Dumbest question.

[huntall6]

To the people that say it will help the birds to have a shell limit:

They already have laws to prevent sky busting. Why not just enforce those? Creating new laws for the same desired result is redundant an a waste of money and resources. If you see yahoos wounding birds and just letting them sail, call the GM. Wanton waste and over limit (bird not picked up count towards your limit). Is more than enough to ticket the fuckers.

[NuffDaddy]

To the people that say it will help the birds to have a shell limit:

They already have laws to prevent sky busting. Why not just enforce those? Creating new laws for the same desired result is redundant an a waste of money and resources. If you see yahoos wounding birds and just letting them sail, call the GM. Wanton waste and over limit (bird not picked up count towards your limit). Is more than enough to ticket the fuckers.

What laws are there to prevent sky busting? It's only wanton waste if you don't make a reasonable attempt to recover the bird. If you find it then it goes in your bag limit and no laws were broken. If you can't find it it is presumed it lived and you can continue hunting without adding to your bag and no laws were broken. The only way to combat skybusting is to limit the number of times the jackasses can blast into the air.

[huntall6]

Harassment of wildlife. Not a reasonable attempt to find downed game. The GW can find something. I guarantee you

[NuffDaddy]

Harassment of wildlife. Not a reasonable attempt to find downed game. The GW can find something. I guarantee you

Then why don't they? The guy is there every day. The guys working the draw tell you to watch the skybusting because they always see a lot of crippled birds.
There is nothing illegal about skybusting or crippling birds.

[3legged_lab]

To the people that say it will help the birds to have a shell limit:

They already have laws to prevent sky busting. Why not just enforce those? Creating new laws for the same desired result is redundant an a waste of money and resources. If you see yahoos wounding birds and just letting them sail, call the GM. Wanton waste and over limit (bird not picked up count towards your limit). Is more than enough to ticket the fuckers.

Again, I'm not advocating shell limits but the reasoning for your arguement is flawed. Creating a new law, ie shell limits, is not redundant or a waste resources (in the form of LEAST payroll), it more the opposite. It intended purpose, would be to make the hunters police themselves - saving the cost of enforcement.
The entire purpose would be to force the hunter to better pick and choose his shots, but I'm not interested in being "forced" to do anything so I am still against shell limits.

[NuffDaddy]

I don't LIKE having limited shells. I've ended hunts a couple times a few birds short because we were out of shells. But I'd rather run out of shells on a good hunt than watch guys skybust for 5 hours and be pissed off all morning.

[assateague]

1. Make my hunt better
2. Less crippled birds
3. Don't have another reason

#1 doesn't matter. Just as you say "hunting isn't a right", that's correct, and goes both ways. You have no "right" to enjoy yourself at the expense of others, which is precisely what shell limits do. What about the kids who can't shoot worth a darn? If they blow through 25 shells and have to leave, what makes your desire to have a good time a more "noble" objective than THEIR desire to have a good time? You have no more "right" to get a chance at killing ducks than someone else has a "right" to blast at them however they want. "Having fun" is not, and should not, be the basis for laws of any sort, because it is a totally subjective judgement.

As for #2, there is no proof whatsoever that shooting more than 25 shells increases cripples. You yourself were just talking in another thread about chasing cripples, and I assume you aren't a skybuster, so how does that happen? We get cripples at 10 yards- there is no exclusivity based solely on number of shells. I've had days where I only shoot 3 times, and one is a cripple that dives, never to be found. So really, the "25 reduces cripples" is simply an appeal to emotion, with no basis in fact.

Furthermore, if you feel that 25 is a good number to keep people from blasting and creating cripples, why not only 10 shells? According to your theory, that would REALLY force people to take only excellent shots, and would further reduce the potential number of cripples by over half. If you believe 25 is good, then you must believe 10 is even better, if you want to be intellectually honest with yourself. You on board with that?

[assateague]

I don't LIKE having limited shells. I've ended hunts a couple times a few birds short because we were out of shells. But I'd rather run out of shells on a good hunt than watch guys skybust for 5 hours and be pissed off all morning.

And the other guys would rather skybust for 5 hours than be pissed off because they ran out of shells in 30 minutes. What makes your desire to not be pissed off more important than their desire to not be pissed off?

[NuffDaddy]

I don't LIKE having limited shells. I've ended hunts a couple times a few birds short because we were out of shells. But I'd rather run out of shells on a good hunt than watch guys skybust for 5 hours and be pissed off all morning.

And the other guys would rather skybust for 5 hours than be pissed off because they ran out of shells in 30 minutes. What makes your desire to not be pissed off more important than their desire to not be pissed off?

Because I'm right.

[NuffDaddy]

Is anarchy or democracy better?

[assateague]

You realize we don't live in a democracy, right? Individual rights will be trampled by a democracy smear quicker than under anarchy.

As a system of government, I would argue that a democratically elected republic is the best so far, which is what we are supposed to have (not a democracy), but in practice it is not.

Nowhere do I refer to a lawless society. What I DO refer to is a system where the only things regulated are those which cause real harm or violate the rights of others. Hurt feelings and/or "not having a good time" are not "real harm". As I'm sure you realize, when it cones down to it, your right to "have fun" is no more or less important Thant the skybusters right to "have fun". But you're trying to make it appear as if yours is.

[NuffDaddy]

Not talking about the government. I'm talking about hunting regs at the management areas. Surveys are sent every year asking for feedback and meetings are held to discuss how they will be managed. A majority of the people support shell limits, so why should the minority that doesn't want them get their way?

[assateague]

If the majority wanted to ban coffee thermoses, plastic soda bottles, and black people, is that ok too?

You should google "tyranny of the majority" sometime. What it distill down to is just because 51% want something, that doesn't make it right.

[3legged_lab]

Nuffy, brother, you can't win. You couldn't win with a solid argument, much less the weak one you are throwing down. Jim argues better than a woman, even if he was wrong, he'd still make you think he was right...

[Bootlipkiller]

Nuffy, brother, you can't win. You couldn't win with a solid argument, much less the weak one you are throwing down. Jim argues better than a woman, even if he was wrong, he'd still make you think he was right...

[Bootlipkiller]

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1388945003.730474.jpg

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1388945018.263654.jpg

[NuffDaddy]

Nuffy, brother, you can't win. You couldn't win with a solid argument, much less the weak one you are throwing down. Jim argues better than a woman, even if he was wrong, he'd still make you think he was right...

I know...but no one has a solid argument here. Assa posted himself a while back, if I'm remembering right, that he doesn't like to hunt where he can hear other people shoot. How can he argue anything other than his "principal" without hunting the places I'm talking about.

[huntall6]

To the people that say it will help the birds to have a shell limit:

They already have laws to prevent sky busting. Why not just enforce those? Creating new laws for the same desired result is redundant an a waste of money and resources. If you see yahoos wounding birds and just letting them sail, call the GM. Wanton waste and over limit (bird not picked up count towards your limit). Is more than enough to ticket the fuckers.

Again, I'm not advocating shell limits but the reasoning for your arguement is flawed. Creating a new law, ie shell limits, is not redundant or a waste resources (in the form of LEAST payroll), it more the opposite. It intended purpose, would be to make the hunters police themselves - saving the cost of enforcement.
The entire purpose would be to force the hunter to better pick and choose his shots, but I'm not interested in being "forced" to do anything so I am still against shell limits.

It isn't flawed in the least. I these people are causing such a terrible experience, I guarantee the warden can find something to write them on. After a few tickets and the warden explaining how he got several calls about their group, I would bet those people would either shape up or go elsewhere.

An how would it be more expensive to not go through the process of passing a new law? It is simply making the game wardens do their jobs.

[3legged_lab]

Can you prove that a 25 shell limit will produce less cripples?

If they're really sky busting birds as high as you say they probably aren't really doing and damage other than "educating" the birds.

[NuffDaddy]

Can you prove that a 25 shell limit will produce less cripples?

If they're really sky busting birds as high as you say they probably aren't really doing and damage other than "educating" the birds.

We already have a 25 shell limit. And it is as bad as I'm saying. Every hunt I watch at least close to a dozen birds get cripples to where they were never found. I don't have any proof that unlimited shells would leave more cripples, but logic would say their if someone can cripple 2 birds with 25 shells in 2 hours before they run out if shells...Why couldn't they cripple 6 with 75 shells in 6 hours?

[NuffDaddy]

To the people that say it will help the birds to have a shell limit:

They already have laws to prevent sky busting. Why not just enforce those? Creating new laws for the same desired result is redundant an a waste of money and resources. If you see yahoos wounding birds and just letting them sail, call the GM. Wanton waste and over limit (bird not picked up count towards your limit). Is more than enough to ticket the fuckers.

Again, I'm not advocating shell limits but the reasoning for your arguement is flawed. Creating a new law, ie shell limits, is not redundant or a waste resources (in the form of LEAST payroll), it more the opposite. It intended purpose, would be to make the hunters police themselves - saving the cost of enforcement.
The entire purpose would be to force the hunter to better pick and choose his shots, but I'm not interested in being "forced" to do anything so I am still against shell limits.

It isn't flawed in the least. I these people are causing such a terrible experience, I guarantee the warden can find something to write them on. After a few tickets and the warden explaining how he got several calls about their group, I would bet those people would either shape up or go elsewhere.

An how would it be more expensive to not go through the process of passing a new law? It is simply making the game wardens do their jobs.

What would they write a ticket for? There hat law says you can't shoot your gun at birds that are out of range? What law says you have to count birds you can't find in your bag limit?
The place I'm talking about has 2 DNR personnel that run the draw in the morning then work around place while everyone is hunting. They say in the announcements before the draw that the skybusting is bad. You think if there is anything they could legally do about it they would?

[huntall6]

To the people that say it will help the birds to have a shell limit:

They already have laws to prevent sky busting. Why not just enforce those? Creating new laws for the same desired result is redundant an a waste of money and resources. If you see yahoos wounding birds and just letting them sail, call the GM. Wanton waste and over limit (bird not picked up count towards your limit). Is more than enough to ticket the fuckers.

Again, I'm not advocating shell limits but the reasoning for your arguement is flawed. Creating a new law, ie shell limits, is not redundant or a waste resources (in the form of LEAST payroll), it more the opposite. It intended purpose, would be to make the hunters police themselves - saving the cost of enforcement.
The entire purpose would be to force the hunter to better pick and choose his shots, but I'm not interested in being "forced" to do anything so I am still against shell limits.

It isn't flawed in the least. I these people are causing such a terrible experience, I guarantee the warden can find something to write them on. After a few tickets and the warden explaining how he got several calls about their group, I would bet those people would either shape up or go elsewhere.

An how would it be more expensive to not go through the process of passing a new law? It is simply making the game wardens do their jobs.

What would they write a ticket for? There hat law says you can't shoot your gun at birds that are out of range? What law says you have to count birds you can't find in your bag limit?
The place I'm talking about has 2 DNR personnel that run the draw in the morning then work around place while everyone is hunting. They say in the announcements before the draw that the skybusting is bad. You think if there is anything they could legally do about it they would?

are these DNR personnel officers? biologists? secretaries?

if these people are doing something unethical, call the warden. if they are wounding as many birds as you say, i guarentee the warden can cite them on not making a good enough effort to recovor downed birds. thus, wanton waste. it is up to the warden to determine wether the attempted recovery is good enough (at least here). simple as that.

and even just the warden meeting them in the parking lot after their "hunt" telling them that they are making unethical shots would most likely have some impact on their practices.

and didnt FF post the regs that state a lost bird does count toward you limit? or was that just here in illannoy?

[NuffDaddy]

To the people that say it will help the birds to have a shell limit:

They already have laws to prevent sky busting. Why not just enforce those? Creating new laws for the same desired result is redundant an a waste of money and resources. If you see yahoos wounding birds and just letting them sail, call the GM. Wanton waste and over limit (bird not picked up count towards your limit). Is more than enough to ticket the fuckers.

Again, I'm not advocating shell limits but the reasoning for your arguement is flawed. Creating a new law, ie shell limits, is not redundant or a waste resources (in the form of LEAST payroll), it more the opposite. It intended purpose, would be to make the hunters police themselves - saving the cost of enforcement.
The entire purpose would be to force the hunter to better pick and choose his shots, but I'm not interested in being "forced" to do anything so I am still against shell limits.

It isn't flawed in the least. I these people are causing such a terrible experience, I guarantee the warden can find something to write them on. After a few tickets and the warden explaining how he got several calls about their group, I would bet those people would either shape up or go elsewhere.

An how would it be more expensive to not go through the process of passing a new law? It is simply making the game wardens do their jobs.

What would they write a ticket for? There hat law says you can't shoot your gun at birds that are out of range? What law says you have to count birds you can't find in your bag limit?
The place I'm talking about has 2 DNR personnel that run the draw in the morning then work around place while everyone is hunting. They say in the announcements before the draw that the skybusting is bad. You think if there is anything they could legally do about it they would?

are these DNR personnel officers? biologists? secretaries?

if these people are doing something unethical, call the warden. if they are wounding as many birds as you say, i guarentee the warden can cite them on not making a good enough effort to recovor downed birds. thus, wanton waste. it is up to the warden to determine wether the attempted recovery is good enough (at least here). simple as that.

and even just the warden meeting them in the parking lot after their "hunt" telling them that they are making unethical shots would most likely have some impact on their practices.

and didnt FF post the regs that state a lost bird does count toward you limit? or was that just here in illannoy?

They are staff that run and manage the place. An officer shows up a few times a week. Don't know what else to say other than the place is run by the DNR and nothing is done to stop it.
FF posted the law, but he is interpreting it different than what it's supposed to mean. (because all game laws are so well written) cripples birds do not count towards your limit of you don't find them.

[Bootlipkiller]

BEEF! Where are you?

[Bufflehead]

BEEF! Where are you?

No WIFI in the nuthouse

[Tiler_J]

BEEF! Where are you?

X2! Please God! Make it stop!!

[aunt betty]

1. Make my hunt better
2. Less crippled birds
3. Don't have another reason

What about the kids who can't shoot worth a darn?

They need to go fucking somewhere else to practice missing ducks.

[NuffDaddy]

1. Make my hunt better
2. Less crippled birds
3. Don't have another reason

What about the kids who can't shoot worth a darn?

They need to go fucking somewhere else to practice missing ducks.

:lol:
Or wait for them to land. I've don't that on more that one occasion when I can't hit anything.

[rebelp74]

Is anarchy or democracy better?

Neither a republic is better, which is what the U.S. is.

[rebelp74]

Can you prove that a 25 shell limit will produce less cripples?

If they're really sky busting birds as high as you say they probably aren't really doing and damage other than "educating" the birds.

We already have a 25 shell limit. And it is as bad as I'm saying. Every hunt I watch at least close to a dozen birds get cripples to where they were never found. I don't have any proof that unlimited shells would leave more cripples, but logic would say their if someone can cripple 2 birds with 25 shells in 2 hours before they run out if shells...Why couldn't they cripple 6 with 75 shells in 6 hours?

Wow just wow.