Hunt Talk Radio - Look for it on your favorite Podcast platform

Access to public land lost due to hunters using semi-auto rifles

I will answer your question through the eyes of a retired rural school teacher i know quiet well.

Her dad was a life long big game hunter. She began going out hunting with him when she was 10, She can spot big game like a professional guide. She took one deer once. not her thing but totally supports hunting and hunters.

She once had a big chunk of land and was very generous with allowing hunters to hunt her property for free, would even bring her horses to help pack out deer or elk,

She adores her vintage saddle ring model 94 in 32 Winchester special.

She loathes AR's, To her they are the rifle that kills school children and school teachers, the preferred weapon of crazy murderers. She would not allow anyone on her property with one,

Pump rifles are benign, Lever actions are beloved, AR's are bedeviled and loaded with baggage,
 
Would the fart have smelled different if they were lever action or pump action rifles?
I just answered your question in my last post about the rural school teacher. Depends on who is smelling the fart. To some it does not stink at all, to others, they are gagging.
 
It really takes some extra gumption to go up to two guys so heavily armed and give them some serious feedback.

Also, I should add they never should have even been there. The road was officially closed due to fire. To get there they had to have come in from the back way and ignored a very big "road closed" sign.

It does not take a very big fart to clear out a room. All it has to do is be really smelly.

These two guys were really smelly in so many ways.

Cliff's Notes version:

Your friend closed down access across a small sliver of his land because two heavily-armed hunters showed up with "semi-auto" rifles, (which he doesn't like) and he wouldn't tell the "heavily-armed" hunters they should leave (even though he could see them from his front porch), and they came in from a different direction than across his land in the first place (so they weren't really using it for access, were they even on his land? It's not very clear...).
 
Last edited:
She could prohibit hunting but grant access to cross the land to the public land.
She had no objection to hunters and hunting. She liked the meat too, She welcomed hunters, She simply loathed semi autos seeing their role in school shootings.

Check this out.

 
She loathes AR's, To her they are the rifle that kills school children and school teachers, the preferred weapon of crazy murderers. She would not allow anyone on her property with one,

Pump rifles are benign, Lever actions are beloved, AR's are bedeviled and loaded with baggage,


Sounds like one of millions of emotional people we get to share our country with. If it’s any comfort to you, you’re not alone. I know a few myself.

Maybe the “F Your Feelings” flag/sticker guys with the truck nuts that most of have grown to cringe at are more crucial to society than i thought. They’re a counter balance, eh?
 
Last edited:
I have a hard time with private property being used to block public property. Then I have a hard time whit a lot of a-holes that have guns and fire like that also. If I had public property blocked I think I would put in an access point for people but I would not allow semi auto rifles on the property at all. problem is the AR craze. Crazy's are getting them and abusing them. They make us all look bad! Long as I'm here, i wouldn't allow wht I thought were long range hunter's either!
 
Common sense sure is helpful sometimes. This is the one argument that will always put a tear in all gun owners gun rights argument.
“I need an AR that shoots 30 rounds in seconds to harvest my animal!”
“ A bolt action with a well practiced shooter is the best deer rifle!”
“A single shot rifle will kill any animal out there if used properly!”
Humans can’t get along about anything even though most of us do agree on the situation we are arguing about. Leave our 2nd amendment rights alone.
This thread has zero to do with 2A. It is about a private property owner’s reaction to folks who use such owners land in a manner they did not like. No government infringement anywhere to be found here to provoke the need for anyone’s “cold dead hands”.
 
I honestly have doubts this is anything other than a couple of contrived hypothetical circumstances.

If a person owns property, they are well within their rights to deny access for any reason they deem. It does not need to be rational or logical. I have been denied access because it was windy out, and they were concerned about fire. It's their call. I do not have to like it, but I have to respect their decision.

I don't own an AR type weapon. I have zero desire to have one. I also know that the overwhelming percentage of these that are sold, never get used for mayhem. I also know that the very large percentage of people who decide to shoot up a church, school, or mall choose a semi automatic weapon. Both things are true. There is no easy solution to the mass killings.
 
Kenetrek Boots

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,567
Messages
2,025,360
Members
36,235
Latest member
Camillelynn
Back
Top