The way it should be...give it right back!

[Tunaman]

You guys might like this from a fellow gun owner/land owner...make sure to read it from the beginning of the thread.

https://www.njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/103606-epic-landowner-reply-to-wa-fgw/&tab=comments#comment-1387571

[Pyrate Jim]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hw3CE04LGiA

[going_home]

Classic

[Nobody]

Let me get this straight. The state's F&W office, sent a letter asking permission to access the property to look and survey the land for some specific wildlife and the owner had put these gross stipulations on just because? Now I can see that if the letter was imposing multiple trucks, odd hours of operations, or even taking over the property because of the property being a wildlife habitat and you can't live there.

I found the letter pleasant. The F&W officers I know are all nice people. I don't see why the landowner(which is ironic as if he was so proud of shoving it to the government, that his name was omitted) would put up such a belligerent fight over this. And, with F&W, they have more authority than state troopers, as the state, the entire state is their jurisdiction. So, I am sure that they will find a way around this supposed owners refusal.

I thought, and I will assume the owner is a republican, that Republicans are all for the police? Law & order and such.

edit: I would really like an answer to this. Not looking at a flame war or anything other than why would anyone do that, in such a belligerent way? It would be one thing if F&W moved in without notice, without consideration to the landowner, I can certainly see pushing my rights as a landowner against them. But they asked, rather politely, for access. Shouldn't it be that way, the government working with you and not against you?

[Walker]

You may be reading WAY too much into this. It might be nothing more than a Jerks way to say "No".

Unless, the Officer is a friend of the property owner, and knows the answer will be "No", but is following his orders and sends the letter anyway. The owner responds with the restrictions to get a laugh from his friend and also let the unthinking higher ups know that they are fools?...

Not enough background information to go one way or another. A typical out of context internet post?

[Tunaman]

I guess neither one of you liberals has ever went hunting or fishing in this state? They want your left nut in fees, just like everything else in this sorry ass state.

[going_home]

There are consequences to giving the government access to your property to search for an endangered species.

Its never a good idea to trust government.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-06-10-mn-2665-story.html

“I am disappointed in American government,” he said. “But my feelings toward the people are very warm.”
Taung Ming-Lin

[pimped mag 01]

There are consequences to giving the government access to your property to search for an endangered species.

Its never a good idea to trust government.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-06-10-mn-2665-story.html

“I am disappointed in American government,” he said. “But my feelings toward the people are very warm.”
Taung Ming-Lin

I've told the game wardens in my state to **** right off of my property multiple times. Hunting in this state is such a pain in the ass I barely even go in state anymore. But then again nobody's probably so soft the thought of people living freely keeps him up at night. The scariest words you can ever hear from the government are "we are here to help".

Edit: for the liberals in here who don't hunt, he's making fun of all the stupid regulations and extortion hoops you have to jump through. I hunt down in Georgia every year just because of BS like this. At least down there the F&W actually hunt and fish and know what they're talking about. In this state they're all failed science majors

-Brett-

[Loguzzzzzz]

Let me get this straight. The state's F&W office, sent a letter asking permission to access the property to look and survey the land for some specific wildlife and the owner had put these gross stipulations on just because? Now I can see that if the letter was imposing multiple trucks, odd hours of operations, or even taking over the property because of the property being a wildlife habitat and you can't live there.

I found the letter pleasant. The F&W officers I know are all nice people. I don't see why the landowner(which is ironic as if he was so proud of shoving it to the government, that his name was omitted) would put up such a belligerent fight over this. And, with F&W, they have more authority than state troopers, as the state, the entire state is their jurisdiction. So, I am sure that they will find a way around this supposed owners refusal.

I thought, and I will assume the owner is a republican, that Republicans are all for the police? Law & order and such.

edit: I would really like an answer to this. Not looking at a flame war or anything other than why would anyone do that, in such a belligerent way? It would be one thing if F&W moved in without notice, without consideration to the landowner, I can certainly see pushing my rights as a landowner against them. But they asked, rather politely, for access. Shouldn't it be that way, the government working with you and not against you?

Said the contrarian....

So predictable.....

[going_home]

Said the contrarian....

So predictable.....

[Tunaman]

Said the contrarian....

So predictable.....

and his "assumption" is wrong. The guy is not a republican.

[Nobody]

and his "assumption" is wrong. The guy is not a republican.

Ok wow. I assumed, and maybe I am wrong. Like Walker stated, there is not enough context in the post to judge one way or the other and Walker is right. It was wrong for me to assume.

But I used to fish all the time, but went salt water, since no fees or licenses needed. Was always aware of limits to catches, and that is fine by me. Since when people overheat & overfishing, it does deprive others of that same act. While I never hunted, I also never needed to. So other than complying with F&W if & when I saw them is never a problem.

But this is interesting, if I was wrong and the "landowner" was not a republican, does that mean you are in support of him(again, assuming that he was a he), being a liberal and such. Just want to make sure

Said the contrarian....

So predictable.....

And I do love how you say I am a "contrararian"? I ask a question, and I am now not allowed to? I wish to understand not only the reasons for this post but the fact that some people are cheering for those actions? Well, excuse me for not knowing something. Most normal people ask questions and that is how knowledge is spread around, and especially when it is a foreign subject that you might never have been in contact. I do many people that hunt but have no problems with F&W, likewise people with firearms that have never hunted. So those 2 groups have similar backgrounds but yet aren't taking your view. So ask a question.

But it also takes the cake John, how little you know of me. But I guess it is fine for you to assume a great many things...

[Tunaman]

You have no sense of humor Doug. It was supposed to be funny...but true. You missed the whole gist of it.

[Nobody]

You have no sense of humor Doug. It was supposed to be funny...but true. You missed the whole gist of it.

And what I find funny here is, that I asked what was the point of that, and all you had to do was say it was a joke. But you figured to lambast me, just because. I do have a sense of humor, as I still consider you Tuna, Scott & John friends. Call it self-deprecating....

[going_home]

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/west-needs-wwiii-martin-armstrong-warns-theres-no-return-normal-here