Proposed New York bill is absolutely criminal
By Gene Mueller
Published February 23, 2005

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New York hunters are in an uproar over state assembly Bill 1850 that would
make sport hunting a punishable act of animal cruelty.
The bill, introduced by Assemblyman Alexander Grannis, New York City
Democrat, would revise the state's definition of animal cruelty to include
the "killing or injuring [of] wild game and wild birds." The revision would
make hunting and trapping activities criminal offenses. The bill is now
being considered before the body's Agriculture Committee.
"The bill creates a contradiction in the law [because] the state code
allows regulated hunting," said Tony Celebrezze of the U.S. Sportsmen's
Alliance, a national watchdog group that is ready to enter the fray whenever
Americans' right to hunt is challenged. "If [this] becomes law, anti-hunters
will have a field day ensuring that sportsmen are prosecuted on animal
cruelty charges."
The proposal is similar to a Texas bill that also would turn everyday
hunters into criminals. Hunters in Iowa and Connecticut also have had to
defeat animal cruelty bills that threatened hunting with dogs.

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 19:12:29 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

~~ snippage ~~

The proposal is similar to a Texas bill that also would turn everyday
hunters into criminals. Hunters in Iowa and Connecticut also have had to
defeat animal cruelty bills that threatened hunting with dogs.

Believe this or not, this actually has a chance of passing.

Idiots.

Later,

Tom

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message


I say...arm and train the animals. Might give them a 'sporting' chance.

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message


I say...arm and train the animals. Might give them a 'sporting' chance.



It is in our Constitution....the right to keep and arm bears.;-)

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 20:45:05 GMT, "Don White"
wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message


I say...arm and train the animals. Might give them a 'sporting' chance.

The reason I say idiots, is this.

Dogs have been man's hunting companion since the first wolf wandered
into the circle sitting around the campfire and scrounged what ever
was left of the animal du jour.

It's idiocy and political correctness of the highest order.

Later,

Tom

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
snip
Dogs have been man's hunting companion since the first wolf wandered
into the circle sitting around the campfire and scrounged what ever
was left of the animal du jour.

snip


The English pushed this a little far with their fox hunts.

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 22:50:13 GMT, "Don White"
wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
snip
Dogs have been man's hunting companion since the first wolf wandered
into the circle sitting around the campfire and scrounged what ever
was left of the animal du jour.

snip

The English pushed this a little far with their fox hunts.

Nothing wrong with mounted fox hunts with dogs.

Later,

Tom

It's idiocy and political correctness of the highest order.

Could you define 'political correctness'?

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 06:47:32 GMT, "Falky foo"
wrote:


It's idiocy and political correctness of the highest order.

Could you define 'political correctness'?

Your version or mine?

Political correctness is entirely subjective and while there are what
can be thought of as "PC", in fact, it is anything that one finds to
be offensive in particular when dealing with politicians and their
need to be all things to all people.

In short, there isn't a definition - it's whatever you find offensive.

In this case, it is an attempt by certain members of an outside
non-government agency to restrict the hunting/recreational fishing
communities ability to participate in their chosen sports. It is very
popular down state where people hunt their food in upscale, trendy
boutique stores. Up in the rural NW and NE CT, a certain population
which has moved instate and upstate which seems to believe that large
property owners can't or should not be allowed to set the rules by
which one allows hunters, or fishermen, onto streams, ponds or rivers
that adjoin or run through one's property.

So in this instance, that is my definition of Political Correctness as
it affects this particular issue.

Later,

Tom

In article ,
says...
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 20:45:05 GMT, "Don White"
wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message


I say...arm and train the animals. Might give them a 'sporting' chance.

The reason I say idiots, is this.

Dogs have been man's hunting companion since the first wolf wandered
into the circle sitting around the campfire and scrounged what ever
was left of the animal du jour.

It's idiocy and political correctness of the highest order.

Later,

Tom


Gee thanks Tom. I understand perfectly well now.

jps