Conference vmsnet::hunting$note:hunting

    Walt, If an anti where to follow me into the woods I believe they would
    regret it. First I would welcome them along, then proceed to walk a
    couple of miles into the woods, get them good and turned around, then
    sit down and ask them how they plan on getting out of the woods.

    Rich

    BTW: I would travel through any swamp that came my way.

    .1 I like your idea except after bringing them into the woods I
    might want to lose them myself. Then get a game warden to come back
    with me to get the anti. I'm sure I could lose the guy in a good
    enough spot where I could find him again. 
    							Bret

	In Colorado, Washington, and maybe some other states, there have
	been laws passed that will get those persons harassing hunters
	or spooking wildlife while in the field or woods jail time and/or
	a fine.  I was hoping to see that law exercised during the deer
	hunt at the Air Force Acad this last season.  Three antis were
	arrested for tresspassing and then freed.

	As to how it goes as to what I would do.  That would be a hard
	call, I am not tolerent to that BS.  I'll leave it at that.

	Gordon

       A friend of mine whom I met through hunting trials had an
    interesting experience in Rhode Island.  He was planning on hunting
    a management area on a Saturday morning.  When he arrived, there
    were a bunch of people protesting.  He got out of his truck and
    proceeded to enter the area with his dog.  When he entered the area
    he loaded his shotgun and started walking.  One of the protesters
    came up to him and said "I'm going to do everything I can to disturb
    your hunting."  My friend advised that that was not a good idea,
    and continued walking.  At this point the protester reached down
    and grabbed this guys dog by the collar.  At which point my friend
    knocked out two of his teeth with the muzzle of his gun!  The cops
    were called and my friend was arrested for assault with a deadly
    weapon.  The case is still pending.... Now, I'm not a violent person
    but if someone touches my dog in a hostile manner, all bets are
    off.  Opinions???
    
    Jeff

    Jeff,
    
        Your friend will lose his case, a dam shame too. I get really
    p.o. when I hear stories like this. In my opinion your friend had
    every right to smack that prick, but unfortunatley the law protects
    people like that, and they know it and use it to hurt us hunters.
    I don't know what I would have done if some geek grabbed my dog,
    or me, but I do know it would not be pretty!!
    
    
    (my .02)
    Jamie

    Jeff, The way I look at the guy was trying to steal his dog. He used
    the needed force to retrieve his personal property ( His Dog ). Sounds
    simple to me, but life just isn't that simple unfortunatly. 
    He used some good sense, 1st he didnt lay his weapon down to go after the 
    guy, second he didnt point the weapon at him.  I would think he should
    get off and the other jerk should be prosicuted for theft.
    
    Only my opinion
    Rich
    
    BTW: If someone plays games with my dog he will wish he only got a few
    teeth knocked out.

    Is your friend filing a counter-suit?  May be worth the effort.
    
    I'd like to see someone try that with me.  Max (at 120 lbs.) is
    always looking for a HAND_OUT!
    
    Dave

         Certainly I'd be steaming mad if a protester tried something
         like that on me. But swinging a *loaded* gun into the
         protester's face was way out of line. I wouldn't hunt with a
         hothead like that. This guy deserves to lose his case and his
         hunting privileges.

         In this country, you don't have the right to respond with
         violence unless you're threatened with violence. That means I
         can join the ranks of the pro-lifers and block the entrance
         to an abortion clinic and nobody has the right to beat me up
         for that. You can charge me with some violation, but you
         can't physically harm me. That's good, don't you think?

         When you're being harassed like this, try to think beyond the
         current situation and consider the consequences of your
         actions on the future of hunting. Violence can only draw more
         sympathy for the protesters while making hunters look
         uncivilized. 

         Good thing that loaded gun didn't discharge in the guy's
         face.

         Doug
                                            

    Don't TOUCH my dog!
    
    It could have been worse, Jeff.  He could have shot the $$%%%&^%^&^&.
    
    My experience came just a week or two ago.  My fishing bud and our
    wives came out of the Sportsmen's show and there were about 20 nuts
    standing around with these signs that had really clever and thought
    provoking signs like:
    
    The animals don't like it; should you?  
    
    Really deep.
    
    So I did exactly the wrong thing, but it made me feel good.  I walked
    up to the one lady that looked like a second grade teacher....the
    kind with the cats running all over her house and tuna fish cans
    smelling......
    
    I said, "It's great.  You take em with one shot.  Just one shot to the
    heart and drop em right in their tracks.  They don't even hear the
    shot."
    
    She was mortified.  Not one of them spoke.  Then they all started with 
    their chatter. 
    
    I said, "How many of you are vegetarians?"
    
    I heard two say, "I am."
    
    I told the rest of them they were a bunch of hipocratic wimps.
    
    As we walked away, they made some noise and then I observed them
    walking to the end of the building.  I can't believe they were going
    home.  Anyway, I felt good about it.
    
    Brett.

    
    I have a question, a few replies back someone said it was good he did
    not lay his gun down, Why not? Wouldn't this have removed the dangerous
    weapon part of the assault? If you are gonna hit him, then you don't
    have to worry about him getting the gun.
    
    Hitting with the gun was out of line, but I don't feel he should be 
    prosecuted for assault, the guy was making the motions of stealing his
    dog, or at least threatening the dog. He should have the right to 
    protect his dog.
    
    --Bob

    I believe I could make any anti wish he hadn't tried to follow me
    in the woods.  But if he touched my dog, I couldn't keep my cool.
    
    Mark,
    

    Doug,	What would you do if the guy took your wallet out of your
    back pocket? Let him walk away? I would compare the two as being close
    to the same except if I had a choice between the dog and my wallet the
    wallet would go. I am not trying to be a smart ass, just tying to point
    out what is important to me.

    Rich

    Bob I wouldnt lay the gun down because some other hoser could grab it
    while I was beating the daylights out of the guy that was stupid enough to
    grab my dog.
    
    
    Rich

     I have mixed feelings on this situation.  First, I think sticking
    a loaded shotgun in someones mouth is pretty extreme. But I also
    would start "swinging like a bast*rd" if someone touched my dog.
    I also agree with those that wouldn't put the gun down, no way
    I would leave my shotgun where one of these nuts could grab it.
    I think the best that could happen would be for the dog to take
    a chunk out of the guy.  
    
    Jeff                                                
    

    Tough one to call. I wouldn't put my gun down for fear of an Anti
    picking it up but I might hit the b*&$*@%d with the butt of a gun.
    One might lose his temper and hold the gun on this person and still
    get in trouble for protecting his property. I know if it happened
    to me I would think that I would be in trouble for soemthing I did
    to the anti.
    							Bret

    I think i would of done the same. (-:  
    
           He was wrong for hitting the guy with the gun, i know
    it must of really pissed him off.... If that was my dog.....
     I think i would of shoved his head up his a@@... The nerve of
    some people.... Then the anti's cry when hunters lose their kool...
    
    
                 Open season on ANTI'S anyone??????
    
       Jeff

         Rich, all we know from Jeff is that "the protester reached
         down and grabbed this hunter's dog by the collar." You're the
         one who introduced the idea that the protester was actually
         attempting to steal the dog, not Jeff. These protesters may
         be a little nutty, but you'd have to be insane to attempt to
         harm or steal a dog belonging to an armed hunter. Isn't it
         more reasonable to assume that the protester was simply
         attempting to prevent the dog from hunting? 

         Everyone's got all this tough talk about how they'd beat the
         crap out of the anti. Well Jeff's friend took tough action
         and now he's probably awfully sorry he did. Most likely his
         story is being followed by the local paper. His family,
         friends, and coworkers are probably all talking about the
         trouble he's in; and some of these people might now think
         that he's a violent person and don't want to associate with
         him anymore. He's probably not sleeping too well because he's
         worried about his court date. And even if he's acquitted he's
         going to spend a ton of money defending himself! 

         IS THE SATISFACTION OF KNOCKING OUT THE ANTI'S TEETH WORTH
         ALL THIS TROUBLE? 

         The best response to a situation like this is avoid it if you
         can. Just about every time I go hunting I've got a choice of
         several areas. If I found antihunting protesters at one
         area, I'd simply enter the area from another location or I'd
         drive to another area. The goal of the antihunters is to
         harass you and prevent you from hunting. If you drive five
         minutes to another area and enjoy some good hunting, you win
         and they lose.

         Doug              

    
    I hate the whole disscussion but I do not judge any of you
    for what you would do or won't do...
    
    The sole purpose of their actions is to try to get you to
    over react.. With this in mind they want you to do something
    that will make the paper. They want you to committ assult.
    
    In there wildest dreams if one of them were shot and it 
    made national news it was worth while to them. It was worth
    the danger, it was worth the pain.
    
    Surely you all must have seen some of the things that green peace
    does that makes national TV...
    
    We are playing into their hands by responding in this manor.
    
    I sincerely doubt if they could grab one of my dogs but even if
    they did I don't beleive my dog is in any danger. Remember
    they are against even your dog being hurt.They are against
    violance but they are try to expose you as a violant person.
    
    Personally my dog's life is not of more value than any of
    bleeding heart liberals.
    
    I beleive what we really have to do is fight these people
    in legislation. We have to become more politcally involved.
    
    I am not just refering to let freedom ring either.
    
    we all need to put about 2-5 hours in this every week
    if we are to survive. We need to support other sportsmen
    because they will need us if they are to survive.
    
    The bear hunters, the dog men, the trappers, archery,
    turkey, snowmobiling, all the outdoor activities.
    we all need to stick together because when the 
    snowmobilers gets the thousands of acres posted
    "No tresspass " it purtains to us hunters also.
    
    Once the sign are up, it too late.
    
    Please Get involved. 
    
    Bear
    
    I just wish they would stop trying to force their values on
    us. 
    

     To be truthfull, I don't know what the anti's intentions were
    when he grabbed the dog.  I don't think the owner knew either.
    The guy who owns the dog does seem like a "hot head".  When telling
    us the story he was visibly upset.  I do know that if someone 
    grabbed my dog and I *thought* that they met him harm, I would 
    belt them.  Right or wrong.  I'm also pretty sure that if I did
    hit the person, they would then have to contend with 80+ pounds
    of nasty dog.  He is protective also.  All in all the whole episode
    is a no-win situation for the people involved.
    
    Jeff
    

    What Bear says is the position I like to think I would have
    the presence of mind to revert to.  However, Bear, given somebody
    grabs Rose in the woods, I'm not sure if you would stick to this
    or not.....especially had you not thought about it previously.
    
    >Was it worth it to knock the teeth out of the guy's mouth?
    
    Hmm.....it may be worth it.  The guy's frustration is probably not at
    his own actions but at the way the law is structured (right or wrong).
    
    Jeff, can you ask the guy if he had it over to do again what he would
    do?
    
    Just curious.
    
    Brett.

    Re .18	

    	Doug, 	You have a good point about what the protester was actual
    	going to do. I don't believe either one of us knows, we where not
    	there at the time. I should clarify myself. If the guy refused to
    	let my dog go when I asked him to I would do what is needed to
    	retrieve the dog. I WOULD NOT LEAVE WITH OUT THE DOG, but again I
    	wasn't there. So this is all hypothetical. Another point you made
    	was that you could go somewhere else. Good point! That is what I
        would have done if upland bird hunting. If I where duck hunting
        the accesses are limited and I would have gone through them. But
        the dog is always on a leash until I get her in the boat. 

        I think it safe to say that I most likely wouldn't get myself into the
        situation. I have to say though at this point in time (1989) I am
        so sick and tired of Anti this Anti that. Now they want to take
    	away my assault Ruger 10/22. This country has gone to hell in the
        past 10 years, but Bear is right it will only get worse if you don't
        get involved.

        Rich

    Brett,
      Yea I think that this guy would do it again.  I should clarify
    that I don't know the guy real well.  I met him at a trial last
    year and then saw him again last week at a tower shoot.  It was
    last week that he told us about the incident.  He does seem like
    the type that would be abt to fly off the handle.
      But then again, people will go to extremes when it comes to there
    family and there dogs.  I honestly don't know hwat I would have
    done.  I would not let them keep or hurt my dog.
    
    Jeff 

     
            Well said Bear, I would hunt with you ANYTIME.
    

     Having never been actually harrassed by any of these do-gooders,
    it is difficult to say how I'd react, but it is an extremely volatile
    situation to say the least. You have a very annoyed person with
    a loaded gun. Now is not a safe time to harass.
    
     In the safety and comfort of our offices, we can sit and speculate
    as to how we'd react in any given situation. It does not begin to
    approximate the realities of the moment. We can sit here with
    comparatively little emotion and calmly discuss the situation; even
    this can get out of hand. Now think about being there with some
    piss ant telling you you've wasted a vacation day since he's taking
    it upon himself to deprive you of liberty. It's a nasty situation
    and clearly one that needs to be addressed with legislation.
    
     I do not own a dog, but I do own cats. I would not be a happy camper
    if someone messed with them either. To be honest, I think that popping
    some jerk in the mouth with a loaded gun does cross the line of
    a reasonable and measured response. However, like I said, after
    the fact analysis is far easier than being there. With a competant
    lawyer and a non-anti judge, the case should end in acquittal. The
    guy had to expect trouble; in fact he provoked it. He does not deserve
    to get a favorable decision. It is very unfortunate that as hunters
    we all suffer when an avoidable misfortune like this happens.
    
     Were I in the same situation, I would definitely not put my gun
    down. I also would not use it to strike the harasser (unless I felt
    physical danger would befall me otherwise or the guy began to walk
    off with my dog). I would tend to very firmly demand that he release
    my dog. If he refused, he'd probably end up keeled over holding
    a sensitive area. In any case, I would neither leave without my
    dog nor allow the jerk to detain him.
    
     This whole area disgusts me. It's getting to the point where you
    are not free anymore. Whatever happened to the pursuit of happiness?
    If I am not hurting anybody, then I should have the RIGHT to do
    whatever. RI, I think, rescinded their hunter harassment law under
    the guise that it was unconstitutional. What a crock! If it is
    unconstitutional to prevent hunters from being harassed, then it
    is unconstitutional to prevent anyone from doing anything that does
    not directly lead to another's personal injury. It's time that we
    as sportsmen become more politically active and make our presence
    felt. The weathervanes that get elected to public office need a
    prevailing wind to keep them pointed in the right direction. We
    must become that wind- like a hurricane.
    
     I made my first ever political call to an elected official yesterday.
    I called in opposition to senate bill 386? and voiced my opposition
    to outlawing semi-auto firearms. I feel better already, but this
    is just the beginning.  
    
    The Doctah

    I disaggree, with the thought that this person should be
    aquitted by non anti judge.
    
    What I think should happen and I beleive will happen
    is that the charge should be dropped from asult to
    aggrevated assult and the person who grabbed the dog
    should also be charged with asult also.
    
    I think both people will be found gilty, fined , and
    be given a suspended jail sentence.
    
    These suspended jail sentenced will be a reminder that 
    they better not repeat this performance in the near future.
    
    What really would bother me is if this is exactly what
    does happen it might be a felony and the person hunting
    may never be able to hunt again with a gun anyway.
    
    I do beleive that this person better get a good lawer.
    
    Bear
    
    

    Harrasing hunters in RI is illegal. If anyone is curious of the 
    specific law #, I'm sure I can dig it out.
    
    I live in RI and this was discussed at length during a hunter safety
    course I had attended.
    
    What was suggested was that (I know this takes a little restraint)
    you simply take the offenders plate number, name if possible (anything
    to identify them) and walk away. Then you report them to the warden
    and THEY are arrested!!! 
    
    Tom            
    

    re: bear
    
     In NH, aggravated assault is a more severe charge than simple assault.
    If the indictment said felonious assault or aggravated felonious
    assault, then the guy is in big trouble. I also think assault with
    a deadly weapon is a felony. It would be a crime if the hunter was
    no longer allowed to hunt as a result of the anti's antagonism.
    
     I would like to know if the anti has been charged with anything.
    If not, it would be a good time to start howling about equity under
    the law. Clearly the harasser took possession of the hunter's property.
                                                                   
    The Doctah

    I must admitt that I am not very knowledgeable about the laws
    but as it was explained to me 
    
    Assault was being hit for no reason. Like sucker punched in a bar.
    
    And Aggravated Assault was when someone did something to provoke
    you into hitting him by Lets say grabbing your shirt near the neck
    and pushing you or in this case grabbing your dog.
    
    I do beleive I was in Mass. when this was explained, however
    it might have different meanings from state to state.
    
    I beleive this individual was Aggravated however I beleive
    it was an assault.
    
    I am somewhat puzzled as why in N.H. aggravated assault
    would be more serious than an assault.
    
    bear
    

    I always thought agravated assault was the more serious of the
    offenses.  Anyone know for sure?
    
    Jeff

          
                One morning you arrive at your favorite hunting area
                only to find some rowdy hunters there, what would you
                do? Punch them in the mouth or leave?
    
                                                          Al
    

    Leave

    Me too.
    
    Mark.

    Al,
    
    What is a "rowdy hunter", I don't know about down there in the U.S.,
    but up here in Ontario I have never come accross any hunters that
    were acting rowdy in the field. The only time I've seen them get
    rowdy is at the end of a weeks hunt when the guns are put away.
    
    But, if you did encounter "rowdy hunters" in the field it would
    be best to leave, but, you should also report them to the proper
    athorities. If we just turn around and walk away, and forget all
    about situations like this, then when an accident happens because
    someone was fooling around, the antis are going to have one more
    thing to use against us.
    
    
    
    Jamie

    	Generally assault means threatening an individual in such a
    manner as to make the individual believe that he/she was going to
    be injured,, i.e. holding a club or fist in a threatening manner.
    	Aggrevated assault is probably actually hitting the person,
    but I'm not sure of that.
    	The key here is that a believable threat is sufficient to
    constitute assault, sort of like; you can be charged with assault
    with a deadly weapon even if the gun you point at a person is a toy,
    since the victim doesn't know that it's a toy, and is in fear of
    his/her life.

         
        Lets face it, there are good and bad in every organization.
        We hunters do not have the best of reputations, lets ask our
        selfs why. We are known as drinkers, women chases, we like
        to shoot up the woods and leave all our litter behind.
        Each year we see more and more land posted. All the attention
        is focused on the one that will mar our image. If we are to
        see our sport survive then we must do all we can to help
        remove and rid any bad apple. Rember we are know as SPORTSMAN.
        Help keep it that wey.
    
                                                   AL

    I resent that.
    
    I never litter.
    
    Brett.

    According to NH law (I think it's this way most everywhere) an
    aggravated charge is more severly punishable than a simple charge.
    Simple assault is like smacking a guy in the head and leaving.
    Aggravated assault is continuing to beat the crap out of him when
    there is no longer any resistance, or way beyond reason, or using
    a bat etc. 
    
     EX of simple vs. aggravated. In NH, DWI requires a .10 BAC and
    has a certain punishment associated with it (LOL for 90 days).
    Aggravated DWI requires either .20 BAC or driving 25 mph over the
    speed limit and carries harsher penalties.
    
     In any case, each of us had better decide how we should act in
    such a situation since these types of situation are becoming more
    and more commonplace.
    
     The Doctah

      I came across an interesting article the other day that dealt
    with this subject.  It had to do with a sheep hunt in CA where this
    fellow talked about his hunt.  After winning the lottery for a permit
    this guy spent a lot of time and money practicing and scouting.
    His goal was to take a trophy with his bow.  Well some
    anti-conservation group was nice enough to give ample warning that
    they would be in the area to disrupt the hunt.  The officials took
    this warning lightly.  Fortunately the hunters didn't.  Each hunter
    had to bring along another hunter/friend to guard his/her base camp
    because the anti-conservationists would trash the hunters camp if
    it were left unprotected.  The author then went into a little detail
    on how the anti's would ruin his stalks by pushing the draws while
    blasting away on portable air horns.  Needless to say the strategy
    worked.  On the 4th or 5th day he gave up using his bow and picked
    up his rifle.  This sour story had a pretty good ending because
    the fellow did end up with a nice trophy (I think it made BC). 
    Still, reading the article .... just thinking about it ..... raises
    my blood pressure.  Especially since it was hunters that spent time
    and money improving the habitat so that the sheep could prosper.
    
    No, I can't believe that the anti-conservationist honestly believe
    that we are all a bunch of drunken, irresponsible, slobs.....  who
    in their right mind would confront someone of that capacity?????????
    
    Dave

    I noticed that the previous noters all seem to assume a certain 
    amount of guilt.  I feel that we the Sportsmen have much higher 
    moral standards than the anti's.  For this reason I feel we are 
    the do-gooders and not the problem.
    Take a look a note 105.3 for my solution!
    
    Regards,
    Nanook of the North

The following is copied without permission from _Fishing_and_Hunting_News_,
Volume 47, Issue 16 (July 25 - Aug. 8, 1991).

---------------------------------------------------------------------

A current bill before the U.S. Senate would make it illegal for so-called
animal rights activists to harass hunters in the field.  The proposal,
S. 1249, sponsored by Sens. Wyche Fowler (Georgia) and Conrad Burns
(Mont.), enjoys bipartisan support, according to the Wildlife Managment
Institute.  According to Fowler, the reason for the bill is simple: 
"We should not allow this harassment to dictate our national traditions,
or our national environmental policies.  Nor can we allow a lawful
activity, one that requires extreme safety precautions, to degenerate
into a truly dangerous situation both for hunters and protestors."
Under the proposal, penalties for those convicted of harassing a hunter
would be not less than $500 nor more than $5000.  Violations involving
the use of force or violence against person or property would be subject
to a minimum civil penalty of not less than $1,000 and not more than
$10,000.  The bill would also prevent protestors from entering
national forests; blocking roads, trails or other public areas in
national forests; or scaring, herding or decoying game to prevent a
lawful hunt.  The bill is currently in the Senate Agricultural Sub-
committee on Conservation and Forestry, which Fowler chairs.

    
    	A old timer I know offered this solution:
    
    	Get some skunt scent.  Be creative in how you use it.
    
    
    				       	Dave