John Kerry on Hunting

Muledeer4me

New member
Joined
Dec 11, 2000
Messages
1,597
Location
Idaho
Saturday, July 10, 2004
John Kerry on Hunting


["I go out with my trusty 12-gauge double-barrel, crawl around on my stomach. I track and move and decoy and play games and try to outsmart them. You know, you kind of play the wind. That's hunting," said Kerry. (Craig Gilbert, "Bringing candidate to life," Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 7/5/04)


The Truth about John Kerry’s Record for Hunters


§ John Kerry has the highest rating on the Humane Scorecard sponsored jointly by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and the Fund for Animals. Both groups are firmly committed to ending hunting in this country.

o HSUS’ website says “sport hunting – the killing of wild animals as recreation – is fundamentally at odds with the values of a humane, just and caring society” (emphasis added). (www.hsus.org/ace/12035; viewed 7/5/04).

o Heidi Prescott, the National Director of the Fund for Animals, said in a 1995 speech that the Fund for Animals is “unalterably opposed to the killing of animals for sport” (emphasis added). (Speech by Heidi Prescott to the 4th Annual Governors Symposium on North America’s Hunting Heritage, August 1995)



§ John Kerry was endorsed by and received an “A” rating from the League of Conservation Voters. This environmental extremist group supports anti-hunters in Congress.



§ Kerry also has a 100% voting record with the anti-gun Brady Campaign.



§ John Kerry received an “F” rating from the NRA and a “0%” rating from Gun Owners of America in their most recent rankings of legislators.

o Kerry’s campaign says he agrees with the view that there is “no personal constitutional right, under the Second Amendment, to own or use a gun”.

o Kerry made his feelings about hunters known when he said “I don’t want to be the candidate of the NRA in this country”.



§ Unlike 60% of the U.S. Congress, John Kerry is not, and has never been, a member of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus. The Caucus describes its membership as “open to Congressmen and Senators who are sportsmen or who support the concept of sustained use and wildlife management, even if they do not themselves take to the fields and waters to fish, hunt or trap.”



§ Kerry, who has missed more than 2/3 of his Senate votes this year, came back to the Senate to help kill the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. During the debate, he voted for Senator Kennedy’s amendment to the bill which would have outlawed many center-fire rifle cartridges that hunters regularly use.



§ John Kerry cosponsored the Roadless Area Conservation Act in the Senate with other enemies of hunters like Barbara Boxer, Charles Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton. The bill, if passed, would have greatly restricted access to our National Forest system by hunters, fishermen, and other recreational users. "
 
This is a real gem here:

"§ John Kerry cosponsored the Roadless Area Conservation Act in the Senate with other enemies of hunters like Barbara Boxer, Charles Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton. The bill, if passed, would have greatly restricted access to our National Forest system by hunters, fishermen, and other recreational users. "

Yep, Kerry is antihunting because the fat assed ATV crowd has to get off their machines and walk.

Where do people come up with this crap?

By the way, because a candidate wont be the NRA's boy, sure doesnt make them anti-hunters. I know plenty of hunters who dislike the NRA and dont support them at all. Are they antihunters too?

Dont insult the posters in SI with this kind of third grade garbage.
 
"In a speech to NAACP on Thursday, Sen. John Kerry said he would be a "uniter," and would meet with anyone, even those who disagree with him. Gun Owners of America is ready to take him up on his offer.


Story Continues Below



Kerry said that when you're president, "You need to talk to all the people - and that's exactly what I intend to do.

"I will be a president who truly is a uniter," Kerry said, "not one who seeks to divide our nation."

"Excellent!" said GOA Director of Communications Erich Pratt. "We're so glad to hear that you want to talk with us and help unite this nation. How about working with us to defend the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights?

Gun Owners of America notes that Kerry has not shown up for most of his Senate votes this year. However, Pratt said, "He did fly into town this March, specifically to ban several scores of semi-automatic firearms."

GOA says Kerry's voting record on gun rights issues has been "consistently poor," and the group said it "looks forward to discussing these issues with his campaign."

Gun Owners of America said it has contacted the Kerry campaign to take the candidate up on his offer. "

Copyright CNSNews.com

" I know plenty of hunters who dislike the NRA and dont support them at all. Are they antihunters too?"

Buzz ,That depends ----Do they look you in the eye and tell you they are hunter's then vote for animal right groups ?
 
BuzzH,

If nra members, offroaders and all sportsmans groups don't stick together, they will all be defeated separately.

John Kerry is not and has never been a friend of the hunters. Pull your head out.

JB
 
D13er,

I only have one thing to say about "sportsmen" sticking to together.

I will quit hunting and join PETA before I become an NRA member or join ranks with fat-assed ATVers...

I'm not out for atv riders or the nra, I'm out for the average sportsmen, period.
 
"I will quit hunting and join PETA before I become an NRA member or join ranks with fat-assed ATVers...

I'm not out for atv riders or the nra, I'm out for the average sportsmen, period."


Buzz, Im sorry to see you post that.
It's that type of division that is going to sink us all.

Please define " Average sportsman " .
 
["I go out with my trusty 12-gauge double-barrel, crawl around on my stomach. I track and move and decoy and play games and try to outsmart them. You know, you kind of play the wind. That's hunting," said Kerry.

Yep, sure sounds like a great hunter. LMFAO
 
MD, "Buzz, Im sorry to see you post that.
It's that type of division that is going to sink us all."

What's going to sink us all is people like you who don't understand the issues but go around making simpleton remarks and stirring up trouble with other idiots. Why don't you ride your ATV back to California instead of trying to Californicate Idaho?
 
Ithaca - getting a little personal, aren't you? I think MD4me understands the issues as well as you do, but has a different opinion. How did this become an Idaho topic?
 
CH,
Not trying to pick a fight but the way Ithaca feels about Californicating things is most likely the same way about 99% of the Natives in Montana and Idaho feel about transplanted Californians. It isn't enough that they completely f__ked up their own state but they want to come in and f__k the rest of the west as well.

It just makes me disgusted listening to the majority of transplants who moved here to "get closer to nature" but pine away for all the things they left. Pick a town in Western Montana: Bozeman, Missoula, Kalispell, Polson, Livingston, Dillon, Hamilton, Big Fork, Hell even Butte, have all been invaded by refugees from California and all are worse off for it. Sounds harsh but that is reality.

Nemont
 
That's all great, Nemont, and as a 3rd generation Native Californian, I feel the same way about about all the flakes that have moved here and ruined my state - but what does that have to do with John Kerry hunting??? And how did it become a personal attack on MD4me?

Start a different topic if you want to, but why hijack this one?
 
MD4ME,

Whats an average sportsmen? To me its someone who is committed to hunting. And I dont mean just buying a tag every year. Someone who recognizes the need for quality habitat, understands issues, promotes wildlife ahead of their need to "fill my tag", understands how they effect wildlife, get involved in habitat improvement, attend meetings, etc. etc. etc.

A couple things I've noticed over the years is that very, very, very, few hunters are actively involved in the sport they claim is so important to them. I'll use Missoula as an example. Each year the MTFWP holds public meetings on things that effect hunters, seasons, etc. I attended nearly all those meetings, and it was always the same 40-50 people attending those meetings. Everyone seemed to have "better things to do" than attend a meeting about their sport. I dont know how many hunters live in Missoula, but its in the thousands for sure. I've found the same thing in Laramie, same faces all the time.

The other thing that I've found to be true, and this is ridiculous. The NRA, ATVers, Guides/Outfitters, etc. start the worn out crap about we have to stick together as SPORTSMEN. Look, thats BS, plain and simple. The atv crowd, the NRA, the Guides and Outfitters dont give a crap about the average hunter. They're more concerned with their own agendas and are using scare tactics to get hunters on their side. I have no trouble with them representing themselves, just dont include me in your BS unless I ask you to.

When was the last time the NRA financially supported the Mule Deer Foundation? The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation? Pheasants forever? Ducks unlimited? How about the BRC, do they financially support wildlife? The NRA cares more about trying to defend someones right to own an AR-15 with a 50 round clip. The BRC cares more about having a jillion miles of roads to ride their atv's.

I dont care if thats what they want to defend, in fact I encourage them to do it. Just dont throw the "hunters and the NRA need to stick together" BS around. I dont ask them to, nor want them to represent ME as a hunter. I want to be represented as a HUNTER for HUNTERS. Not a hunter being represented by the Blue Ribbon Coalition, the NRA, or the guides and outfitters association.

Its long past due for hunters to represent themselves and let the other political interest groups worry about their own problems. Wildlife issues are complicated enough without dragging extra baggage into it.

So, if it comes down to me having to join ranks with the NRA, Guides/Outfitters, ATVers, etc. to get representation for hunting issues...I'll quit and join PETA long before that ever happens.

But, hey, do what you want.

Marland, could you show me anywhere in the 2nd that references hunting or sportsmen? Yeah, I know, I cant find it either.
 
I can agree with a lot of your post, Buzz. I do, however, feel strongly about the Second Amendment and that is why I support (somewhat) the NRA. I have seen them abandon California to the liberals, though, and so I tend to financially support Gun Owners of Californian and the California Rifle and Pistol Club more than the NRA.

There is no Constitutionally guaranteed right to hunt that I am aware of. The Second Amendment says nothing about hunting, and was not included in the Bill of Rights to guarantee hunting rights. It was included as an aid in guaranteeing the other rights, IMHO. Hunters are a minority in this country now - and that is an unfortunate fact. It is possible to lose the "right" to hunt - look at the laws passed in the last few years about bear or cat hunting with dogs, over bait, etc.

Frankly, I also see no need to own an M-16 with a 30-round clip. One shot from concealment and I'd be able to collect one from a dead National Guardsman, if it ever came to that.
 
Sorry Marland......Buzz is so riddled with the "Little Man" syndrome that everything else goes over his head (perhaps because where his head is located - cranial rectal inversion you know) However, the rest of us do appreciate your remarks!
 
Well whitedeer I appreciate that. Buzz can't seem to understand that the NRA isn't about hunting it's about gun ownership be it a hunting rifle, a pistol or an AR15 with a 30 round clip. They have fought legislation regarding all of them.
And they are correct all users of the outdoors need to stick together or he can just buy himself a pair of Birkenstocks for hiking (on approved trails only). This candidate, a friend of the environment votes for national parks and against national monuments, that helps hunting and the environment right?

I also noticed that his definition of average sportsman is way narrow,sounds like he's about the only average sportsman on this board.

But, I'm more than willing to adopt his view, I don't use public lands for hunting so SCREW THEM they can close them , hell I'll lobby for it since it's all about me.That will fix the habitat no extraction of anything period.

Everyone can get their hunting lands the way I do, by making concessions in lifestyle and by basically begging for places to go.
 
Cali,

I agree with you on the 2nd, it is important.

I just think that hunting and the 2nd are two entirely different issues. Trying to combine them clouds the individual issues.

One is a constitutional right, the other isnt, etc. etc. etc.

Also, I totally agree with you on this: "Hunters are a minority in this country now - and that is an unfortunate fact. It is possible to lose the "right" to hunt - look at the laws passed in the last few years about bear or cat hunting with dogs, over bait, etc."

Thats the point I was making, hunters have a big enough job representing themselves and defending their "right" to hunt.

Whitedip,

I see you're still busy trying to find that clue. Have a third grader read you the 2nd amendment sometime, then come back and you can join the discussion without looking ignorant.
 
Marland, the part you dont understand is that the NRA is selling a bunch of crap to hunters and doing nothing to support/represent hunting or hunters.

Like I said, show me a list of habitat improvement the NRA has done lately. Show me how they lobbied to keep bear baiting in WA, CA, etc.

They arent a hunting group at all, and thats the point. So why do they beg hunters for $$$ and ask hunters to "stick together" with them on gun rights issues?

Doesnt make sense.

It makes sense for hunters to support HUNTING issues, not gun rights issues.

Marland, my definition isnt narrow. Nearly every hunter I know fits the description I gave...with the exception of most not being actively involved in their sport.

I'm not asking hunters to donate 5K a year or 200 days of hard labor...but for Christ sake at least attend a public meeting once a year.

Hunters are poorly organized and rely too much on a handful of people representing their interests. But, they sure are quick to bitch when something passes they dont like.

The NRA propoganda wagon has taken its toll...thats pretty plain to see.
 
Buzz the part you don't understand is the NRA lobbied against the "cop killer" bullets remember that little pearl of proposed legislation? It encompassed nearly every centerfire rifle bullet used today, all they had to do was defeat the latest version of body armor. A quote from Ted Kennedy "the 30.30 caliber, was responsible for penetrating three officers' armor and killing them in 1993, 1996, and 2002. This ammunition is also capable of puncturing light-armored vehicles, ballistic or armored glass, armored limousines, even a 600-pound safe with 600 pounds of safe armor plating. "

They lobbied against the latest version of the sniper rifle bill, the one using the excuse that the .50 cal could penetrate the skin of an airliner , name one popular big game round that couldn't do that from say 500 yards... I know I know apples to oranges but you know as well as I do how it works they get the legislation for the .50 cal passed, then they say "we didn't go far enough"

They lobbied against another version of the .50 cal ban, this time in my state, the way it was written it included any firearm over .50 cal , how big is the 28 ga shotgun?

Aren't 99% of hunters also gun owners? Aren't there org.s for every species/habitat in existance right now? Don't get me wrong, I ain't an NRA lackey , I dropped their sorry asses after the compromised on "assault Weapons" and I was right, it did come back and included HUNTING firearms.
I do my own research, it would be the same as me blaming your views on fascination with ,oh I dunno the Sierra Club, it's not really fair.

Every gun owner should belong to a Pro-gun org. Every Hunter should belong at minimum to groups dedicated to the species they hunt. That goes a long ways toward making a sportsman.

See, your view is narrow not by design but by lack of knowledge, there ain't crap for organized public meetings here on hunting issues. Atleast not that I've ever been made aware of. What we as hunters can do here is really very limited aside from calling congress critters.

Here's the part you're not going to like because it proves you wrong (somewhat) on the NRA and hunter's issues deal http://www.freehunters.org/Story.aspx?id=1 from the link
Then you need to know about a new initiative from NRA, the boldest commitment to American hunters in our association's 133-year history. Forming now is Free Hunters – The National Hunting Club of America, whose sole mission is to be the nation's watchdog for hunters
 
Marland,

I hear what you're saying, I do. I also think the absolute BEST and only decent argument I've ever heard from the NRA is the "slippery slope" of gun legislation.

I also dont have any problem with people choosing to support the NRA.

What I'm against is the way the NRA is constantly babbling their propoganda to hunters. They flat take advantage of the fact that a firearm is a tool that many hunters need. They peddle the fear of losing guns to hunters, they ask for OUR support of THEIR cause. WE dont get shit in return. I'd be more into the NRA leaning on hunters if they donated say...I dont know...10 percent of what they take in to wildlife habitat, state fish and game agencies, wetlands protections, etc. etc. I'd be getting something for my money. As it is now, if I donated money to the NRA, I wouldnt be supporting a single wildlife related issue. I'm not interested in donating to them so they can fight for some gun nuts right to buy an AR-15, etc. etc. etc.

IF even 10% went to wildlife and hunters interests, I wouldnt have a problem with them begging from hunters...in fact, I'd probably join.

As a hunter, I just dont see how my giving them annual dues will do anything for me or wildlife.

I have other issues as well with the NRA, but its best to discuss that another day.

Marland, you expect me to believe that BS you linked to?

You have got to be freaking kidding me?

Did you read this?

") Push for more public hunting lands. At a time when public lands play an ever-increasing role in providing places for Americans to hunt, Free Hunters will bring its political savvy to bear whenever our interests are jeopardized. No more wholesale lockouts, as was the case when the Clinton Administration banned maintenance and construction on 59 million acres of national forest, effectively closing off access to million of shooters and hunters.

They wonder why they wont be getting support from hunters? Lying bastards, no two ways about it. This is the typical BS lie that the NRA makes that completely turns "sportsmen" away, at least those with more than two firing brain cells.

This is a fact, they're referencing the roadless initiative in their "59 million acres" that Clinton "effectively closed". Thats pure BS, hunters can still hunt all the areas in the roadless initiative, and its undoubtedly some of the best hunting left in the West.

Clintons roadless initiative would and will do more good for public hunting than anything the NRA will EVER do for hunting...that, is a fact.
 
Advertisement

Forum statistics

Threads
113,565
Messages
2,025,262
Members
36,231
Latest member
ChasinDoes
Back
Top