Appeal to Hunters' Self Interest

Hunting organizations and sportsman's clubs should be natural allies in the fight to get Constitutional Carry. However many of them seem to have the sightsighted attitude "why should I care, I don't have a handgun."

Shortsighted because 11% of the cost of firearms, including handguns and handgun ammo helps them out through the Pittman-Robertson Act. That's $55 on a $500 handgun, $5 on a couple boxes of handgun ammo.

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=103

Constitutional Carry, by creating tens of thousands, if not several hundred thousands of concerned gun owners, will strengthen the fight against restrictions on firearms, including those commonly used for hunting.

As Attorney General Doyle in 2001 tried to limit Wisconsin citizens to essentially a single shot firearms. This was AFTER the Wisconsin Constitution was amended in 1998 giving citizens the “right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation and any other lawful purpose.” All it would have taken to get it in effect is passage through a legislature controlled by a governor who dispises the right to bear firearms and a supreme court that agrees that the law is "reasonable" as a way to stop terriorists.

http://www.petitiononline.com/WGB/

http://www.wpri.org/WIInterest/Vol14no2/Syk14.2.pdf

btw: The DNR now can limit hunters to single shot firearms by regulation. Scenario: "Due to depletion of the deer herd only muzzle loaders without scopes will be permitted for this year's deer hunt ....er.. harvest."

Flipper said:

..btw: The DNR now can limit hunters to single shot firearms by regulation. Scenario: "Due to depletion of the deer herd only muzzle loaders without scopes will be permitted for this year's deer hunt ....er.. harvest."

Click to expand...

Constitutional Carry will have no impact on the DNR's ability to limit hunting to a muzzle loader without a scope or a single shot firearm....

Interceptor_Knight said:

Constitutional Carry will have no impact on the DNR's ability to limit hunting to a muzzle loader without a scope or a single shot firearm....

Click to expand...

At the present time anyway. I believe Walker will gut the Department of NO Resources eventually as he is with the Commerce Department in the very near future.

blayze said:

At the present time anyway. I believe Walker will gut the Department of NO Resources eventually as he is with the Commerce Department in the very near future.

Click to expand...

I will believe it when I see it.
The thing is, if he tips the boat too hard, he will be a 1 term wonder....

Interceptor_Knight said:

I will believe it when I see it.
The thing is, if he tips the boat too hard, he will be a 1 term wonder....

Click to expand...

I know 0 hunters who would morn the demise of the DNR. They are universally hated.

oak1971 said:

I know 0 hunters who would morn the demise of the DNR. They are universally hated.

Click to expand...

Agree 100%

They display a level of arrogance once reserved for jackbooted storm troopers. As far as that goes, who figured out a system where they are controlled or not controlled by a committee appointed, not elected and with no special qualifications or contact with the hunting community? That needs to be abolished and they need to be controlled with a tight leash by the voter's elected representative.

The DNR is the reason we must unload and case our guns every time we enter a vehicle.

There are many other reasons to leash them, not the least would be our complaints but their short sighted game management policies and intrusion into people's lives, up to and including no warrant searches are legend and need to come to a grinding screeching halt as well.

Interceptor_Knight said:

Constitutional Carry will have no impact on the DNR's ability to limit hunting to a muzzle loader without a scope or a single shot firearm....

Click to expand...

True - anyone correct me if I am wrong, but the DNR by edict can reduce demand for specific types of firearms and ammo by issuing "commonsense and reasonable" restrictions in the name of wildlife management and/or hunter safety. Like prohibiting the use of a .223 and/or a 5.56 nato round when hunting coyotes.

The Wisconsin DNR and its enviroment "partner" advocate organizations are the recipient of extensive Joyce Foundation funding. If anyone believes that money does not influence DNR policy makers and other Joyce Foundation networked organizations, I may be able to find a Davis P-380 to sell you.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_history_of_Davis_Industries_Firearms

Joyce Foundation $$$ flowing to Wis DNR and enviroment organizations. The members of I wonder if the Doylet presented the "research"funded by Joyce money on global warming during his recent junket to Cancun?

http://www.joycefdn.org/content.cfm/grant-list?GrantID=31011&GrantDetails=1

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/112257064.html

Others:

http://dnr.wi.gov/org/caer/cea/assistance/agriculture/yearonereport.pdf

http://www.lnrp.org/about-us.php

The Elmer Fudd's of the world will never be convinced. They hare happy with their trap and skeet shotguns and single shot rifles.

oak1971 said:

The Elmer Fudd's of the world will never be convinced. They hare happy with their trap and skeet shotguns and single shot rifles.

Click to expand...

Sure, there are a few that won't be convinced but I disagree with the blanket statement. Look a few years back to the Jim Zumbo AR-15 incident. He was convinced very shortly after he made his uneducated anti black rifle comments.

They can be convinced but the need to be hit where it hurts. Zumbo lost almost all of his sponsors until he was converted and now almost all hunting shows look favorably on the AR platform. This has caused a shift in perspective and a lot of old timers are buying AR's and becoming infected with BRD.