hunting, u´re not a hunter, so put youre weapon back in youre truck an take it to the range.

http://baphometsplace.homestead.com/files/gfsig3.jpg
HEAD SLAYER GOAT of the Black Hand BMA tribe.

[Mojo.the.Red]

Goat, let me tell you something

A blind man cannot see the colour of our skin. He cannot see if we pierce our bodies. He cannot see if we tattoo them. A blind man cannot see if we are crippled. A blind man can only see our actions, and judge us based on those. In that, I envy the blind -- for they see more than you or I ever will.

When you first came to these forums, you apologized many times for your broken english. You speak better my mother tongue better than I could speak yours. Man, the clarity with which you speak, the purity of the message, is only enhanced by that wonderful will of yours to strive to communicate.

It never ceases to amaze me

http://badmojojacket.homestead.com/files/bmj.gif

[I_ABuGa]

Its funny that megaman commented on duck hunting with shotguns as not having skill. Where I live, we have a crow problem. Open garbage bins, clogged drains and such has created a boom in the crow population. Our [sarcasm] beloved town planning office (those with more fluent malay please correct me - Majlis Perbandaran) believes that makin it open season on crows would help. Its like a dollar a crow or something besides base fee. The hunters use shotguns, 12 gauge at that, and at the end of the day they barely have any kills.

Anywho, living in a country where its darned difficult to obtain guns and knowing lots of world history, i can understand why some people are pro guns and others not. Its not only culture, its upbringing, education, environment etc etc. In the end it depends on the right and desire of a person to own a gun, and to know the responsibilities of that tool, to be responsible for its keeping and its use. The irresponsible use of the tool called gun is the main cause of all those problems arising today. Thus i definitely agree with education and I do think that licensing is a good idea. We license people to drive cars, start companies, live in a country etc etc. after all.

[Lord_Bunker]

you don't have to eat what you kill. here in kansas there's such a thing as farmkill. if it's not endangered and it's bothering your livestock you can kill it but you gotta leave it lie.

so, if you got coyotes after your cattle what do you do. you go out one the back poarch and shoot'em. i've never eaten a coyote and the idea dosn't appeal very much to me either. so if people who don't eat everything they shoot are frags then i guess you eat dogs and skunks and everyother vermin.

but, before somebody bites my head of. this isn't exactly hunting. it's serving a purpose though. going out just for the fun of shooting is poaching. (except for coyotes in my county where you can still take their ears to the court house for a bounty.)

guns are very important for farmers. I've known people who've had several calves killed by wild dogs and coyotes. what esle would you do with these animals, beat them with a stick.

Lord Bunker
Ruler of The Bunkvanian Empire
"only the first shot truly matters, everything else is just a waste of paint."

[Zundfolge]

Hey Lord Bunker, Which part of KS you from?
I'm stuck here in Wichita /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif (still ploting my escape to the rarified air of the Rocky Mountains)

I remember hunting rabbits as a kid, both with a bow and a .22. Those where some fun times /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I also remember shooting rats in my grandmothers barn (she lived on a farm outside of Burton) I got a quarter a piece for them. Anyway, usualy I'd use the .22, but one time I got my hands on my aunt's boyfriend's .3006. Got 2 rats before I realized that blowing holes in the wall of the barn was a bad idea (plus when you vaporize the rat, you don't get paid for them)

http://home.kscable.com/biles/ZundSig2.gif

[Mojo.the.Red]

On the coyote thing:

As much as coyotes have the right to live and feed, so do humans. If coyotes are endagering the human stock of food, it becomes an immediate fight for survival.

And, in that case, may the best species win. You'll never stop the coyotes, ever. You'll drive them back, for sure, but when they get low in population, the cattle population will grow -- and create more food for the coyotes to grow tougher on. Grow larger numbers. Protecting your source of food isn't WRONG. Plenty of animals protect their kills until they're all eaten, and leave the scraps to the all-important carrion eaters, who accelerate the process of breaking down their bodies -- we just happen to protect our kills before they're actually dead.

Nothing wrong with that at all

http://badmojojacket.homestead.com/files/bmj.gif

[Lord_Bunker]

i told you they have a obunty. been that way since the turn of the century. there's obviosly still a problem with them. skunks are also a prob. number 1 carrier of rabies in kansas. my neighbor started up his tractor to find 11 under the bushhog. I usually use my bbgun. i've droped a coyote or 2 with it. trick is you have to hit them deadon in the ear or my fav. the eye. and pellets don't do ****. need the extra penetration of a bb. somebody wanted to know where i'm from. I'm from Linn county. I'm not claiming a town. I'm currently at KSU.

Lord Bunker
Ruler of The Bunkvanian Empire
"only the first shot truly matters, everything else is just a waste of paint."

[Gener@l Motors]

Steamrolled twice? Hmm. Thought the Netherlands where neutral during WO 1.

We actually made pretty good money as well selling ammo to da Brits, Germs and the garlicbreaths.

[Goat Fucker]

Thanks Mojo, i dident know anyone cared at all!
How long has that message been there, i allmost feel ashame not seeing it sooner.

Anyways, just to clearify my opinion.
Im not talking about shooting vermain or predetors preying on youre livestock, thats ok IMO.

Im talking about the "hunters" who shoot everything in sight, be it small or big, stacks it in a pile and takes a photo of it, and leaves it to decay!
If u go hunting, u should goddamn eat what u shoot, or give youre kill to someone who will.
When u just go hunting for kills, youre doing it for the "rong reason", then its just to went steam and release agresion, u can do that at the range withot killing anything!

IMO, the only time a kill is justifyable, is when its done to save youre ass (or someone elses), or for food.
Obviously theres greyzones in this philosofy, but thats were ones interlect should take over!

http://baphometsplace.homestead.com/files/gfsig3.jpg
All hail the PRF!