Slaughtering wolves from planes

[9sublime]

I agree here. If you are so concerned with the death of innocents through abortion and wish to avoid it at all costs, avoiding war at all costs, and the death penatly are surely absoloute imperatives for you not to contradict yourself.

 

[Federal Farmer]

Federal Farmer

You are supposed to be ignoring me.

Yeah, I know, but sometimes you write things that are just SOOO rediculous that I can't resist shoving the knife in a little deeper, and twisting the blade in your ribs!

You are pro-life but...

You are pro-death penalty which = the death of innocent people

No, the death penalty = the death of GUILTY people.

You are pro-war which = the death of innocent people

Wrong again, I am NOT "pro-war", but I'm not naive enough to believe that it can, or should be avoided at all costs. You see, I'd MUCH rather die on my feet as a FREE MAN, than to live on my knees like a slave, which seems to be your preferred posture.

You are pro-hunting which = the death of innocent animals

Wrong again, I hunt for FOOD! Do you have a problem with people EATING?

And your justification is that some people are in favour of abortion.

Still wrong. You're not "pro-choice", you're "pro-MURDER" which is exactly what abortion is. I do not now, nor have I ever advocated for the MURDER of an innocent human being, that's YOUR mantra.

This displays the kind of reasoning you would see between 5 year olds.

If they had had no education

You sound like you've got a lot of personal experience in that area, but looking at it from the standpoint of an educated person, I can see that you're still all wet.

 

[Federal Farmer]

I agree here. If you are so concerned with the death of innocents through abortion and wish to avoid it at all costs, avoiding war at all costs, and the death penatly are surely absoloute imperatives for you not to contradict yourself.

Am I to presume that was directed to me '9'? Preventing a "mother" (and that is a rather loose usage of the word) from MURDERING her own unborn child IS an imperative, but it has nothing to do with avoiding war, or dispatching those who have been convicted in a court of law for the most heinous crimes in our society. There is no "contradiction" in it '9', because they're totally unrelated subjects.

Frankly, you can consider yourselves lucky that I'M not "King for a year", otherwise I'd have EVERY woman who has had an abortion (excepting those in cases of rape, incest, or IMMINENT endangerment of her life), and the "doctors" who performed them arrested, and charged with 1st degree murder and conspiracy to commit 1st degree murder, and if found guilty (which in my Kingdom they would be), they'd then IMMEDIATELY lined up against a wall and SHOT. No "appeals", no living for years in prison, DEAD, just like the child that they MURDERED.

 

[9sublime]

So, its a heinous crime to kill a child in the name of convinience, but not innocents during war? Or people wrongly convicted of murder?

Total contradiciton, total bull****.

 

[Federal Farmer]

So, its a heinous crime to kill a child in the name of convinience, but not innocents during war? Or people wrongly convicted of murder?

Total contradiciton, total bull****.

Yes, it IS a heinous crime to kill a child in the name of convenience! But if you honestly believe that killing a totally innocent child is OK, then what's your problem with executing murderers or a few "innocent civilians" in a war?

Oh, and while we're on that little totally illogical skreed of yours, perhaps you'd be kind enough to provide a precise list of EVERY "innocent" who has been executed in America in the last 100 years. I'd be willing to bet you that it's nowhere near as many TRULY innocents that you ANIMALS have MURDERED in the past month alone!

Here's a little cluepon for you '9', you ANIMALS murder one and a quarter MILLION totally innocent children EVERY YEAR! We haven't executed that many people in the entire history of America, and unlike you ANIMALS, we at least give those we execute a TRIAL first, in front of an impartial jury of their peers, and DECADES of appeals BEFORE we put them to death. You ANIMALS don't even bother to give your victims a hearing! No, you "people" (and I'm using that term VERY loosely) make Josef Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, Adolph Hitler, Pol Pot, and Idi Amin look like ROOKIES.

Oh, and WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE '9'. HYPOCRITE!

 

[Bunz]

So Bunz I have been spending time in rooms in a chat forum about Sarah Palin. The mod of the room has a really cute nick Sarah Palin is the antichrist. As you can see by her name she doesn’t like Sarah Palin. None of the 20 or so people in the room liked her at all.

Sounds like somewhere I wont be hanging out.

Is it true that Sarah Palin is forcing her daughter to keep this baby that the daughter really wants to kill? But Sarah is making her keep it.

I dont know. The pregnancy certainly was not planned. As for Sarah making her keep the baby or not, I am not that much in the know as of yet. I do know it would be very difficult politically for Palin if it would have come out about a terminated pregnancy.

And the boyfriend really wants that baby to die and really doesn’t want to marry Sarah Palin’s daughter but Sarah Palin the brute wench from hell is forcing this to happen?

Well I certainly wouldnt use the adjectives you have, but there is little question that the relationship between Bristol and Levi was/is rocky. Especially considering the circumstances. My cousin who lives just outside of Wasilla and played hockey with Levi, tells me that they were more or less broken up before the Palin's made the announcement, and now there is somewhat of a shotgun wedding thing going on. Apparently there were some things said on various myspace pages, that have long since come down.

I was not so moved when they called her blood thirsty, or a whore or the b word, It didn’t effect me much when they said she takes much pleasure in killing small animals then throwing the carcass away because she doesn’t like to eat them she just really enjoys the kill.

As I have said I disagree with Sarah on national level social issues, but I would disagree just as much with this statement.

but when they said they have proof that the daughter wants to kill the baby and so does the daughters boyfriend and Sarah Palin, this really sick horrible woman is forcing them to let the baby live and forcing them to get married all for her political power. I admit that bothered me. Can you add that to your list of Sarah Palin dirt so I can get it right from an Alaskan?

I dont know what Bristol wants/ed. But as I said before, there were plenty of things being said in a semi-public way before it became national news. Levi from what I understand made it quite clear that he was no longer interested in Bristol.

 

[Bunz]

Well, as a hunter myself I see no sport in hunting from a plane. To me it amounts to shooting ducks in a barrel.

Well firstly, it isnt hunting. It is predator control. As FF pointed out, it is not an easy feat. Other options have been discussed and ruled out for various reasons.

I can understand wanting to thin out the wolves, but this is their natural habitat and nature can be just as effective in keeping the balance between wolves and their prey as a bullet can. It's human encroachment into the hunting territory of the wolves that is the problem, but it seems to be convenient to blame the wolves.

Nope not in this case. It is not human encroachment. We are talking about a handfull of remote areas, where there is not growing poppulations. Actually we are talking about shrinking poppulations because the people living in the hardest hit villages are leaving because it has become problematic to ensure the subsistence resources are available.

I don't live there so I don't know the full extent of just how dire this situation is. I find it hard to believe that there are starving families in Alaska because the wolves are eating all their food. It wouldn't surprise me a bit to find the same people who are complaing about the wolves eating their food also eat regularly at McDonalds.

Well believe it because it is true. There isnt a McDs within hundreds of air miles. We are talking about remote communities with no road connections.

 

[Bunz]

Nope. If I don't consider it a sport I have no reason to try it. The hunter still has the distinct advantage from the air, and from the clips I've seen, the wolves are pretty much out in the open, leaving the wolves at a huge disadvantage, having been chased there by the plane. The only person on that type of hunt who I would consider a sportsman would be the pilot because he's herding wolves. I still consider it shooting ducks in a barrel.

Again, its not meant to be sport. And you wouldnt be able to try it, there are only a handful of licensed people who are allowed. With the exception of a few circumstances, Alaska has a rule against same day airborne for big game hunting. Meaning that it is illegal to spot an animal from a plane, land and shoot it on the same day. This program it totally outside of "normal" hunting practices and laws.

Well, I've read a lot of arguements in favor of this type of hunt and there are folks who claim the wolves are eating one of their main food sources. If that isn't the issue then it must be because the wolves are eating game that hunters are after but don't want to go any great distance to find, or they are trying to insure urban hunter success ratios.

Urban hunters generally arent able to hunt in these areas. And yes the wolves are eating thier main source of food. Moose and caribou.

It's also true that nature has a way of correcting these balances and that the balance between predator and prey fluctuates in cycles. We have seen the same problem here with coyote and the deer.

I know there are plenty of wildlife issues in the lower 48, but you also have supermarkets and restaraunts. Whereas the people who live in rural communities like myself dont have great access to grocery stores. There are local stores, dont get me wrong, it is just bare minimums of what one can get.

The preditor studies I've read indicate that bears are the real source of the problem, not the wolves.

Id like to see the studies you have read. But bears are also involved in the aerial predator control program in certain areas. One must keep in mind though that managing bears is different from wolves in a few key regards. Firstly, bears are more omnivorous and thier main source of food is salmon. Whereas wolves main source of food is moose and caribou and they are much more effective at catching them than bears are.

Also, considering that bears hibernate, it is much easier to deal with them through those methods.

 

[Pandora]

Sounds like somewhere I wont be hanging out.

I dont know. The pregnancy certainly was not planned. As for Sarah making her keep the baby or not, I am not that much in the know as of yet. I do know it would be very difficult politically for Palin if it would have come out about a terminated pregnancy.

Well I certainly wouldnt use the adjectives you have, but there is little question that the relationship between Bristol and Levi was/is rocky. Especially considering the circumstances. My cousin who lives just outside of Wasilla and played hockey with Levi, tells me that they were more or less broken up before the Palin's made the announcement, and now there is somewhat of a shotgun wedding thing going on. Apparently there were some things said on various myspace pages, that have long since come down.

As I have said I disagree with Sarah on national level social issues, but I would disagree just as much with this statement.

I dont know what Bristol wants/ed. But as I said before, there were plenty of things being said in a semi-public way before it became national news. Levi from what I understand made it quite clear that he was no longer interested in Bristol.

If your cousin or brother knows the boy and he said he doesnt want to marry her, then it is really sad that they have to do it. That does bother me.

If its about Palins political future that really bothers me, much more than if it was a mom just looking after her daughter.

You said that abortion would not look good for palin politically? If a baby is just a political pawn to her then that bothers me too. If the baby is to her like it is to me, a living child who deserves the same as you and I then letting the daughter kill it would be something she just couldnt be a part of.

I guess we have 50 or so days to figure out if she is a monster forcing her daughter to marry and if children are pawns or people.

I would rather find out that she really is a cold hearted wench from hell before the election instead of after.

 

[Bunz]

A few weapons yes, ballistics, not so much. I've only used a single shot 12 gauge and a 30-30 Winchester I use for deer hunting.

Fair enough, it is worthy to note that the usual tool of choice for the purposes of aerial pred control is either a pump action 12ga with buckshot or a mini-14.

I've never fired a 30-06 because I don't see the need for one. I do just fine with my rifle and it's easy to carry. If all the above info is going through your mind before you take a shot it sounds like you are over analyzing the situation to me. A 100 yd. shot under the worst of conditions isn't really difficult, at least the ones I've taken with an open sight.

If it works for you great. The .30-30 isnt really poppular up here because it doesnt give enough ummph for the bigger critters. But you must be one hell of a shot if you can drop a deer sized target humanely with open sights with a breeze and a walking target. Much less running.

A wolf can run 35-40 mph for short period of times so it's not a 90 mph shot.

The 90mph reference was the approximate ground speed of moving in an airplane.

.

5-6 seconds is a long time for sighting a target. IMO. Granted you are on a moving platform but your target is going in the same direction as you are

Often the wolf is not moving in quite the same direction. And rarely will a wolf run in a straight line, especially when being chased.

and you're using a high powered rifle at 100 yds, which means you don't need a precision hit. Anywhere you hit it there is a pretty good chance it's dead.

While you are correct that virtually none of the wolves are able to escape wounded, getting a "precision" hit is more or less luck. Being able to hit the wolf anywhere is a feat in itself. Shooting from a fast moving, unstable platform, at an also fast moving target that is unpredictable in its movements, and doing it from an elevated position is much more difficult than what the most accomplished hunters could manage.

 

[Bunz]

Hi Obamanation, the path we are taking here is becoming off-topic, I will reply to this one, but if you want to discuss it further, I would encourage you to start a new thread so we can keep some organization around here.

If your cousin or brother knows the boy and he said he doesnt want to marry her, then it is really sad that they have to do it. That does bother me.

It is my cousin. I dont have any brothers. Either way, this dates back to July/early August. The fact that Bristol was pregnant was an open secret in Wasilla at the time. I was visiting them at the local race track where my Uncle and Cousin do drag racing. Either way, Sarah came up in the conversation because Troopergate was just begining. It was then that I was told Bristol was pregnant. I was hugely surprised because there was a nasty right wing rumor that said Trig was actually Bristol's child and there was a coverup. I didnt buy into it then as it came from a few fringe crazies and was spread by local talk show hosts. Either way, it was then that he told me about this Levi guy. Who by all accounts is an A-hole himself.

If its about Palins political future that really bothers me, much more than if it was a mom just looking after her daughter.

You said that abortion would not look good for palin politically? If a baby is just a political pawn to her then that bothers me too. If the baby is to her like it is to me, a living child who deserves the same as you and I then letting the daughter kill it would be something she just couldnt be a part of.

I dont have any inside info on this one. But I would say that certainly Bristol and Levi have become political pawns. I feel horrible for those kids. Things were already complicated enough for everyone involved without bringing the international press into the fold.

I guess we have 50 or so days to figure out if she is a monster forcing her daughter to marry and if children are pawns or people.

Well I wouldnt call her a monster either way. There is more to this than forcing her daughter to do something. She may not want to. To be honest, I am not sure there will ever be a marraige between those two. I have the sinking suspicion that the shotgun wedding routine was enough to get the press off thier back on the issue until the election is over.

I would rather find out that she really is a cold hearted wench from hell before the election instead of after.

Well again, I wouldnt use those terms. But there is no question that there is a very vindictive side of Sarah, both personally and politically.

 

[9sublime]

Yes, it IS a heinous crime to kill a child in the name of convenience! But if you honestly believe that killing a totally innocent child is OK, then what's your problem with executing murderers or a few "innocent civilians" in a war?

Oh, and while we're on that little totally illogical skreed of yours, perhaps you'd be kind enough to provide a precise list of EVERY "innocent" who has been executed in America in the last 100 years. I'd be willing to bet you that it's nowhere near as many TRULY innocents that you ANIMALS have MURDERED in the past month alone!

Here's a little cluepon for you '9', you ANIMALS murder one and a quarter MILLION totally innocent children EVERY YEAR! We haven't executed that many people in the entire history of America, and unlike you ANIMALS, we at least give those we execute a TRIAL first, in front of an impartial jury of their peers, and DECADES of appeals BEFORE we put them to death. You ANIMALS don't even bother to give your victims a hearing! No, you "people" (and I'm using that term VERY loosely) make Josef Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, Adolph Hitler, Pol Pot, and Idi Amin look like ROOKIES.

Oh, and WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE '9'. HYPOCRITE!

Firstly, my language was not a personal attack, so I think it can be taken with a pinch of salt.

How on earth am I the one being contradictory??? I think we need to rewind and maybe start this in another thread as its quite off topic. Do you want to?

 

[Federal Farmer]

Firstly, my language was not a personal attack, so I think it can be taken with a pinch of salt.

Oh, so we can use "salty" language as long as it's not a personal attack? Move the goalposts much?

How on earth am I the one being contradictory??? I think we need to rewind and maybe start this in another thread as its quite off topic. Do you want to?

You're being contradictory by supporting murdering the most innocent among us while decrying the execution of those who have been found guilty in a court of law, and the unintentional deaths of civilians (innocent is a question that is open to debate) in a declared war.

Now, if you want to start a new thread so that I can thrash you there instead of here, that'll be just fine by me.

 

[9sublime]

I'm not being contradictory, war is inevitable sometimes, not very often. So I know sometimes innocents have to be killed in the worst of circumstances in war by accident. However, at the same time, I support abortion in cases where is it the best thing to do.

 

[Federal Farmer]

I'm not being contradictory, war is inevitable sometimes, not very often. So I know sometimes innocents have to be killed in the worst of circumstances in war by accident. However, at the same time, I support abortion in cases where is it the best thing to do.

And exactly when is murdering your own child "the best thing to do"? I've already made it clear that in cases of rape, incest or imminent threat to the life of the mother that an abortion would be warranted, and those are the ONLY times that I'm willing to concede that it's "the best thing to do", but other than that, it's nothing but a cop out and a total abrogation of responsibility for the womans own actions! I await your introduction of a new thread to continue this discussion.