Guns vs. Public Land - Which means more to you?

[KoolBreeze]

Gun rights without question. Having the tools needed to defend myself, my family and my property are much more important to me than the having the privilege to use/hunt public lands. If I stopped hunting tomorrow, I'd still keep my guns, every one of them.

But I'm also blessed with more than enough private land to hunt, which is owned/leased by myself, family and/or friends. I haven't hunted on public land in over 20 years at least.

 

[semperfidelis97]

I have no use for guns if I have no public lands to hunt on.

Do you believe your 2A rights are still intact? I don't.

If our rights were still intact as our founders intended we wouldn't have magazine restrictions, suppressor restrictions, full auto restrictions.......

The 2A was supposed to guarantee our right to bear arms so we could appose a rogue government. I don't see how anyone could honestly think we could resist the government if they decided to totally take over? If the military backed the government we would be absolutely powerless to resist.

Justin couldn't be more right here. The rest of our rights let alone our privileges like access to public land mean nothing without the second amendment. Without the second amendment there is no teeth behind the constitution. Our forefathers had the wisdom to see that our liberties are only guaranteed if we can protect them through force if necessary. Any of you that think the second amendment could not be completely gutted by a liberal supreme court are sadly in need of an education in how our government works. I cannot fathom how so many of my fellow sportsman could really be so short sighted when it comes to the rights so many have given their lives to protect.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

 

[semperfidelis97]

And 30 round magazines, suppressors and full autos are going to exactly what against Apaches, Cobras, Laser Guided Missiles/Bombs, etc. If the Military backs the Government you are screwed regardless of having weapons or not.

Supposedly our forefathers were as well when they took on one of the greatest superpowers in the history of mankind. Most here are forgetting that our military is made of men, and women who give their lives to protect the ideals that make this nation great.. I think it's a sad day when the people of this nation think of our military as mindless drones who would kill the very citizens they have sworn to protect.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

 

[CorbLand]

Supposedly our forefathers were as well when they took on one of the greatest superpowers in the history of mankind. Most here are forgetting that our military is made of men, and women who give their lives to protect the ideals that make this nation great.. I think it's a sad day when the people of this nation think of our military as mindless drones who would kill the very citizens they have sworn to protect.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

In no way shape or form do I believe that the Military would back the Government against the people. I have said for years that the Military is built by the people and probably would never back the Government if they people where trying to over through the Government. All I am saying in my statement is that what most people worry about being taken away is pennies compared to what the military has. I am all for the Second Amendment and it is equal if not more important to me than public land. At the current time we are at, public land is a very important topic to me and is directly in jeopardy. I think your Second Amendment rights are safe for the next little bit.

 

[skaldugwas]

Fellas,

I can't help but to notice the conflict between the current republican agenda around bill H.R. 621 to sell off public land, and the commonly held position that republicans are their to protect interest of hunters and gun owners...I am just curious becuase this is pretty conflicting for rifle hunters who hunt public land here in Colorado.

So I'll ask - which means more to you.... Feeling like you have your gun ownership interest protected? Or having security around knowing that you can hunt public land in the west? Had you known what was going to happen with this current bill, would you have voted differently?

Just curious what others have to say here...

The problem is its not nearly this black and white, but thats how many voted. The GOP is not morally superior because of one issue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hall256]

And 30 round magazines, suppressors and full autos are going to exactly what against Apaches, Cobras, Laser Guided Missiles/Bombs, etc. If the Military backs the Government you are screwed regardless of having weapons or not.

Tell that to our enemy that has been fighting us for 15 years. All that matters is the cost you are willing to pay, as the Iraqis would say "we may have the watch, but they have the time"

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

[5MilesBack]

I wish people cared as much about all the other amendments as they do the 2nd, as those are the ones taking a beating in resent memory.

That's what a Constitutionalist is.......they care about it ALL, and don't cherry pick it for their own agenda. So you should absolutely love our new Supreme Court nominee.

Yes, all the Amendments and the Constitution has been taking a beating over the years. It's time to take it back, and quit giving special rights to special interest groups.

 

[NoWiser]

Public lands, without a doubt.

If our government gets completely out of hand and needs overturning, our military will be on our side.

 

[CorbLand]

Tell that to our enemy that has been fighting us for 15 years. All that matters is the cost you are willing to pay, as the Iraqis would say "we may have the watch, but they have the time"

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

I have never served in the Military so those that have may correct me but from the people that I have talked to that have served say its more the Rules of Engagement that are kicking our ass, not those we are fighting against.

 

[Hall256]

I have never served in the Military so those that have may correct me but from the people that I have talked to that have served say its more the Rules of Engagement that are kicking our ass, not those we are fighting against.

Honestly, yes and no. There was a great exercise around 2000 where a Marine General playing the OpFor was able to use our tech against us and defeated most US strength/power using unconventional tactics. But that this is a topic that can be debated for days, not meant to hijack the thread.

As to the topic of the thread, I side with the others that said we need to not view this as an either/or argument. I think we as a group need to organize and be as vocal as the NRA. Organizations like BHA, TRCP, and other need to have a heavy presence in meetings with law makers and consolidating our voting power.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

[elkduds]

With threats to 2A lower in current administration, I would love to see most of the $ corporations spend annually on 2A advocacy going instead to opposing PLT.

 

[Loco4dux]

Gun rights, period.

 

[Publiclandhunter]

We don't need to choose, we need to hold our representatives accountable. They have no right to take either away from us.

 

[bigsky2]

The 2nd amendment wasn't created with hunting in mind, it was created solely to allow people to protect themselves. It is very important, but I think losing our public lands is much more of a reality right now than having our guns taken away. I am sure I am biased living in small town Montana where crime is not much of an issue. People who are fortunate to get to do all their hunting on private land are probably biased when it comes to the public land issue.

It would be selfish to say "well I don't care about public land because I do all my hunting on private land". PLT isn't a hunting issue, in fact the majority of the people who use public lands are non hunters. I am fortunate to be able to hunt both private and public land, but if I lost my public lands then the diversity of my hunting options would sure be different. I could forget about hunting elk, moose, sheep, goat, etc. I could forget about doing my yearly backpacking trips, camping trips, photographing wildlife, fishing trips, etc. My girlfriend is a climber. Do you think there are a lot of landowners that would be happy to take on the liability of having people dangling from cliffs on their land? I usually sight in my rifle on BLM land so I don't have to wait for other people to shoot in front of me at a rifle range. I know I sure as hell don't choose to live in Montana because I enjoy cold winters.

 

[Schaaf]

I refuse to pick between the two, they are both too important to my family and I.

 

[tipsntails7]

We don't need to choose, we need to hold our representatives accountable. They have no right to take either away from us.

In a perfect world I would agree, yet the people of Utah have continually elected Mr. chavettz as one of their reps. This is his fifth bill he has brought forward since 2010 that is a direct attack on federal public lands.

Either the people of Utah don't bother paying attention, or they just don't care. Hard to hold reps accountable with that combination.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MT_Archer]

Both are important, but legislation against 2nd Amendment rights can be undone and I expect to see vacillation depending on what candidate we have in office.

Public lands, once privatized and sold off is MUCH more difficult to undo and return to the public.

Here are two extreme scenarios: California vs Texas

California, the state I live in has some of the most restrictive gun legislation with more on the way. However we have tons of public BLM, national forests, and wilderness areas to hunt. In fact 38.3 percent of the state is open to hunt.

Texas has some of the least restrictive gun laws, but most of the land is privatized. Unless you know someone who owns a ranch or are willing to pay fees to hunt private, you are hard pressed to find public access. One percent of the state is open to the public and averages a staggeringly low 0.1 acre available per person to hunt.

Given these two extreme examples, would take California over Texas any day.

Pic of the Trinity Alps where I took my very first deer earlier this past season

 

[CorbLand]

In a perfect world I would agree, yet the people of Utah have continually elected Mr. chavettz as one of their reps. This is his fifth bill he has brought forward since 2010 that is a direct attack on federal public lands.

Either the people of Utah don't bother paying attention, or they just don't care. Hard to hold reps accountable with that combination.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Generally there is only one choice in Utah, and that makes it hard to vote. I ran into the same problem this year. I agree with an individual on everything but the their stance on public lands. That made it extremely hard to vote this year. But I agree with you, generally people in Utah are terrible when it comes to electing people. There is a good chunk that vote for an individual just because they go to the same church that they do. Its a joke.

 

[realunlucky]

Generally there is only one choice in Utah, and that makes it hard to vote. I ran into the same problem this year. I agree with an individual on everything but the their stance on public lands. That made it extremely hard to vote this year. But I agree with you, generally people in Utah are terrible when it comes to electing people. There is a good chunk that vote for an individual just because they go to the same church that they do. Its a joke.

I will say that your mis representing the truth about religion in Utah politics. More likely people vote against a candidate based on their religion. Whatever you want to believe I guess.

Problem in Utah is the federal government keeps changing the rules on how we can use over half our state. Whatever you believe about bears ears it helped fueled the fire of this fight. I'm personally tired of this type of policy but also understand Utah in no way can manage the federal portion of this state. I will personally be voting against Chavez but the majority of utahans don't understand plt at all. Almost every time it's discussed the majority still will support it and shake their heads in disbelief of the stark consequences

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[William Hanson (live2hunt)]

This is kind of a loaded question because at face value hunting public land matters more to me but I realize that without guns hunting loses momentum and gets chipped away pretty quickly. Of the 2 I believe guns to be more important to the longevity of our way of life.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk