Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS

Hunters Are Silenced In Gun Debate

February 7, 2013

Throughout Chautauqua County, there are hundreds of hunters who have never had a single mishap with their gun. They are law-abiding citizens. Their guns don’t end up used in robberies or murders....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Feb-07-13 5:45 AM

Come on P-J, "extremist" actions taken by the NRA? Can you elaborate? I think solutions and actions proposed by the NRA have more common sense in them than those offered by Obama and Feinstein. And for the record, I'm not a member of the NRA. I think you have been indoctrinated by the media bias such as CBS running 21 anti-gun stories for every pro-gun story.

16 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 6:37 AM

Fact is, most of the activist left would like to get rid of anything that wasn't a bolt action rifle or shotgun that used no more than three shells. On top of that, they hate you people who shoot and eat innocent animals when you can afford to just go get a veggie burger. Handguns are only for police in protecting you when you need it. Closer to the land? Ask a activist what that means, and you won't get shooting animals as an answer.

14 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 7:51 AM

It's a shame that law abiding hunters and other gun owners have been "lumped" together with the 1in4 nra extremists,who contrary to the will of the people, feel the status quo on every facet of gun violence is fine.They would even argue the bi-partisan legislation currently presented.

4 Agrees | 11 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 7:54 AM

---"gun trafficking"----

1 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 8:42 AM

According to last night's national news the NRA is losing its political foothold for this very reason. What is happening, and what should happen, the people speak and they are heard.

4 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 8:57 AM

What is wrong with the P-J lately? You are getting more leftist every day. Just like the Republican party and Neville Chamberlin, you want to give a little more of your freedoms away to keep the liberals happy. Some day you will have given up everything. Couldn't happen here? Yeah, we've heard that before throughout history.

7 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 8:58 AM

Let me guess Howard, you heard that on MSNBS.

7 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 9:17 AM

I'm not quite sure, mrinbetween, as I watch all stations and keep an open mind on every subject. Seems though, that I heard these comments on more than one station. It certainly makes sense. How does this P-J editorial offend you? Just a blanket disapproval must be, as by your comment to me your mind is already made up for any debate on any subject for the rest of your life. Sounds like a dull existence to me.

4 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 9:31 AM

I'm a supporter of the 2nd amendment and I think the NRA has stopped representing its millions of members, not to mention the millions more who hunt and own firearms and don't belong, in favor of the large corporations whose only aim is to maintain and increase sales. They have staked out what looks like an extremist position to most Americans by opposing minor restrictions on firearms ownership. I think that's the point of this editorial.

When the NRA takes such rigid and unbending positions, the opposition counters it with ridiculous proposals like our recent "SAFE" act's limitation of magazine capacity from 10 to 7 rounds. Without such a "take no prisoners" approach the NRA could have had better access and more negotiation leverage when the act was passed. Instead, it was rammed though with no real input from the community who was most affected by it.

The NRA needs to rethink it's policies and how it presents them. They need to leave off the extremism.

5 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 10:44 AM


0 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 10:56 AM

6:37am--more hate referrences from the author--dems "hate you people who shoot"--dems "hate our country"---- what "extremists."

2 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 11:14 AM

The next time you're in TOPS, spend some time in the magazine section thumbing through some of the hunting/shooting related magazines. Some of you will be amazed at what guns are being used today for hunting & target shooting, especially by the "younger generation". The days of Elmer Fudd stumbling around the woods with his double barrel shotgun during "wabbit season" have gone the way of the rotary phone on the kitchen wall.

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 11:23 AM

Gov. Cuomo forced this legislation thru in the middle of the night, with no public input allowed. "We the People" had no input...."We the People"...get it? This isn't just about the 2nd Amendment Rights, it's about all rights of Citizens of this state, and the denial thereof. Shame on Gov. Cuomo and those elected "officials" that went along with him on this.

10 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 11:39 AM

From the e-mails and calls that I've received over the past few days, it looks like the various hunting/shooting clubs from across the state are gearing up to sent bus loads of representatives to Albany on the 28th.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 12:09 PM

Giving up your rights, just a little bit at a time.

4 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 12:10 PM

Much of the SAFE act made some sense but the ban and the magazine limits below 10 rounds are pointless. While I don't need 20 or 30 round magazines to defend myself and my home, I can't see how limiting magazine capacity for law abiding citizens is going to keep higher capacity magazines out of the hands of criminals who just have to cross one state border to get them.

Violence control is difficult so people pressure their representatives to put meaningless and ineffective bandaids on the problem in the form of gun control, blaming the tool rather than its user. The reality is that criminals, the ones who commit most of the violence in this country will always get the tools they want. Banning things doesn't work. If it did, we'd have no illegal drug problems in this country.

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 12:37 PM

Finally a P-J editorial that I can agree with. It was thoughtful, reasonable and balanced, something we don't often get in P-J editorials. Still, the regressives who post here gnash their teeth and complain that they will lose all of their guns. NOBODY has said that hunters shouldn't have their guns. The issue is keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally unstable. If you don't fall into those two categories then what is your problem?

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 12:39 PM

I have to agree with Emelye. The truth is that if someone really wants to hurt people, they will. At some point, people will need to realize that not every tragedy can be averted, not every bad or insane person stopped.

When they decreased magazine capacities from 30 to 10 it didn't bother me too much (Seriously, who needs a 30-round magazine? What are you hunting, SuperDeer?), but I don't see the point in going from 10 down to 7. It's arbitrary.

Background checks don't bother me. In fact, I think we all know or know of someone who should never, ever own a gun. I'd have to look at exactly how they expanded the checks in the SAFE Law before I fully endorse the change, but generally, I tend to think this is okay.

Limiting the semi-automatics? I know a lot of people whose hunting guns fall under those categories.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 12:58 PM

very well written letter!! great job here PJ staffers!!

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 1:01 PM

it sickens me to admit this but emelye is right. you people with the "take no prisoners" attitude, who refuse to compromise on anything, are mirror images of the ineptitude afflicting our gov't.

7 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 1:06 PM

no offense meant emelye. simply meant we typically are at opposite ends of the spectrum on our views.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 1:58 PM

Had to laugh, when I first started reading this. Although an accident, didn't we have a bullet go through a school bus in the Randolph area?

3 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 2:01 PM

I hate guns, but I have no problem with hunters using "hunting" guns. There is no need for semi-automatic, military style guns. What is wrong with registering your gun? We have to have drivers licenses and car registrations. We even have to register a snowmobile. Just register your guns and then lock them up.

3 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 2:05 PM

giving up your rights to pass a weapon on to someone who can't legally purchase one? Where's that "right" written?

2 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-07-13 2:05 PM

i had to laugh when i read your comment. taken in the context of the sheer massive, absolutely staggering numbers of hunters in NYS it's a wonder you didn't give that comment some more thought before you posted it.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 106 comments Show More Comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web