Trump jr interview on hunting

[JWP58]

You came onto this thread to talk about 2A because I replied to you talking about 2A on this thread? That's magic.

I see your signature says Native Texan. Do you share Ted Cruz's view that "In Texas, only 2% of land is public and we think that's 2% too much"?

Lol ya, apparently you're really new. Maybe you should go source my past thoughts on Ted "booger eating" Cruz. I did not bring second amendment talk to this thread. Reality, see how that works?

 

[tipsntails7]

Actually the court can go around reversing itself at any time the majority wants to. It's tradition that they don't generally do that but there's nothing stopping them.

Actually they can't, "a decision to overrule should rest on some special reason over and above the belief that a prior case was wrongly decided". That's out of their own mouths.

They would also need to agree to hear a case that again involves the 2A and the right of people to keep and bare arms for personal defense.

Then they would need to agree to overrule the precedent. It would be a very tough thing to do as A) the amount of time that has lapsed between the rulings is very short. B) the public has relied on that ruling GREATLY, C) there are no changes to my knowledge in legal doctrine that would affect the case at the federal level D) the facts of the case has not changed, and honestly the perception of the facts in society have not changed(I.E. Slavery, gay marriage all that jazz.)


They can't just wake up one day and vote to abolish heller. It doesn't work like that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JWP58]

Actually they can't, "a decision to overrule should rest on some special reason over and above the belief that a prior case was wrongly decided".

They would also need to agree to hear a case that again involves the 2A and the right of people to keep and bare arms for personal defense.

Then they would need to agree to overrule the precedent. It would be a very tough thing to do as A) the amount of time that has lapsed between the rulings is very short. B) the public has relied on that ruling GREATLY, C) there are no changes to my knowledge in legal doctrine that would affect the case at the federal level D) the facts of the case has not changed, and honestly the perception of the facts in society have not changed(I.E. Slavery, gay marriage all that jazz.)


They can't just wake up one day and vote to abolish heller. It doesn't work like that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bro this thread has nothing to do with the 2a, fyi.

Also you might have missed the fact that Supreme Court case law sets precedence. Several rulings and extreme liberal interpretation (of the second amend) the hardcore left would get their wish....without an amendment.

 

[blicero]

Lol ya, apparently you're really new. Maybe you should go source my past thoughts on Ted "booger eating" Cruz. You brought the 2a discuss not me, I responded to you. Reality, see how that works?

No offense but I probably won't be "sourcing your past thoughts on Ted Cruz", which is why I asked. I'll assume from your response that you're not a fan of his, so we've at least got that as common ground. Peace!

 

[tipsntails7]

Bro this thread has nothing to do with the 2a, fyi.

Also you might have missed the fact that Supreme Court case law sets precedence. Several rulings and extreme liberal interpretation the hardcore left would get their wish....without an amendment.

Considering I used the word precedence in what you quoted, I don't think I missed anything.

Your conduct on this thread is so off putting it's ridiculous. Another thread ruined by the 2A.
I guess I should let misinformation rule instead of replying to posts that do nothing but derail threads.

Guess what, none of those steps need to happen for the Feds to fork over our public lands...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tipsntails7]

Copy

 

[JWP58]

Considering I used the word precedence in what you quoted, I don't think I missed anything.

Your conduct on this thread is so off putting it's ridiculous. Another thread ruined by the 2A.
I guess I should let misinformation rule instead of replying to posts that do nothing but derail threads.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Conduct? I haven't told someone they don't belong in a discussion. I haven't used profanity and I haven't called anyone names. Just taking part in a discussion, sorry. I did not realize opposing viewpoints were unwanted.

Maybe my conduct would be better if I talked some shit about Kuiu? Would I be in the kool kid club then, sir? (ya now im just being a dick)

 

[tipsntails7]

Conduct? I haven't told someone they don't belong in a discussion. I haven't used profanity and I haven't called anyone names. Just taking part in a discussion, sorry. I did not realize opposing viewpoints were unwanted.

Maybe my conduct would be better if I talked some shit about Kuiu? Would I be in the kool kid club then, sir? (ya now im just being a dick)

Is this hunttalk.com or something? Yes liberals the sky is falling, and every acre will be sold on January 21st. Please say hi to chicken little for all the folks that don't think hunting will end as we know it.

But if you'd like to throw your 2cents out there...tell him...

Access Denied

Oh I know it has everything to do with people jumping to conclusions, assuming, etc. Hopefully he'll stay true to his word concerning not selling off public lands. I know the country should've elected the corrupt shrew. But that didn't happen, and we'll just have to make it through these troubling times. We made it this far with our current supreme leader, we might make it these next 4yrs.

On an actual serious note, at least its not Ted "booger eatin" Cruz. Let us not forget, the republican party did not want trump because he didn't conform to party norms (like his stance on public land).

Now lets get back to irrational thinking......

I figured as much. You should move to CO or MT, you'd find a large population of like minded one issue voters.

I'll throw this out there since your beloved MSNBC probably hasn't covered it yet. Trump has stated on several occasions that he wants to see public land stay public, and believes public land is one of the thing that makes this country so special. Now I know your favorite liberal DNC ran hosts haven't mentioned that, but its worth noting.

There was more than just the 2a on the line if Clinton would've been elected. The country might have been completely lost to the social justice warrior commies that are currently throwing temper tantrums as I type this over Trump winning the election.

And yes if hilldog had the chance to appoint extreme liberal justices the right to own firearms would be the first thing to go, don't kid yourself.

I get that you don't comprehend that the 45th president will nominate multiple Supreme Court Justices, but it's fact. Stacking the court with more Sotomayor's and Ginsburg's is how firearm ownership would become a memory.

Yes it is, and the people who usually bring it up assume that only vote republican based off the 2nd amendment, because MSNBC told them it was so. Yes believe it or not, some of us are trendy liberals that demand free shit, so we don't vote democrat. Sometimes people don't vote based on one issue, but based on the big picture.

I don't want to see Federal public land change hands, but I also don't want to see my country turn into even more of a liberal social justice warrior cesspool shithole. Apparently some people are tired of being told they are racist, sexist, bigots, and xenophobes. That's why people voted for Trump, not based off of his public land stance. Well that and because Hillary Clinton is a lying p.o.s.

Contact your representatives and tell them land transfer is a no-go and you'll be triggered by it....#publiclandsaremysafespace


p.s. Supreme Court case law sets precedence, a few cases and interpretations of the 2a and they'll have their way (with a stacked psyco lib court)

Lol ya, apparently you're really new. Maybe you should go source my past thoughts on Ted "booger eating" Cruz. I did not bring second amendment talk to this thread. Reality, see how that works?

Bro this thread has nothing to do with the 2a, fyi.

Also you might have missed the fact that Supreme Court case law sets precedence. Several rulings and extreme liberal interpretation (of the second amend) the hardcore left would get their wish....without an amendment.

These are literally every comment you have had on this thread. Not only are they ridiculously condescending but the amount of assumptions that you have made when you ridiculed other posters for their assumptions is startling. it seems that in light of all the lashing out that you have done that it is you that has an issue with other viewpoints.

I especially like how you edited supreme court case precedence in after the fact to one of your posts.

 

[gmajor]

So anyway....public lands are facing their toughest battle in a generation, and the quote below pretty much sums up a huge portion of the rural west. It's a shame, and we've got to figure out a way to get past our infighting, which is an absolute gift to the entities licking their chops at a land sale.

a large population of folks want this to happen just to seemingly spite the federal government...all they have to say is those damn Feds can't tell us what to do back in DC which isn't even close to the truth.

 

[elkduds]

Priorities, please! If we don't enlist every Rokslider, MMer, OYOAer, Eastmaner, WapitiTalker, every customer in sporting goods stores, every real estate shopper wanting "adjacent to public land," every mtn biker, OHV user, peakbagger, tent camper, fly fisher, backpacker, photo taker, tree hugger, every friend and relative, OUR PUBLIC LANDS WILL BE GONE. And every thread on this site will be irrelevant.

SO PLEASE support organizations that advocate for public lands: RMEF, TRCP, BHA. Write and PHONE your US congressional reps, tell them of your opposition to ANY direct or side-door legislation to reduce federal lands, and remind them a lot of voters will hold them accountable for their votes on these bills. Those that continue to betray us must be fired by voters.

 

[Lip_Ripper Guy]

It's a bit alarming how quickly these land transfer bills have been introduced, seeing as how we are about 10 days post election. It is obvious that despite my very far right leaning tendencies, the Republican party is no friend of public land.

Admittedly, I haven't paid as close of attention to this issue as I should have, but better late than never. I just joined Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, and also set up a monthly auto pay to the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, in addition to my RMEF membership. It sounds like these 3 organizations are very much on top of assisting with stopping the public lands transfer. Randy Newberg is also very knowledgeable, and has a lot of podcasts and videos addressing these topics.

 

[blicero]

Randy Newberg on the latest attempts post-election. Everyone needs to take notice and do what you can:

[video=youtube;VKURN_121es]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKURN_121es&feature=youtu.be[/video]

 

[JustinSmith1754]

Jr. is an avid outdoorsman. I liked it that he said he would be in his Dad's ear when it came to these issues. Leadership that is on the hunter's side. I am excited about the future.

 

[TJ]

Randy Newberg Highlights Another Attack on Your Public Lands - YouTube

Here is the Randy Newberg video. Watch it.

If congress get it's way you won't have public land, period. I don't care who's ear jr. whispers in.

 

[Gr8bawana]

Jr. is an avid outdoorsman. I liked it that he said he would be in his Dad's ear when it came to these issues. Leadership that is on the hunter's side. I am excited about the future.

Excited is not the word I would use for our future on anything in our country, more like apprehensive. We've all seen how the republicans view our public lands as a cash cow and we need to do everything possible to not let the transfer to the states happen.
Write your congressman, your senators, your governors and let them know how you feel about this issue.

 

[Superkodiak38]

I watched Randy's video the other day, emailed Senators and Congressmen from my State and Joined BackCountry Hunters and Anglers. I figured that was the least I could do.

 

[Upcountry]

I'm really glad to see this getting some attention. My good friend emailed me a link to the draft of that bill only three days after the election. As a Nevadan, we have the most to lose(over 80% public land). So this hits really close to home for me. Aside from hunting and fishing all over the state, I've driven thousands of miles of back roads. Last year I rode my mountain bike across the entire state on dirt roads, over 500 miles, and never once encountered a locked gate! The sale of this land will without doubt change that, as will opening it up to mining/fracking/etc. This is something special we have her,. something that you can't put a dollar amount on. The moment the precedent is set by transferring it once(Fed to State), I have absolutely zero faith that it will remain in OUR hands!

 

[blicero]

As a Nevadan, we have the most to lose(over 80% public land). So this hits really close to home for me.

I stumbled onto this article today about Nevada's past history with disposal of their trust lands, thought it was really interesting reading:

Past transfers of federal land to Nevada led to corruption, history suggests

Especially since we're told how terrible the Federal government is, and how the States will manage everything so much better.

From the article, quoting a Republican former governor:

"Russell, governor from 1951 to 1959, minced no words about what happened with Nevada’s state lands. Russell noted that in 1938, Nevada had about 400,000 acres of land to administer. By 1951 when he took office, that number had been reduced to 8,000 acres.

“A number of state officials became very wealthy on the land that they accumulated,” Russell said. “This, to me, is one of the low points in Nevada history, because the land had been given to the state of Nevada as having a land-grant college, and much of this land went for a very minimum.

“And such people as Red McLeod and other state officials (this is easily a matter of record) had obtained these large acreages, especially in Clark County, which made them wealthy people,” Russell said."

 

[Gr8bawana]

Corrupt politicians? No way! That would never happen with today's republican controlled senate, congress and whitehouse.

 

[mfolch]

Y'all should come hunt in New York: +3 million acres of constitutionally protected wilderness, designated as 'forever wild' and open to hunters of all stripes...