National Forest Recreational Shooting Ban
- Thread starter Oak
- Start date
BuzzH
Well-known member
Then don't complain when the lowest common denominator forces your land management agencies to close down recreational shooting.
Rights end when they infringe on other users...if only obviously.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
You bet, lets abandon personal responsibility and rationalize non performance with ideological scapegoating.
..if only obviously.
..if only obviously.
BuzzH
Well-known member
You bet, I see how well personal responsibility works every day....
Using that logic, you will have to ban hunting because there are not enough conservation officers to stop poaching.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Do nothing and wait for a few people to be killed, that will be better.
Poaching an animal is one thing, killing a person because of unsafe recreational shooting mean much different things.
The resulting impacts each will have with decision makers also are 2 different things.
But, nice try on your "logic"...
BTW, context matters...
Poaching an animal is one thing, killing a person because of unsafe recreational shooting mean much different things.
The resulting impacts each will have with decision makers also are 2 different things.
But, nice try on your "logic"...
BTW, context matters...
Nameless Range
Well-known member
The reason most any law exists is because relying on the personal responsibility of individuals fell short of society's acceptable threshold, in terms of limiting the frequency of undesirable occurrences of specific acts.
We can debate over where that threshold is, and how we will avoid reaching it, but in Colorado they've decided implementing laws may be the best way. It's not out of the ordinary at all to implement laws when the personal responsibility of the collective falls short.
We can debate over where that threshold is, and how we will avoid reaching it, but in Colorado they've decided implementing laws may be the best way. It's not out of the ordinary at all to implement laws when the personal responsibility of the collective falls short.
This is likely the best solution to an issue that isn't going away, and I think it needs to be included in any plan to close a significant portion of the Forest to recreational shooting. The Forest and the public need to work together and identify areas that are suitable for recreational shooting and are a reasonable distance from the population centers.
We can all grouse about how it isn't right that we are being restricted from certain activities on our public lands (I am just as guilty), but the problem of an expanding population and increased development along the boundaries of fragmented Forest lands is only going to get worse. In CO, these also happen to be the most wealthy (politically influential) counties in the state.
People die in hunting accidents every year.
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
If the cumulative effects of poaching were on display for all to see, in one spot, for many years, then that would probably be the end result.
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
Sure they do, and it's incredibly unfortunate. Multiple use is just that, and I don't see where it's unreasonable for the non-shooting public to expect that they can recreate safely on THEIR public lands, just as I have my expectations for MY public lands.
Look, I'm not a punish everyone because of several idiots type of guy in any way. Shooters have created this issue and have no one to blame but themselves.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Odin said: People die in hunting accidents every year.
Sure they do, but hunters as a group have been proactive in dealing with it. Passing hunter safety laws, requiring hunters safety, etc.
People die in car accidents too, we require licensing, driving tests, lots of laws and enforcement, etc.
Anyone even hints about similar things in regard to firearms and Wayne Lapierre's hair catches fire.
Keep making false analogies and kicking the can down the road.
Don't be proactive, just reactive, and see where that leads...actually its intuitively obvious, even to the most casual of observers, where it leads.
Sure they do, but hunters as a group have been proactive in dealing with it. Passing hunter safety laws, requiring hunters safety, etc.
People die in car accidents too, we require licensing, driving tests, lots of laws and enforcement, etc.
Anyone even hints about similar things in regard to firearms and Wayne Lapierre's hair catches fire.
Keep making false analogies and kicking the can down the road.
Don't be proactive, just reactive, and see where that leads...actually its intuitively obvious, even to the most casual of observers, where it leads.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
This isn't more laws, it's an expansion of existing bans. Why don't you quit arguing semantics and provide something constructive to the conversation?
It's my personal experience that the only way to keep shooting sites from turning into landfills is to designate specific locales where people can shoot, and only allowing shooting when either a range volunteer or employee is on site to oversee it. Unregulated shooting sites quickly turn into moonscapes and wastelands.
Driving cars hasn't been banned.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Really?
Try driving your car the wrong way on an interstate. Try driving your car across a high school football field. Try driving across your neighbors lawn. Try driving through the neighborhood park.
Having areas you cant recreationally shoot on public lands is NO different. Doesn't mean you cant shoot or drive because some areas are off-limits.
Recreational shooting is already banned in campgrounds.
Similar threads
