Humaniacs at it again.

[scratchin dog]

Ok there is a big difference between the purpose of the dept of wildlife its members and their views and that of the hsus. The aforementioned agency and its members are in no way anti hunting. The purpose is to protect animals not for their own sake but for the use of humans and future generations. Whether that is for hunting or taking pretty pictures. In contrast the hsus is a militant org. and its purpose is to protect animals for their own sake because they have "rights". They are against any kind of animal use and seek to fill their pockets with money given by the clueless. So again i dont think that guy was wrong for hunting in another state where it is legal and shouldnt lose his job over it. I do agree 100% that human populations should be controlled.

[Officially Retired]

Ok there is a big difference between the purpose of the dept of wildlife its members and their views and that of the hsus. The aforementioned agency and its members are in no way anti hunting.

Good rebuttal. As a matter of fact, Fish & Game gives out hunting licenses

The purpose is to protect animals not for their own sake but for the use of humans and future generations. Whether that is for hunting or taking pretty pictures.

Good point again.

In contrast the hsus is a militant org. and its purpose is to protect animals for their own sake because they have "rights". They are against any kind of animal use and seek to fill their pockets with money given by the clueless.

Well, I don't want to digress on the fact HSUS is a corrupt, militant organization. We all know that. Nor is the issue of legality even relevant.

For example, I could drawn a parallel to a leader in the Civil Rights Movement going to a KKK meeting in another state. No issues of legality at all, just a tremendously duplicitous act. Can you imagine what would happen to a white Civil Rights Leader's job if he came back from posting pictures of himself and his buds at a KKK meeting in another state?

The issue here really has nothing to do with legality; it has to do with a blatant conflict of interest in a leadership position. However, I think your underscoring the fact that Fish & Game actually controls hunting, so there would be no duplicity if some of its members do hunt--and go out of state to hunt animals they can't kill in their own state.

I do agree 100% that human populations should be controlled.

Yep.

Jack

[scratchin dog]

Good rebuttal. As a matter of fact, Fish & Game gives out hunting licenses





Good point again.





Well, I don't want to digress on the fact HSUS is a corrupt, militant organization. We all know that. Nor is the issue of legality even relevant.

For example, I could drawn a parallel to a leader in the Civil Rights Movement going to a KKK meeting in another state. No issues of legality at all, just a tremendously duplicitous act. Can you imagine what would happen to a white Civil Rights Leader's job if he came back from posting pictures of himself and his buds at a KKK meeting in another state?

The issue here really has nothing to do with legality; it has to do with a blatant conflict of interest in a leadership position. However, I think your underscoring the fact that Fish & Game actually controls hunting, so there would be no duplicity if some of its members do hunt--and go out of state to hunt animals they can't kill in their own state.





Yep.

Jack

Exactly...my point was not about legality just duplicity. The fish and game dept is not an organization but a govt/ state run agency with employees that enforce hunting laws as well as instruct hunting classes and give out licenses. So they dont have to be held to any standard that a public official would.