HR 127 and BHA

[hodgeman]

again why is BHA getting involved in gun control issues when they refuse to deal with much more important hunter related issues? Where is gun control in BHA's charter?




simple question

Believe it or not, Ryan Busse is allowed to speak for himself on all manner of issues without representing BHA every time he scribbles a letter to the editor.

BHA has a long history of not speaking about 2A issues, individual members can and do hold a variety of viewpoints from the right and left.

Of course, you can just call em up and ask them what their position is and they'll be happy to tell you.

 

[Hoodie]

again why is BHA getting involved in gun control issues when they refuse to deal with much more important hunter related issues? Where is gun control in BHA's charter?




simple question

Serious answer.

I don´t think they are. Iḿ pretty sure Busse isn´t on the BHA board anymore, and I´m pretty sure that piece was his opinion.

BHA hasn´t put up anything about constitutional carry in Montana. Just like the NRA hasn´t said anything about public land access in Oregon.

This is less than surprising.

Why would BHA care if someone could concealed carry on a college campus in Montana?

Why would the NRA care if I need a permit to hunt in a wilderness with a High Cascade deer tag?

 

[alecvg]

I just don’t understand why people
Have such a hard time understanding that BHA is focused on public land and wilderness values- that’s what their mission is, I support them for that reason. I support RMEF because they are pro conversation and habitat- that is their focus. Support the NRA for guns- it’s not a one does all group, none of them are. NRA doesn’t give a shit about public land and wilderness, and that’s fine- that’s not their mission.

 

[gabenzeke]

again why is BHA getting involved in gun control issues when they refuse to deal with much more important hunter related issues? Where is gun control in BHA's charter?




simple question

If they are pro conservation, then the loss of PR funds that would come with limiting ownership and use of firearms would be concerning. That said, I didn't realize this bill has been around and agree it's likely DOA.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[gabenzeke]

I guess my thing with BHA is they should speak out on gun control because I'd bet the average guy at the range who looks like he's preparing for the zombie apocalypse and blasting away a few hundred rounds is dumping more into PR funds than the average one weekend a year hunter.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[Hoodie]

If they are pro conservation, then the loss of PR funds that would come with limiting ownership and use of firearms would be concerning. That said, I didn't realize this bill has been around and agree it's likely DOA.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

This is a rational argument, but realistically if generating revenue for Pittman Robertson is the central goal everybody should vote Democrat all the time.

Nothing drives gun and ammo sales like an incoming Democrat president. How much tax revenue do you figure has been generated on gun/ammo sales since November alone?

Note: Not seriously advocating this. Just pointing out the connection between power shifting between the parties and gun sales.

 

[Okhotnik]

Serious answer.

I don´t think they are. Iḿ pretty sure Busse isn´t on the BHA board anymore, and I´m pretty sure that piece was his opinion.

BHA hasn´t put up anything about constitutional carry in Montana. Just like the NRA hasn´t said anything about public land access in Oregon.

This is less than surprising.

Why would BHA care if someone could concealed carry on a college campus in Montana?

Why would the NRA care if I need a permit to hunt in a wilderness with a High Cascade deer tag?

so why did Busse include his BHA creds in the op ed? This was certainly no accident unless you are brain dead cult follower.

And why aren't RMEF and MDF chairs writing the same anti gun op Eds?

Cant believe the hunting public still buying into this fraud

 

[Okhotnik]

I just don’t understand why people
Have such a hard time understanding that BHA is focused on public land and wilderness values- that’s what their mission is, I support them for that reason. I support RMEF because they are pro conversation and habitat- that is their focus. Support the NRA for guns- it’s not a one does all group, none of them are. NRA doesn’t give a shit about public land and wilderness, and that’s fine- that’s not their mission.

So why is a BHA chair getting involved in anti gun issues? A very simple question again unless you ignore logic. just simple facts whether or not you chose to engage in obfuscation

 

[Hoodie]

so why did Busse include his BHA creds in the op ed? This was certainly no accident unless you are brain dead cult follower.

And why aren't RMEF and MDF chairs writing the same anti gun op Eds?

Cant believe the hunting public still buying into this fraud

To add to his personal credibility to strengthen his position.

Appeal to Authority

Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered. Also see the appeal to false authority.

www.logicallyfallacious.com

Spouting off about his background in the gun industry and with BHA is meant to say ¨Look at what I used to do. I know about guns. Let me tell you about guns because boy do I know about them. You should listen to me¨

But that just is not the same thing as an official statement from BHA.

CA BHA Opposes Proposed Ban on Bear Hunting

Backcountry Hunters & Anglers (BHA), the voice for our wild public lands, waters, and wildlife, urges California legislators to oppose Senate Bill 252, which would ban black bear hunting in the state. For more than 100 years, the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and the Public...

www.backcountryhunters.org

This is an official statement from BHA expressing their position on something. Note the language they use: ¨CA BHA opposes _______¨

Presumably the former chairs of RMEF and MDF aren´t writing op-eds opposing constitutional carry because they don´t oppose it? Or maybe they do and they just didn´t have time to write an op-ed? Or maybe it didn´t occur to them?

Here´s a question. This guy doesn´t work for Kimber anymore, right? Why is that any less relevant than him not being a BHA board member anymore?

If I say that, because this dude used to work for Kimber, that Kimber is totally against constitutional carry, am I being accurate?

 

[hodgeman]

so why did Busse include his BHA creds in the op ed? This was certainly no accident unless you are brain dead cult follower.

And why aren't RMEF and MDF chairs writing the same anti gun op Eds?

Cant believe the hunting public still buying into this fraud

You keep fishing in this puddle...

Busse isn't currently a BHA chair. The bio also lists his involvement as a chair of Western Conservation Voters and as Vice President of Kimber... do you extend your anti gun assumptions to both of them as well?

The bio is there to give him credit with gun people, arguably not that effective considering his position in the Op-Ed.

 

[orionthehunter1]

At least Kimber publicly came out how they didn't agree with Busse and that he is not an employee. Did BHA address it at all?

 

[Hoodie]

At least Kimber publicly came out how they didn't agree with Busse and that he is not an employee. Did BHA address it at all?

As a gun manufacturer I imagine Kimber has more reason than BHA to make some sort of public statement.

Concealed carry on college campuses or in bars isn't something I'd expect BHA to address.

 

[cuerro viejo]

NRA has a stronger advocacy for hunting then BHA has for guns rights and gun USE.

Fan or not of the NRA they atleast advocate for hunting and put money towards it. BHA just praises any anti gun politician if they are anti multi-use on public land.

NRA Explore

When it comes to hunting and skills training, America's hunters have known for years where to go: the National Rifle Association.

explore.nra.org

 

[alecvg]

So why is a BHA chair getting involved in anti gun issues? A very simple question again unless you ignore logic. just simple facts whether or not you chose to engage in obfuscation

Good point- but did he get involved with it as a citizen, or actively representing BHA? Not saying I agree with him- but I don’t think he was going in there actively trying to represent BHA. I think it’s okay to have someone in your organization who you may not agree with on every aspect of life.

 

[Mtnboy]

Man, you guys are relentless....So much ignorance and stupidity any time BHA is mentioned.

Have any other Conservation Orgs dumped funds and resources in to fighting this? RMEF? Mule Deer Foundation? Wild Sheep Foundation? etc. etc.

Did I miss the threads bashing them?

BHA hates guns so much that they GIVE YOU ONE for becoming a life member.....but hey, F them right?

Some of ya'll are just idiots, period. If that gets your feathers ruffled, good. If that gets me banned, oh well....it will be par for the course.

 

[Trial153]

Little Johny, now point to the doll and show us where BHA hurt you.

So many Triggered on both sides at this point. Pretty sad.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Little Johny, now point to the doll and show us where BHA hurt you.

So many Triggered on both sides at this point. Pretty sad.

We don't live in a utopia and all nonprofits aren't alike. In today's diverse spectrum, it's nice to know if those asking for support really do what they say and if the align with your thoughts as a hunter.

Obviously there lots of questions consistently around BHA. Why?

There is never questioning on RMEF’s access accomplishments, or SCI’s hunting related work.

Maybe BHA should overemphasize these issues for a more robust and well-known stance.

Just outside looking in.