JohnRich 4 #1 October 11, 2004 In the news (Maryland): An animal-rights activist has sent out a mass mailing to property owners stating they should not allow bear hunters on their properties because 40 percent of them are drug addicts, drunks or mentally unstable. Earle Hightower, chairman of the Institute for Public Safety, acknowledges the statistic printed on 600 cards is phony, but says it's all for the cause. "My personal opinion is that anybody who goes out and shoots helpless animals has a psychiatric problem," said Mr. Hightower. "Logically, statistically if you look at a sample of the regular population, certain people will have some kind of psychiatric problems." Full Story: Washington Times To the anti-gun crowd, lying is okay, if it helps achieve what you want. The end justifies the means... Oh, and if bear hunters can't be trusted, since some percentage of the population has psychiatric problems, then shouldn't we also disarm the police? And for gosh sakes, no one should be trusted to drive a motor vehicle! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #2 October 11, 2004 Anti-hunting is not always anti-gun. A lot of anti-hunters are also the Anti-fur and other causes. This is not a gun issue.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #3 October 11, 2004 A lot of anti-hunting types are anti-rights (as in guns) since they see it as a means to an end.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bch7773 0 #4 October 13, 2004 nah this looks like animal rights groups to me, not anti-gun group. its wrong what they are doing anyway, regardless of their position on anything. MB 3528, RB 1182 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mark 105 #5 October 13, 2004 QuoteAn animal-rights activist has sent out a mass mailing to property owners stating they should not allow bear hunters on their properties because 40 percent of them are drug addicts, drunks or mentally unstable. The first time I read this, I thought the comments about drugs, alcohol, and mental instability applied to the bears, not the hunters. I have a vision of a world of vegetarians. Bears should be natural converts to the cause. We have a chance with lions and wolves. I'm not sure how we're going to train the great white sharks, but I'm sure the PETA Extension Office will help. Won't you contribute to the cause? Mark Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyangel2 2 #6 October 13, 2004 Wow John, did they do a profile on you when they wanted to find out more about people who carry guns? <Damn, where is that Kissing Face Icon?>May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. - Edward Abbey Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paulipod 0 #7 October 13, 2004 QuoteOh, and if bear hunters can't be trusted, since some percentage of the population has psychiatric problems, then shouldn't we also disarm the police? And for gosh sakes, no one should be trusted to drive a motor vehicle! The difference there is that the bear hunters have proven themselves to be individuals that enjoy killing and the power trip it gives - and hence shouldnt be allowed out in public, whereas the police are hopefully trying to control these primates when they break their curfew Bodyflight Bedford www.bodyflight.co.uk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #8 October 13, 2004 QuoteThe difference there is that the bear hunters have proven themselves to be individuals that enjoy killing and the power trip it gives - and hence shouldnt be allowed out in public Do you eat meat? Wear leather? Your theory is full of crap. There are about 15 million hunters in America. If they were so darned dangerous to the rest of society, we would have heard about it. Just because someone likes to shoot a deer and put venison in their freezer, doesn't mean that they are dangerous to people. That kind of extrapolation of motivations is total bunk. You might as well accuse baseball players of being drunk on the power of hitting things with bats, and using that to suggest that they like to club people to death. That theory is yet another fine example of anti-gun bigotry. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,170 #9 October 13, 2004 John, he had a smiley, and I'll just bet that post was intended to be funny. Drop that chip off your shoulder and back away slowly Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #10 October 13, 2004 QuoteYour theory is full of crap. Umm, I think his theory was sarcasm and meant to be humorous in its ridiculousness. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,471 #11 October 13, 2004 >That theory is yet another fine example of anti-gun bigotry. Or of someone making a joke. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
