The Liberal Gun Club Forum

In Texas, of course.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 76856.html

Next stage:

"I'm going to use this 6" knife and my bare hands to kill this grizzly bear."

Today's tech provides a clean and efficient kill. Period.


Sent from The Horse's Mouth

"Primitive" hunting using a Toyota pickup on a fenced Texas game ranch.

masonalannz wrote:"Primitive" hunting using a Toyota pickup on a fenced Texas game ranch.

Well they don't turn the A/C on and the radio doesn't work.

There's also guys who use older technology, a spear launcher called an atlatl. Several years ago a guy on another site wrote about using an arrowhead he found to take a deer which I thought was pretty cool. Same weapon used hundreds or thousands of years apart.

I think this is an interesting trend, and worth encouraging in some instances, although Sonofagun makes a good point about clean vs. messy animal kills.

The Inuit, Makah, and certain other native groups have been exempted from laws outlawing whaling based on their claim that whaling is central to their culture.

This kind of issue typically splits liberals between concern for the endangered animal and sympathy for the traditional culture.

I've always thought the obvious solution is to allow hunting/whaling, but only with the traditional technologies and weapons. Seal-skin boats and bone harpoons, rather than power boats, steel harpoons, and high powered rifles.

Dangerous to the hunters? You bet. But preserving your traditional culture is either worth running the same risks your ancestors did, or it isn't.

Same goes for hunting dangerous animals on land. Some people want to hunt grizzlies (and wolves) in the Rockies, others want to protect them. Solution: allow hunting of grizzlies with flint spears and knives only. That will even out the population of both grizzlies and grizzly hunters nicely.

That's a good one.
I remember though while my reminigton 1100 set quietly, I used my strike eagle during the rut to be stealth. I was also addicted to stalking.


Sent from The Horse's Mouth

Sonofagun wrote:That's a good one.
I remember though while my reminigton 1100 set quietly, I used my strike eagle during the rut to be stealth. I was also addicted to stalking.

This Strike Eagle?


McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing) F-15E Strike Eagle

That hardly seems sporting.

larrymod wrote:

Sonofagun wrote:That's a good one.
I remember though while my reminigton 1100 set quietly, I used my strike eagle during the rut to be stealth. I was also addicted to stalking.

This Strike Eagle?

McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing) F-15E Strike Eagle

That hardly seems sporting.

That would be perfect for a Sarah hunt and with my full support.

By the way, some day I'd love to see northern Cali.

I am with you. I hate any argument that's main gist is that 'its tradition'. So was slavery. And denying women the right to vote. And passing on oppressive religions. Etc.

i'm supposing that the clean-ness of the kill is compatible with traditional
methods--in the hands of experts. and that is a hurdle to the "traditional ways" argument: a tradition is not just a practice, it is an inherited expertise. when the inheritance chain is broken decisively, all that's left is more or less reverent, but not authentic, imitation.

I think the original and our idea of a clean kill may have diverged. I think the original as we know it had time between the strike and the killing blow for ritual prayers. So I'm not so sure 'clean' meant quick as much as it meant religiously pure.

Anyone know for sure which was 'clean' in the traditional sense - a one shot drop without prayers or a delayed kill with all the right words spoken?

Life Is A Highway - I'm on Tapatalk

So humans, in their infinite glory, have finally gotten to the point in their quest for quick and efficient hunting that we've now begun to regress? Cool.

These primitive hunters look about the right size for the type who sit in hides all day waiting for something to walk by, so I could imagine it would be quite boring for them. The thrill of hunting is in the stalk, not the shot.

I don't see anything wrong with hunting the old fashioned way. I have often given thought to buying a flintlock, flints powder and lead to cast balls. Why? Because I figure that if something terrible happens and we as a whole have to defend ourselves, ammo and reloading supplies would be in real short supply. Powder and flints would probably not be effected. Percussion caps would probably be hard to get as well.

I am a progressive. These boys are RE-gressives.

Though i find it hard to feel sympathy for a critter as destructive as a feral hog, even they deserve to die without suffering. Too many arrows...

The older methods are more difficult, no 200 yard shots. You'd have to get within range of an arrow or spear which takes a lot of effort or dumb luck. They probably had to be in much in better physical shape and were probably more motivated to track down wounded animals. It was more like hunting. Today, some guys sit in trees above baited plots. I don't see how that's more noble.

Oldskool wrote: Today, some guys sit in trees above baited plots. I don't see how that's more noble.

That is called poaching around these parts. Ain't nothin' noble about that.

SamuraiCowboy wrote:I don't see anything wrong with hunting the old fashioned way. I have often given thought to buying a flintlock, flints powder and lead to cast balls. Why? Because I figure that if something terrible happens and we as a whole have to defend ourselves, ammo and reloading supplies would be in real short supply. Powder and flints would probably not be effected. Percussion caps would probably be hard to get as well.

I think there is a lot of difference between hunting with a muzzle loader and using primitive bows and stone age arrow heads. An obsidian arrow head can be extremely sharp and penetrate as good as a steel one but the primitive bows could be so under powered that the hunters had to use some kind of poison in order to kill the game generally after a long stalk waiting for it to die. A muzzle loader has a tremendous amount of knock down power and up to 100 yds is extremely accurate. I like my .58 cal. flintlock a lot and have no doubt that after a stalk when a deer is in my sights at 100 yds. that it would be down and out as efficiently as from an 06.

Here in Illinois we get naked roll in mud for a good camo effect hide on the edge of a corn field. for weapons we use ink pens nail files and keys (recommended by Illinois state police) It works great for any kind of game predatory foe or friend .

irishman wrote:Here in Illinois we get naked roll in mud

+1

Shot and killed with my Beretta while camping. Not so primitive.



Sent from The Horse's Mouth

Sonofagun wrote:Shot and killed with my Beretta while camping. Not so primitive.

Sent from The Horse's Mouth

Did you shoot the chicken or the fish?

masonalannz wrote:

Sonofagun wrote:Shot and killed with my Beretta while camping. Not so primitive.

Sent from The Horse's Mouth

Did you shoot the chicken or the fish?

Both. It was self defense. The mother fucker jumped out of the water and attacked me and I had just enough time to draw, flip off the safety, pull the hammer back "double action on the first shot" and shoot 9 times as fast as I could. I shot 4 squirrels, 2 of my friends and a wild chicken in the background.

Actually my buddy caught the fish and I put the poor bastard out of his misery. The fish that is. He, he.