Biden Administration urges Supreme court to let cops enter homes and seize guns without a warrant

[Ten Bears]

It´s less about what´s fair for me, and more about what´s effective.

Given their broader mission it seems reasonable to expect that BHA would have a broader donor demographic than RMEF or MDF. Public lands have a lot of bi-partisan support.

But after SB-252 and SB-32, it´s clear that BHA is more willing to vocally oppose legislation targeting predator hunting and trapping.than either of the other organizations. Thatś pretty much beyond debate at this point.

If RMEF and MDF are so much more pro-predator hunting, I wouldn´t have expected them to sit on the sidelines during the California bear debacle. Given that they did, Iḿ not sure that having more pro-2A sources of funding matters that much to me.There´s plenty of pro-2A organizations out there for that.

Massive spending isn´t what got SB-252 tabled in California. People speaking up did.

It just doesn´t make any sense at this point to say BHA is anti-predator hunting.

you seem like a nice guy with good intentions. but I seriously doubt a $35 a year member is taking his time to dedicate more than half of his posts to BHA defense.

that being said. the “what about RMEF or MDF argument” sounds like when a child gets caught doing something and starts pointing at others.

they are both completely different orgs than BHA (as YOU state has a broader mission) and I’d be willing to bet you don’t know what they have done or tried to do or what stance they took. you’re just pissed because the org that you probably work for gets rightfully crapped on here.

want to get people to not think BHA is liberal fronted untrustworthy org ? stop taking the money from them and stop making arguments based on what you maybe think others have done or need to do. take some accountability for what you do.

 

[Wib]

Not only should no sportsman support BHA, no freedom and liberty loving American should support BHA. Oh, they do good things, on the surface. They are a leftist "progressive" organization in bed with the America hating leftists who are presently in control of this country. Yep, they are good. And really, really bad. Ice cream is good! Pouring gasoline on ice cream makes it bad. BHA is very bad. Sheep and Commies love them though!

 

[lyle_destroys]

Can we just start a "They comin' to take your guns!" super thread and sticky it? Alternatively, we can just start two or three versions of the same thread (like this) everyday. Thoughts?

Do you really think it's not already happening? The katrina aftermath, red flag laws. Demonizing ar platforms and turning the public against gun owners.

 

[lyle_destroys]

It

The Gov't SHOULD be scared of us. Not vice versa.

It's amazing to me that some members here don't think there's a problem when they won't protect our borders but they will wall off and put troops around the capital.

 

[wind gypsy]

you seem like a nice guy with good intentions. but I seriously doubt a $35 a year member is taking his time to dedicate more than half of his posts to BHA defense.

that being said. the “what about RMEF or MDF argument” sounds like when a child gets caught doing something and starts pointing at others.

they are both completely different orgs than BHA (as YOU state has a broader mission) and I’d be willing to bet you don’t know what they have done or tried to do or what stance they took. you’re just pissed because the org that you probably work for gets rightfully crapped on here.

want to get people to not think BHA is liberal fronted untrustworthy org ? stop taking the money from them and stop making arguments based on what you maybe think others have done or need to do. take some accountability for what you do.

I can't speak for hoodie but I find myself throwing jabs at the BHA derangement syndrome folks quite a bit lately.

I am a RMEF member and not a BHA member. I'm not a BHA member because of my concerns with where some of their funding has come from and some of the things Land Tawney has supported in the past. That said, I am deeply concerned with protecting wild things/places and our access to hunt and recreate on public lands. My rub comes when people try to diminish the need for protection of wild places/things/land/access because they don't like that there's a handful of liberals in prominent places with BHA. It's even more absurd when BHA gets attacked for not doing enough even when they one of the leading orgs taking stances against things like banning trapping in NM and bear hunting in CA.

MtGomer couldn't have said it better:

reminds me of a broke, tattooed, enraged, woke pink haired feminist protester who’s Trump Derangement Syndrome makes it impossible for her to think about anything without blaming Trump, except he’s a grown man and it’s BHA instead.
Reeeee the patriarchy.reeeeeee

This is a thread about our firearm rights being threatened yet we mock BHA's effort to protect/defend public lands. What do they have to do with each other? It doesn't seem like something to mock when one looks at the mountain of garbage access/hunting/fishing legislation brought forward this year in MT now that republicans finally have control of all three branches. Can't we fight both?

 

[Hoodie]

That said, I am deeply concerned with protecting wild things/places and our access to hunt and recreate on public lands. My rub comes when people try to diminish the need for protection of wild places/things/land/access because they don't like that there's a handful of liberals in prominent places with BHA. It's even more absurd when BHA gets attacked for not doing enough even when they one of the leading orgs taking stances against things like banning trapping in NM and bear hunting in CA.

This is a thread about our firearm rights being threatened yet we mock BHA's effort to protect/defend public lands. What do they have to do with each other? It doesn't seem like something to mock when one looks at the mountain of garbage access/hunting/fishing legislation brought forward this year in MT now that republicans finally have control of all three branches. Can't we fight both?

This pretty much sums up my thinking on the issue. I´m concerned with where all this hyper-partisan crap will inevitably lead.

I´d be even more concerned if I was a MT resident. Now´s not a good time to alienate potential allies because we don´t fully agree on every last issue. We´re gonna lose some of these political battles if we don´t get our shit together. That´s just an unfortunate reality.

I don´t work for BHA, and I don´t need to to see the problem with people repeatedly shitting on one of the more vocal organizations responding to these threats.

It´s just a symptom of the much bigger, more serious problem of division. That division is absolutely going to lead to more outcomes like we just had with NM SB-32. No way around it.

 

[RyanT26]

Hey Buzz. For the third time how much money of their many many millions did BHA donate to help stop the trapping and bear ban in NM and California to help hunters? The BHA website indicates zero dollars

What's your response to this as a high ranking BHA rep? pretty simple question. Why did did BHA not support Zinke who was highly qualified and and support Haaland who has never held a real job, has two DUI convictions, did not pay her taxes and introduced three bills to ban firearms. Again a real simple question for a BHA rep like you. Seems like BHA is a scam because you refuse to answer these very simple questions

Haaland has 2 Dui’s?

 

[Hoodie]

Haaland has 2 Dui’s?

I looked into it.

Theyŕe from 35 years ago apparently. She claims to have been sober for over 30 years.

That´s not an opinion on the matter one way or the other. Just what I found digging into it.

 

[Wib]

Haaland is going to do more damage to this country sober than she could have ever done drunk. She is exactly what the radical left and globalist cabal need in that position. An absolute disaster.

 

[Ten Bears]

I can't speak for hoodie but I find myself throwing jabs at the BHA derangement syndrome folks quite a bit lately.

I am a RMEF member and not a BHA member. I'm not a BHA member because of my concerns with where some of their funding has come from and some of the things Land Tawney has supported in the past. That said, I am deeply concerned with protecting wild things/places and our access to hunt and recreate on public lands. My rub comes when people try to diminish the need for protection of wild places/things/land/access because they don't like that there's a handful of liberals in prominent places with BHA. It's even more absurd when BHA gets attacked for not doing enough even when they one of the leading orgs taking stances against things like banning trapping in NM and bear hunting in CA.

MtGomer couldn't have said it better:

View attachment 279326

This is a thread about our firearm rights being threatened yet we mock BHA's effort to protect/defend public lands. What do they have to do with each other? It doesn't seem like something to mock when one looks at the mountain of garbage access/hunting/fishing legislation brought forward this year in MT now that republicans finally have control of all three branches. Can't we fight both?

I don’t even know where to begin with this one. I don’t think you read my posts so I will back track. Former member, basically same ideas on the org as you. Didn’t throw a tantrum nor did I accuse BHA of anything. Nor did I start this thread or derail it (that’s just what happens on the internet) I was pretty happy when I saw them involved in the NM trapping ban.

My rub came from Hoodie tossing other orgs into the fire because his favorite org came under fire. I also asked if he is an employee as I found it odd that he rushes to their defense like a watch.

IMO BHA does get beat on sometimes too much here, but their employees (Looking at you down there Buzz) and their members bring a ton of it on themselves. So does the organization. Hence former member. It seems like some members/employees only exist on here for BHA defense.



When we have a NRA thread how many of there members on here openly criticize leadership or actions they have taken ? a ton, if not most. So it’s not some Karen partisan thing you are making it out to be. It’s ok to not like everything an org stands for and to speak up.

I like wild places or whatever term encompasses that sentiment. I am a member of at least 10 different hunting fishing and conservation orgs. Maybe right now we need a shift on focus though from “conservation” to actually protecting hunting

 

[Hoodie]

I don’t even know where to begin with this one. I don’t think you read my posts so I will back track. Former member, basically same ideas on the org as you. Didn’t throw a tantrum nor did I accuse BHA of anything. Nor did I start this thread or derail it (that’s just what happens on the internet) I was pretty happy when I saw them involved in the NM trapping ban.

My rub came from Hoodie tossing other orgs into the fire because his favorite org came under fire. I also asked if he is an employee as I found it odd that he rushes to their defense like a watch.

IMO BHA does get beat on sometimes too much here, but their employees (Looking at you down there Buzz) and there members bring a ton of it on themselves. So does the organization. Hence former member. It seems like some members/employees only exist on here for BHA defense.



When we have a NRA thread how many of there members on here openly criticize leadership or actions they have taken ? a ton, if not most. So it’s not some Karen partisan thing you are making it out to be. It’s ok to not like everything an org stands for and to speak up.

I like wild places or whatever term encompasses that sentiment. I am a member of at least 10 different hunting fishing and conservation orgs. Maybe right now we need a shift on focus though from “conservation” to actually protecting hunting

I think he was speaking more about the general sentiment than anything you said in particular.

I´m not inclined to shit on RMEF or MDF. They are both fantastic organizations that do great work and every single western hunter should be a member of both. Period.

I just stated a pretty mundane fact about both of them pertaining to a few recent threats to predator hunting. Iḿ not cancelling my MDF membership because they didn´t say anything about SB 252 in California. Iḿ not advocating a mass exodus from RMEF because they didn´t speak up for trapping in New Mexico.

Meanwhile, folks like Okhotnik are suggesting people shouldn´t support BHA because they didn´t take a stand on concealed carry on college campuses in Montana. Or because they didn´t post a lengthy rebuttal to Beto O´Dorkś primary pandering.

Does that not seem like maybe these organizations are being held to somewhat different standards to you? Is this useful?

At the end of the day, for me, this is about being practical. Iḿ going to get my hackles up when people imply that BHA is anti-predator hunting because it´s stupid. I´ve already pointed out why it´s stupid repeatedly, so Iĺl try to refrain from beating that particular dead horse too much more.

I´m saying something pretty simple here. If you want predator hunting to be a thing, maybe support organizations that are vocal in defending it when it comes under attack. If you want trapping to be a thing, support organizations that support trapping.

Or don´t. But if people are actively advocating against the loudest voices on our side of the debate, at a certain point they´re part of the problem as far as I´ḿ concerned.

 

[Ten Bears]

I think he was speaking more about the general sentiment than anything you said in particular.

I´m not inclined to shit on RMEF or MDF. They are both fantastic organizations that do great work and every single western hunter should be a member of both. Period.

I just stated a pretty mundane fact about both of them pertaining to a few recent threats to predator hunting. Iḿ not cancelling my MDF membership because they didn´t say anything about SB 252 in California. Iḿ not advocating a mass exodus from RMEF because they didn´t speak up for trapping in New Mexico.

Meanwhile, folks like Okhotnik are suggesting people shouldn´t support BHA because they didn´t take a stand on concealed carry on college campuses in Montana. Or because they didn´t post a lengthy rebuttal to Beto O´Dorkś primary pandering.

Does that not seem like maybe these organizations are being held to somewhat different standards to you? Is this useful?

At the end of the day, for me, this is about being practical. Iḿ going to get my hackles up when people imply that BHA is anti-predator hunting because it´s stupid. I´ve already pointed out why it´s stupid repeatedly, so Iĺl try to refrain from beating that particular dead horse too much more.

I´m saying something pretty simple here. If you want predator hunting to be a thing, maybe support organizations that are vocal in defending it when it comes under attack. If you want trapping to be a thing, support organizations that support trapping.

Or don´t. But if people are actively advocating against the loudest voices on our side of the debate, at a certain point they´re part of the problem as far as I´ḿ concerned.

But you did kinda shit on them and in a backhanded way you are still doing so. And you seem to do the same thing OKN does which is overstate your view or selectively forgetting important pieces.

The organizations are not apples to apples, and you are definitely intelligent enough to know that. Maybe that’s why they don’t chime in on everything, just the same as BHA doesn’t chime in on everything that fits RMEF/MDF directive.

And again some of the BHA stuff is warranted, there is a reason this sentiment exists. Having a large percentage of folks on here harp on some of their short comings just doesn’t happen. Honestly for some I don’t think it’s repairable, which is unfortunate.

I think you have some great thoughts on stuff that I have read on here. Even if I disagree with some of them. It just struck a cord when you pass the buck onto RMEF/MDF, they do great work and it was unnecessary.

 

[wind gypsy]

I don’t even know where to begin with this one. I don’t think you read my posts so I will back track. Former member, basically same ideas on the org as you. Didn’t throw a tantrum nor did I accuse BHA of anything. Nor did I start this thread or derail it (that’s just what happens on the internet) I was pretty happy when I saw them involved in the NM trapping ban.

Maybe I left context out.. My post was in regards to why folks might be responding to the anti BHA rhetoric that frequently seems out of place. I step in to defend them and I'm not even willing to be a member. I didn't intend to lump you in with the full fledged BHA derangement syndrome folks.

When we have a NRA thread how many of there members on here openly criticize leadership or actions they have taken ? a ton, if not most. So it’s not some Karen partisan thing you are making it out to be. It’s ok to not like everything an org stands for and to speak up.

The point is that this isn't a BHA thread. This is a gun control thread that took an awkward turn into a BHA bash thread. Like the NM trapping ban thread took an illogical turn into a BHA bash thread when BHA was one of the few organizations actually voicing opposition. How many wildlife management, access, public land, predator hunting, etc threads illogically turn into NRA bash threads?

 

[Hoodie]

But you did kinda shit on them and in a backhanded way you are still doing so. And you seem to do the same thing OKN does which is overstate your view or selectively forgetting important pieces.

The organizations are not apples to apples, and you are definitely intelligent enough to know that. Maybe that’s why they don’t chime in on everything, just the same as BHA doesn’t chime in on everything that fits RMEF/MDF directive.

And again some of the BHA stuff is warranted, there is a reason this sentiment exists. Having a large percentage of folks on here harp on some of their short comings just doesn’t happen. Honestly for some I don’t think it’s repairable, which is unfortunate.

I think you have some great thoughts on stuff that I have read on here. Even if I disagree with some of them. It just struck a cord when you pass the buck onto RMEF/MDF, they do great work and it was unnecessary.

That´s pretty fair.

Iĺl acknowledge that I was somewhat disappointed with the lack of response from RMEF and MDF. I´ve been disappointed with BHA´s response, or lack thereof, to other matters in the past too.

That said, I do think pointing out the differences in response to those recent threats by all three organizations is worth doing. Someone in the middle of the NM trapping ban thread said ¨The anti-predator hunting BHA crowd makes me sick.¨

Thatś not an accurate characterization. Full stop. And that matters because often times these things comes down to coordinated counter-efforts on the part of sportsmen. SB-252 in California illustrated that clearly.

People are going to read stupid comments like that and take it at face value unless someone points out why it´s stupid. People taking stuff like that at face value is how we get divided. And being divided is how we get conquered.

 

[BuzzH]

The bottom line is that if anyone is looking for a Sporting group that supports every issue you support, and oppose every issue you oppose, you're going to have a membership of exactly 1 person. If you think that there's never going be a time when you're in disagreement with the group you join, save your time and never join.

There are things that every sporting group does that I'm not real cracked up about, and there are things that every group does that are great work.

I think what many are missing too is exactly what 501c3 sporting groups can do and what they can't do. They have to be selective in where they lobby, how they advocate, etc. per federal law/regulations. They aren't full time lobby groups, they can't contribute to political campaigns. I would argue that hunters and fisherman absolutely need to form c4's and c6's to have equal footing in lobbying and campaign funding...no question. Most groups just aren't in a legal position to do that.

So, under those constraints, what they can do is work to improve habitat, access, advocacy by keeping their memberships up to speed on issues, getting involved in public land/wildlife policy and decision making processes. Those are also important places to spend time and money on and lots of groups do a very good job at it and are extremely successful in doing great things for public land, wildlife, habitat, access, etc. etc. etc.

There just isn't one group out there that has the bandwidth to do it all...best thing is to support the common good, ignore the trolls who won't be happy no matter what, and find a group that best supports your concerns. Also realize that a majority of the various local board members are NOT employees, they're volunteers and don't need the criticism they constantly get. If the critics think they can do better...get after it. I'm always impressed by the amount of influence a small number of passionate volunteer sportsmen/women can get done...

Finally, I would challenge all the serial carnival barkers that seem to support nothing, to actually start supporting something to do with wildlife, habitat, access, public lands, etc. You'll be way more successful at that than complaining on an internet board about those that actually are getting things done and how they go about it.