Driftless Trout Anglers

Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

5 Pages<12345>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
TheDancingMan  
#21 Posted : Wednesday, November 15, 2017 2:46:14 PM(UTC)
TheDancingMan
Rank: Caddis Fly

Joined: 2/22/2015(UTC)
Posts: 133
Location: St. Paul

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Originally Posted by: NE IA Drifter Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: TheDancingMan Go to Quoted Post
"Dude, people vote with their wallet, it’s been proven countless times. They also wanted something different, a lot of people felt left behind."


Don't even begin to tell me about people voting regarding jobs and money. I graduated college in 2009 and I know what it's like for the economy to be in in ruins. In 2016 and 2017 that is not the case. There are so many jobs out there, it's incredible people fell for that.

Who even brought up guns? You guys all think I am some liberal crazy but in fact I'm a moderate democrat. The reality is guns are going nowhere in this country, but what's tragic is some cuckolded GOP moral cowards can't even agree or throw a bone and let the CDC study mass shootings and what we can do as a country to address this problem. I refuse to acknowledge a reality where we have to accept these mass shootings as a part of daily life. The sad part is you gun guys can't even put up solutions besides some fantasy "good guy with a gun."

Brevitz, life is that dangerous in Lake Elmo you need a semi-automatic weapon? No one needs those weapons, join the military if you really need one. I walk through Frogtown in St Paul everyday and have never felt the need for a gun.

You're an idiot an exemplify everything that is wrong with American politics. You're probably some kid from middle of nowhere Midwest USA who moved to St. Paul and now thinks they know everything.

Your foul language does nothing but make you look even more idiotic and I hope that your family doesn't see it. The fact that you use such language when describing your disdain with other ideology shows that you, in fact, are the cuckold. I feel bad for the kids who you teach and hope that they are old enough to understand how simple minded you are.

Instead of trying to belittle others please suggest instructive ideas for protecting our environment. Have you thought about volunteering in conservation groups?

We should really stop with the name calling. It doesn't accomplish anything except drive the divide in our country further.

To keep this on topic here is a link to a blog by one of the guides quoted in the article:

https://arcticwild.com/category/general/



I'm actually born and raised in St. Paul. But, nonetheless, I'm going to step back from this conversation and tamper down the flames of partisanship, partly caused by me. I do stand by original comments though that no one can be surprised about these wild places suddenly open to development. Obviously, not all development is bad, but it's disheartening when a false narrative is cast that it's either jobs or no nothing. Subsequently, it should make any conservationist sick when our EPA chief meets behind closed doors with industry executives to open areas like Pebble Mine for devastating natural resource extraction. I probably said some dumb stuff on here, but I get so pissed with this new administration and their hate for the environment. And you've still have people who think Ryan Zimke is a conservationist. As anglers and hunters, we have the most to lose with this.

As for guns, I never owned a gun but I do believe in compromise. As policy experts will say, there are 300 million guns in this country and in no way could the government ever take them all away, either politically, through a buy back or through force. Even policy experts who want assault rifles banned, soberly acknowledge that point, and as a result argue more on a mental health basis. I don't want all guns taken away either. But with so many people dying in gang violence and mass shootings, it's incumbent upon us to make sure wrong people don't have access to a weapon. You guys are all responsible gun owners, so I would think some checks on guns based on mental health would only make the 2nd Amendment stronger. When a toddler accidentally sets of a firearm and kills or injures himself, when a gang member decides to settle a beef or a psychopath shoots concert goers, it makes unchecked gun sales and access look bad. What doesn't look is bad is making sure that only law-abiding, properly trained individuals have access to guns. I've said my peace, I'm out.
thanks 1 user thanked TheDancingMan for this useful post.
NE IA Drifter on 11/16/2017(UTC)
NE IA Drifter  
#22 Posted : Thursday, November 16, 2017 3:45:44 AM(UTC)
NE IA Drifter
Rank: Caddis Fly

Joined: 7/9/2013(UTC)
Posts: 160
Location: Decorah

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Thanks for the replies. It's obvious we all feel strongly about this subject.

My personal view is that there should be a balance between growth and preserving our natural resources for future generations. Places like the ones described in the article I linked should be our last resort for development and only after careful and deliberate consideration.

I think now more than ever it is important to actively support conservation organizations that are advancing the preservation of our natural resources. There are so many groups that can benefit from our time and money especially at the local level.

Hopefully we can focus on the things we have in common and feel strongly about vs the things driving us apart.
mbchilton  
#23 Posted : Thursday, November 16, 2017 5:38:38 AM(UTC)
mbchilton
Rank: Dragon Fly

Joined: 12/16/2012(UTC)
Posts: 377
Man
Location: Decorah

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 5 time(s) in 4 post(s)
Here’s a great interview of a senior official at Patagonia about public lands on April Vokey’s podcast.
Anchored Podcast
weiliwen  
#24 Posted : Thursday, November 16, 2017 3:05:33 PM(UTC)
weiliwen
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 4/16/2014(UTC)
Posts: 292
Man
United States
Location: Lincolnshire, Illinois

Thanks: 72 times
Was thanked: 23 time(s) in 18 post(s)
Good points, BTJ. A lot of people seem to be easily distracted to vote for a candidate who talks about issues that are waaaay down on the list of things we should be worrying about. Demonizing illegal immigrants is a perfect example. Few on this forum will be affected by this issue. One part has done a great job at demonizing them, to distract from other, more important issues. Gun ownership is another of these issues. There is, in fact, little support for a limitation of the 2nd Amendment from the people, but both parties use it as a hot button to push agendas.

Here is what I worry about - because these things affect me personally:
  • The environment affects me personally, as a fisherman.

  • Taking public land and selling it to private interests affects me personally, as I own this land, as do you. Taking it away to despoil it takes money out of my pocket.

  • The tax "cuts" will affect me personally if the current Senate and/or House proposals pass - I'll be out an additional $30K of tax - some "cut."

  • Stupid posturing and war-mongering affects me, as the father of a 19-year old son with a draft card in his pocket.

  • Cuts to education affect me personally, as the father of a 17-year old daughter.

  • F*cking up healthcare affects me, as I will soon retire.

The current administration and I are on opposite sides of all of these issues.

Edited by user Thursday, November 16, 2017 3:09:56 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Create a list

Bob Williams, "Weiliwen"
Guillermo  
#25 Posted : Thursday, November 16, 2017 8:18:41 PM(UTC)
Guillermo
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 6/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 407
Location: Wisconsin

Thanks: 18 times
Was thanked: 22 time(s) in 20 post(s)
Originally Posted by: weiliwen Go to Quoted Post
Good points, BTJ. A lot of people seem to be easily distracted to vote for a candidate who talks about issues that are waaaay down on the list of things we should be worrying about. Demonizing illegal immigrants is a perfect example. Few on this forum will be affected by this issue. One part has done a great job at demonizing them, to distract from other, more important issues. Gun ownership is another of these issues. There is, in fact, little support for a limitation of the 2nd Amendment from the people, but both parties use it as a hot button to push agendas.

Here is what I worry about - because these things affect me personally:
  • The environment affects me personally, as a fisherman.

  • Taking public land and selling it to private interests affects me personally, as I own this land, as do you. Taking it away to despoil it takes money out of my pocket.

  • The tax "cuts" will affect me personally if the current Senate and/or House proposals pass - I'll be out an additional $30K of tax - some "cut."

  • Stupid posturing and war-mongering affects me, as the father of a 19-year old son with a draft card in his pocket.

  • Cuts to education affect me personally, as the father of a 17-year old daughter.

  • F*cking up healthcare affects me, as I will soon retire.

The current administration and I are on opposite sides of all of these issues.


"There is, in fact, little support for a limitation of the 2nd Amendment from the people, but both parties use it as a hot button to push agendas".

Problem for the left right now is they aren't going to gain any kind of long-term control because of the nonsense they're pushing regarding gun control. Long as they keep talking about Australian gun laws, they're going to keep losing their working-class moderate democrats. And they're certainly not going to gain converts from the other side. Doesn't matter how much some people may agree on the things you mentioned above. Amendment 2 is a line in the sand for many, like it or not. People don't like the Constitution getting messed with. And make no mistake, that is the ultimate goal. Jim Webb could fix this. But that'll never happen because he gets disqualified for supporting self-defense and self-reliance.

Edited by user Thursday, November 16, 2017 8:22:52 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

weiliwen  
#26 Posted : Friday, November 17, 2017 1:07:02 AM(UTC)
weiliwen
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 4/16/2014(UTC)
Posts: 292
Man
United States
Location: Lincolnshire, Illinois

Thanks: 72 times
Was thanked: 23 time(s) in 18 post(s)
WRR, you are dead wrong - 99% of people only wrap themselves in the Constitution when it suits them. When it doesn't, then they feel free to disregard it. The wrongheadedness with gun control is shared equally between the two parties. If you feel that this stupidity is only coming from the left, you aren't looking too hard.
Bob Williams, "Weiliwen"
Guillermo  
#27 Posted : Friday, November 17, 2017 3:37:17 AM(UTC)
Guillermo
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 6/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 407
Location: Wisconsin

Thanks: 18 times
Was thanked: 22 time(s) in 20 post(s)
Originally Posted by: weiliwen Go to Quoted Post
WRR, you are dead wrong - 99% of people only wrap themselves in the Constitution when it suits them. When it doesn't, then they feel free to disregard it. The wrongheadedness with gun control is shared equally between the two parties. If you feel that this stupidity is only coming from the left, you aren't looking too hard.


2 things:

Education, the Environment and Healthcare are not constitutional guarantees. We can debate whether that’s right or wrong, but it is what it is.

Secondly, if you think both sides deserve equal blame on gun control that pretty much explains my point about losing voters. It will continue as people don’t like to be lectured.
Gurth  
#28 Posted : Friday, November 17, 2017 4:29:14 AM(UTC)
Gurth
Rank: Stone Fly

Joined: 11/7/2016(UTC)
Posts: 761
Man
Location: Madison

Thanks: 34 times
Was thanked: 54 time(s) in 41 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Guillermo Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: weiliwen Go to Quoted Post
WRR, you are dead wrong - 99% of people only wrap themselves in the Constitution when it suits them. When it doesn't, then they feel free to disregard it. The wrongheadedness with gun control is shared equally between the two parties. If you feel that this stupidity is only coming from the left, you aren't looking too hard.


2 things:

Education, the Environment and Healthcare are not constitutional guarantees. We can debate whether that’s right or wrong, but it is what it is.



Well... owning any weapon we want isn't actually a right granted by the constitution.

There is currently an arbitrary line between semi and fully automatic weapons.

The line has to be somewhere and it has never been and will never be all guns. That's a very effective myth that is used to ensnare votes.

The debate over where that line should be is not a threat to anyone's constitutional rights.
Private correspondence at: jkschind "at" tds.net
Guillermo  
#29 Posted : Friday, November 17, 2017 5:58:58 AM(UTC)
Guillermo
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 6/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 407
Location: Wisconsin

Thanks: 18 times
Was thanked: 22 time(s) in 20 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Gurth Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Guillermo Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: weiliwen Go to Quoted Post
WRR, you are dead wrong - 99% of people only wrap themselves in the Constitution when it suits them. When it doesn't, then they feel free to disregard it. The wrongheadedness with gun control is shared equally between the two parties. If you feel that this stupidity is only coming from the left, you aren't looking too hard.


2 things:

Education, the Environment and Healthcare are not constitutional guarantees. We can debate whether that’s right or wrong, but it is what it is.



Well... owning any weapon we want isn't actually a right granted by the constitution.

There is currently an arbitrary line between semi and fully automatic weapons.

The line has to be somewhere and it has never been and will never be all guns. That's a very effective myth that is used to ensnare votes.

The debate over where that line should be is not a threat to anyone's constitutional rights.


It is a threat to constitutional rights if the debate includes recommending for semi-autos in any form to be banned, as I've seen many people call for. That would make a hell of a lot of guns illegal, hunting and self-defense guns I might add. When people say you don't need a semi-automatic weapon, they clearly have never had to deal with the threat of their house getting broken into at gunpoint. Guess what? I don't want to worry about having to reload in that scenario. No laws being proposed as of late would stop any shootings that have happened. Democrats are cowards on this issue. Same as Republicans are on the environment.

Australia is frequently brought up by mainstream democrats...Australian gun control was a mandatory buyback....Confiscation in simpler terms....Tyranny in the simplest terms.
weiliwen  
#30 Posted : Friday, November 17, 2017 1:12:49 PM(UTC)
weiliwen
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 4/16/2014(UTC)
Posts: 292
Man
United States
Location: Lincolnshire, Illinois

Thanks: 72 times
Was thanked: 23 time(s) in 18 post(s)
This is exactly what I mean when I wrote about wrongheadedness on both sides. If you feel that means I'm lecturing you, then we have a difference of opinion on what that means.

I follow the debate very closely and haven't heard any significant number of folks say all semi-automatic firearms should be banned, nor do I feel that way. I own a semi-auto firearm (a .22, to be sure, but still...) myself.

Just curious since you mentioned it, have you had to use firearms to defend yourself in a home invasion? I'm perfectly fine if you feel you need a weapon to do so, by the way, but this scenario is so rare as to be statistically insignificant, and is a red herring used by the far right. I doubt you'll find any great number insisting that the ownership of firearms for home defense should not be not allowed.

Australia's confiscation of firearms is, in fact, frequently brought up by far right-wing folks as being brought up by mainstream Democrats, not actually by any large number of Democrats itself (I'm not a Democrat, BTW, but you called that party out on this). Australia is a different country with different rules and is not analogous to the USA. Here, the Pandora's Box is open and the huge number of arms out there is there to stay.

That's all I have to say about firearms, as I'm certainly not going to sway you from your opinion.

Back to the subject of the thread itself, I do not believe that a single acre of public land should be sold for development of oil or mining resources, but to wait until there is a need and the proven ability to utilize it without degrading the land. To do so now will only make the rich richer and the citizens poorer.
Bob Williams, "Weiliwen"
Users browsing this topic
5 Pages<12345>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2018, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 1.334 seconds.