NJ Forbids Youths to Participate in Bear Hunt

[Superfly]

Link

<snip>

Today, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) began informing the parents of 278 young hunters that their children will not be allowed to participate in the upcoming black bear hunt. All of the youth have bear hunting tags and have attended a half-day class to prepare for the hunt. (read: all of the children have gone through all of the appropriate and mandatory training classes and licensing.)

The DEP told several parents that the prohibition was issued to prevent children from being confronted by animal rights protestors that have been threatening to disrupt the hunt.

<snip>

So the reason NJ is preventing young hunters from participating in this hunt (even with their parents' supervision, when applicable) is because of the criminal activities of people who want to disrupt the hunt.

Things in italics added by yours truly.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CO Liberal]

2. Or In Other Words......

...anti-hunting protesters legally exercising their First Amendment rights are (in your eyes) criminals.

Did I get that right?

[Superfly]

3. Interfering with the lawful pursuit of game is a crime.

...

Edited for spelling.

[CO Liberal]

5. Let Me Get This Straight

A bunch of people carrying picket signs in a parking lot where the hunters set off from is "interfering with the lawful pursuit of game"?

I'm sorry you feel the Second Amendment is so much more important than the First.......

[Superfly]

6. Yes it is, when that picketing and protesting

prevents the youths in question from participating in a legal hunt.

[MrBenchley]

10. Hell, shooting off guns is more important than

breathing to the RKBA crowd..as we've seen they'll regurgitate any absurdity, defend any scumbag, or show contempt for any principle in pursuit of their fetish.


<sarcasm>Being publicly critical of the racist NRA's propaganda proposal is brutally trampling THEIR first amendment rights (and their COLLECTIVE rights, at that) but letting the majority of New Jerseyans have their public say on a matter that concerns New Jerseyans is a federal crime...</sarcasm>

[Superfly]

12. Don't get mad at me...it's the LAW of New Jersey

that interfering with the lawful pursuit of game is a crime.

[MrBenchley]

14. Really, fly?

A few posts back you were claiming it was a Federal crime...now it's only a state law...

[Superfly]

16. I claimed that where?

Are you putting words in my mouth?

[Mikimouse]

23. Saw it prior to the edit

n/t

[MrBenchley]

25. Says it all, doesn't it?

[Superfly]

28. Says what? What are YOU trying to say?

...

[alwynsw]

Gee, Benchy, isn't that the reason for the edit option?

We're only human. Humans make mistakes. But then, I suppose you've never inserted an inadvertent word, comma, or typo in a post.

I didn't see the post in question before the edit, but if the word Federal was there before, it's not there now. It's the final version of the post that should stand for praise or criticism, not an evident misstatement, misspelling, or other flawed comment that the poster saw fit to fix.

[Name removed]

114. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Superfly]

116. First of all, CO

please, a little respect, eh? Stop trying to call me dishonest. I've already alerted the mods (who seem to be a little slow this AM) to the first time you did that.

Second, regardless of what word was in there, I realized my mistake, removed it, and based my entire argument on that statement (sans "federal").

You are really grasping at straws if you are attempting to discredit my entire argument because of a word that appeared in a reply for 30 seconds.

Brian

[CO Liberal]

118. Oh, Puh-Lease, Brian

Second, regardless of what word was in there, I realized my mistake, removed it, and based my entire argument on that statement (sans "federal").

You are really grasping at straws if you are attempting to discredit my entire argument because of a word that appeared in a reply for 30 seconds.

Look at the time marks on your original post, Brian. You orignally posted #3 at 6:05 AM, then edited it at 6:37. Many of us saw that post before you edited it. You added a note that said "edited for spelling", but did NOT indicate that you also corrected the information in the post. Later, when someone questioned your statement about a federal crime, you acted like you didn't know what they were talking about, and accused another poster of putting words in your mouth.

On balance, does this seem dishonest to you? It does to me, Brian.

[MrBenchley]

120. We could also mention

the elected/appointed fish and game officials later downt he thread if we felt like it...

[alwynsw]

126. I was going to say that!

But you did it so well!

[MrBenchley]

24. Edited on Wed Dec-10-03 08:13 AM by Superfly

[Superfly]

26. Edited to say what?

nt

[CO Liberal]

43. Edited To Take Out "Federal"

You said you edited it for spelling. But I saw the original post before I left the house this morning - you originally said it was a federal crime.

We caught you, Superfly.....

[Superfly]

44. I edited for both spelling and content

BEFORE anybody had a chance to respond to it. I could find no evidence that it was a federal crime, only that anti-hunter harassment laws exist in 48 states, including New Jersey.

So, what's the rule...you can't edit your posts for non-accurate information?

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CO Liberal]

121. Looks Like It Was Edited More Than Once

Right?

[Superfly]

128. So the hell what?

What are you implying? Please see the PM I sent you.

[Name removed]

129. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[alwynsw]

148. I never shoot off guns

I shoot guns, but shooting off of them is precarious and uncomfortable.

Or were you referring to catapulting rifles and handguns?

[MrBenchley]

4. Yup...

And "bear" in mind that the vast majority of New Jerseyans are OPPOSED to this hunt...

[Superfly]

7. So what?

For all their bitching, whining and moaning, this hunt is still going forward as a viable and beneficial means of controlling swelling bear populations.

[MrBenchley]

8. Yeah, who cares what voters think, eh, fly?

And the only people in NJ pretending this travesty is "a viable and beneficial means of controlling swelling bear populations" are a tiny knot of asswipes.

[Superfly]

9. And your New Jersey government

chosen by voters like you. "Back to life, back to reality." (wasn't that an 80's song?)

[MrBenchley]

11. Sez you, fly...

The hunting interests on the Fish & Game Commission say so...that's about it.

[Superfly]

13. Ummm...hate to tell you this...

but the Fish and Game Commission is an elected body put into office by voters like you.

[MrBenchley]

15. Not even close to true...

It's appointed.

[Superfly]

17. OK, appointed by whom? McGreevey?

nt

[MrBenchley]

27. Nope....

Guess again...

[Superfly]

29. Wrong, Bench...

From the NJ website:

"The Fish and Game Council, appointed by the Governor, oversees the Division's operations and appoints a Director (subject to the Governor's approval)."

[MrBenchley]

35. And which governor

appointed the current members?

[CO Liberal]

47. Probably Christie Clod Witless

[MrBenchley]

48. As I noted...

Whitman cancelled the bear hunt and then waved her cancellation like a flag to show she was "pro-environment."

Allowing the bear hunt was a stupid move on McGreevey's part...especially since he promised on the campaign trail to prevent it.

[Superfly]

49. Pro-hunt does NOT equal anti-environment

I am staunchly pro-hunting and staunchly pro-environment.

The two activities can be mutually beneficial.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Superfly]

53. Where's that middle finger emoticon when you need it?

nt

[MrBenchley]

54. It was edited away

[ET Awful]

20. Here's a clue for you . . .

The people picketing aren't stopping kids from killing animals. The state is stopping kids from killing animals because they don't want the kids to see people picketing (it's fine for them to see blood spattered and disemboweled carcasses, just don't let them see a group of people that think for themselves, that could be dangerous).

[Superfly]

22. Here's a clue for you...

regardless of their reasoning, denying the licensed and trained kids the opportunity to participate in a legal hunt is wrong.

[ET Awful]

38. Wrong it may be . . .

But you attempt to place the blame on the protesters. The protesters aren't the ones that are stopping children from killing things. The protesters are simply voicing an opinion. You attempt to paint the protesters as criminals for hindering the "lawful pursuit of game." Considering they are in parking lots and not stopping anyone from doing anything, they aren't hindering jack squat.

Seems to me the only ones hindering are the state.

[Superfly]

50. They are criminals

any time their activities interfere with the lawful pursuit of any activity.

"You attempt to paint the protesters as criminals for hindering the "lawful pursuit of game.""

- Thank you for stating the obvious.

[CO Liberal]

51. They Only Appear to Be Criminals......

...because they diagree with you.

Welcome to Amerika.......

[Superfly]

57. First of all

they are criminals because they are interfering with the lawful pursuit of game. In the state of New Jersey, that is a crime.

I do not care what they say or what their opinions are. I do care when they interfere with lawful hunting practices.

Second, who was it yesterday who was saying that we should prevent the NRA from gaining the airwaves on a self-funded television channel? I'll give you a hint...he's from Colorado and he's a frequent poster here on DU.

[CO Liberal]

62. I'm Gonna Drop This Right HERE, Superfly

Because I don't want to escalate this any further. Carrying a picket sign is NOT "interfering with the lawful pursuit of game". Physically preventing someone from entering the woods with a rifle, on the other hand, would be.

And this is totally different than the NRA thread of yesterday. I was talking about private citizens and companies stopping a propaganda machine. You're talking about criminalizing the expression of an opinion.

[Superfly]

64. When carrying a picket sign forces the

government to take action "on behalf" of the citizenry, "protecting" properly trained and licensed individuals, regardless of age, from engaging in a legal activity, THAT is a crime.

Yes, this is a CRIMINAL expression of opinion for the reason stated above.

[MrBenchley]

68. Hahahahahaaha.....

Who ARE you trying to kid, fly?

"THAT is a crime."
Then WHERE are the arrests?

[Superfly]

73. I don't have access to the police blotter, do you?

nt

[MrBenchley]

76. You got google

and you pretend to know about New Jersey thann those of us who live here...

[Superfly]

79. hahahahahaha

You call that "living"? You can have it.

[MrBenchley]

83. I'll keep it...

[Muddleoftheroad]

65. Stealth

Hunting relies on quiet and stealth. When crowds gather to deliberately scare off game, then thet ARE interfering in a hunt.

Edited to correct a stupid typo.

[MrBenchley]

70. Quick...

Everybody who thought there would be game IN the parking lot, raise your hands....if you can get them out of the straight-jacket sleeves....

[Muddleoftheroad]

74. You speak from ignorance of hunting

You can easily make enough noise in a parking lot to scare game away from an area. Noise does carry pretty far in more rural areas. If they protestors go there and try to do that, then they are in violation of the law.

[MrBenchley]

77. I speak from knowledge of knowing

how desperately the RKBA crowd can spin....

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Muddleoftheroad]

90. If you break the law, you break the law

In this forum of all places, you must acknowledge that.

[MrBenchley]

93. And if they don't break the law...

the RKBA crowd will pretend they broke the law...

[Muddleoftheroad]

97. Who's pretending?

I'm sure not. Making noise to scare away game or attempts to inhibit hunters are against the law.

[alwynsw]

143. Let's see, deer-auto accidents are on the rise nationwide

Gee, you're right. All the game is in the highway.

What asswipe lunatic would expect them to be parked?

[MrBenchley]

63. Really, fly?

How many have been arrested?

[MrBenchley]

30. Exactly so...

Not to mention that the hunters desperately need to pretend that people opposed to hunting represent some sort of menace...although it's the pro-hunting group that vandalizes anti-hunting billboards, put sugar in wildlife biologists' gas tanks,, etc....

That's why the Fish & Game Commission is cynically "protecting the children" from peaceful demonstrationns...

[Superfly]

31. Reading too many Edward Abbey books, eh Bench?

The Monkeywrench Gang must be your favorite read.

[MrBenchley]

37. Never read him, fly...

But thanks for the recommendation.

[Superfly]

39. You're welcome...

I heartily recommend the MW Gang and Desert Soiltaire. The first one is pretty much the environmental activists handbook and is a great read.

Desert Solitaire (along with most his other stuff) is deeply philosophical, following the best traditions of Thoreau, Muir, etc.

B

[alwynsw]

153. That tiny knot of asswipes

are the people you (NJ voters) put in office. I hate to tell you this, but Nj state government is built on the Federal model. That makes it a republic, or representative, form of government.

What that means is simply this: we elect them to do our bidding, but once in office, they do as they please. If we don't like it, we vote 'em out next election.

In the case of appointed officials, the voters are still responsible by extension because the voters elected the officials who make the appointments.

You have no one to blame for your dislike of current policy but the electorate in your state. If the appointed official are holdovers from a previous administration, then blame - Oh! that's right, the electorate who put the lunatic asswipes in a position to make those appointments.

[LARED]

19. You keep repeating that

.... the vast majority of New Jerseyans are OPPOSED to this hunt...

Do you have any evidence of this?

Nationally a large majority of people oppose all banning of hunting.

http://www.gallup.com/subscription/?m=f&c_id=13497

Public Lukewarm on Animal Rights
Supports strict laws governing treatment of farm animals, but opposes bans on product testing and medical research

The vast majority of Americans say animals deserve at least some protection from harm and exploitation, with a quarter saying animals deserve the same protection as human beings. But most Americans oppose banning medical research and product testing on laboratory animals. By an even larger majority, they oppose banning all types of hunting. A clear majority, however, favors strict laws concerning the treatment of farm animals. Women are more likely than men to support animal rights, and Democrats more than Republicans, but there are few differences by age.

[MrBenchley]

34. Gee, lared...

Hand us another laugh...

"A poll commissioned this month by several New Jersey wildlife organizations found that 58 percent of registered New Jersey voters feel that the bear hunt should be stopped and 67 percent believe the state should use non-lethal methods to reduce bear-related incidents instead of having a hunt. Most voters – 68 percent – say that Governor McGreevey should not have broken his campaign promise to support a five-year ban on bear hunting. "

http://www.hsus.org/ace/20121

I tthink it was a mistake for McGreevvey to allow the hunt...and you know damn well the GOP is goinng to pose as "pro-environment" and beat him over the head for breaking his promise...

As for your poll...

"The poll shows that:
- Nearly four of five (79%) Americans oppose allowing trapping on refuges. Fifty-five percent are strongly opposed to the practice.
- A large majority (78%) of Americans mistakenly believes that hunting and trapping are illegal on wildlife refuges. By sharp contrast, trapping of wildlife for various purposes occurs on 280 or 54% of refuge units, and hunting occurs on 296 or 56% of all refuges.
- When respondents were asked what should be the priority for National Wildlife Refuges, nearly nine out of every ten (88%) identified "Preserving the natural, undeveloped landscape and preserving the habitat and wildlife." "

http://www.charitywire.com/charity20/00868.html

[Muddleoftheroad]

55. You don't suppose some bias might have slipped into those polls?

Given who the polls were for? Nah, never happens...

[MrBenchley]

56. No I don't

But then I'm not desperately trying to justify this disgraceful and unpopular hunt, either...

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

59. Sure you don't want to edit that one too, fly?

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Muddleoftheroad]

60. I don't consider it disgraceful and I don't hunt

Hunting is an effective means of keeping species who no longer have natural predators in check.

[MrBenchley]

67. Too frigging funny...

Of course, the reason there are no natural predators is that hunters killed them all....

[Muddleoftheroad]

72. Not entirely true

We as a society killed them all, or destroyed their habitats and made it a bad place for them to live.

Bears in the wild don't have many predators, but young bears can still be killed by various wildcats and by wolves. Personally, I'm glad urban areas no longer have wildcats, bears and wolves and would like to keep it that way.

[LARED]

89. What about Coyotes?

NJ brought back the coyote hunt about 5 or so years ago. I don't recall any whew and cry about those wonderful fussy critters.

I think to many animal rights activists grew up on Yoga and BooBoo Bear.

[Romulus]

95. *snicker*

I think to many animal rights activists grew up on Yogi and BooBoo Bear.

Like that "bear hugger" guy who got eaten in Alaska . . .

[LARED]

115. As I recall he told a ranger that he

would be honored to end up as bear scat.

Well he got his wish. Poor fool.

[LARED]

80. You like to have it both ways

If a poll is posted from a pro hunting site, you would without doubt cast dispersions on its validity because of the source.

But when you post a poll from an OBVIOUSLY biased site against hunting it's OKEEDOKEE. It's honest. The angels are smiling on MrBenchly.

I can only speculate that intellectual honesty doesn't count for much in your world. As long as demagoguery no matter how misleading continues unabated you're a happy camper.

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

102. It was all the response that post deserved....

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

125. Tell you what

Next time I edit a post to change what I said and then begin lying about doing so, or pimp for some right wing piece of shit, or start pretending Bwana Cheney's canned hunt was a noble bit of sportsmanship, you can call me on it.

[Name removed]

142. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Emoto]

32. So?

I would think that a democrat would be sensitive to the concept of majority tyranny. By your logic, anything that differs from what the majority favors should not be allowed. Can you defend that on a conceptual level?

[MrBenchley]

40. Hell, I would think

that a Democrat wouldn't pimp for every right wing loony that crawls out of the gutter....or push for right wing extremist propaganda broadcasts...or try to spin away open racism...or try to pretend Bwana Cheney was a great white hunter...

But we saw the RKBA crowd do all of these things this week....

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

103. I DO think....

And I think it's ludicrous to cry "tyranny" on this issue...just as I think it's hypocritical and ridiculous for the RKBA crowd to peddle the crap they peddle...such as this thread.

Any other questions?

[Romulus]

85. IME, the vast majority of New Jerseyans

are against racial integration . . .

[MrBenchley]

108. Sez you....

And that's plenty funny from somebody spouting the same rhetoric on guns as David Duke, Trent Lott, Tom DeLay, John AshKKKroft, Ted Nugent, Larry Pratt, Pat Buchanan, etc., etc., etc.....

[beevul]

117. Which is

Which is plenty funny from somebody spouting the same rhetoric on freedom as David Duke, Trent Lott, Tom DeLay, John AshKKKroft, Pat Buchanan, Adolph Hitler ,VPC , Brady, HCI, Pol Pot, Barbara Lipscomb, Amy Fisher , Rosie O' Donnel, Michael Bellisiles, etc., etc., etc.....

[Name removed]

122. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

127. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

130. Beev....

Don't ever change....

[Mikimouse]

18. What are the ages of the 'young hunters'?

I ask only because I would have a problem with any 'young hunter' below the age of 12 or 13. I have been on lottery hunts where these 'young hunters' were allowed and it has always led to animals being wounded (and almost never tracked). Two years ago,there were two guys that brought their 8 year old kids with them (armed with HR single shot .243s), and between the two boys, they fired at four deer. The fathers' response, on being questioned by the other hunters about why they didn't track the animals (which they admitted had probably been hit) was that the kids were getting too tired to do that. Hunting requires a certain modicum of maturity and respect for the game, it is not something to be taken lightly, so I question the notion of this 'youth hunt' in the first place. I would also take issue with part of the article in which it is stated that parents bought shotguns???? for the children' And two man climbing stands? And, I assume, other materials? I suppse that there is also baiting involved? Too many unaddressed issues for my taste. It sounds like a hunt designed by SCI, for SCI.

[Superfly]

21. Young hunters (10-15)

have to be accompanied by an adult of 21 years or older.

[Mikimouse]

33. I still question the wisdom of the hunt

If the parents of these 'childen' had to go and buy firearms for them to participate, then I assume that they are not regular hunters. Thus, I would argue that they have no real understanding of what hunting is, or should be. Let's face it, for most of these 'children', it will be a matter of 'point the gun, pull the trigger, and then what?' Will they have respect for the animal once they have killed it (assuming that they do so), or will it be tantamount to a video game? The true hunter recognizes the value of the animal, and the fact that it has a soul. I somehow doubt that a neophyte kid has that kind of maturity. We all learn at different rates. I learned the hard way when I shot my first bird in my backyard and proudly took it to my mother, who told me, through her tears, that it was a songbird, not edible, and had not been doing anyone any harm. My father, OTOH, shoots anything for the sheer power trip; unconscionable! I derive no pleasure from killing, and try to make every effort to ensure that there is no suffering involved. This hunt still sounds somewhat odd to me.

[Superfly]

36. Then the licensing authority

should withhold licenses to kids who are not properly trained, which they do. The hunter education course, which the kids are required to take, satisfies th state's requirement for showing that a kid, or any hunter, is properly trained and experienced.

BTW, I started hunting when I was 8 years old. Went out with my Dad for ducks...I'm still alive and ticking.

[Mikimouse]

154. Knowing how state agencies tend to work, I would seriously doubt the

effectiveness of such a course, especially for someone who had never hunted in the past. Sorry, I don't buy the 'state sponsored hunter education' bit. I started hunting at an early age as well, and am still here because I have enough sense not to trust anyone or anything, as long as there is a gun involved. Also, such a program may teach the mechanics of the hunt, but cannot reasonably substitute for observing, first hand, a number of hunts prior to participation. I would bet that many of these children think that hunting is just like what they see on ESPN, which is anything but reality.

[CO Liberal]

155. Perhaps Some Of These Kids Learned About Hunting.....

...from watching this guy:

[Superfly]

157. If that's not good enough, then what is?

If the state says: "In order to hunt, you must do A and B. Then you will be properly licensed and trained."

[Liberal Classic]

41. Correction: NJ Forbids Yutes to Participate in Bear Hunt

:)

[Superfly]

42. What did you say?

[Vogon_Glory]

46. Health Insurance For All, Chicken in Every Pot, and

Here's to national health insurance for all American citizens, a chicken in every pot, and a hungry bear in each and every kitchen of these "animal rights" protestors.

:evilgrin:

[Fescue4u]

66. What is it about NJ?

Seem like that state just spews facism out on a regular basis.

Every time I turn around NJ is in the news with some kind of draconian law against law abiding citizens. Man what a crap hole.

Why on earth would anyone want to live there under the thumb NJ government???

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CO Liberal]

71. Here's a Link to a More Mainline News Source

BOYS, GIRLS BARRED FROM N.J. BEAR HUNT

Thursday, December 04, 2003

BY BRIAN T. MURRAY
Star-Ledger Staff

The state yesterday barred nearly 300 youngsters from next week's bear hunt in a move officials said was designed to protect the young hunters from potential confrontations with protesters.

DEP employees began telephoning the 278 boys and girls, ages 10 to 15, who had applied for permits for the hunt, telling them they could not participate even though they had already attended mandatory safety courses earlier this fall.

<snip>

"There have been some revocations that I determined to be necessary for the safety of the hunt," Campbell said afterward. "I'm not going to comment on it until I have had an opportunity to contact all of those affected."

<snip>

"It's not a matter of the youths being safe to participate in the hunt," the DEP official said. "It's a matter of their maturity in judgment when they are faced with the possibility of angry confrontation. This is not just any hunt."

<more>

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index.ssf?/base/news-12/107052130735930.xml

[Superfly]

75. That is saying EXACTLY the same thing as the

link I posted.

[MrBenchley]

82. Not even close to true...

funny how your version left out the agency's rationale...that they didn't want some young "sportsman" plugging somebody for fun....

[Superfly]

87. So, the same agencies that oversee the

training and licensing of these individuals are forbidding them from hunting after satisfying ALL state and agency requirements to hunt?

Man, New Jersey is one screwed up place.

[MrBenchley]

91. Gee, what a shame...

Guess they ought to have somebody other than dimwits from the hunting industry manning that agency....

Clearly the pro-hunting side doesn't give a rat's ass about honesty or rules...

[CO Liberal]

94. They Don't Seem to Care About Safety, Either

This bear hunt is the first one in 33 years, and it's a highly emotional event. The potential for violence is huge - it sounds like the state officials were acting responsibly in order to protect children.

I see nothing "criminal" about that.

[Romulus]

96. what's next?

revoking underage drivers' learning permits because of the fear of "road rage?":shrug:

It's for their own good, right? :eyes:

[MrBenchley]

99. Let's face it

Some people's fetish for guns is causing them to imagine federal crimes....

[beevul]

105. Do you approve of this?

From your source:

"A high-ranking DEP official, who asked not to be identified, said the decision to revoke the youngsters' permits was not made to appease animal-rights groups, which have opposed the hunt and criticized youth involvement."

"The official said e-mails the agency has received from animal-rights activists indicated that young hunters would be the target of planned protests when the hunt begins."

Who is it in this case that really doesn't care about safety? The ones making young hunters the "target of planned protests"?

Whos really playing dirty pool here CO?


Oh, and do you suppose they forbade boys and girls, ages 10 to 15 from protesting? After all, it IS "a matter of their maturity in judgment when they are faced with the possibility of angry confrontation."

[beevul]

98. Clearly...

"It's not a matter of the youths being safe to participate in the hunt," the DEP official said. "It's a matter of their maturity in judgment when they are faced with the possibility of angry confrontation. This is not just any hunt."


"Clearly the pro-hunting side doesn't give a rat's ass about honesty or rules..."

From the article:

"The official said e-mails the agency has received from animal-rights activists indicated that young hunters would be the target of planned protests when the hunt begins."

And clearly, the anti-hunting side doesn't give a rats ass about KIDS
and don't seem to care if theres an "angry confrontation" with them there.

I wonder if they forbade kids protesting too, "maturity in judgment when they are faced with the possibility of angry confrontation" and all that.....:eyes:


Only in PRNJ...

[Name removed]

100. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[beevul]

101. Spin this Benchly

From CO's source:


"The official said e-mails the agency has received from animal-rights activists indicated that young hunters would be the target of planned protests when the hunt begins."

"This action sends a terrible message to animal-rights protesters," said Rob Sexton, vice president for government affairs for the U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance Foundation. "It tells them that if they protest, the state will fold and cancel hunting opportunities. This will only encourage more law breaking by anti-hunters."

[MrBenchley]

104. Too TOO funny....

"A high-ranking DEP official, who asked not to be identified"
Yeah, I wouldn't want my name attached to that rubbish either....

[beevul]

106. Thank you

For confirming it by not replying to this subject matter:

"The official said e-mails the agency has received from animal-rights activists indicated that young hunters would be the target of planned protests when the hunt begins."

And clearly, the anti-hunting side doesn't give a rats ass about KIDS
and don't seem to care if theres an "angry confrontation" with them there.

[MrBenchley]

109. Gee, beev....

Might as well let the kids see what angry dangerous nutcases some gun lovers are......

And don't you wonder why an official wouldn't want his name mentioned if he really had those e-mails? Don't you wonder why he wouldn't have the State Police on the case?

[beevul]

132. Quality Bench

"Might as well let the kids see what angry dangerous nutcases some gun lovers are......"

Yeah, the gun lovers that had bear hunting tags and have attended a half-day class to prepare for the hunt, but were under 16, right?

Are you trying to tell us that it should be ok for kids to be allowed in the protest of this hunt, but not the hunt itself, and that the excuse/reasoning ("It's a matter of their maturity in judgment when they are faced with the possibility of angry confrontation. This is not just any hunt")for any denial of participation doesn't work both ways?

Quality try, I'll give you that.

"Don't you wonder why he wouldn't have the State Police on the case?"


Just curious Bench, can you point me to the article where it says he doesn't have the state police involved?

[MrBenchley]

136. Gee, beev...

You're the one moaning and whizzing about children being allowed to protest...and the hunt for kids was pulled for fear some young "sportsman" would shoot somebody for fun....

"Are you trying to tell us that it should be ok for kids to be allowed in the protest of this hunt, but not the hunt itself, and that the excuse/reasoning ("It's a matter of their maturity in judgment when they are faced with the possibility of angry confrontation. This is not just any hunt")for any denial of participation doesn't work both ways?"
Jeeze, beev...it isn't the anti-hunters keeping these young booboos from hunting...nor is it the anti-hunters carrying dangerous weapons.

[beevul]

144. Don't feign ignorance

"It's a matter of their maturity in judgment when they are faced with the possibility of angry confrontation."

You think they denied the youth hunters participation because it was supposed to be a peaceful protest?


Anyone here in the legal business know what I'd be charged with if I hit someone with a protest sign?(which one of those "youth" protesters MIGHT be carrying, and verry likely has easy access to)

[MrBenchley]

150. Who are you kidding?

Clearly, the commissioners think the little darlings are likely to shoot someone.

"You think they denied the youth hunters participation because it was supposed to be a peaceful protest?"
I think there's no lie, however desperate and silly, that the RKBA crowd won't tell.....

[CO Liberal]

107. Let Me Try, Beevul

"The official said e-mails the agency has received from animal-rights activists indicated that young hunters would be the target of planned protests when the hunt begins."

I'm sure the animal rights activists realize they're not gonna change the opinions of any of the adult huners, so they'd direct their efforts where they would do the most good.


"This action sends a terrible message to animal-rights protesters," said Rob Sexton, vice president for government affairs for the U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance Foundation. "It tells them that if they protest, the state will fold and cancel hunting opportunities. This will only encourage more law breaking by anti-hunters."

The U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance Foundation has an obvious agenda. I'd put this Rob Sexton guy in the same class as Wayne LaPierre and Ted Nugent.

[MrBenchley]

111. That's assuming that

these e-mails exist in the first place...

By the way, that "This will only encourage more law breaking by anti-hunters" is rich, considering there hasn't been anything but empty allegations of lawbreaking to this point.

[beevul]

112. Thats painting them in a ...

Thats painting the protesters in a pretty benevolent light, CO. To target kids is pretty low. Targeting thier efforts at kids, where "it would do the most good" also seems to be where it would do the most harm, based on those kids being prevented from exposure to it.

Do you approve of protesters targeting kids?

Do you think they should also deny kids the same age from protesting that particular hunt?


"The U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance Foundation has an obvious agenda. I'd put this Rob Sexton guy in the same class as Wayne LaPierre and Ted Nugent"


Why specifically would you "put this Rob Sexton guy in the same class as Wayne LaPierre and Ted Nugent"?

Because he sticks up for hunters? Or is there some other reason that I'm unaware of? I have never heard of him.:shrug:

[Name removed]

113. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

119. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

123. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[alwynsw]

151. And just what agency do the game wardens work for in NJ

if not the very sameagency that is barring the kids from their legal activity?

Also, just what is the extent of your experience with game wardens - or police in general for that matter? Mine is fairly extensive, both privately and professionally. I have several relatives and friends who are cops and have a few who are game wardens. I met most of the friends in these vocations as a member of the FOP, which I joined when I was employed by the KY Dept. of Corrections. I've also assisted both from time to time in a volunteer status during my stint as a prison supervisor.

Have you ever been out of a city for more than a few days? If not, I doubt that you're qualified to pass judgement on rural matters.

[MrBenchley]

81. So in other words

the reason for cancelling the young nimrods' participation was not that they would be endangered by the protestors...but fear that the little dimwits might shoot a protestor for the fun of it.

Ho-kay...

[alwynsw]

124. Seems as though the Game and Fish folks

are caving to avoid conflict.

Let's see, we use law enforcement to provide safe passage for women to get through protestors to abortion clinics. It's a good thing.

In the past, we have seen law enforcement and even National Guardsmen providing securityy for Americans of color to enter previously segregated schools.

We have seen law enforcement even provide safe passage for celebrities to get through throngs of fans.

Why not use police and/or game wardens to provide safe passage for the young hunters from the parking areas into the hunt area? They are citizen's pursuing a lawful practice, as were/are those in the instances cited above.

[MrBenchley]

131. Too TOO funny...

Want the cops to wear riot gear? How about putting the protestors in a "first amendment zone" (oh wait, they're already confined to parking lots)?

[Superfly]

133. Or, better yet...

we can forbid people from engaging in a legal activity because "IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN." :puke:

[MrBenchley]

134. How tragic for you

that the gutless pinheads on the Fish and Game Commission pulled that tactic....

Guess NJ should have qualified people and not just pro-hunting bozos...

[Superfly]

135. Tragic for me? I don't live in that shithole you call a state.

...

[MrBenchley]

137. And yet here you are pissing and moaning about

events in New Jersey that have nothing to do with you for the second day in a row...

[Superfly]

138. When the rights of people are being trampled

by a government that is as crooked as the mafia, it should be a concern to all Americans.

[MrBenchley]

140. Who the fuck are you kidding?

Nobody's rights are being trampled...except the rights of the majority of New Jerseyans who didn't want a bear hunt.

And let's see you back up that "crooked as the mafia" shit, fly. I'm goddamn tired of hearing a state with a Democratic governor, two Democratic Senators, a mostly Democratic House delegation and a newly Democratic legislature being described as a "shithole", especially by someone whose "honesty" is on clear display above.

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

145. Sure you don't want to edit that one too?

[Superfly]

146. Ha, ha, ha...you got me, Bench! You must be proud.

Way to go....maybe next you can concentrate on graduating to the level of "discussing the issues".

[beevul]

139. Because...

"Let's see, we use law enforcement to provide safe passage for women to get through protestors to abortion clinics. It's a good thing."

"In the past, we have seen law enforcement and even National Guardsmen providing securityy for Americans of color to enter previously segregated schools."

"We have seen law enforcement even provide safe passage for celebrities to get through throngs of fans."

Verry true, and valid. All 3 good things.





"Why not use police and/or game wardens to provide safe passage for the young hunters from the parking areas into the hunt area? They are citizen's pursuing a lawful practice, as were/are those in the instances cited above."


Because wer'e talking about NJ. Gun hater paradise.

[alwynsw]

147. Ya got me there.

But then, let's give NJ it's due. As has happened in many other states, the vast majority of the population has become urbanized. Urban dwellers often have no clue about the daily lives of rural folk. Would you believe that I know people in a semi-urban community, Louisville, KY who have never been out of town? 15 miles in any direction and you're in farming country. Some of them actually believe that wildlife is exactly what is portrayed on the movie screen - harmless, cute, lovable, etc. I can imagine the thoughts of those living in the NY - Philly metro area (Yes, the World Gazeeteer considers it all one big urban blob.) think of rural life and it's needs.

Maybe we should leave all the guns in the hands of the gangbangers and organized crime types. They only hunt humans, usually in cities. That makes far more sense to me because we all know that humans are inherently evil and the sure cause of doom to our fragile planet. Fewer humans, better planet. Simple.

But then, who would become the next wave of asswipe lunatics?

[Superfly]

149. What's with the NY Giants?

Are they a New Jersey team (play in Newark) or a New York team (the name.) Just one more example of why the people in NJ are very confused.

[alwynsw]

152. And ya gotta go through a swamp to get there.

Marsh, swamp, who cares? They're both wet.

[CO Liberal]

158. Simple

They actually play in Rutherford, not Newark. And it's apparantly a contract requirement that they remain the "New York Giants," even though they play in NJ.

Same thing with the NY Jets, who share Giants Stadium with the Giants.

[beevul]

160. Way ahead of me Co N/T

[Superfly]

161. Well...they BOTH suck

ha, ha, ha...

Go Seahawks!

[MrBenchley]

163. The RKBA crowd sticking to the issues

as usual....

Guess even they know what a piss-poor argument they had.....

[beevul]

159. Is that...

not also the case with the jets too?

[CO Liberal]

162. I Believe So

The only team that changed its name when it moved across the Hudson was the New Jersey Nets. (The New Jersey Devils are a separate case - they were originally the Colorado Rockies when they played in Denver.)

[beevul]

164. Whats the name?

Whats the name of thier stadium? Is it the meadowlands, or am I thinking of the patriots? Kinda been away from football a few years now. I barely make it to watching the superbowl....2 ADHD girls, 15 cats, and 4 dogs will do that to you though.

[CO Liberal]

165. The Jets & Giants Both Play at Giants Stadium

Which is in the Meadowlands Sports Complex. Along wiht the Contenental Airlines Arena, formerly the Brendan Byrne Arena - home of the Nets and the Devils.

There's also a harness racing track there. All along Route 3, which leads to the Lincoln Tunnel which takes you to Manahttan (less than ten miles away).

[beevul]

166. Ah, ok.

Thanks CO.:)

[beevul]

156. Chuckle

Its really too bad though, alot of those urbanites have no idea what they're missing. Living out in the sticks, as I used to, or out in the dunes, as I do now, is peaceful. Wildlife in abundance and enjoyable, but also needing absolute respect. Scorpions, black widows,gila monster, and pretty much the most dangerous snake in the US, the Mojave Rattlesnake , in addition to some 15 plus other venomous species, are more than abundant enough to give the unwary a potentialy bad day if in the wrong place at the wrong time. They tend to scare alot of the "never been out of the city" urbanites away. But they're also verry beautiful creatures too.



Places to fish, freedom to move about the country uncrowded and without bothering anyone else. Rural is the place for me. I would never survive big city life. And even if I could, I would spend every chance I could getting away from it.