Changing Hunting StereoTypes.

Submitted: Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 20:12
ThreadID: 108194 Views:3455 Replies:12 FollowUps:94
This Thread has been Archived
We were up early over this long weekend and off on a mostly scenic trip into Vic High country.
We separated from the kids who decided to go to Craig's hut (from film Man from snowy river) while we headed to Mt Skene and beyond.
With no snow at all to negotiate we actually arrived before 10am at our destination but not early enough to beat several groups of hunters.

There was no snow at all , so we did some long forgotten little side runs ,whilst the kids had to bypass the closed Circuit road and took all day to get to the completely full carpark.
There was surprise at just how many people took the long alternate track via No.3 track to get to this icon of high country tourism.

On this milk run we listened to radio news and since TV interview's about the recent Vic report on just how beneficial hunting is to the economy.
The interviews we heard praised the Deer hunting groups as delivering over $400 million to state tourism economy which while not really comparable is more than the flash for cash brigade tax us.

The minister explained how the profile of this group spend big on 4wd's camping gear accommodation etc etc and that their profile is high income family people above average educated who spend the majority of that money in country areas and that Victoria with more hunting reserves than any other state, is well placed to capitalize on this form of adventure tourism.

One can get a false idea of some of these things from left leaning news sources but a 46% increase in licenses in the last few years is a money stream governments can't avoid.
But I wondered whether or not that group is a cash cow for some other departments as there were law enforcement checks at several areas up there from Yarck , Mansfield , the Pines, even on Mt Skene itself and then even a Booze bus opening up at Boonie doon 3pm today to catch a few on the way home.


Our flight paths and timing avoided all the obstacles, but others like the Navara at Kevington whose mishap meant its occupants had to be Life-Flighted out would have preferred the holdups.

As we sat on the banks of the river making early morning coffees its was good to see hunters wading the river in full cammo gear holding rifles up high, I could have used them to wade a couple of the river crossings.

All in all a delightful long weekend with some goods news thrown in.

Note 35" ST Maxx tyres were on test and performed well.



Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: SDG - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 21:06

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 21:06
There are apparently more registered rifles now, than there were before the Port Arthur Massacre, which sparked the buy back scheme.
AnswerID: 534100

Follow Up By: John and Regina M - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 21:45

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 21:45
That's good news.
Let's hope there is also a corresponding drop in unregistered and illegal firearms, which is what the buyback was aiming to achieve.
0
FollowupID: 817651

Follow Up By: Ross M - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 21:54

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 21:54
Nothing wrong with rifles, but nut cases with rifles or anything for that matter, is of great concern.

Having been threatened with a loaded with a loaded, hammerless, double barrel, with safety OFF, and pressed against my head, it isn't the gun which was at fault, just the drunk on the other end.

Drunk or or unhinged doesn't matter.
0
FollowupID: 817653

Follow Up By: Penchy - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 08:12

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 08:12
I'm not sure what the relationship is here between the number of registered firearms and Port Arthur. Also, the buy back was primarily for removing semi automatic long arms from the community, and secondary for removing unregistered firearms.

0
FollowupID: 817662

Follow Up By: SDG - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 13:34

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 13:34
The buy back scheme was introduced in an effort to get rid of unwanted/illegal firearms, because of the Port Arthur Shooting. Other laws also surrounding ownership also came in to effect at this same time.
0
FollowupID: 817680

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 16:43

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 16:43
wrong SDG.
It was as Penchy said.
I was forced to hand in a legal, registered and regularly legally used .22 rifle which I had owned since 14yrs old and brought to Australia with me.
Great sentimental value.
0
FollowupID: 817773

Follow Up By: SDG - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:35

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:35
1984–1996 multiple killings[edit]
From 1984 to 1996, multiple killings aroused public concern. The 1984 Milperra massacre was a major incident in a series of conflicts between various 'outlaw motorcycle gangs'. In 1987, the Hoddle Street massacre and the Queen Street massacre took place in Melbourne. In response, several states required the registration of all guns, and restricted the availability of self-loading rifles and shotguns. In the Strathfield massacre in New South Wales, 1991, two were killed with a knife, and five more with a firearm. Tasmania passed a law in 1991 for firearm purchasers to obtain a licence, though enforcement was light. Firearm laws in Tasmania and Queensland remained relatively relaxed for longarms.

Shooting massacres in Australia and other English-speaking countries often occurred close together in time. Forensic psychiatrists attribute this to copycat behaviour,[8][9] which is in many cases triggered by sensational media treatment.[10][11] Mass murderers study media reports and imitate the actions and equipment that are sensationalised in them.[12]

The Port Arthur massacre and its consequences[edit]
The Port Arthur massacre in 1996 transformed gun control legislation in Australia. Thirty-five people were killed and 23 wounded when a man with a history of violent and erratic behaviour beginning in early childhood[13] opened fire on shop owners and tourists with two military style semi-automatic rifles. Six weeks after the Dunblane massacre in Scotland,[8] this mass killing at the notorious former convict prison at Port Arthur horrified the Australian public and had powerful political consequences.

The Port Arthur perpetrator said he bought his firearms from a gun dealer without holding the required firearms licence.[14]

Prime Minister John Howard immediately took the gun law proposals developed from the report of the 1988 National Committee on Violence[15] and forced the states to adopt them under a National Firearms Agreement. This was necessary because the Australian Constitution does not give the Commonwealth power to enact gun laws. The proposals included a ban on all semi-automatic rifles and all semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns, and a tightly restrictive system of licensing and ownership controls.

Some discussion of measures to allow owners to undertake modifications to reduce the capacity of magazine-fed shotguns ("crimping") occurred, but the government refused to permit this.

The Howard Government planned a series of public meetings to explain the proposed changes. In the first meeting, on the advice of his security team, Howard wore a bullet-resistant vest, which was visible under his jacket. Many shooters were critical of this.[16][17][18]

Some shooters applied to join the Liberal Party of Australia in an attempt to influence the government, but the Liberal Party barred them from membership.[19][20] A court action by 500 shooters seeking admission to membership eventually failed in the Supreme Court of South Australia.[21]

The Australian Constitution prevents the taking of property without just compensation, so the federal government introduced the Medicare Levy Amendment Act 1996 to raise the predicted cost of A$500 million through a one-off increase in the Medicare levy. The gun buy-back scheme started on 1 October 1996 and concluded on 30 September 1997.[22] The buyback purchased and destroyed more than 631,000 firearms, mostly semi-auto .22 rimfires, semi-automatic shotguns and pump-action shotguns. Only Victoria provided a breakdown of types destroyed, and in that state less than 3% were military style semi-automatic rifles.
1
FollowupID: 817793

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 21:11

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 21:11
Im a bit dizzy after reading the first 2 paragraphs of that, skimming over it though I couldnt see where it was for illegal firearms unless you count making them illegal then buying them back?
Mine were perfectly legal.
0
FollowupID: 817799

Follow Up By: SDG - Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 07:51

Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 07:51
Simple. If it was a semi automatic, it was made ILLEGAL. Therefore they bought them back. Does not matter if it was registered or not. I lost mine as well. So what. Made a few grand off them. More than what they were worth.
Still have my bolt actions. Still have the break downs.
0
FollowupID: 817815

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 20:53

Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 20:53
as I said! But they are not illegal, just restricted
0
FollowupID: 817903

Reply By: Member - Donnyj - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 09:57

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 09:57
Hi Robin. Glad you enjoyed your weekend in the High Country, which is where I used to be a farmer and where feral animals are becoming more and more of a problem. If Registered hunters can nail a few of those feral animals it has to be a good thing, but it is probably too little too late. I farmed very close to the eastern side Snowy River National Park, where for several years the pigs have been breeding uncontrolled and now the numbers are such that they are coming out into the farm land and the potential for damage is enormous. The locals thought they had a problem with wild dogs, but they haven't seen anything yet!
If local farmers and shooters had been allowed into the Park when pigs first appeared the problem may have been contained. And had the local farmers arranged a shooting weekend in the Park, targeting pigs, we'd have all gone to jail!
Our left wing press DOES beat up this issue of hunting in national Parks.
AnswerID: 534113

Follow Up By: SDG - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 13:35

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 13:35
Not to mention the feral cats which are decimating our native fauna.
0
FollowupID: 817681

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 16:10

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 16:10
Their does seem to be a constant beatup Donnyj , but I am always surprised by the lack of real material presented in support of the beatup.
It seems many countries have made sporting shooting a successful pastime.

I have seen the effect of wild dogs on a pack of sheep and its truly horrendous , but I've only ever heard about the pigs and from your post I rather not see what they could do.

Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 817690

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:04

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:04
The link between (some) hunters and pigs is fairly well known. The reason hunters want access to National Parks is primarily because land owners won't have a bar of them - for good reason. Same old story - the idiots spoil it for the serious, responsible shooters.
0
FollowupID: 817787

Reply By: Tony H15 - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:32

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:32
There’s nothing wrong with firearms per se, I was in defence for 25 years so I’m quite comfortable around weapons. I’m not so comfortable around farmers, hunters, collectors and gun nuts mishandling and waving them around all over the place, no safety standards, they scare the hell out of me, but I can always make myself scarce I suppose. Hunters, now they’re a different matter: hunting, killing and consuming an animal is one thing, as is the necessity for culling and destroying sick and injured animals, but to admit to actually enjoying hunting and killing – that is a concern!
AnswerID: 534117

Follow Up By: Member - Trouper (NSW) - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:03

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:03
Tony, there is nothing wrong or any concern if sensible folk hunt and kill ferals like pigs,foxes,wild dogs etc.(its been going on for a 100 years or more) The destruction and killing spree these things cause is an ever increasing problem. To clean them up any other way is too cost prohibitive to governments or National Parks organisations.
Does anyone know how many people have been shot/injured by hunters over the past 10 years???

Jeff
0
FollowupID: 817676

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 13:52

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 13:52
Trouper I didn't say there was anything wrong with killing/culling/destroying animals! What I did say was there is something wrong with people who enjoy it. On the other matter, does it matter how many people are shot/injured through stupidity and negligence, one is too many. Is one life worth any less than 10?
1
FollowupID: 817684

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 16:04

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 16:04
Its Ironic Trouper , hunting is almost the safest sport apparently.

It sure ain't cars and motocross bikes which are everywhere in our group.

In the interview on Tv they brought in the usual anti-gunners and Lawry was asked about the danger in the bush from firearms and he could only come up with 1 example of a death and that was 20 years ago.
A massively more dangerous thing to do is to give a kid a push bike according to statistics.

Tony , its an interesting philosophy but wouldn't it be abnormal if some one didn't enjoy the hunt and kill as its a natural instinct in all animals for survival.

I worry more about those who get Big Mac's and don't associate that with supporting the culling of animals.

Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 817689

Follow Up By: SDG - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 16:19

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 16:19
Fishing is a form of hunting, different weapon. More dangerous carrying a fishing rod while hunting, than a rifle or bow.


For some reason people don't associate fishing as hunting.
0
FollowupID: 817691

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 19:34

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 19:34
I have had to kill as a necessity, but I can promise you it was not enjoyable. Anyone who 'enjoys' killing whether it be fish, cows, dogs, lions, whatever, has a serious problem. Before anyone asks, yes, I have been hunting and I have killed an animal - once. I have never been so disgusted and vowed never to do it again. I have killed a few animals myself as a matter of necessity and watched and overseen the destruction of many more - I found it a sad and emotional time on every occasion, but a necessary evil of the job. Sporting shooters and sporting hunters, a misnomer if ever there was one: how can anyone who hunts a pig or a deer, rabbit, elephant, whatever, possibly call themselves a sporting hunter or sporting shooter. Sporting is defined as: fair and generous in one's behaviour or treatment of others, especially in a contest. Going out armed with a firearm, often in multiples, for the express purpose of stalking/hunting and then killing your quarry can hardly be called ‘sporting’ if your quarry does not know or recognise your intent and is not armed in a like manner. It is a natural instinct to kill to survive, it is not a natural instinct to kill for pleasure. Big Mac burger meat does not come from animals that have been culled, it comes from animals that have been bred for the specific purpose of feeding us – but that is a another discussion. If you are intent on exhibiting your masculinity, ship off to Afghanistan, get in the boxing ring, sign up for ultimate fighting - fight something that fights back.
0
FollowupID: 817711

Follow Up By: The Explorer - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 00:33

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 00:33
"wouldn't it be abnormal if some one didn't enjoy the hunt and kill as its a natural instinct in all animals for survival"

All animals? Take cows for instance, the amount of grass they kill in one day is unbelievable :) ...but maybe things aren't as they seem...

[vimeo]Cows Enjoy Killing[/vimeo]

Cheers
Greg
I sent one final shout after him to stick to the track, to which he replied “All right,” That was the last ever seen of Gibson - E Giles 23 April 1874

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message
Moderator

0
FollowupID: 817737

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:15

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:15
Lol Greg. That was exactly what popped into my mind when I read Robin's line and I was about to do precisely what you did. I often think of the Croc Dundee scene on the rare occasions one of those nutters from the NSW Shooters Party put their heads above the parapet.
0
FollowupID: 817789

Follow Up By: Penchy - Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 08:50

Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 08:50
"gun nuts mishandling and waving them around all over the place". Cmon Tony, you are the exact reason there is a generalisation with firearm owners. Not only that, you are a hypocrite! If you were in defence then you would have been asked the question, "are you prepared to be shot at, and to shoot at other people", but you go on to say, "Anyone who 'enjoys' killing whether it be fish, cows, dogs, lions, whatever, has a serious problem". So you don't regard yourself in the same category as hunters, even though you could have potentially been posted in a conflict and had to kill another human being? Seriously?
" Going out armed with a firearm, often in multiples, for the express purpose of stalking/hunting and then killing your quarry can hardly be called ‘sporting’ if your quarry does not know or recognise your intent".
By that statement I make the assumption that you have never been deer hunting. Do you honestly think they just stand there in an open plain eating grass waiting for someone to line up a kill shot? Hunters can spend days (and nights) in the field stalking one deer, only to not even be given a chance to fire their weapon. Do us all a favour and educate yourself, then get some experience before making any further comments.
0
FollowupID: 817871

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 15:17

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 15:17
Sorry I missed that one. Certainly, being in defence I was prepared to be shot at and to shoot other people, was even asked to sign an acknowledgement to that fact (not quite in those terms of course [not politically correct]; however, and this is the big however, I was never asked/told to enjoy it and neither would I expect to enjoy it. Necessity – ring any bells? I say again, anyone who ‘enjoys’ killing has a serious problem. There is no enjoyment in killing a living entity – neither should there be. Again: necessity – enjoyment, worlds apart.

Do you seriously consider a hunter hunting deer is in the same category as defence personnel involved in conflict? I think the 57,000 odd defence members currently serving would disagree with you on that point, most particularly the ones who did not return. Attempting to draw a parallel between the people who serve and protect this country and the hunter is an insult to their memory.

On your last point, I must say I really feel for you: that’s terrible having to wait days (and nights) waiting to line up a kill shot. How distressing that must be. There is a breed of goat that will play dead when frightened, perhaps you should hunt them: less distress and danger for the hunter.

A simplified version for you:
Normal: Hungry + kill + eat = Necessity
Not Normal: Not hungry + kill + not eat = enjoyment.
1
FollowupID: 817934

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:05

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:05
Do you think it is a necessity to kill the dear before you eat it?
Or is eating not a necessity?
0
FollowupID: 817940

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Sunday, Jun 15, 2014 at 20:37

Sunday, Jun 15, 2014 at 20:37
Again:
A simplified version for you:
Normal: Hungry + kill + eat = Necessity
Not Normal: Not hungry + kill + not eat = enjoyment.
0
FollowupID: 818064

Reply By: Dion - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 22:18

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 22:18
I also did 25 plus years in Defence, also quite comfortable around firearms, but was not categorised in the later years as a Weapons User, but I did in my junior years.
I ENJOY hunting. I take pride in the one shot one kill philosophy. Same as I ENJOY fishing. There is nothing more satisfying than to sit down to a meal of something I have caught, shot or trapped.
I don't shoot indiscriminately, unless it is a cat, then the cat will get it.
AnswerID: 534158

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 23:27

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 23:27
Yes, but do you enjoy killing the animal?
0
FollowupID: 817733

Follow Up By: Dion - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 00:18

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 00:18
When accomplished with one well placed projectile, then of course yes.
When the animal drops instantly and does not move because that one projectile hit exactly where required to inflict instant death, then also of course yes.

Feral Cats require no explanation, yes I enjoy killing them.
2
FollowupID: 817736

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:06

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:06
That tells me all I want to know.
0
FollowupID: 817749

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 17:08

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 17:08
Tony you have no friggin idea mate.
Sitting in your city apartment passing judgement on people who dont think the same as you (most often country people who enjoy or participate in hunting of ferals)
Buying your meat on a foam tray and disasociating yourself from the process.
I kill foxes, not to eat and enjoy it.
Foxes kill chickens, lambs etc not to eat but for fun or whatever reason-who knows.
Maybe you could provide some councilling for them
1
FollowupID: 817776

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 22:14

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 22:14
Fisho64, I'm afraid it is you that has no idea, what on earth gives you the idea I live in an apartment in the city - talk about having no friginn idea. As for passing judgements, you've just passed judgement on me, why is that any different? Plenty of country folk kill ferals, sheep, cows, emus, roos, whatever, been there and assisted - never seen anyone enjoy it though. Plenty of swearing and cursing and pleased there is one less feral maybe, but no enjoyment. What is it with you lot? You just can't seem to get it through your heads, there is a difference between the necessity of it and taking enjoyment from it. Now there I ago again, getting all judgemental, what a naughty man I am!.
0
FollowupID: 817803

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 20:57

Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 20:57
"what on earth gives you the idea I live in an apartment in the city"

your attitude.
Gels with-"the city is the centre of the universe and the rest of the countryside and its people are there for our amusement and must conform to my beliefs"
0
FollowupID: 817904

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 15:25

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 15:25
So any attitude or belief that does not parallel yours is restricted to city dwellers. What an interesting observation - perhaps you should google 'persecution complex'.
0
FollowupID: 817935

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:55

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:55
Yes and i guess thats where our similarities end.
The difference between us is that i dont feel compelled to make you admit that carrying a manbag and wearing socks with thongs is plain wrong
:-)
0
FollowupID: 817953

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Sunday, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:01

Sunday, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:01
Keep up the good work Tony. For the most part I gree with you. I recall a TV chef once berating a contestant for his lack of respect for a beautiful fish he was asked to prepare. The message was have respect for the animal and not to abuse the resource.
0
FollowupID: 818019

Reply By: Member - Beatit (QLD) - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 09:01

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 09:01
G'day Robin,

Another interesting thread, thanks!

Hunting is in our makeup and it is sometimes difficult to justify to those that don't understand it. Even when as kids we play hide and seek or do an Easter egg hunt we are satisfying the hunting urge.

Those that hunt and fish understand this and will usually just keep quite about their past time. Their contribution to feral pest eradication is still undervalued because of the kill factor. Introduced pests are making life tough for native animals and vegetation and not to forget farming. With feral pest numbers increasing due to neglect and or social pressures it already a huge cost burden which the taxpayers and farmers are asked to fund.

There have been solutions such as baiting which for those against hunting is more humane but clearly they are not there when the animal suffers.

I also understand that there are those philosophically opposed the any killing for meat and that is their prerogative. I admire that they refuse to consume any animal products out of principle but eradicating pests such as pigs, goats, deer, rabbits, cats, dogs, camels, donkeys, foxes, the list is long is another matter al together. There is a decision required if we want these pests instead of native animals.

Kind regards
AnswerID: 534165

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 14:47

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 14:47
Hi Beatit

Its interesting to see the responses isn't it. The evidence shows hunting to be one of the safest sports , where giving your kids a bike is one of the more dangerous.

Yet despite this some have what are I guess, ideological views against what is most natural. If it was cruelty or something I understand those views but our society runs on culling animals , even a practical vegetarian like myself can except what is normal in our world and not deny the obvious.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

1
FollowupID: 817769

Follow Up By: Member - Beatit (QLD) - Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 09:35

Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 09:35
G'day Robin,

Yes gun ownership tends to polarise people and the facts will never satisfy some.

Kind regards
0
FollowupID: 817821

Reply By: Ron N - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:35

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:35
I dunno what a "hunting stereotype" is supposed to look like - but as far as the gun buyback and tighter firearms laws since the Port Arthur massacre, goes - there's two outstanding facts the squealing gun-lovers can't deny, as a result:

1. An 80% reduction in gun-related suicides due entirely to tighter firearm laws, which included increased security of firearms storage.

2. There's never been a gun massacre in Australia since the buy-back, and the tightening of firearms laws - unlike the U.S. with its lax firearms laws.

It's just a shame that we had to have Port Arthur to bring in those changes.
Anyone who has been close to any family that has suffered from a firearm death or deaths would have no hesitation in saying Howard did the right thing.

All we need to do now, is pyschologically screen out those firearm owners, who are the types who would willingly use a firearm on a spouse when there's a marital dispute, and we'll be able to save at least another 50 womens lives a year.
The steroid users need to be eliminated as firearm owners as well. The level of 'roid rage' is increasing each year, ask any police about it.

I used to be a multiple firearms owner, and shoot everything in sight - then my house burnt down, and with it, went all my firearms.
I was forced to indulge in some serious self-examination as to why I really needed all those firearms, and why I needed to kill things every day.

I'm a Vietnam vet and I've had more experience with serious firearms and killing than a lot of people have had.
I can tell you I've stared directly into the face of a bitter, murderous enemy at close quarters and experienced the shock of seeing seething murderous hatred, in a face so twisted, it was Satanic.

It only took a short period of soul-searching after my house fire, to make me realise that I didn't really need any firearms, and didn't need to kill things every day, to live a normal, enjoyable life.
I never replaced those firearms, and I've never regretted it - and that was 30 yrs ago.

I'm happy to have properly trained people carry out vermin reduction, and for farmers to have firearms to shoot dying stock and vermin pestering their operations - but there's way too many people out there today, who own firearms, who are pyschologically unsuited to firearms ownership, and who don't have any real NEED for a firearm.

Firearms licences should always be issued on a NEEDS basis only - and only to those who are properly assessed as being pyschologically stable. There's still too many road signs being shot up daily, and too many harmless animals being shot unnecessarily.
AnswerID: 534173

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 14:34

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 14:34
Hi Ron

Stereotypes occur when people exaggerate things out of all proportion , these beliefs get picked up by media shock jocks etc and we end up with a general false impression of the real situation.

When true research is done as it has recently been done here with firearm ownership a quite different picture presents itself.

In this case the hunters have been shown to be of generally above average citizens which help our economy particularly in the bush and deserve our support based on an excellant track record.









Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 817767

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 17:20

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 17:20
"but there's way too many people out there today, who own 4WD's, who are pyschologically unsuited to 4WD ownership, and who don't have any real NEED for a 4WD."

See how easy it is to substitute your anti firearm stance for anothers anti4WD stance?
"But thats different, I NEED my 4WD because I paid taxes all my life and now I want to have enjoy my 4WD".

Your position is that you no longer needed your firearms (which you used to "shoot everything on sight") and I applaud that you recognised that you were not suited for firearms ownership.

Why does that translate to everyone who owns a firearm being a "squeeling gun owner" who "shoots everything on sight" and "needed to kill things every single day".

You dont sound like the ideal candidate to own firearms.
0
FollowupID: 817777

Follow Up By: Ron N - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 19:28

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 19:28
Ya know, fisho - you're right with your first line, too. I don't know how many 4WD owners have shoved their bullbar up against my back window, trying to shove me along. And I always travel at the speed limit, too.

My missus has just come in and told me about the dropkick in the "giant 4WD" (her words), who slotted himself right in between her rear end, and a Kenworth on the freeway this arvo, leaving no stopping room for the truck, and no stopping room for him.
She said his bullbar was "2 inches off my back bumper!" (her words again). Then he swerved out and did exactly the same to someone else.

I don't know why it is, that gun-lovers feel the need to become personally aggrieved, and see any supporter of tighter gun laws, as a direct, personal affront to their RIGHT to have a firearm (or firearms).
There is no RIGHT to anything in this country (unlike America, that most gun-lovers seem to think this place is).

We have PRIVILEGES in this country, that have to earned by showing you have the abilities and skills to carry out the ownership or operation of the job or item, without danger to others.

That includes - driving on a public road - operating machinery - flying an aircraft - constructing a building - installing electrickery or mains water - plus 1000 other important things.

It never ceases to amaze me that someone who will agree, that not everyone should have the right to do anything they choose, without proper training and assessment and licencing - yet that same person will immediately claim that firearms should be freely available to anyone who just has a personal desire to shoot the crap out of things.

In the area where I lived in the country, the local shire just gave up on road sign replacement after constant sign damage by shooters. It was costing them thousands annually for sign replacement, thanks to dozens of idiots with guns.

I know station owners who'd like to shoot every firearn owner that comes onto their properties, such is the tally of bullet damage to their properties and stock. Shot-up water tanks, shot-up PVC piping, shot-up cattle - the list is endless.

Cattle shot and left to die

The amount of indiscrimate shooting damage is still so high, that it only goes to prove that too many of the wrong type of people are still gaining UNNECESSARY access to firearms.
0
FollowupID: 817784

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 19:35

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 19:35
" yet that same person will immediately claim that firearms should be freely available to anyone who just has a personal desire to shoot the crap out of things."

Nobody except you has said and done the things i have quoted from your post.
Because you shot up everything in sight and had to kill everything in sight, should mean other responsible people will do the same?
0
FollowupID: 817785

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 15:52

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 15:52
As your driving around your local area fisho64, look out your window, look at the signs, the water tanks, the fence posts. The evidence is everywhere. I quite often camp in out of the way areas, if there's a farm nearby, you'll more than likely see the idiots racing around the paddocks, spotlights blazing, shooting at anything they see.
0
FollowupID: 817938

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:14

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:14
And as you drive around the city you see signs of idiots in cars too does that make all drivers raving lunatics? I hope not?
0
FollowupID: 817942

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:17

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:17
From your own posts, that sounds like you Tony quote "shooting everything in sight"
0
FollowupID: 817944

Reply By: Tony H15 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:40

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:40
I don't know of anyone opposed to eradicating cat's pigs, goats, deer, rabbits, dogs, camels, donkeys, foxes or any other introduced pests. They compete with our wildlife which lose in the long run. And you're right, baiting is not a humane method, it is cruel and indiscriminate. It is one thing to eradicate them, it is another to enjoy it - necessary or not.
AnswerID: 534175

Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 16:53

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 16:53
I would think it is fair to say that most hunters "enjoy" the act and those that don't would be an exception to the rule.
Reality is most hunt as a liesure activity and some turn it into a proffession as well.
I am not anti the activity but it does rub me up the wrong way a bit when gun owners drag out the " we are helping keep the feral population down' story.
Reality is they are doing what they like and that is just a byproduct to the activity, you don't often see these same people out eradicating knoxious weeds or trying to stop the cane toad invasion or reducing soil erosion etc

A few people I know who were keen hunters seem to have melowed over the years and whilst still loving their firearms and going out on a hunt are doing the ancillery activities of holding the spotlight and driving rather than pulling the trigger these days
0
FollowupID: 817775

Reply By: Member - Trouper (NSW) - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 16:59

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 16:59
Lots of people enjoy it. That does not mean they are deranged or are a menace to society or that they will go out and start shooting people (except americans of course).
I wonder how many people have been murdered in Australia by licenced gun owners??
AnswerID: 534190

Follow Up By: Nargun51 - Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 00:21

Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 00:21
From my knowledge of only one state, and predating Port Arthur; most of them.

Homicides can be divided roughly into 3 groups, which the relationship/social interaction group is the largest (more than 75%). Most of these are assaults and stabbings, but if a firearm is available; the assailant can be almost guaranteed of a kill. It takes quite a lot of energy to stab or beat a person to death and quite often the act of violence exhausts the anger before death. A gun shot only requires 1 action.

For purely criminal homicides,"Underbelly" type murders, which are the minority of homicides, I'd agree that most of those would be committed with illegal weapons.

Unfortunately, domestic/relationship/social interaction murders far outnumber disputes between crims. During the "Underbelly" there were far more women (partners, wives or women that said no) murdered than crims. A firearm (whether legal or illegal) is also an instrument used to threaten. which automatically escalates the chances of it being used with intent
0
FollowupID: 817811

Follow Up By: SDG - Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 07:59

Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 07:59
Hence why there was a stipulation that ammo was to be stored, and locked up, separately to the actual firearm.
Give the person time to cool down while looking for all the keys act.
Of course this did not always happen. I know of some loaded ones sitting out in the open in the shed.
0
FollowupID: 817817

Reply By: Tony H15 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 18:29

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 18:29
Yep, that'd be smart, shooting someone with your own licensed firearm - how not to get caught 101? If someone enjoys watching an animal die they have just shot, I can't see it mattering to them what species it is: dog, cat, goat, human pig, fox, kangaroo, wombat. The only thing stopping them from shooting their own species would be the fear of being caught! Sneaking up on something (stalking) and shooting it, not at lot different from sneaking up on someone and king hitting them - amounts to the same thing: the recipient of your maleficence is unaware of your presence and certainly isn't aware of your your intentions. Empathy: The ability to be aware of and share others thoughts, feelings and emotions. One of the characteristics that supposedly sets us apart from the lesser species on the evolutionary scale - I wonder? Hunting and killing in our nature? man hunted and killed, simply because there weren't a lot of supermarkets around then, even fewer McDonalds and KFCs - he hunted and killed as a necessity. We are supposedly the intellectually superior species on this planet, the onus falls to us to protect those we consider lesser, be they animals, plants or even our own kids.
AnswerID: 534196

Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 18:40

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 18:40
Mate that first part of your post is just nonsense. I like many others know lots of people who shoot and fish and not for a minute do I fear for my life around these people.
0
FollowupID: 817779

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:01

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:01
Good for you, I for one would never go bush with a hunter, nor would I ever turn my back on one, gun or not... A gun nut is a nut, is a nut...
0
FollowupID: 817786

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:31

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:31
Oh, I almost forgot - the gun lobbyist's favourite: Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Guess what sort of people kill people? People who enjoy killing. Oh well, I guess everyone's got to have a hobby!
0
FollowupID: 817791

Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:34

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:34
Tony I don't own a gun and never have but I do like to fish so I guess I must still be threatening to you in some way and to my family who are blissfully unaware of what danger they are in.
Your extreme view on the matter is no different to the a Redneck type gunslinger shooting everything in sight, just at the other end of the scale.
I appreciate that hunting may not be in your DNA but it still is in others, we are all different. Perhaps in our more primitive days you may have taken on other duties in your community of basket weaving, growing or collecting fruit and vegetables or contributed in some other form. Whereas someone else in the community excelled at ( probably enjoyed) the hunting aspect of providing their part in the community.
We are all different and whilst I may no want to partake in a particular activity I respect other wishes to do so and keep an open mind on the subject.
0
FollowupID: 817792

Follow Up By: SDG - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:46

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:46
How would you even know they were a hunter that you may be travelling with, unless they are actually hunting?
0
FollowupID: 817796

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 21:23

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 21:23
No I don't think I'd enjoy basket weaving much at all Alby, or collecting fruit and vegetables for that matter, I'd probably be out killing animals to eat. I'd enjoy the exercise and the food, but I certainly wouldn't be taking any enjoyment from watching the unfortunate animal die. There is a difference between killing to eat and killing for enjoyment - I find it extraordinary that you don't understand that difference. As for feeling threatened Alby, let me put your mind at rest: I don't think anyone would find you threatening.
0
FollowupID: 817800

Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 22:07

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 22:07
Yes I do understand the difference.
There is a difference between Ivan Milat style hunting and someone who has enjoyed being successful in their hunting conquest
0
FollowupID: 817802

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 22:35

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 22:35
Now you're moving the goal posts Alby: you're now saying that someone enjoys being successful, that's a world away from someone taking enjoyment from watching an animal's death! As for conquering the hunted, how could you possibly not conquer, it's hardly a level playing field - very sporting!
0
FollowupID: 817804

Follow Up By: Dion - Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 01:14

Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 01:14
Would it help to get more enjoyment out of hunting Tony if we go back to first principles and discuss the safe end and the dangerous end of a firearm?
0
FollowupID: 817812

Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 06:51

Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 06:51
Tony I am not moving the goal posts but perhaps you have misinterpreted what people are saying when they enjoy hunting
People obviously must enjoy the activity as they do it as a leisure / sporting activity, the taking of an animals life is just part of the activity not the sole focus of the enjoyment
If that was the case they would all be lining up to get a job at the abattoir to get their jollies.
As I said in an earlier post, I know of people who still participate in the hunt but no longer pull the trigger but still enjoy the activity of the hunt.
As far as level playing field, I guess that it up the individual with what and how they hunt. There are plenty who prefer the bow and arrow as their skill set and craft of hunting
But I get what you are saying, just walked up to a beast in a paddock and shooting it point blank for pleasure is not what hunters are talking about
0
FollowupID: 817814

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 12:50

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 12:50
Tony,
How does "Hide and seek" rate in your eyes?
I mean, to enjoy sneaking around looking for people who are hiding from you? That would have to be the first sign of a serial killer wouldn't it? LOL
1
FollowupID: 817927

Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 14:28

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 14:28
Hairy gee that made me laugh, if that statement gets into the wrong hands they will be banning the game at preschool.LOL

Perhaps another analogy for hunting would be playing golf.
There is a vast array of equipment, planning, technical ability and social intercourse involved in a game of golf and in simplistic terms the aim is to put a little white ball in a hole. Watching a golfer they get a lot of pleasure in doing so but you cannot analyse that as getting a bucket of balls and sitting next to a hole and dropping them in to get some ultimate pleasure rush even though that is the end result.
0
FollowupID: 817931

Follow Up By: SDG - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 15:38

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 15:38
Good old fashioned game of Brandy was more satisfying than Hide and Seek. The infliction of pain with that tennis ball was a precursor to hunting life. lol
0
FollowupID: 817936

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 15:46

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 15:46
What about playing Armies or Cowboys and Indians as kids with air rifles?.......Picking gum nuts and slugs out of your cousins and brothers arse when they didn't put their hands up.....Bwhahahahaha
I should probably hand myself in now before I turn bad....LOL
0
FollowupID: 817937

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:09

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:09
Well Hairy, I find that disturbing, you shot at people with an air rifle and your parents allowed you to keep the rifle? That's astounding! I lived in the Williams/Narrogin region when I was a kid, a few mates had air rifles and a few made the mistake of shooting at others - they never saw their rifle again. I, like most kids made gings/catapults/ as well as bows and arrows, my folks couldn't afford things like air rifles, but they would have gone spare had I actually shot anyone with a ging or arrow..
0
FollowupID: 817941

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:19

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:19
I find it disturbing that you think we would have told our parents!!!!
1
FollowupID: 817945

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:23

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:23
Tony that was probably just an excuse your parents made up as they realised early on that you were unsuited to firearms ownership.
0
FollowupID: 817946

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:25

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:25
Gings and bows and arrows so you were manufacturing weapons as a kid...Mmmmm ....very disturbing.
Any way Im off down the creek to have a few shots with my new compound bow. Now Im shooting at a target of a rabbit........is this the start of me going bad? God help me if a real rabbit pokes his head out or the neighbour comes over!!!!!

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 817947

Follow Up By: SDG - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:59

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:59
I must be a terrorist as well.
Apart from sling shots, bow and arrows, throwing knives, I also made explosives.

Just because kids and some adults do these things, does not make them nut cases.
0
FollowupID: 817955

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Sunday, Jun 15, 2014 at 18:33

Sunday, Jun 15, 2014 at 18:33
Aiming a weapon at anyone - any weapon - is just plain stupidity, actually shooting them is a criminal offence! As a youngster I never aimed a weapon at anyone, nor did I shoot anyone, tin cans and the like were a good enough target for me. Today I still wouldn't aim a weapon at anyone for the very same reason - it is sheer stupidity - nor would I shoot anyone. So, if that makes be an unsuitable candidate for a firearm license, so be it...

If you're interested in a good read, Martin Bryant's biography is interesting. His father bought him an air rifle as his first weapon when he was a kid. Martin used it to shoot at the other kids. He then graduated to actual firearms as he grew, but never held a licence/permit. On your logic fisho64, he would have been the ideal candidate.

BTW Hairy, I think it disturbing that your parents never found out you were using your air rifle to shoot at other kids Just as disturbing: The parents of the kids you shot didn't notice the wounds on their kids behinds?
0
FollowupID: 818049

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Tuesday, Jun 17, 2014 at 00:13

Tuesday, Jun 17, 2014 at 00:13
Tony must have me confused with someone else?
Plus I dont use logic, just common sense :-)
0
FollowupID: 818157

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Tuesday, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:36

Tuesday, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:36
First line your post fisho64, what on earth are you talking about?
Second line your post fisho64 - that says it all.
0
FollowupID: 818174

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Friday, Jun 20, 2014 at 17:51

Friday, Jun 20, 2014 at 17:51
"On your logic fisho64, he would have been the ideal candidate."

Tony you‘re becoming more and more confused and less and less lucid.
0
FollowupID: 818442

Reply By: mikehzz - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:08

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:08
"I enjoy killing things"....seriously, is there any way to say it that doesn't sound creepy? Imagine saying it on a first date with a girl you fancy...lol. It's a deal breaker unless she's Morticia Addams. Killing things for necessity is quite acceptible, we HAVE to eat other living things even if only plants. It's the enjoyment factor that sets off alarm bells for a lot of us. Got to go and murder a few carrots...does that make me weird?
AnswerID: 534206

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:17

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:17
What a terrible person you are Mike - I only eat vegtables that have died of natural old age !
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 817790

Follow Up By: mikehzz - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:42

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:42
I sneak up on them while dressed all in orange with a fluffy green hat. Then I lop them of their green bits with one precise slash of a blade. Please read this in a Hannibal Lector voice for maximum effect. :-)
0
FollowupID: 817795

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:52

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 20:52
No, carrots don't count - don't like them, or pumpkins or brussel sprouts. I think I would enjoy shooting them into extinction.
0
FollowupID: 817798

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 21:41

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 21:41
In answer to the first question Mike: Nope, creepy is as creepy creepy does! I grow veges and fruit to eat on occasion Robin, I've never apologised to them though and I certainly don't wait for them to die of old age - mushy and horrible. Does that make me a bad person? I do take relish with killing sprouts, pumpkins and carrots though, pun intended of course.
0
FollowupID: 817801

Follow Up By: Member - Howard (ACT) - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 23:35

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 23:35
Robin,
if you used to eat meat from animals that died of natural old age I can understand you have become vegetarian
cheesrs
howard
Resigned to Retirement

Member
My Profile  Send Message

1
FollowupID: 817810

Reply By: chisel - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 21:38

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 21:38
"The interviews we heard praised the Deer hunting groups as delivering over $400 million to state tourism economy which while not really comparable is more than the flash for cash brigade tax us."
$400 million?? really? Where does this number actually come from?
AnswerID: 534215

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 07:51

Thursday, Jun 12, 2014 at 07:51
I haven't yet been able to get the actual report Chisel , but the parlimentary commentry gives us some clues as below.

The fascinating thing is the amount that ends up in local communitys its been a massive good news story.

Quote ----------------------------

“We also have this wonderful high country where the deer live and you’ve got this great forested habitat to hunt in and explore,” he said.

Hunting has continued to grow in popularity, with a 46 per cent increase in the number of Victoria game licence holders in the past decade.

The report identified more than 50 towns across the state where hunting expenditure was estimated to be more than $1 million last year.

And hunting expenditure in three towns — Traralgon, Rosedale and Mansfield — was upwards of $10 million.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 817816

Reply By: Tony H15 - Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 14:22

Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 14:22
Foxes and rabbits were introduced to Australia as an animal to be hunted, ironic isn’t it? You hunters now complain about them – even though they still provide you with so much ‘enjoyment’. Horses and camels were introduced to assist in exploring this country, now you hunters are complaining about them - even though they assisted in exploring the very areas that you hunters now use to kill them in. Pigs, goats, buffalo, deer and rabbits were all introduced as food animals, now you country folk are complaining about them - even though you used, and still use, their meat to fatten yourselves with. Kill the feral by all means – but let’s not be joyful about it. They’re the ones that feed and entertain you; and quite obviously bring you so much joy by dieing at your feet. So, while you’re all busy patting yourselves on the back for helping to raise local incomes, stop and think a minute: you people are the source of your own misery. For you lot, hunting is less about community spirit and more about your Machiavellian achievement; less about feeding yourselves and more about sneaky coward shots. When you smile at a picture of yourself, foot on a dead animal’s rump, stroking your weapon and smiling your Machiavellian smile you may well see the great hero – all I see is nut less wonder, intent on massaging their chimerical masculinity...
AnswerID: 534290

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 16:58

Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 16:58
Your sarcastic, threatening, confrontational and abusive manner is more likely the reason for you not being allowed to possess firearms.
This has caused you to feel bitter and suffer from an anger management problem.
Do you own knives and have you had any AVO's issued against you?
1
FollowupID: 817889

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 19:07

Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 19:07
You’re right I don’t own a firearm fisho64, not for the reasons you assume though. I have a target crossbow, which is now classified as a prohibited weapon so requires a permit/license to own – does that count? Let me guess, real men (like yourself of course) only own weapons they can stroke while having their photo taken - correct?. I do own knives fisho64, but I’ve never learned to throw them, they’re used for cutting up the Sunday roast, rope, stuff like that. Sorry, never had an AVO taken against me, never had to seek one either – actually you should have read between the lines of my posts fisho64 - I'm against violence as well as the enjoyment some appear to get from killing..
Sarcastic, yes I think I’ll wear that one (as should a few others); however, confrontational? On the contrary fisho64 I find your enjoyment for killing rather confrontational to be truthful. Threatening and abusive, well you got me there fisho64, I’ve gone over all the posts (for your benefit) and I just can’t seem to see any threatening or abusive language from either side – robust discussion maybe? But, if it’s too ‘robust’ for you, perhaps you should be weaving baskets and collecting fruit and vegetable, as was suggested for me. Anger management problems, now I really must object to that label fisho64: after all, I’m not the one visiting violence on animals - pretending I’m doing the community good and voicing my enjoyment over the killing of them. And you say I have an anger management problem – go figure. No doubt you’ll be stroking your weapon again by now fisho64; I wouldn’t expect anything to come of it though.
0
FollowupID: 817898

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 19:15

Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 19:15
"they’re used for cutting up the Sunday roast,"

obviously that roast committed suicide, and you got no enjoyment from the tragic death of that animal-gagging while forcing it down I'd wager!

You had me going there, for a while I was taking you seriously :-)
0
FollowupID: 817899

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 21:28

Friday, Jun 13, 2014 at 21:28
Ahhh, here we go again fisho64: The roast would have previously been a cow, sheep, pig, whatever, slaughtered in an abattoir for our consumption. As omnivores we are tied in to the eating of meat as well as greens (broccolli, carrots or pumpkins not included), the meat (and veges I hear someone say) are slaughtered as a matter of necessity rather than enjoyment. Just can't seem to grasp that one can we - fisho64: necessity - enjoyment. Worlds apart really. Not too many pigs, sheep, cattle roaming the halls of this apartment in the city in which I live (I'm told), so I guess I'll just have to rely on other avenues for procuring life's essentials. Life's tough ain't it? Never mind fisho64 - I empathise with your confusion. I feel I know you well enough by now to realise your statement was serious, as we now know sarcasm and confrontation are peculiar to me only
0
FollowupID: 817905

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 01:12

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 01:12
I get it now-its ok to enjoy the FRUITS of the slaughter cos we NEED to eat it. I honestly had you pegged as a vegan fruitloop.
Vegans, however odd they may appear would disagree heartily with you that its a necessity.

I however agree with you heartily.

Its odd that you cannot connect that some people enjoy eating meat and as an extension of that enjoy PROVIDING that meat.
And also enjoy providing that meat in a humane manner.

Meantime others who live in their city apartments go on believing that Coles meat comes from an abbatoir where the cows are read a bedtime story then fall asleep under a shady tree as the sun sets having been kindly euthanased by a Dr Harry lookalike.

By flicking out your credit card to pay for your meat, subconsciously I guess you get to disconnect from the reality which is somewhat different, but its better that you dont connect with reality on that as we'd then get a lecture from you on why we should only eat tofu and lentil sausages.
1
FollowupID: 817913

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 12:30

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 12:30
Ummm, yes of course it is ok to eat what you haven’t killed: I don’t make cars, does that mean I shouldn’t drive one; I don’t make socks, does that mean I shouldn’t wear them; I don’t make houses, does that mean I shouldn’t live in one; I don’t make radios, does that mean I shouldn’t listen to one. Many vegans don’t eat animal products because they object to the processes employed in farming our food animals. Some refrain from eating animal products because they believe our physiology is more akin to a herbivore than an omnivore – physiology and science tends to disagree in the main. I certainly enjoy my meat, as I do my house my car, my socks, my radio and a whole heap of other things. As an extension of that, I don’t think too many employers would appreciate their employees skipping work because they had to kill an animal for their supper, build a house to live in, knit some socks to keep their feet warm or make a car to drive to work. And of course there is the issue of the other residents of their apartment blocks (anyone who doesn’t kill their food lives in an apartment apparently) objecting to their attempts at self sufficiency – apparently there is a space reserved for hypocrisy in everyone!

I don’t think anyone (meat eaters or vegans) believe the animal farming and killing industries provide a warm fuzzy environment for the animals, however, they are aware it is the only viable option they have at their disposal, simply because if we all went about our lives gathering, killing and building in the name of self sufficiency our society would very rapidly devolve.

I can totally connect with people enjoying eating meat and as an extension of that enjoy PROVIDING that meat in a humane manner; however, that is not what is being said here. You yourself said, and I quote ‘I kill foxes, not to eat and enjoy it’. Others, as an answer to a direct question also said they enjoyed killing animals – not enjoy the process of providing that meat but actually enjoy killing the animal.

Animals such as rabbits, foxes and dingos are not killed humanely; they are routinely baited or infected with viruses and die an agonising death. Given their sheer numbers it is simply not possible to read them a bedtime story then watch them fall asleep under a shady tree as the sun sets having been kindly euthanised by a Dr Harry look alike. But until an acceptable alternative is available it is a fact of our lives - I can accept that as a necessary albeit less than pleasant reality – what I do not like is people saying they enjoy ‘killing’ an animal.

I do not believe for one minute any of you actually eat all that you kill: Animals in the wild do not have access to veterinary treatment so would suffer from a range of injuries, diseases and maladies; they also don’t have the option of treatments for parasitic infestation. And of course the thought of eating cat, dog or fox, whilst acceptable in some parts of the world, is not readily accepted here.

I hate tofu, lentils I like. While it is clear that meat is not essential in the diet, as witness the large number of vegetarians who have a nutritionally adequate diet, the inclusion of animal products makes it easier to ensure a good diet.

For your benefit let me conclude with:

Normal: Hungry + kill + eat = enjoyment.
Not normal: Not hungry + kill + not eat = enjoyment.
0
FollowupID: 817925

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 13:24

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 13:24
Gday Tony,
Ive had a reasonable read, not every word, but a reasonable read of this thread and I cant see where people have even suggested that watching an animal die at their feet is their reason for hunting other than you suggesting it?
As for the wellbeing of the animals.......personally I would prefer to be killed instantly while out doing what I do naturally without seeing it coming than being herded into yards and waiting in line to be slaughtered, wouldn't you.
As for not trusting or feeling safe around anyone who has hunted /fished or killed anything....well.......that just sounds bloody ridiculous to me, but each to their own I suppose, but you must be pretty lonely or scared.
I personally keep 50-100 sheep purely for food.........I don't line them all up for a mass killing but I do yard them not stalk them in the paddock.......Im confused......does that make me a homicidal maniac or do I come under the producer banner.
Id appreciate you feedback as Ive invited people over for dinner and should probably warn them, if I'm likely to shoot and kill them for fun while they are here? LOL

Cheers
(probably shouldn't have said that......now Im an alcoholic!)
1
FollowupID: 817928

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 14:22

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 14:22
I can see the benefit of your writing style as I fell asleep halfway thru your diatribe and wokeup at the last couple of sentences. But to borrow your style;

"shoot everything in sight, kill something everyday"=TonyH15

"eat red meat but pretend it grew on a foam tray"=TonyH15

"participate in an outdoor activity which is enjoyable, healthy, safe but clearly misunderstood by metrosexuals"=hunters
0
FollowupID: 817929

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:58

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 16:58
G’day Hairy, here’s a cut and post from my original post:

‘hunting, killing and consuming an animal is one thing, as is the necessity for culling and destroying sick and injured animals, but to admit to actually enjoying hunting and killing – that is a concern!

The emphasis here was and still is ‘enjoying killing’ As I have maintained throughout this thread I don’t have any problems with killing as a necessity, I do maintain anyone who ‘enjoys’ the act is a concern - neither have I suggested it is the sole purpose for hunting. Here’s a few quotes from this thread I cut and posted for you:

‘Lots of people enjoy it’.
‘I would think it is fair to say that most hunters "enjoy" the act and those that don't would be an exception to the rule’.
‘I kill foxes, not to eat and enjoy it’.
‘Feral Cats require no explanation, yes I enjoy killing them’.
‘Tony , its an interesting philosophy but wouldn't it be abnormal if some one didn't enjoy the hunt and kill as its a natural instinct in all animals for survival’.

Well I guess I’m different to you, I prefer to have some control over my life: of the two options, I would prefer to know, at least then I can either do something about it or know it’s time to bend over and kiss myself goodbye.

I find it ridiculous not being concerned about being in the company of someone who has admitted to ‘enjoying killing’ No sorry Hairy I’m not lonely or scared, just wise enough not to trust anyone with a penchant for killing things.

Now your last statement is interesting ‘I personally keep 50-100 sheep purely for food’. What part of I don’t have a problem with necessity don’t you understand: You kill them you eat them, terrific, great idea, let me reiterate:

Normal: Hungry + kill + eat = necessity.
Not normal: Not hungry + kill + not eat = not normal.

Now before you jump in boots and all again, let me expand: Killing to eradicate pests and killing to eat amount to the same thing, it is necessary.

Whether you warn your visitors is up to you, I have no knowledge or interest in your intentions.

I don’t really have an interest in your drinking habits, if you say you’re an alcoholic, that’s fine with me - they say the hardest part is accepting it, good luck with that.

Just so it’s clear (although recent history would say – not), here it is again:

Normal: Hungry + kill + eat = necessity.
Not normal: Not hungry + kill + not eat = not normal.

LOL.
0
FollowupID: 817954

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 17:11

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 17:11
Not sure I‘m understanding your post fisho64:

"shoot everything in sight, kill something everyday"=TonyH15.
Please explain? Who shoots everything in sight? Who kills something everyday? Relevance?

"eat red meat but pretend it grew on a foam tray"=TonyH15
Again please explain? Who eats red meat and pretends it grew on a foam tray?

I’m sorry fisho64 but I can’t see the relevance of your writing style, perhaps you should try and stay awake - at least long enough to know what you’re commenting on. Just a suggestion.
0
FollowupID: 817956

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 17:37

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 17:37
Tony,
I could also go through and choose the comments I wish to quote now, and project a different story, but I have better things to do at the moment.
Not every hunter is a threat to humans or some maniac which was the opinion I thought you were portraying at the beginning.
0
FollowupID: 817960

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 18:11

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 18:11
Nope, just the ones that tell you they enjoy killing. New a bloke once who confided in me he enjoyed killing animals. Many years later he stabbed a woman - said he wanted to know what it felt like and whether it would feel the same as killing animals. Fortunately she survived.
0
FollowupID: 817963

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 18:27

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 18:27
Yes. I don't think that too many people would disagree that people who just kill because they like killing are a worry.
Im just not sure what that has to do with hunters though?
I don't know how many killers started as hunters, but if you had to categorise them I think they would have more to do with cities, computer games, drugs and even religion these days .....not hunting?

Any way Ill leave it at that........Im going fishing ( to catch a feed) LOL

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 817964

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 18:34

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 18:34
Well, it was the hunters said they enjoyed killing animals.
0
FollowupID: 817966

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 19:22

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 19:22
comical! Tony you appear to have confused yourself somewhat


"shoot everything in sight, kill something everyday"=TonyH15.
Please explain? Who shoots everything in sight? Who kills something everyday? Relevance?

Those statements were cut from your own post using your own words as actions you undertook
Or have you forgotten my friend?
0
FollowupID: 817972

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 19:28

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 19:28
it appears to be me confused as your compatriot Ron N earlier was the one who "shot everything in sight"

I hang my head in shame while I apologize for confusing you with someone else :-)
0
FollowupID: 817974

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 20:08

Saturday, Jun 14, 2014 at 20:08
I don't mind being confused with someone like Ron N, he's one of those Australiians we should be proud of. Thank you Ron N!
0
FollowupID: 817983

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Tuesday, Jun 17, 2014 at 00:21

Tuesday, Jun 17, 2014 at 00:21
Now I think your confused Tony
The only firearm owner here who says he did all the things you accused EVERY hunter of doing???

"shoot everything in sight, kill something everyday"=Ron N.

Im lost again, no wonder I got confused before...

Google "diatribe..."
0
FollowupID: 818158

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Tuesday, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:14

Tuesday, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:14
Fisho64, you‘re becoming more and more confused and less and less lucid: attributing statements to the wrong people and displaying an inability to recognise dissimilarities in names. Nevertheless, I have enjoyed my time with this thread - I have leant:

hunters believe they are the equal of soldiers serving in a conflict zone,
defence personnel enjoy killing - otherwise they wouldn’t have joined the defence force,
anyone who doesn’t enjoy killing animals is abnormal,
nobody has a right to eat the meat of an animal they haven’t personally killed,
culling animals and slaughtering animals for consumption are the same,
the children’s game of hide and seek is the same as hunting and killing an animal,
inflicting pain on someone is a precursor to hunting life,
city folk think that country folk are there for their amusement and must conform to their beliefs,
city folk carry man bags and wear socks with sandals,
anyone who chooses not to eat animal products is a fruit loop, and
killers are all religious, live in the city, take drugs and play video games.

Apparently hunters also believe that anyone who doesn’t enjoy killing animals:
lives in a city apartment,
is lonely and scared,
is a vegan,
has no idea where meat comes from,
is a metrosexual,
should weave baskets and collect fruit and veges,
is not an ideal person to hold a firearm permit/license,
must have an AVO issued against them, and
eats tofu and lentil sausages.

At least one of your number:
used his air rifle to shoot childhood friends,
had parents who either didn’t know or didn’t care that their offspring was shooting at his childhood friends,
needs instruction on the difference between the safe end and the dangerous end of their firearm, and
believes that any two people who have similar, opposing views to himself must therefore be one and the same person.

The title of this thread is Changing Stereotypes of Hunters. Really? I feel like I’ve just stumbled onto the set of ‘Deliverance’.

I think I should leave it there for now, lest you become any more confused.
0
FollowupID: 818180

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Friday, Jun 20, 2014 at 18:10

Friday, Jun 20, 2014 at 18:10
I know you jest Tony, but sadly some of the lessons you've listed are true, and I understand it can be painful to learn such lessons about oneself.

The difference between us is that while I dont feel a need to force you into submission to our way of thinking-I care little about what you get up to in your apartment.
On the otherhand, you feel hellbent on forcing others to bow to your higher thinking.
In a similar manner to some religious doorknockers, anti 4WD, antifishing anti whatever zealots, any other line than your own requires you to keep on pecking away in the hope that everyone bows to your superiour intellect.

While country people just go on with what their doing, not interfering with you except to ask that you buy their products instead of chinese.

No doubt back to peck peck peck some more
2
FollowupID: 818446

Follow Up By: Tony H15 - Saturday, Jun 21, 2014 at 12:32

Saturday, Jun 21, 2014 at 12:32
Peck, peck...
1
FollowupID: 818481

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)