Wasn't a similar story posted about a year ago? I do recall this issue coming up once before.
In any case, I don't have a problem with them using bow and arrow if their state law permits it. Federal law certainly doesn't.
With the kinds of crime we are now seeing in America thanks to illegal alien drug thugs and MS13 & MS18 imigrants......everybody with a family should be armed...the evil ones sure as hell are...and won't give up their guns regardless of who says they have to...
imo
Wouldn't it be ironic for a felon that has commited murder trying to get a hunting license? :P
I wholeheartedly agree with you. As a retired game warden (31 yrs.), we targeted felons hunting with firearms for several reasons. Depending on felony, they could not possess a firearm in the first place; it could lead to further evidence of other crimes by these folks.
I don't know why the public is brain-dead on this issue. They seem to equate high-powered firearms as somehow harmless when possessed by a felon who is hunting, illogically believing that such arms can only kill four-legged critters, not the two-legged variety, you figure it out, I give up.
On other hunting related threads I always encouraged looking beyond the hunting "accident", to look deeper. Sometimes agencies are too quick to write off a hunting related death as an accident when truth be known, it could easily be a murder. Verify, verify, verify, no coincidences in crime, all leads followed to their very dead end. Not unusual for high dollar deals to be made (or lost) on hunting trips, enemies made, debts paid...
Maybe their wives own the gun and they simply use them to hunt with. Don't laugh, I heard Gordon Liddy say something to this effect when questioned about his post felon target shooting.
It's legal for felons (and others prohibited from owning guns) to hunt, as long as they use legal weapons like a bow and arrow. So what's the point of this story?
The article seem to try to equate "hunting licence" with "having a firearm".
The reporter probably went to public school or something. Not a deep thinker, it would seem.
There was a big article in a Delaware paper just the other day about this very same issue. Delaware is a state with no mechanism to determine if someone applying for a hunting license is permitted to own a firearm.
I do respectfully disagree that all felons should be barred from a restoration of second amendment rights.
My dead used to catch rabbits with deadfalls.
The Lautenburg law should also be canned.
A lot of people buy water fowl stamps, but never consider hunting. I've often bought a fishing license & trout stamps, even though I KNEW it was highly unlikely I would use them that year. Some of this coud be similar.
Also, what about hounding game? Even with no intent to shoot, don't they need the license to 'pursue'?
Trapping also doesn't need a weapon beyond a club ot knife, but in most places I've hunted, you need a general hunting license before you can buy the 'furbearer' tag.
Final analysis: AP/Newsday/antis just trying to stir $*** as usual.
They aren't allowed to have firearms, but what about bows and crossbows?
That's what the Dukes of Hazzard used.