Printable View
In all honesty, it was a waste of my time reading that article - it has no meaningful outcome or any reasoning. I really don't care about antis, have no reason to explain them why i hunt. There are so many things in this world that i don't approve of, yet i do my best to accommodate and adjust - it comes with living in a society of all. My hunting will just have to be something others will have to accept - this is a Canadian tradition and will stay as such.
I still can’t figure out why you feel the need to start a post with out some kind of condescending remark…rude to say the least, totally uncalled for…Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
Here’s the back story… Tovar Cerulli began to experiment with vegetarianism in high school, by the age of twenty, he was a full fledged, anti-hunting vegan. Living off fruit and veggies from the land like a hippy. Ten years later, the lack of protein in his diet was killing him, so he had to come to grips with having to hunt to stay alive.Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
Long story short..he had an epiphany; he found he actually had a lot of the same ‘shared values’ with hunters in their respect for the animals and how they were killed etc. Realizing that he had been a Dick all those years as a vegan and not caring to listen to the hunter side of the story, he now wants to preach that we should listen to what each other has to say and be less adversarial.
My argument, as I have repeated over and over….there is no common ground or shared values with a the anti-hunting/animal rights people, they're the ones that are a threat, the ones that are forever lobbing against our Hunting Traditions, the ones that get the ear of the politicians.
The 'middle' non-hunters are not a threat and not an issue..they don't usually sign petitions to stop the spring bear hunt etc..if you feel the need to convert them with talk of shared values, have at it, I personally don't need to substantiate why I hunt to anyone.
The anti/Hunter relationship is adversarial by nature and both parties have dug their heels in. There is no sitting around a camp fire signing ‘Kombi ya my Lord’ with people who think that it’s animal cruelty to use dogs to hunt.
(but to be honest., I don't totally disagree with them either)
The middle non-hunters vote. That's what got the spring bear hunt cancelled under Harris: the fear of losing those votes. Don't believe for a second that they aren't the most important people in the debate.
I raise my beer to this.Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
And what got it reinstated for the sake of all the gods. And consider to their tenuouss hold, just how POD people are, reinstating the spring hunt as a fairly large risk given things...How thats missed, well theres only a few reasons.
Real world examples for you where the middle.......matters.
Just as its mattering right now in Alberta, and the politicians are reacting......
and for what ever their names are. The middle matters to UA obviously who until recently sponsored them.
Just as the real life examples I provided you of 80 guest at a BBQ, many, nay the vast majority of whom (75 vs 5) are the non hunting middle, with various takes on hunting, with about 5 or 6 of them (equal numbers to the hunters present) being extreme animal lovers, animal rights proponents.
Nope no shared values ( as Welsh correctly said "values" are a cultural thing) and nope none of them have changed their views, softened some since becoming friends with me (he who makes no bones about what I do, nor do I hide it). Funny thing, of the 5 hunters present it was months and months before I found out 2 of them hunted, in fact when they came down to my vault to check out one of my firearms, I was pretty surprised to discover one of them not only hunted, really enjoyed shooting.
Funny that.
****
that's not all together true..Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
you may want to bone up on the MNR decision.: http://www.ebr.gov.on.ca/ERS-WEB-Ext...tusId=MTA3Mjc=Quote:
A quick search of the Environmental Registry reveals that, in 1999, 64% of respondents opposed the cancellation of the spring bear hunt. (only 35% supported it) If the public consultation process operated as a popular opinion poll, the spring bear hunt never would have been cancelled. It needs to be understood that public opinion is only one small factor in sustainable resource management decisions.
lol.
]As a result of public consultation on the proposal, the Ministry received a total of 35347 comments:
[So the basis of such overwhelming proof that its wasn't political, that it wasn't Harris (who is from the North) more afraid of the red vote stronghold of Toronto.
is a whopping 22,622 who wrote in to say they are against.
Im thinking there are way more than 22,600 Liberals and friends of Scad in Mississauga alone.
Got ya. Your right, if Im premier of Ontario 22,000 (likely the vast majority of whom are from the North) is going to have me shaking in my boots and fearing the election results.
After this obvious attempt, we know where you stand on the baiting issue.;)Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
No it means the vast majority of soft 'middle' who are against hunting didn't bother to vote..they never do...that 35% who did, represent the 'anti's...always a small minority.
Yup right above the corn and apples...:)Quote:
Originally Posted by swampsinger