“Let’s be frank: Hunters know that high-capacity magazines and semi-automatic rifles are unnecessary for our sport. These guns are weapons of war, designed to kill human beings. You could say the same about handguns. My dad often talks about bringing a sidearm for protection while hunting in serious grizzly bear country, but I tell him not to bother. Studies have shown that bear spray is more effective, anyway, and there’s a good deal less collateral damage likely to be caused.” – Greg Luther in Hunters, sportsmen must speak up now on gun control [via abqjournal.com]
Yea so? That’s your opinion so what. Do you condemn others right to carry or just stating that you don’t think it’s wise. Either way go kiss a bear and don’t forget your canned Cajun spice’s
One has to laugh.
There he is, out in the wilds, helping nature with the “survival of the fittest” thing through his hunting, and setting himself and his father up, unnecessarily, for their own personal Darwin Awards.
If you can carry bear spray, where you must wait for the bear to get to bad breath distance and then hope for results, you can damn sure carry an effective pistol on your hip at the same time.
A friend of mine in Montana stopped a charging bear that someone else had wounded in his paw with a single .44 magnum round to the skull (Ruger Redhawk). That bear was coming on FAST and he was pissed and I’m pretty sure bear spray would not have slowed him much. Even with the fatal wound to his brain he slid to a stop less than ten feet away.
“…helping nature with the “survival of the fittest” thing through his hunting…” Note: not really true, if you are like most of us hunters. We “harvest” the animals with the largest antlers, horns, body size, ie, the best of the species, unless it’s doe season and we are looking for something for the freezer. Even then, we want a healthy, fat doe. Wild predators harvest the weak, the sick, the injured, the old or very young, and the decrepit. Exactly opposite of what hunters normally seek out. Yes, hunting is needed to control game populations where predators are absent – an argument I’ve long argued to hunting opponents. But it wasn’t until someone pointed out difference in harvesting habits, hunter vs predator, that I understood the differing effects on evolution.
“Studies have shown . . .” As soon as you read this from a gun-controller (or any kind of advocate) you might as well go to full stop because you’re reading something from someone who think twaddle is truth. I had a conversation recently with a “I-support-the-2nd-amendment-but” kind of guy who wanted to tell me that nobody needed a 30 round magazine. When I asked him how in the hell he would know that, he had no answer because, in truth, he really didn’t know. I then pointed out that, if 4 guys break into his house, those 30 rounds in a black, “weapon-of-war” rifle would come in mighty handy. Scheech, these idiots are boring.
About Greg Luther the author of the drivel
https://www.ecologyproject.org/about/our-staff
You can email him at the above link…..
Greg Luther
When Greg was six years old he went on a backpacking trip along the Encampment River – total distance: one mile—an inauspicious beginning perhaps, but he’s never looked back. His interest in travel, conservation, and cultural exchange has taken him from Alaska to Adelaide and countless places in between. He has held too many jobs to count, among them, cheese monger, carpet cleaner, grill master, substitute teacher and encyclopedist. Before joining EPI, he gained experience in the non-profit world while working for Casa Xalteva, an educational shelter for at-risk youth in Granada, Nicaragua. Greg doesn’t have spare time; if he did, it would go to fishing, an activity he takes so seriously it could be deemed a secondary occupation.
John Malintone · Oklahoma State University
Inner city socialist lumberjack discovers outdoors and hunting and wants to profess he is now part of the “hunters” and shares some culture with real hunters and outdoorsman, while promoting self-sufficiency and in the same breath begging for the government to Nanny us by removing our self-sufficiency of firearm ownership, purchase, and use.
“Freedom from” gun violence. In other words, freedom from gun freedoms. All the while, working under the obtuse premise that guns are the problem, the people pulling the trigger aren’t, and more government is the solution.
Any mention that semi-auto rifles were readily available in the 1960s at your local hardware store or convenient store and any teenage boy could just go buy one? Nope. Any mention of the wide spread occurances (lackthereof) of school shootings in the 1960s? Nope. But guns are the problem. Culture isn’t the problem. The demoralization of America a problem? Nope. Guns. Is the problem that someone decided to kill someone? Nope. The problem is guns.
Greg Luther has presented a comically transparent agenda that we can all see through. No thanks Greg – stick with your socialist buddies at your local Missoula Starbucks.
Deputy Matt & Others Who Serve
As a career cop, one who has never hunted in his life, this author is a moron and really should stick to wearing skinny jeans and hanging out is his local gun-free Starbucks sipping soy milk decaf lattes.
The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting you moron! It is about self-defense, up to an including from our own out of control government if need be. You, and others who think like you, are exactly what is wrong with the NRA right now! You are so willing to quickly sell out the other members who enjoy a different aspect of firearms that you don’t enjoy.
Any time you feel up to it, I challenge you to debate the efficacy of gun control on reducing crime.
-Matt
Some other nice comment from a different site eviscerating Luthers piece..
Henry Zee · UC Davis
“If you could ask John Adams (let alone Samuel, a real firebrand), if you could ask Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, or John Hancock after the adoption of the Bill of Rights whether they had an individual right to carry arms and use them for their self-defense, they would have laughed at you. OF COURSE they had that right, they would have said. The Second Amendment didn’t GIVE it to them; it simply recognized a right Americans had always had in common law and protected it.” (My capitalized emphases.)
Craig R. Whitney, “Living With Guns: A Liberal’s Case for the Second Amendment.”
What a giant FLAME DELETED.
https://www.ecologyproject.org/about/blog/ask-5-greg-luther
Fools and their firearms can so easily be separated. Greg is a fool… Thank goodness he can’t actually speak for anyone but himself.
The correct response to anybody who claims that the only purpose of guns is to kill people is to state the obvious: The only purposes of firearms is to preserve human life and defend liberty. How can you be against that?
Because…Some people NEED to be killed.
Good comment! Inverting the wording says the same thing, but with an emotionally totally different message.
The purpose of firearms is
to preserve human life
and to defend liberty !
This dude is probably the biggest tool there is. His dad sounds like a good guy. I wonder what went wrong while he was raising his son.
Sometimes you just can’t predict and protect against societal influences once the child leaves home.
Case in point: My step-daughter was on the right track. She spent some time in the US Military, got a good boyfriend who had a college degree (and was heading towards a lucrative career) and used the GI Bill to get a good education which lead to a well paying job herself. Then she kicked out the good guy, hooked up with a controlling leech who quit his job and moved in with her so she could support him. Needless to say defense of the RKBA is a conversation I can no longer have with her.
The waste of resources who uttered the QOTD sounds and looks just like that POS my step-daughter has taken up with. At some point I’m going to have to have a different kind of conversation with her and it will probably end our relationship.
Still, it’s her life and in the end she will have to take ownership of her own failures as well as her successes. Unfortunately it appears to have become fashionable to push responsibility onto someone else.
Clearly this ash-hat doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Maybe Darwin will favor the rest of us and introduce him up close to a bear.
Most likely he went to a liberal college!
I thought the last Fudd died off in 2012?
Ranks must be getting replenished by urban Zuckerberg types who think hunting is hipster/1890’s cool now.
This guy’s not a Fudd, he’s a hippy. His dad might be a Fudd but I highly doubt he actually hunts on his own.
Call him Caitlyn.
We should call them ‘Phuds’ –they’re just hipsters aping the lumberjack thing in lieu of healthy testosterone levels.
Oh he probably hunts, but it’s kids on the playground from the back of his panel van with a camera.
Where in the Second Admendment does it talk about hunting or sports? Liberals love to make up their own facts, and then they will make up a faux version of history to support their unfacts. Just because a liberal has a gun or two and walks in the woods doesn’t make him an expert worthy of consideration.
I’ll take my firearm over bear spray every time. Also, in a few bear attacks the spray didn’t even make the bears blink.
Oh I’m sure they blinked; they probably did what any creature involved in a life-and-death situation would do – took care of his wounds AFTER the threat (bear-spray-spraying-human) was eliminated.
The 2nd Amendment doesn’t have a word in it that is about hunting.
Well, to be fair, there is sort of an implication that you should be hunting for MEN to be part of your militia.
The bear spray thing is questionable, though often cited as gospel. Still, FUDD’s are a powerful force and the anti’s greatest allies in defeating the pro gun side. Their defeat of both national reciprocity and the hearing protection act should cause us to wake up, but we just don’t have the numbers yet, TTAG’s predictions notwithstanding. According to the admins of a gun rights Facebook group I’m in, there are 18,000 members and less than 10% belong to any gun rights group measured by paying dues.
How can a study like that be validated? Were all the Bears involved charging? How far away from them were their victims when engaged? Had the Bears been maced before, or was this their first time? Are the same bears getting maced repeatedly? My point with the latter questions is that there are essentially two populations – those used to humans and able to coexist, and those who mostly don’t. Importantly, those accustomed to humans don’t seriously attack such – as evidenced by their still being alive. Once they make contact with humans, and esp if they draw blood, their life expectancy tends to plummet dramatically. Which means that there is very likely some natural selection going on towards less aggressive bears in areas where there are frequent encounters between them and humans, such as in National Parks. They probably are also more likely to have been maced in the past, for just that reason. And those aren’t the Bears that I worry about where we live in MT.
They can’t be seriously validated. Correlational studies used to support controversial political positions should always be suspect because, depending on how you manipulate the data, you can correlate anything with anything else.
The reason it was shown more effective was simply numbers. More people carried bear mace than guns. It was a manipulation of stats.
As I recall, World War One was fought with mostly bolt-action rifles. So why don’t you stfu and go sit in a deer stand, preferably with no cell phone reception.
Charles Whitman.
The Ar-15 has never been used in war….lever action rifles..actually used in war. Bolt action rifles…still used in war. Pump action shotguns…still used in war. Revolvers, actually used in war…..Semi-auto pistols, currently used in war around the world………the “Weapons of War” argument can essentially be used to ban every firearm ever made….Which is why the anti gunners are now using that phrase. They are preparing the battle space for future actions against various types of gun…
ALL GUNS (ARE “ARMS”, PROTECTED UNDER THE SECOND AMENDMENT)
FOR THE
O N L Y
PROTECTEC PURPOSE, TO BRING HATE AND RAIN HELL ON THEIR, OR FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS OR BAD ACTORS UNDER THE 2ND PARAGRAPH OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.
EVERYONE CAN POUND MFn “SPORTING PURPOSES” UP THEIR SSS, LUBED WITH LIQUID NAILS.
THEREFORE
““Weapons of War” ???
You are FING A RIGHT.
When someone tries to tell me that my guns are “weapons of war, designed ONLY to kill many people,” I explain that mine must be defective.
My guns were designed to launch projectiles downrange. That’s it. Millions and millions of firearms launch projectiles downrange every year in the U.S. without killing anyone. They must ALL be defective, if their “only purpose” is to kill massive numbers of people.
Hey Greg, shut up.
I’m confused about how to remove semi auto long guns and pistols. Is it that this guy wants to give Trump the power to send Federal agents door to door to confiscate legally bought property from citizens who have never used said property to harm anyone?!?
Because that sounds like a horrible version of America and an ability begging our government to abuse it with anything they want to restrict in the future.
Actually, the people who fear Trump becoming a dictator and removing their “rights” are the same ones who support gun confiscation. Proving once again….
Liberalism is a mental disorder, and will get us all killed.
I could get a study that says my ass ain’t as white as the driven snow, but that’s not going to do much good when you’re getting scalped by a 1200 pound bear.
Dan, let’s get frank, your hunting rounds are much more powerful than the ‘war’ rifles you knock. You sound like a liberal troll and who knows you could be.
If you want gun control then say it, don’t be a baby and try to work both sides! Clear?
Macofjack, you realize Dan is not knocking anything here, right? Dan is the TTAG admin who posted the article. The guy you want to dress down is Greg Luther, the person quoted in the “Quote of the Day” post. And clearly, Luther deserves all the flack he gets.
It isn’t about sport, Sport! Just in case you didn’t know, in jolly old England and much of the rest of the world only the elites were allowed arms, or allowed to hunt. Why? One more time. It wasn’t about sport, Sport.
Then why doesn’t the fish and wildlife depts. carry bear spray? Why are they carrying loaded shotguns and pistols? They don’t need those – they just need some bear spray.
They carry bear spray too, but realize guns is the only solution to bear encounters. As far as I’m concerned there is no need for these national parks anyway. It’s a waste of money and resources. No where in the Constitution does it say anything about protecting animals. Wild creatures were used for food when the founding fathers wrote the 2a. Now with cattle ranches pig, turkey, chicken production, and modern farming there is no need to waste money on natural habitat. The National Parks and game refuges should be opened up for development, all that land just sitting there going to waste.The grand canyon would be an awesome place to set up a gun range think of the echoes, oh hell yes.
Yeah – but the government just signed a document and suddenly 1/3 of the United State’s area belonged to them. I’m sure the framers intended that too.
http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/568c2cf6e6183e1c008b7055/this-map-shows-the-huge-amount-of-land-the-federal-government-owns-in-the-american-west.jpg
I didn’t know hipster douchebags even liked to hunt. If you don’t understand that eventually they will get around to grabbing your blue steel and walnut fuddgun then you are stupider than you look.
Everything about his article screams inner city liberal, that decided to go for the hipster paul bunyan look. Example:
https://i.redd.it/hkpvyiw06wkz.jpg
Then he discovered the outdoors. LOL – just look at the statements from his article:
and
Ohhhh. A rifle strapped to this shoulder. A rifle!
and
When i’m hunting, I never once think about being “escaped” from civilization. I think about the hunt, the specimen i’m about to shoot, and how it’s going to taste. I don’t think about how I have “escaped” from civilization.
and
And he says this after a long spiel about how we need the government to Nanny our freedoms regarding self sufficiency of firearms. Quite comical really. He certainly doesn’t want self-sufficiency on obtaining, purchasing, and using firearms.
Everything here screams inner city socialist leftist hipster discovers outdoors and firearms.
LOL
I forgot this little tidbit too!
Nobody needs skinny jeans, including this hipster doofus. Hunter, my ass.
‘He is a freelance writer in Missoula, Mont.’
I’d say your ass is on to something.
Missoula. Nice town. I lived there for a few years back in the 70’s.
Home of the University of Montana and the Liberal capital of Montana.
You don’t need to go hunting to experience nature in Missoula. Drive south on the 93 to Lolo Hot Springs, park, walk 100 yards into the forest. Unless you hear a Swift truck passing by out on the highway you might as well be in the middle of damned NOWHERE.
Just another douchebag liberal polishing his ‘I’m just like you! Honest!’ credentials.
…’the NRA, an organization that used to receive the vast majority of its funding from sportsmen, relies more and more on donations from the firearms industry. The estimates vary, but from 2005 to 2011, the firearms industry donated somewhere between $14.7 million and $38.9 million to the NRA.’
This snowflake ain’t much good at math. $38.9 million over 7 years = $5.6 million / year. 5 million members paying $40 / year = $200 million / year. So I’m going to go out on a limb and say that the NRA is still an organization that still does receive the vast majority of it’s funding from ‘sportsmen’.
Lying like this to demonize the organization only subverts his entire argument. Once you know someone is being dishonest about one thing you will assume he’s being dishonest on things you can’t immediately verify as well. This is not how you bring others over to your side, this is how you get a pat on the back from people who agree with you.
High power AR15?, most states won’t allow you to hunt big game with a 223 or a 5.56 cartridge (AR15) because the round doesn’t produce significant energy to kill a deer efficiently. Most states require 24 caliber projectile or larger.
Shhh! You’re disrupting the narrative!
I hate Fudds with a passion. May they all get pancreatic cancer.
I was just getting to where i could buy my first ar-15 when the assault weapons ban passed. I was following the whole thing in Congress and from that day have never supported the NRA. Those FUDDS are the reason.
Not good enough.
Cancer of the AIDS of the Herpes of the eye.
I’m curious about his sport. I really dig my 10/22 for squirrels and my AR (aeroplane eRadicater) for coyotes and hogs. So even “our sport” still isn’t his correct sport. Bet I even drive the wrong vehicle. Any bets?
If it has more than four cylinders and doesn’t come from a company with corporate headquarters in Asia, your probably right.
‘Hunters know that high-capacity magazines and semi-automatic rifles are unnecessary for our sport.’
The second amendment was not for hunting. It was to allow the people to be able to defend themselves from an invading force or a tyrannical government. Which would make semi automatic weapons with high capacity magazines very necessary. In Europe I’ve heard tons of people say how they wish they could defend themselves in a home invasion, which happens a lot more often since the intruder knows they won’t get their head blown off. So what was your point again?
I’m not saying this guy enjoys a lot of flowery microbrews and enjoys telling everyone all about them even more… but certainly LOOKS like he does.
“Let’s be frank: Hunters know that high-capacity magazines and semi-automatic rifles are unnecessary for our sport. These guns are weapons of war, designed to kill human beings. You could say the same about handguns. My dad often talks about bringing a sidearm for protection while hunting in serious grizzly bear country, but I tell him not to bother. Studies have shown that bear spray is more effective, anyway, and there’s a good deal less collateral damage likely to be caused.”
Zzzz…
First time I went hunting – not far from Missoula – I used a borrowed Winchester lever action rifle.
Now, unless I am very much mistaken, that was a direct descendant of the Henry rifle developed and designed for use towards the end of the War Between the States for the specific purpose of KILLING PEOPLE.
Every rifle in existence has a design similar to another which at one time was used for killing people. The whole “these weapons can only be used for killing as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time” is the liberals usual silly rhetoric.
Weird how these manly men calling for gun control and the rags they write for never allow comments. Wonder what they’re afraid of? Facts? Logic?
At the bottom of the link is the comment section. Every post was tearing this guy a new one.
Yup. The guy is getting roasted in the comments section.
Let’s not forget that we need to also focus on the delivery system of this FUDD’s message. One of our biggest problems is that the left gins up these hit pieces and is able to get them in print. We need to topple the information chain they have subverted for their own agenda.
How about you like your guns, and I like mine. There already is a law that says you aren’t allowed to murder people, REGARDLESS what you use. So back off about how more laws or taking guns away is going to stop people from killing each other. Grow up and stop it already.
Dad’s OK, kid went to higher education that brainwashed him into the mediocre mentality that is easily swayed by the Demon-cratic party propaganda wing! and being PW by his wife /Girlfriend/boyfriend that doesn’t like firearms,
He’s the kind of hunter that wears bear bells, carries 5 cans of Pepper spray, and a KA -Bar for down in the dirt after his head is ripped off! yet doesn’t eat meat maybe a closet Vegan and animal activist! Griz bears got a right to life too ya know
Griz bears got a right to life too…unfortunately, all too often, the life they want is YOURS.
Quite often, firearms owners are their own worst enemies. The duck hunters don’t like the AR-15 “black rifles” so they see no problem if attempts are made to ban them. The traditional rifle owners don’t like machine guns, so they have no problem with them being legislated out of existence. Some pistol owners see nothing wrong with certain long guns being outlawed just as some rifle owners would have no problem seeing pistols banned.
Friends, ALL firearms advocates must “hang together” and realize that an assault on ANY means of firearms ownership and self-defense is an assault on ALL forms of firearms ownership and self-defense.
There is absolutely NO ROOM for complacency among ANY Second Amendment supporters. An attack on one is an attack on ALL…
ALL firearms laws are unconstitutional on their face. Imagine the hue and cry if “reasonable” restrictions were placed on First Amendment activities, especially with the “mainstream media”. The Second Amendment is clear–what part of “shall not be infringed” do politicians and the media not understand…of course, they understand full well…it’s part of their communist agenda…
The Fudd ignores the reality that all his “hunting rifles” have a military origin.
But. The 2nd amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting. It’s not even mentioned. Nor is magazine capacity, a specific type of weapon, or any sort of regulation. It’s says “shall not be infringed”. Pretty simple really.
Yikes… That man-child is pretty cranky… Greggy must have missed his soy-milk break… Someone should really kick-start his nuts before they shrivel up and fall off completely…
With any luck the next time we hear of this clown. It’ll be in a Montana paper. “Local Fudd discovered in pile of bear scat.”
Bear spray. Always effective. Except when the wind is blowing.
A recent Pew Poll of Montana bears revealed that nine out of ten would like to chomp Luther’s ass. One out of ten disagreed and ate the pollster.
Hunters know that high-capacity magazines and semi-automatic rifles are unnecessary for our sport.
And that’s why the first ten Amendments to the Constitution are commonly known as The Bill of Needs…
What a f***ing idiot! He is a traitor to his people and should be treated accordingly.
You tread on dangerous ground when you start dictating to other people what they should find necessary. I could say guns aren’t necessary for hunting at all, one could use a bow and arrow or a spear. I mean, that’s what humans have used to kill with for thousands of years. As well i could say he doesn’t need to drive that polluting Prius, he could ride a donkey to work.
Remember when that pro hunter of some internet fame actually went out and killed a bear with a spear? Remember the howls of indignation that anyone would do such an “awful” thing? Remember that he lost his corporate sponsorship from Under Armor? Pretty hypocritical, if anyone is asking. (There was another guy who went out and hunted Cape Buffalo with a spear–successfully–but still, what a fool! He actually ran up to and speared a sleeping buffalo!)
He didn’t have corporate sponsorship from UnderArmor.
His wife had ties to UA, and they fired her because her husband ‘met the bear on its own terms’, like the anti hunters say when they call us cowards for not hunting with rocks and spears.
The Germans called it Sippenhaftung, or loosely translated, blood guilt.
If one member of a family goes against the Reich, send them all to the gas chamber.
So to that I say, “Seig Heil, UnderArmor”.
Those persons whom go out into the woods, pull off these ludicrous stunts by killing animals with bows, spears and knives only support those anti-2a proponents position that guns aren’t even needed to hunt with. Hunting should be banned anyway, it’s not needed in the 21 century, and only supports government parasites that use hunting as an excuse to keep there cushy ” Conservation officer” jobs.
Luther’s opening line: I’m a hunter, and I want gun control.
He may as well have written, “I’m a hunter, want gun control, and hope everyone sees and appreciates my virtue signaling.”
10mm lead based bear spray is pretty effective.
It always bugs me when hunters assume that hunting is the only shooting sport. Don’t they know that we need ARs and pistols for other shooting sports? Don’t they know there are other shooting sports? Uh, but then, don’t they know that some hunting is done with ARs and even pistols? But I guess I should ask if they know that the second amendment is not about hunting or sport shooting? Well, maybe also that the word “infringed” actually has a meaning that implies any limit or undermining of the right is not allowed? The word even has a hint of a meaning about frustrating or obstructing. If you take it to the logical limit, it could mean inconvenience. I guess they don’t know that. How do we educate them?
It seems to me that he has never hunted hogs in Texas or Georgia, where the game is to kill as many as you can before they high-tail it out of there. A semiautomatic rifle is essential equipment for that kind of hunt.
“It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers. “
Coolidge is probably the most underrated President ever. We haven’t had one of his caliber since and we desperately need one now.
I just HATE people like him, I hate him. He’s an idiot, FUDD prog libtard anti American small penised middle class yuppie puppy mentally handicapped, stupid, p.o.s. HOW DARE HE SAY anything about an AR. He and his whole family should be tortured until they all die, his mother should be raped repeatedly until she dies, how dare he say anything bad about my right to have a hi capacity magazines. It’s the second amendment asshole, I have a right to own machine gun look a like, you should die s horrible death you anti 2a pos. Bears don’t like guns, so I hate them too, killem all
Fudds like this douchey hipster freak always assume every AR hunter must use 30 round magazines. I seldom use 30 round magazines, even at the range. I have them, but I’ve found 10 round mags fine for my purposes. We’ve made progress in Pennsylvania, you can now hunt small game and varmints with semi autos. Which basically means coyotes. I would have supported a 5 round magazine limit for big game hunting just to put the Fudds at ease, that’s no more lethality that an Amish machine gun (Remington 760), but no, not having any black rifles out there in deer season.
Got crowded off the range today by all Fudds trying to get sighted in for Monday, the only day most of them will ever shoot a rifle all year.
Or they assume that firing every single cartridge in the magazine is both mandatory and inevitable. I wonder if this guy shoots every deer he hunts exactly four times because that’s the magazine capacity of his bolt-action rifle?
I assume the photo is of Mr. Luther. He really needs a new image. He is far too reminiscent of the Obama “pajama boy” of several years ago. I suspect he is holding a nice cup of hot chocolate in his hand waiting to start some great liberal political conversation with his close friends around a campfire. How heartwarming. When it gets dark I bet they all sneak back into town….in their Subaru.
Little puke needs a pink puzzy hat!
He probably can’t tell the difference between brown and black bear scat. Black will be full of pieces of nuts and berries, brown will have little bells and smell like pepper spray.
To find out more about Greggy the FUDD , click here and scroll down. Spoiler alert he wants to go to Cuba.
https://www.ecologyproject.org/about/blog/ask-5-greg-luther
Why do we care what a hipster Bernie voter thinks? What a loser!
We only care because his diarrhea of the mouth got published and now other Fudds can nod and point and say see! This stuff needs to get put down like invasive weeds in your lawn or pretty soon it’s gonna turn into the WHUP WHUP WHUP of the BLACK HELICOPTERS.
I think maybe he blows a meat-whistle by his looks? IMO
Dan, what are you going to say when the anti-gunners decide that your scoped deer gun is a “sniper rifle” and your Remington 870 is a “street sweeper shotgun” and that no one “needs” to own them? Or are you so stupid that you think that if you feed the alligator it won’t eventually eat you?
That’s a hunting issue that is already handled by the States on an individual level.
Now, the Second Amendment which is about Arms, wars, and fighting is a different matter entirely.
OK, close your eyes and have someone read Greg Luther’s opinion to you. Now open your eyes. Isn’t that photo exactly what you imagined Luther would look like? When a bear does eventually eat him, do you think they’ll put his picture on the back of a Starbuck’s cup while they’re looking for him?
40+ years ago I became interested in firearms, I took the hunters safety course and started to hunt…then I joined the NRA and realized that my gun rights are not ONLY about hunting… but protection of life, family and liberty… I stopped hunting for no specific reason but continue with OUR GUN RIGHTS… now I am not saying the NRA is the only pro-gun entity out there but it is a start and do your research….,
Good thing the fellows who wrote and approved of the Constitution didn’t have deer hunting in mind, numbnut.
Looks to me like Fudd’s use “sniper rifles” like the kind used to assassinate President Kennedy. At least that what the gun control people will say once handguns and semiauto rifles are banned. Then after that it wouldn’t be long before shotguns are banned. It’s a slippery slope eh?
Total BS!
https://www.facebook.com/spika.team/videos/1561268643935608/
Oh, the horror. Why do people need to kill poor defenseless animals, why can’t they get their meat at the grocery store like the rest of us liberals, where no animals were harmed!
Lots of inner city young people actually believe this statement. These are future voters. We are doomed!
Hahaha yeah, that fruitcake is a hunter. Ok.
This doofus points out that guns kill people.
OK, Captain Obvious – – I’ll grant you that. – – Now, where’s the problem? – – You say it like killing people is a BAD thing.
I don’t hunt, therefore I should be disarmed? I have no, and never have had, any intent to kill anyone, therefore I don’t need to be armed?
I’ll be Frank, he can be Sue………..How bout those bears?