Posted on 11/22/2013 10:44:15 PM PST by JouleZ
Buffalo come to mind—nearly eradicated by greed!
When you plead I bet it sounds like “baa...”
Respectfully, reality shows that zero-sum-game (liberal) logic NEVER fits Natural Law and the progression of species. Procreation and magnitude of populations in the wild primarily relate to space and forage.
Buying into the mistaken belief that 1 dead duck = one less duck in the flock is only true when believing there is only ONE FLOCK.
Every time the over-'conservationists’ use US Fish and Game to ‘control’ deer populations, they have ended up killing most of the herd(s) in an area due to disease. Same with forests and any other misplaced zero-sum-game thinking. Save that logic for ones bank account.
The other misplaced belief in that position is the “killed any wildlife they wanted” has NEVER been the mindset of the hunter, rather foraging for food or sport. Besmirching the reputation of the hunter with these notions are not ‘conservative’ thought, it is ‘control’ thought.
The ONLY reason for ‘control’ ever by government officials, yes all brought on by loud voices like conservationists (who at any meeting of the Sierra Club one finds all big SUV’s in the car lot) who want to ‘control’ the rest of us.
Bigger government is not a solution. Logically if it were, then all game animals, birds and fish should have died off long ago. Cuz all us foragers would have just murdered ‘em all, right?
If we wanted to protect game, then there should have been careful public discussion about what rights we were giving up with appropriate compensation given in some circumstances.
Instead, laws were passed by rich hunters with the express purpose of expropriating a previously public resource.
When you plead I bet it sounds like “baa...”
It was funny but I’m sure it had no effect whatsoever on the judge’s decision. That judge put up with more than she had to and probably more than she should have.
I watched the video, it’s pretty interesting.
At one point the judge says “Excuse me for a moment” and stands up and walks away.
Now I’m not sure if it is a legal maxim or not, but the rule seems to be the one that leaves the field of battle first is the loser.
At which point the defendant (or someone in his crowd) says “Case dismissed!” and they all stand up and walk out, looked to me like the guy walks out the door, right past the judge who is standing there.
And no one lays a hand on him...
37 posts before someone recognizes what is happening. I congratulate you.
no way. take alaska, they do an incredible job of protecting the animal natural resource . they have it down to quite small areas, know how many animals can be taken in each and control that to have a stable population of a renewable resource. nothing about “rich hunters” in that i can see.
interstingly, the native american groups are not subject to the same laws on their lands, and there are consequences in some places, hav heard some interesting stories.
And no one lays a hand on him...
****
But wait....there’s more:
There you go.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.