# Another example of why not to legislation



## Ranger Ray (Mar 2, 2003)

Goinpostal83 said:


> This is what happens when people that can't deal with change put things in hands of legislation


This is what happens when special interests can't deal with biological science driven regs, and push to change game management socially.


----------



## Joe Archer (Mar 29, 2000)

sureshot006 said:


> @Joe Archer This appears to be anti-trapping legislation. Accidental move?


Definitely outside the 10 ring on that one. 
<----<<<


----------



## Goinpostal83 (Nov 12, 2020)

Joe Archer said:


> Definitely outside the 10 ring on that one.
> <----<<<


I put it there for a reason Joe. For all those that think legislation pushing is such a good idea. This is what they are supporting. Think this is where it will end? It isnt.


----------



## Goinpostal83 (Nov 12, 2020)

Waif said:


> Can't deal with what change?
> Folks deal with change every minute.
> 
> If you are referring to a given law disagreed with , laws are created through legislation.
> ...


Did you read the law? Or just love disagreeing? This is a NATION WIDE ATTEMPT AT BANNJNG TRAPS. What do you think is next great sir?


----------



## 9 (Jan 17, 2000)

Boy, I’ve been half-heartedly contemplating selling some of my Jakes, maybe I’d better get a little more serious.:SHOCKED:


----------



## Waif (Oct 27, 2013)

Goinpostal83 said:


> Did you read the law? Or just love disagreeing? This is a NATION WIDE ATTEMPT AT BANNJNG TRAPS. What do you think is next great sir?


BANNJNG. Is that a place in China? Buy U.S. made traps man..Feed your neighbor before feeding a foreign nation when you can. Sell foreign nations the furs instead. Please ask your representatives when you correspond with them to encourage fur sales internationally. Even if that means encouraging Russia to bid.

You didn't answer my question.
What law do you disagree with that legislation changed? Or , what law or proposal do you believe someone else is objecting to (see leading part of title "another example") should not be handled through legislation? Suggested alternative recourse then?
When you post how someone wanting legislation is involved beyond the subject of trapping , the vagueness leads the reader, for lack of clarification to fill in the blanks based on your prior posts. Which multiple readers have.

Objection to trapping is nothing new.
That was going on in the seventies when I was pinching toes. And likely before.
Don't know a time since that trapping has not been under fire.


----------



## Justin (Feb 21, 2005)

A better title would be...Another example of why you should support your local, as well as national trapping associations.


----------



## Goinpostal83 (Nov 12, 2020)

You guys have nothing better than to b1tch and whine about anything because you want tonshoot a small buck or dump bait. Or in your case waif you don't know what you want ever. But you are now talking about agreeing with someone banning the sale and movement of all traps just for the sake of not liking someone because they don't need to shoot the first buck they see. You would rather see all hunting and trapping come to an end then change alittle. Quite pitiful. And thanks for correcting my spelling waify I know your the perfect one


----------



## sureshot006 (Sep 8, 2010)

Goinpostal83 said:


> You guys have nothing better than to b1tch and whine about anything because you want tonshoot a small buck or dump bait. Or in your case waif you don't know what you want ever. But you are now talking about agreeing with someone banning the sale and movement of all traps just for the sake of not liking someone because they don't need to shoot the first buck they see. You would rather see all hunting and trapping come to an end then change alittle. Quite pitiful. And thanks for correcting my spelling waify I know your the perfect one


I'm not sure I read where anyone here supported banning of traps. Maybe I read past it?


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

Goinpostal83 said:


> You guys have nothing better than to b1tch and whine about anything because you want tonshoot a small buck or dump bait. Or in your case waif you don't know what you want ever. But you are now talking about agreeing with someone banning the sale and movement of all traps just for the sake of not liking someone because they don't need to shoot the first buck they see. You would rather see all hunting and trapping come to an end then change alittle. Quite pitiful. And thanks for correcting my spelling waify I know your the perfect one


"Social Science" started the ball rolling where it stops is anyone's guess. You can thank the alphabet groups for that. Name calling, wild accusations and tantrums will never change that fact.


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

sureshot006 said:


> I'm not sure I read where anyone here supported banning of traps. Maybe I read past it?


In the posters eyes:
If you're not for MAPRs then you want legislative action, baiting ban removed, shoot little bucks, shooting deer out of spite, you're an anti-hunter etc. Now he's tacked on banning trapping as well. He's been singing this tune for a long time, under more than one name.


----------



## Goinpostal83 (Nov 12, 2020)

sureshot006 said:


> I'm not sure I read where anyone here supported banning of traps. Maybe I read past it?


No point as the pot stirring only has chimed in. The point is they could care less. They still would rather see legislation making laws. Or more so stopping outdoor activities. Because we won't support there minority hunting attitude. They say letter group special interests in every thread. They lash out at people in every thread and then try to make the others look like the bad guys. They don't come out and say they support it but have they said they don't? They lean more towards anti padded pockets than the sporting life. Showed there true colors or Lack there of for i hope all to see. If it isn't there way then damn with everyone's rights. Time to get banned again im sure now lol


----------



## Goinpostal83 (Nov 12, 2020)

FREEPOP said:


> In the posters eyes:
> If you're not for MAPRs then you want legislative action, baiting ban removed, shoot little bucks, shooting deer out of spite, you're an anti-hunter etc. Now he's tacked on banning trapping as well. He's been singing this tune for a long time, under more than one name.


Im not a member of qdm and don't support apr over one buck. You just say and think that. you stir pots. Nothing more in any thread. Nothing helpful. If some people posts you jump in and try to get a rise. and are nothing to this site or probablythe world for that matter if thats how low you are. You go as far as to do it in a thread meant for attention that the people you want making our laws are trying to ban other things . Now who is the problem. They know. But don't care.


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

Goinpostal83 said:


> Im not a member of qdm and don't support air over one buck. You just say and think that. you stir pots. Nothing more in any thread. Nothing helpful. If some people posts you jump in and try to get a rise. and are nothing to this site or probablythe world for that matter if thats how low you are. You go as far as to do it in a thread meant for attention that the people you want making our laws are trying to ban other things . Now who is the problem. They know. But don't care.


----------



## Goinpostal83 (Nov 12, 2020)

FREEPOP said:


> View attachment 630067


Another very helpful post. Thanks for your input on the matter. You show your colors time and time again lol.


----------



## Ranger Ray (Mar 2, 2003)

sureshot006 said:


> I'm not sure I read where anyone here supported banning of traps. Maybe I read past it?


I didn't either. Doesn't surprise me though. Hunters lying about others, to push an agenda. Who'd of thunk? Can't make this stuff up. "Watch out for Peta!" Hell, who needs Peta, we got goingpostal. Oh, and I like who he accused of pot stirring. 

Majority (maybe all) of the restrictions on my hunting and fishing during my lifetime, has come from fellow sportsmen, not PETA. Dats a fact!


----------



## Tron322 (Oct 29, 2011)

OP needs to get and do something outdoors for a while away from devices.

I am slightly curious where he is gonna go next, started with banning trapping, then baiting, something about deer hunting, should touch on the consent decree next.

Get outdoors and throw your devices in the snow leave them there, set some steel and enjoy that before "the man" takes them away from you.


----------



## sureshot006 (Sep 8, 2010)

I think that is enough of the personal stuff


----------



## Goinpostal83 (Nov 12, 2020)

Don't care even lol. They are bashing as normal. While real news is in front of them. Just shows there sad lives. And no worries tron. I've been fishing 3 days in a row. Cought limits. Deer scouted and found an otter. These guys all know what I'm talking about and why I brought up baiting they are just to high on themselves to admit that legislation is bad no matter what. And that social science is one of the most important factors these days. But it doesn't match there agenda so they lash out at me rather than read the bill in question and actually worry or be constructive


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

Goinpostal83 said:


> And that social science is one of the most important factors these days.


That is exactly what will cause a ban on trapping.


----------



## 22 Chuck (Feb 2, 2006)

Goinpostal83 said:


> Do you or do you not believe legislation should make our game laws? Simple question. Not do you want them doing some but not others.


Look at what the legislators have done to gun laws and carriers!!! Can carry here but not there, if you have a permit etc etc etc--all in violation of US AND State constitutions...


----------



## Goinpostal83 (Nov 12, 2020)

22 Chuck said:


> Look at what the legislators have done to gun laws and carriers!!! Can carry here but not there, if you have a permit etc etc etc--all in violation of US AND State constitutions...


Exactly and some want our game laws in there hands.


----------



## Goinpostal83 (Nov 12, 2020)

Waif said:


> Is the N.R .C. a product of legislation? Then you'll need to reframe your question.
> 
> Is the N.R.C. the end all to any given law? Of course not.
> Is it vulnerable to other legislation? Of course it is.
> ...


Simple means yes or no. Still have no clue so again yes or no which way


----------



## Waif (Oct 27, 2013)

Goinpostal83 said:


> Simple means yes or no. Still have no clue so again yes or no which way


Dude, stay out of court. You'll fry yourself.


----------



## Goinpostal83 (Nov 12, 2020)

Waif said:


> Dude, stay out of court. You'll fry yourself.


Still won't answer lol.


----------

