Tndeer Logo

Page all of 3 123>
Topic Options
#3051330 - 11/27/12 10:42 AM Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill
Jugfish
4 Point


Registered: 01/17/11
Posts: 243
Loc: Corbin, KY

Offline
Well, the Republicans again prove they are fully capable of stepping on their own "Richards". Below is a link to the story and below are the comments I sent to Mithch McConnell's office this morning.

http://helenair.com/news/state-and-r...a4bcf887a.html

The Republican opposition to this bill is just plain stupid. I am a Republican, I vote R 99% of the time. I felt physically sick when Obama got re-elected. I am a right winger. But this vote against Tester's bill was stupid. You guys sided with Barbara Boxer, HSUS, NRDC, and the CBD, albeit for different reasons. The Dems got to vote with the NRA and all the outdoorsman, conservation, and hunting and gun-owner groups. The Dems will kill you guys with this issue for years.

Top
#3051366 - 11/27/12 11:00 AM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Jugfish]
stik
"Popcorn"
18 Point


Registered: 03/12/99
Posts: 21006
Loc: lenoir city,tn

confused Online
"sorry, that page don't exist".

from what i have heard and read, this is a bad law. i'm happy they voted against it.
_________________________
experienced hunters know its not just a bushy white tail, its a big middle finger.

nothing makes a fish bigger than almost being caught


Top
#3051367 - 11/27/12 11:00 AM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Jugfish]
fishboy1
16 Point


Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 10527
Loc: Warren Co

Offline
Read the bill and not just the title.

Its a red herring. 90% of the SPENDING in the bill goes overseas.

Thats right. They packaged a turd in a fancy box and hoped we would think it was chocolates.
_________________________
If you can't trust people with freedom, how can you trust them with power ?




Top
#3051428 - 11/27/12 11:32 AM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: fishboy1]
Hawk
TnDeer Old Timer
12 Point


Registered: 09/03/99
Posts: 6636
Loc: west tenn.

Offline
Not sure if this is the same bill that Tennessee Wildlife Federation is supportin or not.

E-mail from TWF:

One of the most critical components of our mission is to keep you informed on important policy issues that affect sportsmen and women. Now that the election is over, Congress has gotten back to business, and one of the first items on the agenda is the Sportsmen's Act of 2012.



At least 46 national hunting, fishing and shooting organizations have come together to support an unprecedented piece of bi-partisan legislation. Passage of this historic pro-sportsmen's bill will promote, protect and advance our nation's hunting, shooting and conservation heritage for generations to come.



The Act will increase the number of acres of public land available to hunters and anglers, streamline the common-sense regulation of lead shot, and simplify the reauthorization of funding for conservation programs that ensure we have abundant game on our public land.



This legislation is scheduled for a vote TODAY, Monday, Nov. 26.
_________________________
"Sometimes it's not enough to know what things mean, sometimes you have to know what things don't mean."

Top
#3051495 - 11/27/12 12:16 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Hawk]
Jugfish
4 Point


Registered: 01/17/11
Posts: 243
Loc: Corbin, KY

Offline



Yes, this is the bill that TWF was supporting, as was the NRA, Ducks Unlimited, NWTF, RMEF, The Nature Conservancy, every state wildlife agency, etc etc etc.



Edited by Jugfish (11/27/12 12:17 PM)

Top
#3051497 - 11/27/12 12:19 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Jugfish]
Jugfish
4 Point


Registered: 01/17/11
Posts: 243
Loc: Corbin, KY

Offline
Some of the groups that were aginst the bill include the Humane Society of the United States, The NRDC, the CBD, and other assorted wacko enviro groups. This bill would have made it impossible for the EPA to regulate lead ammunition and fishing lures.

Heck, the only Democrat to vote with the Republicans was Barbara Boxer.

I suggest fishboy and stik do a little more research.


Edited by Jugfish (11/27/12 12:20 PM)

Top
#3051542 - 11/27/12 12:42 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Jugfish]
Diehard Hunter
CRAMP
12 Point


Registered: 08/01/08
Posts: 6810
Loc: East Tennessee

Offline
I read it pretty closely. I saw it had overwhelming republican support in the house.

It looked to me like a bill that was actually in our best interest as sportsmen.


I t also looks to me like the republicans are just gonna be pissy for the next 4 years, and absolutely nothing will get done in Washington.

It really is time to jack our elected officials up and run new ones under them. They are a bunch of over paid and under worked 3 year olds who have had their pacifiers taken away.
_________________________
The recreational value of a game animal is inverse to the artificiality of its origin and the intensiveness of the management system that produced it. Aldo Leopold


Top
#3051605 - 11/27/12 01:06 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: fishboy1]
The Ol'Professor
6 Point


Registered: 04/16/08
Posts: 925
Loc: Mid TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: fishboy1
Read the bill and not just the title.

90% of the SPENDING in the bill goes overseas.


I've read the bill twice now and can't find that information?
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s3525/text
_________________________
The wealthy man can get hunting anyhow, but the man of small means is dependent solely upon wise and well-executed game laws for his enjoyment of the sturdy pleasure of the chase. Theodore Roosevelt

Top
#3051606 - 11/27/12 01:06 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Diehard Hunter]
fishboy1
16 Point


Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 10527
Loc: Warren Co

Offline
Possible I got it mixed up with another bill.

Personally I have stopped caring who endorses a bill. I want to read it myself. You can hide a lotta razor blades in a pot of stew.
_________________________
If you can't trust people with freedom, how can you trust them with power ?




Top
#3051784 - 11/27/12 02:35 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: fishboy1]
preds1
12 Point


Registered: 10/16/09
Posts: 6367
Loc: Sumner County

Offline
Not too sure I'm up to borrowing even more money to build target ranges, reefs, etc. just to have our kids pay for it later on.
Sure I love hunting/fishing, but there's bigger issues to be concerned with today than something "I" want. That's what got us in this mess.

IMO - everything needs to be cut, across the board, whether I like/dislike any particular bill and who the sponsor is.
Senate should pass a budget first. ;\)


Edited by preds1 (11/27/12 02:36 PM)
_________________________

http://youtu.be/pqICP295APA

Top
#3051787 - 11/27/12 02:37 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Diehard Hunter]
Wildcat
Non-Typical


Registered: 06/10/00
Posts: 42188
Loc: Western Ky.

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Diehard Hunter
I read it pretty closely. I saw it had overwhelming republican support in the house.

It looked to me like a bill that was actually in our best interest as sportsmen.


I t also looks to me like the republicans are just gonna be pissy for the next 4 years, and absolutely nothing will get done in Washington.

It really is time to jack our elected officials up and run new ones under them. They are a bunch of over paid and under worked 3 year olds who have had their pacifiers taken away.


re-read those two bills again. They ARE different.
_________________________
Obama, “the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid." Liberal law professor Jonathan Turley.




Top
#3051790 - 11/27/12 02:38 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Wildcat]
Jugfish
4 Point


Registered: 01/17/11
Posts: 243
Loc: Corbin, KY

Offline
Here is a response from the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

NSSF Pledges to Continue Work on Sportsmen's Act


The National Shooting Sports Foundation today expressed disappointment with the results of last evening's procedural vote in the U.S. Senate that has delayed action on the Sportsmen's Act of 2012 (S.3525), but pledged to continue working in a bipartisan fashion, along with a coalition of more than 45 other leading sportsmen's and conservation groups, to advance the historic package of bills before the adjournment of the 112th Congress.
"It is clear there is broad bipartisan support for the policies contained in the Sportsmen's Act, which contains our industry's top legislative priorities" said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel. "While we are disappointed by Monday's procedural vote, we will continue to work in a bipartisan manner to address budgetary concerns raised by senators in time to ensure a vote on the Sportsmen's Act before the end of the lame-duck session."


Edited by Jugfish (11/27/12 02:39 PM)

Top
#3051800 - 11/27/12 02:41 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Jugfish]
Wildcat
Non-Typical


Registered: 06/10/00
Posts: 42188
Loc: Western Ky.

Offline
Get a bill for AMERICAN Sportsmen and ONLY that then we will support it.

Just because a bill has certain things in it does not make it the one we want or need. Read the other stuff in that very same bill and people will understand.
_________________________
Obama, “the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid." Liberal law professor Jonathan Turley.




Top
#3051826 - 11/27/12 03:02 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Wildcat]
Poser
Mud Dauber
16 Point


Registered: 07/28/10
Posts: 12860
Loc: Tennessee

Offline
USF&W is supporting the bill via twitter. just saw it:

https://twitter.com/USFWSHQ
_________________________
It doesn't have to be fun to be fun.

Wild & crazy, can't be stopped. Only the strong will survive.

Keep your knife sharp and your skillet greasy.

http://www.GoCarnivore.com

Top
#3051852 - 11/27/12 03:18 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: preds1]
waynesworld
8 Point


Registered: 05/13/12
Posts: 1471
Loc: Mboro, Tennessee

Offline
Well before any bill that has a cost can be passed they need to have the hard dollar funding for it. Or do any of you think we can put that to fund it we will cut the obama phone, Car credit, or other entitlement spending. It is a trap to get republicans to start spending money on things there base supports to just throw in some more entitlement spending.
Top
#3051887 - 11/27/12 03:45 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Wildcat]
The Ol'Professor
6 Point


Registered: 04/16/08
Posts: 925
Loc: Mid TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Wildcat
Get a bill for AMERICAN Sportsmen and ONLY that then we will support it.

Just because a bill has certain things in it does not make it the one we want or need. Read the other stuff in that very same bill and people will understand.


Wildcat, I'm not sure I know what you're referring to. Here is the bill, I've read it three times now. Maybe I'm missing something?
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s3525/text
_________________________
The wealthy man can get hunting anyhow, but the man of small means is dependent solely upon wise and well-executed game laws for his enjoyment of the sturdy pleasure of the chase. Theodore Roosevelt

Top
#3051977 - 11/27/12 04:48 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: The Ol'Professor]
BMan
16 Point


Registered: 02/06/06
Posts: 10555
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: The Ol'Professor
 Originally Posted By: Wildcat
Get a bill for AMERICAN Sportsmen and ONLY that then we will support it.

Just because a bill has certain things in it does not make it the one we want or need. Read the other stuff in that very same bill and people will understand.


Wildcat, I'm not sure I know what you're referring to. Here is the bill, I've read it three times now. Maybe I'm missing something?
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s3525/text

Three times?

For starters, section 245 deals with African species and specifies the funds are to be spent outside of the country.

Also, a bunch of reauthorizations for bills that may or may not be good; would have to review each one to see. If they are that good, why not reauthorize them on their own rather than tying them to another bill?

There's a whole lot in that bill about creating boards to do this and that, and looks like some added government employees to boot.

The whole "expanded federal land for hunting" is but one or two pages in a 102 page bill, and is virtually nonexistent when it comes to specifics - except it rules out any hunting on national parks at all.

The Senate needs to get their act together and start trying to pass a budget, rather than on things that, in the grand scheme of things, really do not matter.
_________________________
Rules are for people who lose fights.

Top
#3052006 - 11/27/12 05:03 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: BMan]
The Ol'Professor
6 Point


Registered: 04/16/08
Posts: 925
Loc: Mid TN

Offline
Yes, 3-times and the first time I read it I understood that section 245 dealt with African species. These funds are already being spent outside the United States and have been since the first African species act was passed in 1989. All this bill would have done is amend those acts.
_________________________
The wealthy man can get hunting anyhow, but the man of small means is dependent solely upon wise and well-executed game laws for his enjoyment of the sturdy pleasure of the chase. Theodore Roosevelt

Top
#3052023 - 11/27/12 05:19 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: The Ol'Professor]
de novo
10 Point


Registered: 07/21/08
Posts: 4030
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
Another example of how %^&* up our government system is. It should be fairly straightforward to write and pass a bill for America's "sportsmen". Instead every special interest lobbyist or corrupt politician is able to insert items that make the bill to difficult to comprehend without a law degree.

I haven't followed this piece of legislation, is this one where the House has one version and the Senate has their own? Is this where the confusion arises?
_________________________
“Reality is what continues to exist whether you believe in it or not.” 

“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.”

Top
#3052036 - 11/27/12 05:24 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: The Ol'Professor]
BMan
16 Point


Registered: 02/06/06
Posts: 10555
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: The Ol'Professor
Yes, 3-times and the first time I read it I understood that section 245 dealt with African species. These funds are already being spent outside the United States and have been since the first African species act was passed in 1989. All this bill would have done is amend those acts.

Wildcat's statement was to have a bill that supports American Sportsmen.

Section 245 reauthorizes, including expenditure of funds, supporting African and Asian species and mandates the money be spent outside the U.S.

So, please explain how reauthorizing anything for African and Asian species and spending money on them outside the U.S. supports American Sportsmen.
_________________________
Rules are for people who lose fights.

Top
#3052479 - 11/27/12 09:39 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: preds1]
Super8
8 Point


Registered: 07/15/12
Posts: 1473
Loc: USofA

Offline
 Originally Posted By: preds1
Not too sure I'm up to borrowing even more money to build target ranges, reefs, etc. just to have our kids pay for it later on.
Sure I love hunting/fishing, but there's bigger issues to be concerned with today than something "I" want. That's what got us in this mess.

IMO - everything needs to be cut, across the board, whether I like/dislike any particular bill and who the sponsor is.
Senate should pass a budget first. ;\)



Exactly........This Sportman's Bill was full of PORK and once again a good idea for a bill but it was highjacked with wasteful spending. It would be like selling your soul to the Devil for a pocket full of cash. Guess they will play this game until the end of time. Its sad!
_________________________
You could save more innocent lives by taking pens away from politicians than by taking guns away from law-abiding citizens.

Top
#3052506 - 11/27/12 09:55 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Super8]
Big J
16 Point


Registered: 03/10/06
Posts: 11990
Loc: Joelton

Offline
Use of Funds- Of the amounts made available under subsection (a) for each fiscal year, not less than 75 percent shall be expended for projects carried out at a location outside of the United States.’.


Thats enough for me to say go screw yourself!!!!! Dont wrap a turd up in pretty paper and call it chocolate!!!
_________________________
Love God, Love people, Live Gospel!!

Top
#3052516 - 11/27/12 10:03 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Big J]
Big J
16 Point


Registered: 03/10/06
Posts: 11990
Loc: Joelton

Offline
Hey I have an idea!! Instead of implementing this group of bullcrapers!! Send this money to the state wildlife agencies and let them use it to do what needs to be done instead of putting together a board of idiots to report it to someone that has no idea what the heck they are being told!!!!!!!

SEC. 205. NATIONAL FISH HABITAT CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP OFFICE.
(a) Establishment- Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Director shall establish an office, to be known as the ‘National Fish Habitat Conservation Partnership Office’, within the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.

(b) Functions- The National Fish Habitat Conservation Partnership Office shall--

(1) provide funding for the operational needs of the Partnerships, including funding for activities such as planning, project development and implementation, coordination, monitoring, evaluation, communication, and outreach;

(2) provide funding to support the detail of State and tribal fish and wildlife staff to the Office;

(3) facilitate the cooperative development and approval of Partnerships;

(4) assist the Secretary and the Board in carrying out this subtitle;

(5) assist the Secretary in carrying out the requirements of sections 206 and 208;

(6) facilitate communication, cohesiveness, and efficient operations for the benefit of Partnerships and the Board;

(7) facilitate, with assistance from the Director, the Assistant Administrator, and the President of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, the consideration of fish habitat conservation projects by the Board;

(8) provide support to the Director regarding the development and implementation of the interagency operational plan under subsection (c);

(9) coordinate technical and scientific reporting as required by section 209;

(10) facilitate the efficient use of resources and activities of Federal departments and agencies to carry out this subtitle in an efficient manner; and

(11) provide support to the Board for national communication and outreach efforts that promote public awareness of fish habitat conservation.

(c) Interagency Operational Plan- Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, and every 5 years thereafter, the Director, in cooperation with the Assistant Administrator and the heads of other appropriate Federal departments and agencies, shall develop an interagency operational plan for the National Fish Habitat Conservation Partnership Office that describes--

(1) the functional, operational, technical, scientific, and general staff, administrative, and material needs of the Office; and

(2) any interagency agreements between or among Federal departments and agencies to address those needs.

(d) Staff and Support-

(1) DEPARTMENTS OF INTERIOR AND COMMERCE- The Director and the Assistant Administrator shall each provide appropriate staff to support the National Fish Habitat Conservation Partnership Office, subject to the availability of funds under section 213.

(2) STATES AND INDIAN TRIBES- Each State and Indian tribe is encouraged to provide staff to support the National Fish Habitat Conservation Partnership Office.

(3) DETAILEES AND CONTRACTORS- The National Fish Habitat Conservation Partnership Office may accept staff or other administrative support from other entities--

(A) through interagency details; or

(B) as contractors.

(4) QUALIFICATIONS- The staff of the National Fish Habitat Conservation Partnership Office shall include members with education and experience relating to the principles of fish, wildlife, and aquatic habitat conservation.

(5) WAIVER OF REQUIREMENT- The Secretary may waive all or part of the non-Federal contribution requirement under section 204(e)(1) if the Secretary determines that--

(A) no reasonable means are available through which the affected applicant can meet the requirement; and

(B) the probable benefit of the relevant fish habitat conservation project outweighs the public interest in meeting the requirement.

(e) Reports- Not less frequently than once each year, the Director shall provide to the Board a report describing the activities of the National Fish Habitat Conservation Partnership Office.
_________________________
Love God, Love people, Live Gospel!!

Top
#3052608 - 11/27/12 11:37 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Jugfish]
stik
"Popcorn"
18 Point


Registered: 03/12/99
Posts: 21006
Loc: lenoir city,tn

confused Online
 Originally Posted By: Jugfish


I suggest fishboy and stik do a little more research.


i stand by my original opinion. read the bill.
_________________________
experienced hunters know its not just a bushy white tail, its a big middle finger.

nothing makes a fish bigger than almost being caught


Top
#3053198 - 11/28/12 10:44 AM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: BMan]
Jugfish
4 Point


Registered: 01/17/11
Posts: 243
Loc: Corbin, KY

Offline
Wildcat's statement was to have a bill that supports American Sportsmen.

Section 245 reauthorizes, including expenditure of funds, supporting African and Asian species and mandates the money be spent outside the U.S.

So, please explain how reauthorizing anything for African and Asian species and spending money on them outside the U.S. supports American Sportsmen.
[/quote]

I think I understand now what you are upset about. I'll try to explain. The money that would go to overseas projects to do things like conserve apes or lions would come from the sale of 'stamps' much like duck stamps. This program already exists now and is completely voluntary. If somebody wants to contribute to an effort to conserve African wildlife, they can purchase one of these stamps, and this bill says that at least 75% of that money has to be spent on the issue in Africa. It can't be spent on offices in DC. The money is not appropriated. It comes from the sale of stamps which are bought volunatrily for the intended purpose, just like duck stamps.

This bill would have created the ability to buy duck stamps on line as opposed to going to the post office.

This was a good bill, and the Rs will hurt from this for a while. Also, programs that support hunting, fishing, etc will hurt.

This bill would also have prevented EPA from regulating lead in fishing lures and bullets.

Top
#3053237 - 11/28/12 11:14 AM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Jugfish]
Wildcat
Non-Typical


Registered: 06/10/00
Posts: 42188
Loc: Western Ky.

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Jugfish
Wildcat's statement was to have a bill that supports American Sportsmen.

Section 245 reauthorizes, including expenditure of funds, supporting African and Asian species and mandates the money be spent outside the U.S.

So, please explain how reauthorizing anything for African and Asian species and spending money on them outside the U.S. supports American Sportsmen.


I think I understand now what you are upset about. I'll try to explain. The money that would go to overseas projects to do things like conserve apes or lions would come from the sale of 'stamps' much like duck stamps. This program already exists now and is completely voluntary. If somebody wants to contribute to an effort to conserve African wildlife, they can purchase one of these stamps, and this bill says that at least 75% of that money has to be spent on the issue in Africa. It can't be spent on offices in DC. The money is not appropriated. It comes from the sale of stamps which are bought volunatrily for the intended purpose, just like duck stamps.

This bill would have created the ability to buy duck stamps on line as opposed to going to the post office.

This was a good bill, and the Rs will hurt from this for a while. Also, programs that support hunting, fishing, etc will hurt.

This bill would also have prevented EPA from regulating lead in fishing lures and bullets. [/quote]







And THAT'S all the 200+ page bill would do??????


That bill was nothing but a show designed to fool some people. They put in a "little sweet stuff" (see above) in there and "named" it the Sportsmans Bill" also desinged to fool the same people.

So far I've seen less than 6 things that would have helped AMERICAN SPORTSMEN in that 200+ page bill.

Now what's in the rest of that bill??? Ever ALL Of our posts on this subject will NEVER reach 200+ pages so what all is in there???

Like I said, they put in a few "sweet things" in and add a nice name to the bill and they've fooled some people
_________________________
Obama, “the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid." Liberal law professor Jonathan Turley.




Top
#3053285 - 11/28/12 12:03 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Wildcat]
Jugfish
4 Point


Registered: 01/17/11
Posts: 243
Loc: Corbin, KY

Offline
Just about like I told you in KY, OK,whatever. Nevermind.
Top
#3053571 - 11/28/12 03:23 PM Re: Senate Republicans vote against Sportsmen's Bill [Re: Jugfish]
BMan
16 Point


Registered: 02/06/06
Posts: 10555
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Jugfish
I think I understand now what you are upset about. I'll try to explain. The money that would go to overseas projects to do things like conserve apes or lions would come from the sale of 'stamps' much like duck stamps. This program already exists now and is completely voluntary. If somebody wants to contribute to an effort to conserve African wildlife, they can purchase one of these stamps, and this bill says that at least 75% of that money has to be spent on the issue in Africa. It can't be spent on offices in DC. The money is not appropriated. It comes from the sale of stamps which are bought volunatrily for the intended purpose, just like duck stamps.


Sections 244 and 245 deal with completely different acts, so your combining them into one doesn't wash. Sorry.

Even if they were for the same acts, how exactly does that help American Sportsmen? That's right - it doesn't, not one bit.

 Originally Posted By: Jugfish
This bill would also have prevented EPA from regulating lead in fishing lures and bullets.

Really? Read the bill again; the only thing addressed is sport fishing, which doesn't include bullets.

Oh, and don't forget this little nugget which eliminates any "protection":

(b) Relationship to Other Law- Nothing in this section or any amendment made by this section affects or limits the application of or obligation to comply with any other Federal, State or local law.

 Originally Posted By: Jugfish
This was a good bill, and the Rs will hurt from this for a while. Also, programs that support hunting, fishing, etc will hurt.

We'll just have to disagree on this. In fact, I'd go so far as to say the only reason the bill was introduced was to put the Rs into a bind: they could be against it and be labeled as anti-sportsmen, or they could support it and be labeled as excessive spenders.

Again, if this bill is supposed to help sportsmen, and open up federal land for hunting, why is that covered in 1 or 2 pages of the bill, but numerous boards and positions are created? That doesn't seem odd to you?

_________________________
Rules are for people who lose fights.

Top
Page all of 3 123>


Moderator:  Crappie Luck, Tennessee Todd, RUGER, Unicam, stretch, Cuttin Caller, Bobby G, Kimber45 
Hop to:
Top Posters
4105487
RUGER
86937
Deer Assassin
65373
BSK
60967
Crappie Luck
51376
spitndrum
Newest Members
Urban deer Hunter, Mclem135, Cch, Timberninja31, Claims Rep.
13266 Registered Users
Who's Online
97 registered (hitek7, THEdonkey0515, downthebrown, bjohnson, Buzzard, Reaper40, 7 invisible) and 149 anonymous users online.
Forum Stats
13266 Members
42 Forums
92918 Topics
1085676 Posts

Max Online: 788 @ 11/11/13 08:06 PM
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON
September
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30
Forum Donations
The TnDeer.Com Deer Talk Forum is for Tennessee Deer Hunters by Tennessee Deer Hunters. If you enjoy using our Talk Forum and would like to contribute to help in it's up-keep. Just submit your contribution by clicking on the DONATE button below and paying with PayPal or a major credit card. Any amount is much appreciated. Thanks for your support!

TN Burn Safe

Generated in 0.187 seconds in which 0.001 seconds were spent on a total of 14 queries. Zlib compression enabled.