Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="KDM" data-source="post: 147136" data-attributes="member: 314"><p>NO!!&nbsp; This measure is NOT needed.&nbsp; This DAPL CRAP is a non issue.&nbsp; No trespass signs only need to be up on ONE place on the property for it to be enforced.&nbsp; All those protesters should have been arrested and charged.&nbsp; One small incident is NOT a reason to make sweeping legislation.&nbsp; That's the liberal knee jerk type of thing that causes more harm than good.&nbsp; Let the landowner decide what they want to allow on their land.&nbsp; I have metal signs that I put up that have my name on them.&nbsp; They will last for as long as I'm the owner of my little piece of dirt.&nbsp; The questions to ask is &quot;Who benefits from this measure??&quot;&nbsp; It's really not the landowners as the guys that don't post their land obviously don't want it posted so it does them no good.&nbsp; In fact it forces the guys that don't post to deal with calls and contacts they didn't want in the first place.&nbsp; Do the sportsmen benefit??&nbsp; Maybe on a competition side, but not really as it makes finding a place to hunt more difficult for even the residents to find places to hunt.&nbsp; Do the business owners benefit?&nbsp; Probably not as their customer base will fall.&nbsp; WHO BENIFITS??&nbsp; The anti hunting groups would.&nbsp; The number of hunters will decline in ND as stated already on here.&nbsp; The anti gun folks would benefit as the number of guns and ammo purchased would decline.&nbsp; The landowners that post wouldn't have to spend the time and money to post, but that benefit would probably be erased by having to deal with calls and contacts from hunters who would now have to call the landowner instead of reading the posted sign.&nbsp; With the reduction in hunters, gun purchases, ammo purchases, and other items related to hunting, the amount of money going to conservation through taxes on those items is reduced.&nbsp; Couple that with the reduction of licence sales and you get a huge hit to the hunters and sportsmen of ND.&nbsp; Less money equals less conservation and opportunity no matter how you slice it. THIS BILL HURTS ALL SPORTSMEN WHILE HELPING THOSE I DETEST!!!!&nbsp; To me, this bill benefits the WRONG people and I won't support it.</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="KDM, post: 147136, member: 314"] NO!! This measure is NOT needed. This DAPL CRAP is a non issue. No trespass signs only need to be up on ONE place on the property for it to be enforced. All those protesters should have been arrested and charged. One small incident is NOT a reason to make sweeping legislation. That's the liberal knee jerk type of thing that causes more harm than good. Let the landowner decide what they want to allow on their land. I have metal signs that I put up that have my name on them. They will last for as long as I'm the owner of my little piece of dirt. The questions to ask is "Who benefits from this measure??" It's really not the landowners as the guys that don't post their land obviously don't want it posted so it does them no good. In fact it forces the guys that don't post to deal with calls and contacts they didn't want in the first place. Do the sportsmen benefit?? Maybe on a competition side, but not really as it makes finding a place to hunt more difficult for even the residents to find places to hunt. Do the business owners benefit? Probably not as their customer base will fall. WHO BENIFITS?? The anti hunting groups would. The number of hunters will decline in ND as stated already on here. The anti gun folks would benefit as the number of guns and ammo purchased would decline. The landowners that post wouldn't have to spend the time and money to post, but that benefit would probably be erased by having to deal with calls and contacts from hunters who would now have to call the landowner instead of reading the posted sign. With the reduction in hunters, gun purchases, ammo purchases, and other items related to hunting, the amount of money going to conservation through taxes on those items is reduced. Couple that with the reduction of licence sales and you get a huge hit to the hunters and sportsmen of ND. Less money equals less conservation and opportunity no matter how you slice it. THIS BILL HURTS ALL SPORTSMEN WHILE HELPING THOSE I DETEST!!!! To me, this bill benefits the WRONG people and I won't support it. [/QUOTE]

Verification

What is the most common fish caught on this site?

Reply to thread

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA