Poachers

[Woody]

What Reb said.

You said all animals.

[3legged_lab]

So now that we're completely off track, "eradicating all animals", how about back to assa's original question? Why shouldnt the govt take responsibility for their animals if they choose to take control of their animals?

If my dog kills one of jeffys lambs (and makes it out of his yard alive) im responsible for paying for the loss. If one of jeffys lambs eats an acre of my corn he's responsible for the loss. Right? Why isn't the govt responsible for their animals damages?

[Woody]

So now that we're completely off track, "eradicating all animals", how about back to assa's original question? Why shouldnt the govt take responsibility for their animals if they choose to take control of their animals?

If my dog kills one of jeffys lambs (and makes it out of his yard alive) im responsible for paying for the loss. If one of jeffys lambs eats an acre of my corn he's responsible for the loss. Right? Why isn't the govt responsible for their animals damages?

No one is arguing against that point. I am just asking, where is the money coming from to accomplish that?

[The Duck Hammer]

So now that we're completely off track, "eradicating all animals", how about back to assa's original question? Why shouldnt the govt take responsibility for their animals if they choose to take control of their animals?

If my dog kills one of jeffys lambs (and makes it out of his yard alive) im responsible for paying for the loss. If one of jeffys lambs eats an acre of my corn he's responsible for the loss. Right? Why isn't the govt responsible for their animals damages?

No one is arguing against that point. I am just asking, where is the money coming from to accomplish that?

I don't know maybe the revenue from issuing tickets?

[sws002]

So now that we're completely off track, "eradicating all animals", how about back to assa's original question? Why shouldnt the govt take responsibility for their animals if they choose to take control of their animals?

If my dog kills one of jeffys lambs (and makes it out of his yard alive) im responsible for paying for the loss. If one of jeffys lambs eats an acre of my corn he's responsible for the loss. Right? Why isn't the govt responsible for their animals damages?

No one is arguing against that point. I am just asking, where is the money coming from to accomplish that?

Perhaps we require all those fucking bird watchers to buy a habitat stamp?

[3legged_lab]

So now that we're completely off track, "eradicating all animals", how about back to assa's original question? Why shouldnt the govt take responsibility for their animals if they choose to take control of their animals?

If my dog kills one of jeffys lambs (and makes it out of his yard alive) im responsible for paying for the loss. If one of jeffys lambs eats an acre of my corn he's responsible for the loss. Right? Why isn't the govt responsible for their animals damages?

No one is arguing against that point. I am just asking, where is the money coming from to accomplish that?

I don't know maybe the revenue from issuing tickets?

Or any other of the forms of revenue the animals bring in?

[Feelin' Fowl]

So now that we're completely off track, "eradicating all animals", how about back to assa's original question? Why shouldnt the govt take responsibility for their animals if they choose to take control of their animals?

If my dog kills one of jeffys lambs (and makes it out of his yard alive) im responsible for paying for the loss. If one of jeffys lambs eats an acre of my corn he's responsible for the loss. Right? Why isn't the govt responsible for their animals damages?

No one is arguing against that point. I am just asking, where is the money coming from to accomplish that?

Perhaps we require all those fucking bird watchers to buy a habitat stamp?

I like it

[3legged_lab]

So now that we're completely off track, "eradicating all animals", how about back to assa's original question? Why shouldnt the govt take responsibility for their animals if they choose to take control of their animals?

If my dog kills one of jeffys lambs (and makes it out of his yard alive) im responsible for paying for the loss. If one of jeffys lambs eats an acre of my corn he's responsible for the loss. Right? Why isn't the govt responsible for their animals damages?

No one is arguing against that point. I am just asking, where is the money coming from to accomplish that?

Perhaps we require all those fucking bird watchers to buy a habitat stamp?

I like it

The Lower Klamath NWR actually does require an annual pass be purchased by ALL users, but I dont know if its actually enforced for anyone other than hunters.

[DeadEye_Dan]

So now that we're completely off track, "eradicating all animals", how about back to assa's original question? Why shouldnt the govt take responsibility for their animals if they choose to take control of their animals?

If my dog kills one of jeffys lambs (and makes it out of his yard alive) im responsible for paying for the loss. If one of jeffys lambs eats an acre of my corn he's responsible for the loss. Right? Why isn't the govt responsible for their animals damages?

No one is arguing against that point. I am just asking, where is the money coming from to accomplish that?

There is none, which is why for the umpteenth time, they should abrogate control....just like when you have a pet you can't afford to keep - you give it up.

[assateague]

So now that we're completely off track, "eradicating all animals", how about back to assa's original question? Why shouldnt the govt take responsibility for their animals if they choose to take control of their animals?

If my dog kills one of jeffys lambs (and makes it out of his yard alive) im responsible for paying for the loss. If one of jeffys lambs eats an acre of my corn he's responsible for the loss. Right? Why isn't the govt responsible for their animals damages?

No one is arguing against that point. I am just asking, where is the money coming from to accomplish that?

Pretty sure Nuff was arguing against that point.

[Woody]

So now that we're completely off track, "eradicating all animals", how about back to assa's original question? Why shouldnt the govt take responsibility for their animals if they choose to take control of their animals?

If my dog kills one of jeffys lambs (and makes it out of his yard alive) im responsible for paying for the loss. If one of jeffys lambs eats an acre of my corn he's responsible for the loss. Right? Why isn't the govt responsible for their animals damages?

No one is arguing against that point. I am just asking, where is the money coming from to accomplish that?

Pretty sure Nuff was arguing against that point.

Nuff doesn't know what he is arguing.

[NuffDaddy]

So now that we're completely off track, "eradicating all animals", how about back to assa's original question? Why shouldnt the govt take responsibility for their animals if they choose to take control of their animals?

If my dog kills one of jeffys lambs (and makes it out of his yard alive) im responsible for paying for the loss. If one of jeffys lambs eats an acre of my corn he's responsible for the loss. Right? Why isn't the govt responsible for their animals damages?

No one is arguing against that point. I am just asking, where is the money coming from to accomplish that?

Pretty sure Nuff was arguing against that point.

Nuff doesn't know what he is arguing.

Don't fuckin tell me what I don't know.

[DuckMulisha]

My question is, how they can be charged with over limit when there isn't a season going on? They are def douches though..make the rest of hunters look bad..tisk tisk

[Woody]

My question is, how they can be charged with over limit when there isn't a season going on? They are def douches though..make the rest of hunters look bad..tisk tisk

1 is more than 0

[DuckMulisha]

Good point. Touche

[aunt betty]

This thread is the most entertaining thread on this site and should be made a sticky.
Enjoying watching the mod repeatedly state the same lame argument.
Says, "I'm done arguing" and then starts arguing again within 10 posts.
Then states again that he is "done arguing in circles" and again...can't wait ten posts before he's arguing again.

That's some funny shit right there.

Will state that the game laws in Illinois are not made by a group of hunters but are made by appointees that are appointed by elected officials who claim to take their advice from a panel of hunters that are in advisory positions. It's all a bunch of lies coated in horse shit then dipped in white chocolate.