Winning Hearts and Minds

Bog Trotter99

JP22 wrote: »

Retired but as an ex H&S Practitioner/Risk Management (Chartered member of IOSH), I agree with you but at the same time I respectively disagree.

We all need H&S, Risk Management, Food Safety etc., in the workplace but I admit some industries are definitely over-kill when it comes to safety in general, maybe they were caught/fined/in court etc.

All aspects of H&S when applied correctly should not stop or hinder a business or a particular job from taking place. Saying a job cannot be done because it’s too dangerous is a bucket load of you know what.

Just look at some Military jobs, dangerous is not the word yet they are completed daily in a safe manner. You must have all your ducks in a row, or in military parlance, all your P’ssssss in place (proper planning & preparation, prevents pi**, poor performance.

Just my tuppence worth.

But all those H&S rules you introduce for the military have to go out the window when the crap hits the fan otherwise the other side wins.

For example.........If one man can only carry 20kg of ammo or lift same without a mechanical hoist, then when the Chinese attack it makes it very easy for them to quickly deplete your ammo and destroy your bomb loading capacity.

H&S is the scourge of western society on par with 'woke' and 'pc'.

What was needed back then in the 80's was common sense not jumped up office workers with white coats, clip boards and Friday afternoon rule books.

cookimonster

Just for clarity - the military does indeed have to comply with national health and safety regulations / law ...... on a day to day basis, but there are exemptions and they are based around offical training routines and active service.

Mundane and simple example - load carrying ie personal kit and full marching order (back packs / bergens) over rough and unsuitable ground for extended periods of time, a nessacery evil but during normal daily routine the rigours of safe manual handling should be applied.

dto001

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

You'd wonder is that the actual case?As it quite clearly says in the guidelines that as a hunter you can sell "small amounts " of game to butchers and restaurants.

4.2 Hunter Exemption for the Supply of Small Quantities of Primary Products
European food law makes provision for the scenario where small quantities of wild game primary products, e.g. in the fur or in the feather eviscerated, or non-eviscerated wild game bodies, may be supplied either direct to the final consumer or to local retail establishments, e.g. a retail butcher or restaurant who directly supply the final consumer.

A hunter supplying in such a manner is exempt from Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 which sets general hygiene rules applying to all food businesses; and Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 which sets additional hygiene rules applying to businesses producing food of animal origin but must comply with the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 such as the obligation to produce safe food and have a traceability system in place.

It is important to note that a hunter invoking this exemption but also supplying game meat other than primary product would have to comply with, at a very minimum, the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 involving among other things: registration, general hygiene requirements, including appropriate storage and would be required to have a food safety management system in place.
The term ‘small quantities’ has not been defined in Irish legislation.
It would be expected that the demand for ‘in-fur’ or ‘in-feather’ wild game bodies, in such small quantities from either local consumers or local retailers, would be very limited.

The exemption is described in this section merely for completeness and to raise awareness of its existence.
FOOD SAFETY AUTHORITY OF IRELAND

THEN

Hunters Supplying Game
into the Food Chain
5.1 General
The hunter is permitted to do no more than the necessary preparation that is part of normal hunting practice before supplying the game into the food chain. Such preparation may be done ‘in the field’ or in a ‘game larder’.
This necessary preparation includes killing and where appropriate, bleeding and the removal of stomach and intestines (‘the green offal’).
For trained hunters (trained person), this preparation will also involve the removal of the heart, lungs and associated tissues and the head, as part of the examination of the live wild animal, wild game body and viscera for abnormal behaviour characteristics or suspicions of environmental contamination (please see Section 5.5 Hunter Training for further information on this).
If good hunting practices are observed, the stomach, intestines and other body parts of wild game may be disposed of safely on the site of hunting unless circumstances dictate that these parts must accompany the wild game body to the approved game handling establishment.

Except in the case of private domestic consumption, any further processing (such as skinning, plucking, cutting) of the wild game must be performed in an approved game handling establishment.

My take on this...
you can sell "small amounts" [whatever that is defined as]of the game to a butcher, restaurant etc. So long as it is gutted but still a complete carcass and in its fur or feathers. That's sOP all across the EU..But if you start breaking it down or skinning/plucking the game. Then it is considered a food processing affair.
So we seem to have a clash of the legislation here with this, which is EU legislation and the Game dealer act here in national law? So which one is it at the end of the day?

Surely we could just try keep it simple and either raise money to pay for a game dealer to butcher a carcass or maybe a game dealer would go it for a good cause it would be excellent PR

Grizzly 45

Rows Grower wrote: »

Thanks for the go ahead.

I think.

What does the clause "and nothing else" cover?

Does it differentiate between friends and family, neighbours, work mates, hungry people you know, people you know that just appreciate a nicely prepared piece of wild venison?

Read the legislation on it and proceed as you see fit... If one of them comes back looking for compensation for biting on a bit of lead copper bullet fragment or from salmonella or something else...deal with it.:cool:

Grizzly 45

JP22 wrote: »

Retired but as an ex H&S Practitioner/Risk Management (Chartered member of IOSH), I agree with you but at the same time I respectively disagree.

Best one I love is you have some guy teaching people who have been doing a particular job for years safely from a manual,on a mandatory [and expensive]safety course,and has never touched or experienced a machine/job in question themselves.:rolleyes:

Bog Trotter99

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Best one I love is you have some guy teaching people who have been doing a particular job for years safely from a manual,on a mandatory [and expensive]safety course,and has never touched or experienced a machine/job in question themselves.:rolleyes:

Exactly my points.

tudderone

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

But all those H&S rules you introduce for the military have to go out the window when the crap hits the fan otherwise the other side wins.

For example.........If one man can only carry 20kg of ammo or lift same without a mechanical hoist, then when the Chinese attack it makes it very easy for them to quickly deplete your ammo and destroy your bomb loading capacity.

H&S is the scourge of western society on par with 'woke' and 'pc'.

What was needed back then in the 80's was common sense not jumped up office workers with white coats, clip boards and Friday afternoon rule books.

Well in fairness, i do remember the spate of "Personal injury" claims back in the 80's/90's until it was all dealt with. The work dodger next door was an expert at it, he got many many thousands in compo, to be spent wisely on Heinekin and John Player blue.

He was telling the father one day, he normally had two, possibly three claims in a year. He was always falling, tripping, or having things falling off shelves on him.

Rows Grower

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Read the legislation on it and proceed as you see fit... If one of them comes back looking for compensation for biting on a bit of lead copper bullet fragment or from salmonella or something else...deal with it.:cool:

I though you might have been reading different legislation when you said of the food safety authority " they''ll nail you for illegal food processing under the food safety act the moment you "prepare" game."

But it was just a load of baloney really that you got carried away with while feeling persecuted by the Irish authorities.

It's not as bad living in Ireland as you portray, I know some people think it's a dump but I love it here. Lots of positives to dwell on.

cookimonster

They'll nail you for "illegal food processing under the food safety act" The moment you "prepare" game.IE take it out of its skin or feathers.Its considered food processing and you need then to have a full food processing setup with all that entails.

Absolutely this above.... see below, recent case 2021.

Reference Material-

https://www.farmersjournal.ie/illegal-game-meat-butcher-in-wicklow-closed-601096

https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/meat-sent-for-destruction-following-discovery-of-deer-processing-business/

https://www.fsai.ie/news_centre/press_releases/january_enforcements_08022021.html

The result is publication of various enforcement orders and the investigating report on the FSAI website as well as public media. Subsequent prosecution can lead to fines, gaol or both.

Rows Grower

cookimonster wrote: »

Absolutely this above.... see below, recent case 2021.

Reference Material-

https://www.farmersjournal.ie/illegal-game-meat-butcher-in-wicklow-closed-601096

https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/meat-sent-for-destruction-following-discovery-of-deer-processing-business/

https://www.fsai.ie/news_centre/press_releases/january_enforcements_08022021.html

The result is publication of various enforcement orders and the investigating report on the FSAI website as well as public media. Subsequent prosecution can lead to fines, gaol or both.

The three links you provided are all related to people running an illegal business.

That's a different topic.

cookimonster

Nope, its an example of an unregistered food producer being 'nailed' as Grizzly-45 put it ohh so elegantly.

The point that is being made is 'money doesn't nessacerraly have to change hands for the food safety laws to apply'. Just to be clear food safety regulations do not apply to domestic situations but anything out of the norm can come under scrutiny. The example I gave a few posts back- 'sandwiches / curry' for the local football team won't be an issue on an occasional stance but it does become an issue if it is a routine arrangement (regardless of financial circumstances).

We are splitting hairs here, but the law is quite clear-

The trained hunter is allowed sell game on to a dealer once it-
a. Eviscerated but not skinned,
b. Intact and in feather.

The trained hunter can indeed sell to the trade prepared game - but only if they have the suitable premises, plant / equipment and a food safety management system ( ....theres a bit in it, not impossible but enough to wreck your head).

Giving it away to a registered food buisness is in breach of their food safety management chain as they are required to have traceability and therefore a breach in law.

You want to give someone something as a true gift ... no bother but if it's some form of payment in kind then its dodgy.


As a by the by ( and yes I know is a different duristriction) but I remember an interesting point on one of the Discovery Channel outdoor shows. Basically the outfitter couldn't feed their clients on game they, the outfitter, had previously harvested, as it was considered a commercial transaction and illegal under US or that particular State wildlife laws.

Grizzly 45

While on the subject of game dealers etc. One we might want to stick in the sticky on legislation.The game preservation act of 1930
Never seen this one before and I don't know has this been revoked or amended.it still reads as active legislation

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1930/act/11/enacted/en/html

Rows Grower

cookimonster wrote: »

Nope, its an example of an unregistered food producer being 'nailed' as Grizzly-45 put it ohh so elegantly.

The point that is being made is 'money doesn't nessacerraly have to change hands for the food safety laws to apply'. Just to be clear food safety regulations do not apply to domestic situations but anything out of the norm can come under scrutiny. The example I gave a few posts back- 'sandwiches / curry' for the local football team won't be an issue on an occasional stance but it does become an issue if it is a routine arrangement (regardless of financial circumstances).

We are splitting hairs here, but the law is quite clear-

The trained hunter is allowed sell game on to a dealer once it-
a. Eviscerated but not skinned,
b. Intact and in feather.

The trained hunter can indeed sell to the trade prepared game - but only if they have the suitable premises, plant / equipment and a food safety management system ( ....theres a bit in it, not impossible but enough to wreck your head).

Giving it away to a registered food buisness is in breach of their food safety management chain as they are required to have traceability and therefore a breach in law.

You want to give someone something as a true gift ... no bother but if it's some form of payment in kind then its dodgy.


As a by the by ( and yes I know is a different duristriction) but I remember an interesting point on one of the Discovery Channel outdoor shows. Basically the outfitter couldn't feed their clients on game they, the outfitter, had previously harvested, as it was considered a commercial transaction and illegal under US or that particular State wildlife laws.

There's no splitting hairs, the law is the law.

It is not illegal to give oven ready venison to a friend.

Richard308

cookimonster wrote: »

Nope, its an example of an unregistered food producer being 'nailed' as Grizzly-45 put it ohh so elegantly.

The point that is being made is 'money doesn't nessacerraly have to change hands for the food safety laws to apply'. Just to be clear food safety regulations do not apply to domestic situations but anything out of the norm can come under scrutiny. The example I gave a few posts back- 'sandwiches / curry' for the local football team won't be an issue on an occasional stance but it does become an issue if it is a routine arrangement (regardless of financial circumstances).

We are splitting hairs here, but the law is quite clear-

The trained hunter is allowed sell game on to a dealer once it-
a. Eviscerated but not skinned,
b. Intact and in feather.

The trained hunter can indeed sell to the trade prepared game - but only if they have the suitable premises, plant / equipment and a food safety management system ( ....theres a bit in it, not impossible but enough to wreck your head).

Giving it away to a registered food buisness is in breach of their food safety management chain as they are required to have traceability and therefore a breach in law.

You want to give someone something as a true gift ... no bother but if it's some form of payment in kind then its dodgy.


As a by the by ( and yes I know is a different duristriction) but I remember an interesting point on one of the Discovery Channel outdoor shows. Basically the outfitter couldn't feed their clients on game they, the outfitter, had previously harvested, as it was considered a commercial transaction and illegal under US or that particular State wildlife laws.

If there’s a reward it is illegal, just like if you give a friend a €5 for dropping you somewhere etc they’re in breach of Psv regulations.
The next question is how enforceable is it?

Bog Trotter99

Richard308 wrote: »

If there’s a reward it is illegal, just like if you give a friend a €5 for dropping you somewhere etc they’re in breach of Psv regulations.
The next question is how enforceable is it?

Well you have just highlighted how ridiculous this country is.

Run by a succession of fools who pass stupid laws, because they think they know better than others, just to get their name in headlines.

cookimonster

Rows Grower wrote: »

There's no splitting hairs, the law is the law.

It is not illegal to give oven ready venison to a friend.

Never said it was - did say :

Just to be clear food safety regulations do not apply to domestic situations but anything out of the norm can come under scrutiny.

....followed up by :

You want to give someone something as a true gift ... no bother but if it's some form of payment in kind then its dodgy.

Again for clarity, transparency, openness and upfront, as also explained Richard308 -

If there’s a reward it is illegal

tudderone

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

Well you have just highlighted how ridiculous this country is.

Run by a succession of fools who pass stupid laws, because they think they know better than others, just to get their name in headlines.

Oh they are not finished yet, wait til a dogs breakfast of a hate speech law is done, then you'll see a stupid law :rolleyes:

Bog Trotter99

tudderone wrote: »

Oh they are not finished yet, wait til a dogs breakfast of a hate speech law is done, then you'll see a stupid law :rolleyes:

It would have been bought in a few years ago but they hit a big problem which they still haven't been able to overcome.

They just can't work out how they they can still blame the English/British and Brexit for all the problems of Ireland and still have a hate law.:rolleyes:

Grizzly 45

Richard308 wrote: »

If there’s a reward it is illegal, just like if you give a friend a €5 for dropping you somewhere etc they’re in breach of Psv regulations.
The next question is how enforceable is it?

In the 2nd most litigation-happy country in the Western world?
You'd soon find out how good your friends are if one of them bites on a steel shot pellet or their kids gets a slight stomach upset from eating your free wild game meal.
I've found two things Ireland does take seriously... Their farming image and practices and protecting such, and their safe green food and traceability. So i'd kind of say if there was a complaint about something like this, they will be shifting to find out what's this about? Esp if it was in a group setting like a charitable donation to some welfare operation?

Sika98k

Rows Grower wrote: »

There's no splitting hairs, the law is the law.

It is not illegal to give oven ready venison to a friend.

Well it’s illegal to give your friend venison hamburgers you made as that is processing. ! That’s what the FSAI said to a friend of mine who was doing no more than any hunter does with his venison, steaks, burgers , sausages, etc. He made a damn good salami also.

Bog Trotter99

It could explain food choice here.

dto001

It’s not the only thing we can do if each club were to do small things around the local community and promote it. It would give each local club a bit of a boost and nearly every parish in the country has a club this will bring a lot of good PR.
A lot of small community based ideas can be better than one large national idea and more people will see it happening in their locality and will remember it.

But if we don’t do something now there will be an end to shooting in our lifetimes.

A big one would be if everyone put aside their bickering and just got Fieldsports to a place where it is safe and then they can go back to bickering!!

Excuse the rant 😂😂

Bog Trotter99

dto001 wrote: »

It’s not the only thing we can do if each club were to do small things around the local community and promote it. It would give each local club a bit of a boost and nearly every parish in the country has a club this will bring a lot of good PR.
A lot of small community based ideas can be better than one large national idea and more people will see it happening in their locality and will remember it.

But if we don’t do something now there will be an end to shooting in our lifetimes.

A big one would be if everyone put aside their bickering and just got Fieldsports to a place where it is safe and then they can go back to bickering!!

Excuse the rant ����

To do that you have to work with what people find acceptable. After all it is those same people you are trying to convince that you do right and good things.

This means you have to distant yourself from other that the public will not accept today.

dto001

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

To do that you have to work with what people find acceptable. After all it is those same people you are trying to convince that you do right and good things.

This means you have to distant yourself from other that the public will not accept today.

Yes but as a group this should be possible, as a majority of people eat meat (for now) so what’s the difference between me getting my own organic meat and them eating horse infused burgers from Tesco?

If we are doing proper conservation work and show that then nobody “should be able” to complain about it. But to do that we need to stand as one and not bickering between each other on how it’s done. Then Get proper advice on PR.

Bog Trotter99

dto001 wrote: »

Yes but as a group this should be possible, as a majority of people eat meat (for now) so what’s the difference between me getting my own organic meat and them eating horse infused burgers from Tesco?

If we are doing proper conservation work and show that then nobody “should be able” to complain about it. But to do that we need to stand as one and not bickering between each other on how it’s done. Then Get proper advice on PR.

I agree but the problem you raise of traceability is because of being part of the EU. That is entirely a different topic.

'Stand as one'?............Who is that exactly?

dto001

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

I agree but the problem you raise of traceability is because of being part of the EU. That is entirely a different topic.


'Stand as one'?............Who is that exactly?

Traceability shouldn’t be a different topic at the very least I know where my meat is coming from.

At the very least all shooting interests should stand together NARGC, Countryside alliance, deer alliance, clayshooting, etc. and I personally would try get all other Fieldsports enthusiasts as well ie. angling, coursing, fox hunting etc.

Bog Trotter99

dto001 wrote: »

Traceability shouldn’t be a different topic at the very least I know where my meat is coming from.

At the very least all shooting interests should stand together NARGC, Countryside alliance, deer alliance, clayshooting, etc. and I personally would try get all other Fieldsports enthusiasts as well ie. angling, coursing, fox hunting etc.

Traceability runs into problems with EU laws I think.

The public will not accept coursing or fox hunting.

Grizzly 45

dto001 wrote: »

.

At the very least all shooting interests should stand together NARGC, Countryside alliance, deer alliance, clayshooting, etc. and I personally would try get all other Fieldsports enthusiasts as well ie. angling, coursing, fox hunting etc.

We had that...It was called the Sports Colation...until the usual Irishthings, attitudes,pettiness, egos and especially MONEY, [Accounting for, and making thereof others backs] destroyed a organisation that was about to go places...

So if you can figure out how to unite this disparate bunch and disciplines...

Grizzly 45

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

T

The public will not accept coursing or fox hunting.

Says who?
ICABS and the usual bunch of ski-masked baseball bat-wielding idiots, when they aren't working for BLM/ANTIFA these days?:rolleyes.

Bog Trotter99

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Says who?
ICABS and the usual bunch of ski-masked baseball bat-wielding idiots, when they aren't working for BLM/ANTIFA these days?:rolleyes.

The idea is to ................Win Hearts & Minds

It is not about what 'you or I' think is right or wrong or what same think should be.

It is about firstly what the public will even bother to stop and listen to. Then about what 'they' are willing to accept.

You can go out there guns blazing if you want and start shouting and ramming down their throats the rights and wrongs of how it all should be.

Joe public will just look and walk away.

If it isn't on their radar then they will not listen and neither will you in the same position.

Generally:

The public will not wear fur coats anymore.

The public will not accept shops adorned with whole dead animals anymore.

The public do not want to know or have to think or see where their meat comes from.

They will not accept those forms of hunting when it could be done by other means.

You may get a few country folk who will accept. But the majority will just not listen. And that is your goal.

Grizzly 45

It is about firstly what the public will even bother to stop and listen to. Then about what 'they' are willing to accept.

Think the word is AFFECTING them,not accepting.
.

If it isn't on their radar then they will not listen and neither will you in the same position.

Exactly.it isn't on their radar at all here.As they,do ,not,care.
Generally:

The public will not wear fur coats anymore.

Yeah, those poor Russian, Canadian and American furriers and trappers are finding it hard in these times... Its making a comeback! Because you have the Chinese using DOG fur on those "fake fur" garments that the antis espouse.Or its made from oil and plastic...How polluting can you get?;)
WILD fur otoh is a renewable product harvested in its natural environment, and not kept cruelly in cages in fur farms. Articles like these is what's needed to counter the antis drivel on topics like this. WE have to be able to counter their propaganda, with better propaganda and facts.
https://qz.com/356854/theres-actually-a-way-to-feel-good-about-fur/

The public will not accept shops adorned with whole dead animals anymore

.

Have butchers died out then?:P

The public do not want to know or have to think or see where their meat comes from.

Why do you think the antis are using this "meet your meat" tactic? They are trying to force people to see where it comes from,and revolt them into thinking about killing.Counter by telling them where our meat comes from..And it wasn't living in its own filth,and dying terrified in a slaughter house.

They will not accept those forms of hunting when it could be done by other means.

Quite frankly, the GP here don't care... Otherwise, ICABS would have achieved all its aims 40 years ago. They have been here for 55 years and so far they have managed to ; muzzle greyhounds, ban carted deer hunting, and otter hunting. They don't have the numbers like in the UK, to push this further, plus they are going on against with fox hunting a multi-billion euro industry in Ireland of the bloodstock industry.Why d'ya think half their petitions and members are UK/EU mercenaries filling them in or showing up for protests? It gets drowned in the bog of Irish indifference.

You may get a few country folk who will accept. But the majority will just not listen are interested. And that is your goal

Grizzly 45

You want to win hearts &minds...You need to get your side over in a cool and rational manner... A great example here. How difficult to put together a film like this in Ireland?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhLkPxIINW0

Grizzly 45

Knowing how your enemy thinks and acts is also a great advantage.Just substitute hunting for gunownership[or not] and you have a good idea here on how these people think.

[/I]They hate us.

The funny thing is, we don’t hate them.

Consider the following dynamics.

They want to come into our houses. They want to go through our stuff. They want to find contraband, whether it’s an AR-15, an 1877 Colt Peacemaker or a Dr. Seuss book. They want to take these things away from us so that they’ll feel all roasty-toasty inside.

They want more. They want the police involved—and the media. They want us destroyed for harboring certain stuff they don’t like, for reasons they can’t clearly articulate, and for the ideas that stuff represents. They will use social media, old media, TV media, gossip media, any media whatsoever. This makes them even more superior.

And here’s what we want from them: Not a damn thing.

We don’t care how or where they live. We don’t care what or if they believe. We don’t have any interest in controlling anything they do, say or plan. We’re not interested in calling the authorities on them.

If we’re active at all, it’s always defensive. We don’t shame them, demonstrate against them, demand public lists of them. We don’t harass, demonstrate or write endless ill-mannered op-eds criticizing them while preening in the limelight of our own self-decreed morality. We never proclaim that a citizen has a right and an obligation to confront and destroy criminal effort, even if we know he does.

In short, we want them to get the hell out of our faces and go away, and tone down the holier-than-you-guys caterwauling.

What psychiatrist, shorn of bias, would look at these opposing behaviors and not see the first as overly aggressive, hostile, perhaps genuinely disturbed? The same fellow would find the second boringly normal. Then he’d call a member of that group to see how his air-conditioning repair was coming.

protestors

But isn’t it nice to dream of a world without them gibbering into a loudspeaker turned up to 11? But they’ll never go away. They’re addicted to moral superiority and they hate the non-believers. They love to hate gun owners. It feels so good.

That hate is part of our everyday reality. We see it on TV, on the internet, in the media and the movies—anywhere the self-designated enlightened gather to celebrate their superiority. We feel it in their eye-rolls, their eagerness to navigate away, their refusal to engage in debate because it’s beneath them. Even in their refusal to get basic facts about guns right.

The reality is that if we were forced to register our guns on a national level, they would applaud.

If we were forced to give up our guns, they would cheer.

If we were arrested and our guns confiscated, they would be ecstatic.

If we were all rounded up and sent to reeducation camps, they would feel vindicated. (But only because they hadn’t figured out that tomorrow would be their day to go to the gulag—or until they found themselves in a real life-threatening situation and hoped for someone to come to their aid.)

Why? There’s no easy answer. It’s too easy to say, “It’s complicated,” even if it is. It’s also too complicated to say, “It’s easy.”

But if we are to survive and achieve some sort of civil calm and normalcy of discourse, it does us well to see where this all comes from and why it’s going to be around a long time.

It begins with history, of which they are willfully ignorant. If you point out to them that many gun-control initiatives started as a tool of that which they pretend to despise most highly—pure white supremacy; they won’t believe you. Tell them what happened in the South in the aftermath of the Civil War, when everyone knew “gun control” didn’t apply to white gentry, but only to the newly freed slaves, different in race and culture, and they yawn, if they’re even still listening.

Tell them the real history of New York’s Sullivan Act of 1911, that it was enacted by a Tammany Hall politician to arrange the arrests of his enemies, and it’s likely they’ll blank out. History, they believe, is for the historians, and, anyway, the mainstream media hasn’t give them the basis to even begin to understand that slice of history.

Logic, as well, has little weight with them. We are a country with over 400 million guns and yet our “gun-violence rate” is astonishingly low, not astonishingly high. It is typically the highest in the areas with the most gun control and those crimes are almost all done with illegal guns. But they put their fingers in their ears when we tell them this.

Show them that in the wake of rare tragedies, gun deaths tend to go down, not up, even as gun sales tend to go up, and they’ll accuse you of lying; they might even get hysterical. (I’ve felt it!)

Facts bore them. Strictly for the unwashed. Tell them it’s not an “assault weapon” and should be properly called a semi-automatic, and their eyes wander. Tell them “high-capacity” firearms have been around since the Civil War (ever hear of a Spencer?). Tell them John M. Browning designed the Model 1911 semi-automatic pistol in the first decade of the twentieth century and watch how fascinating their shoes become. Tell them Baby Face Nelson used a semi-automatic pistol in the 1930s and learn they never heard of Baby Face Nelson.

Tell them for all the endless buzz about “gun violence” in America, it is nowhere near the top in leading causes of death, and they profess not to understand the meaning of the word “rate.”

In all, it’s like trying to explain the difference between a revolver and a semi-automatic or why there’s no decimal point before 9 mm, while there is in front of .38 Special, or, God help you, what “gauge” means and where it comes from. Forget it, Jake. It’s anti-gun town around here.

Without a doubt, there are false-media narratives at the root of their irrationality. The first is the view that the gun is an emblem of toxic masculinity. While it’s true that the gun was developed by men for what was then viewed as men’s work—protecting and providing—it’s equally true that many women are attracted to the defensive use of guns and many women become superb shots. Memo to the Left: The gun doesn’t care which sex the person shooting it is. Kim Rhode, Lena Miculek and Kirsten Joy Weiss can shoot better than I can, even in my dreams. The old saying demands revision: “God created woman. And Col. Colt made her equal.”

Then there’s the play of race, which is used on this topic just as it is on nearly every topic in America today. Why must this civil-rights issue ever be viewed through the prism of race? Most self-defense shootings suggest a different dichotomy: the criminal against the victim. Irrespective of race, most gun-control schemes have the loathsome attribute of rendering our most-vulnerable citizens even more vulnerable.

Class is another big player in the game. Many gun folks have traditionally been practical, focused, accustomed to and in full enjoyment of working with their hands. They can lay pipe, install windows, fix refrigerators, harvest corn and build cities. They are blue-collar and proud of it. The elite, by contrast, often contribute something “higher”—that is, nothing physical, but cognitive products like “creativity,” as in entertainment, or “profit,” as in the stock market. They never get their hands dirty. And, though relying desperately upon the people who can do stuff whenever things go bug-eyed, they routinely detest the “lower classes” as crude, unironic, NRA members, bowlers, NASCAR fans who don’t even know what a Negroni cocktail or Aviation American Gin is. They see guns as symptoms of social inferiority.

But even all that is based on a media narrative, as today, Americans of every type and occupation own guns. This is proper, as this is a civil right we all enjoy. Why can’t they appreciate that?

Of course, all of this fits into a larger context and is symptomatic of an overarching pathology of the Left, evident in most of its other initiatives. They fear force. Everywhere, always and 24/7/365, their instinct is to yield. They fear force in foreign policy; they fear it in immigration policy; they fear it in domestic policy; they fear it in law enforcement. They see no such thing as righteous force.

The police officer, not the perpetrator, will always be the suspect, as far as they are concerned. The border patrolman, not the illegal immigrant, will always be the culprit. The soldier, and not the guerilla, will always be the war criminal. When confronted, they believe accommodation is preferable to action. For them, it’s always Munich—and if Munich evolves into war, as Munichs do, it won’t be their children on the front lines.

But there is one thing they fear more than anything. It’s not quite us because they know us to be reasonable, decent and law-obeying. We won’t get in their faces and bathe them in spit. What they fear, however, involves us. They don’t fear we’ll do something wrong with the gun. They fear we’ll do something right.

They hate heroes. That’s because they know it is not in them to be one. So their response is to declare heroism defunct. It’s obsolete. It’s tainted by racism, sexism and other sins. And the gun is entwined with American notions of heroism, both from history and popular culture.

booksThey know that if you defend your life, your family, your store, or your car from a determined armed force with your own armed force, you have done something most people would view as heroic, even if the media will not say so. They want to obliterate the entire concept.

Because righteous force does the one thing they hate most of all. It makes them feel bad about themselves. They live entirely in a universe of feelings; not logic, action and accountability—even our potential actions, even our symbolic actions. This fear and self-loathing forces them to confront the totality of their abandonment of the duty of protection, which then tosses out any implicit endorsement of heroism. They don’t want anyone equalized courtesy of Col. Colt. They can never do that. It’s not in them and they hate that it just might be in you.

They hate us for being what they can never be.

Stephen Hunter is a Pulitzer Prize-winning critic, author of the must-read Bob Lee Swagger series of novels and the author of many other books.

Bog Trotter99

There's not a lot you can say is there?

I thought it was about showing the general public on how the shooting community was in keeping with the countryside.

Grizzly 45

Its just part of it,the keeping with the countryside, but even that has been thrown back at us. As "only doing it to encourage more game birds to massacre...etc,etc.:rolleyes:
The point of the last two posts were to show us how we have to be able to justify and understand the mindset of those who oppose us. If you cant explain yourself and your mission,how do you win someone else's heat and mind?Esp if you don't understand how they think and influence others?

Bog Trotter99

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Its just part of it,the keeping with the countryside, but even that has been thrown back at us. As "only doing it to encourage more game birds to massacre...etc,etc.:rolleyes:
The point of the last two posts were to show us how we have to be able to justify and understand the mindset of those who oppose us. If you cant explain yourself and your mission,how do you win someone else's heat and mind?Esp if you don't understand how they think and influence others?

I think I understand exactly how they think. Some of the objectors may even have in some part valid points. The rest are either fruitcake or political.

But you are never going to get your point across by waving a stick and shouting it is my right or my tradition or all the other crap.

Grizzly 45

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

I

But you are never going to get your point across by waving a stick and shouting it is my right or my tradition or all the other crap.

Do you realise hunting is a protected global culture under UNESCO programmes? Whether you are an Eskimo hunting polar bears or a lad down in the Amazon shooting a blowgun with poison tips.Or jack Murphy, out with his SXS?:)

So actually we do have a "right and tradition" to hunt.:) A bit harsh to not accept the right of anyone to not hunt for their food,if we are all supposedly part of the global village?

Simply put, you need to do whatever locally and as an individual, you think best to your circumstances and locality and personality to win H&M. There is no manual,or organisation or whatever to help us all out as the opinions and actions are as diverse as anything in the shooting& hunting world.

Bog Trotter99

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Do you realise hunting is a protected global culture under UNESCO programmes? Whether you are an Eskimo hunting polar bears or a lad down in the Amazon shooting a blowgun with poison tips.Or jack Murphy, out with his SXS?:)

So actually we do have a "right and tradition" to hunt.:) A bit harsh to not accept the right of anyone to not hunt for their food,if we are all supposedly part of the global village?

Simply put, you need to do whatever locally and as an individual, you think best to your circumstances and locality and personality to win H&M. There is no manual,or organisation or whatever to help us all out as the opinions and actions are as diverse as anything in the shooting& hunting world.

It is 2021...........who gives a f****. Nobody cares. All they care about is what affects them and not a shooter.

Go up to someone and say ...."Listen mate I shoot because it's my right under a UNESCO program".

Do you honestly think it would convert them to your way of thinking?

They would want to see actual results of you doing something good.

Grizzly 45

No but I can say "are you trying to destroy my culture and way of life you RASCIST BIGOT? You MUST accept my lifestyle and beliefs that are officially recognised... Nothing like using the same tactics against an aggressor as they use themselves.
But hey,its up to you to use what you think will work for you...But good luck trying to change closed minds in the 1st place.