• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
Sign in to follow this  
Mohammed Bin Lyin

Agriculture minister tell farmers to get semi auto rifles

Recommended Posts

On 9/5/2017 at 7:27 PM, Rockdog said:

Why is it illegal to hunt in Michigan with a .22?

Depends on what you are hunting. Small game like rabbits .22s are fine. Deer, bear,...nope. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

17 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

My 30/30 has a tube magazine. But not pointy bullets.

Have you seen the new pointy center-fire bullets for tube magazines? The pointy end is a soft material, doesn't punch the primer but aids in the ballistic property of the round once fired. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2017 at 5:00 PM, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

A Category D firearm is a semi auto rifle with no magazine limits or semi auto/pump action shotgun.

Nice to see the Queensland Agriculture minister admit farmers need semi auto rifles with large capacity magazines to control feral pests like pigs.

 

 

feral pig.png

Actually, if you really wanted to get serious about this - A Dillon Aero M134 would be ideal.  

a8555520181af3337477458.jpg

And maybe some tannerite for fun.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2017 at 5:36 PM, jocal505 said:

Would some (hopefully non-Libertarian) anarchist please lay out the differences between centerfire and rimfire, NTTAWW either, and the importance of such distinction.

Thank you.

Joe

Jesus, you can't make this shit up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Jesus, you can't make this shit up!

Go ahead, explain the significance here.

  • 1)It seems pretty irrelevant to me at this point.
  • 2)My life has been somewhat fulfilling without parsing these bits.
  • 3)I felt no significant improvement once I learned.
  • 4) Pooplius has pointy thirty thirty bullets available for his tube feeder centerfire carbine. WTF? (Winchester .308 on left)

Marlin ,308 Expresses.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/5/2017 at 7:59 AM, mikewof said:

Yeah, the hunters I knew in Bama ate the meat or fed it to their dogs. It was dirty work, one guy lost both of his expensive hunting dogs from the same boar, the fugger tusked them both.

I wonder if that was the same boar that killed Robert Baratheon???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

Go ahead, explain the significance here.

  • 1)It seems pretty irrelevant to me at this point.
  • 2)My life has been somewhat fulfilling without parsing these bits.
  • 3)I felt no significant improvement once I learned.
  • 4) Pooplius has pointy thirty thirty bullets available for his tube feeder centerfire carbine. WTF? (Winchester .308 on left)

Marlin ,308 Expresses.jpg

The point, joeplius, is that if you don't even fucking know the difference by now between a centerfire rifle round and a rimfire round.  As someone said at the beginning - you have no fucking right to tell us what gunz we should and should not have.  Nor should Dianne Fuckstein for that matter - for the same reason.  

Look, I don't tell you what kind of Alzheimer's and anti-depression meds to take for the simple fact that I am not up on that shit and admit it.  So STFU for once about telling the rest of us what is good for us until you walk a 1000 meters in our shoes. 

I'm still waiting on your report back to us of shooting your make believe "friend's" AR-15.  You will shat your pants, trust me on this.  Its SOOOOO powerful!  And speaking of which..... what does your "friend" with the AR-15 think of your stance on so-called AWs???  Is he a convert to your religion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I wonder if that was the same boar that killed Robert Baratheon???

Is that a fictional tv character?

He lost both of his presa canarios. They were rounding the brush like they were supposed to, and it shot out and tusked the first one, threw it into the air. Then before the owner knew what was happening, the same boar turned on the second dog, same way, and ran back into the brush. He never even had the payback of shooting it.

I think that moral of is that you shouldn't bring any pet to hunt something with the intelligence of a human, unless you're prepared to lose your pet.

That same hunter is friends with another family friend who has a pet pig. I'm told that the pig is smarter than the dogs, it cleans out its own kennel, and comes home in time for dinner. It's unnerving how smart they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

The point, joeplius, is that if you don't even fucking know the difference by now between a centerfire rifle round and a rimfire round.  As someone said at the beginning - you have no fucking right to tell us what gunz we should and should not have.  Nor should Dianne Fuckstein for that matter - for the same reason.  

 

 

Quote

STFU for once about telling the rest of us what is good for us 

This goes from insult to logical failure. The mis-use and design of AW's drove their own containment in four of eleven federal districts so far. 

Quote

until you walk a 1000 meters in our shoes. 

Your footprints don't lay in a culturally desirable direction.

Quote

what does your "friend" with the AR-15 think of your stance on so-called AWs???  Is he a convert to your religion?

My friend disagrees with my gun stance from A to Z, but (like yourself) can't debate it on an informed level. He thinks the Chinese will attack by sea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

The point, joeplius, is that if you don't even fucking know the difference by now between a centerfire rifle round and a rimfire round.  As someone said at the beginning - you have no fucking right to tell us what gunz we should and should not have.  Nor should Dianne Fuckstein for that matter - for the same reason.  

Just to point out, that's a logical fallacy.

I can only assume that you have never tried heroin or smoked methamphetamines, and yet you have the right to tell heroin and meth addicts what drugs they should or shouldn't have.

Even if someone knows nothing at all about guns, college degrees, diesel engines or road flares, they still have all the right to tell others that they should or shouldn't have those things, and you have the right to ignore them or disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jocal505 said:
Quote

what does your "friend" with the AR-15 think of your stance on so-called AWs???  Is he a convert to your religion?

My friend disagrees with my gun stance from A to Z, but (like yourself) can't debate it on an informed level. He thinks the Chinese will attack by sea.

How the fuck else are they going to get here???  Are they going to drive overland?  And they don't have enough airlift to bring in even a fraction of the number of troops they would need to invade.  Jeez!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

How the fuck else are they going to get here??? Are they going to drive overland?  And they don't have enough airlift to bring in even a fraction of the number of troops they would need to invade.  Jeez!

The easiest way, by a charter jet and a rental car when they come to sign the foreclosure papers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mikewof said:

Just to point out, that's a logical fallacy.

I can only assume that you have never tried heroin or smoked methamphetamines, and yet you have the right to tell heroin and meth addicts what drugs they should or shouldn't have.

Even if someone knows nothing at all about guns, college degrees, diesel engines or road flares, they still have all the right to tell others that they should or shouldn't have those things.

That's a fair point.  He may have the "right" to say anything he wants.  He doesn't have the credibility to do so and have anyone take him seriously.

For instance, someone may have the right to say it's just so wrong and unfair to hunt twitchy ilk at long ranges while sitting in a lawn chair in the back of a pickemup truck at the top of a powerline cut.  But having never done that and therefore lacking credibility of such things, such a person would be the butt of jokes and mockery for years to come.  Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

That's a fair point.  He may have the "right" to say anything he wants.  He doesn't have the credibility to do so and have anyone take him seriously.

For instance, someone may have the right to say it's just so wrong and unfair to hunt twitchy ilk at long ranges while sitting in a lawn chair in the back of a pickemup truck at the top of a powerline cut.  But having never done that and therefore lacking credibility of such things, such a person would be the butt of jokes and mockery for years to come.  Just saying.

And yet you probably have never shot heroin and likely believe that you have the credibility to denounce drug use. Why is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

That's a fair point.  He may have the "right" to say anything he wants.  He doesn't have the credibility to do so and have anyone take him seriously.

For instance, someone may have the right to say it's just so wrong and unfair to hunt twitchy ilk at long ranges while sitting in a lawn chair in the back of a pickemup truck at the top of a powerline cut.  But having never done that and therefore lacking credibility of such things, such a person would be the butt of jokes and mockery for years to come.  Just saying.

Gut shooting deer is a concept that does not require practical experience to condemn. 

The only joke here is you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, mikewof said:

And yet you probably have never shot heroin and likely believe that you have the credibility to denounce drug use. Why is that?

I'm actually on the side of ending the war on drugs and letting addicts have as much as they want.  Who am I to tell them what they can inject into their bodies?  I would rather spend the money on treatment.  Far more ROI.  And for those that don't accept treatment, the ability to shoot up all they want will be self-critiquing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I'm actually on the side of ending the war on drugs and letting addicts have as much as they want.  Who am I to tell them what they can inject into their bodies?  I would rather spend the money on treatment.  Far more ROI.  And for those that don't accept treatment, the ability to shoot up all they want will be self-critiquing.  

How do you envision these addicts to buy their illicit drugs? Legalize not only the consumption, but the market too? Just shitcan the FDA's guidance over pharma and bring back the glory days of radium water and snake oil?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, mikewof said:

How do you envision these addicts to buy their illicit drugs? Legalize not only the consumption, but the market too? Just shitcan the FDA's guidance over pharma and bring back the glory days of radium water and snake oil?

Yes.  And tax the market to pay for the treatment.  The FDA can regulate it.  Problem SOLved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, mikewof said:

1. You are 100% full of shit. The USA doesn't allow any wild meat into the country except for seafood and some personal game hunted in Canada. If you think that the USA is buying any of your feral goat or pig meat then you're either stoned or stupid. We don't even allow domestic wild meat to be sold here, let alone a bunch of feral goat meat from Australia.

2. Junk Science is you or your local politicians trying to connect freer access to higher power guns as a solution to your feral pig problem. The numbers don't agree with you. 

3. Animals can be sterilized chemically for about $30/pig per year. No transport, no vets, no surgery. It's given either at a feeder or a dart. Yes, the animal still causes damage, but it also still attempts to reproduce, and then crowds out the smaller animals. You want an old population, unable to reproduce to control an invasive species. You definitely don't want a bunch of 6 month and 12 month old smaller sows dropping new litters twice a year. Hunters tend to shoot larger animals and the problem with pigs is the smaller ones. You also avoid millions of rotting hog corpses and the boom in carrion eaters. Remember the 80% rule? Good luck hitting that with guns. That's as dumb as trying to fix the lionfish population explosion with fishing rods.

1.You are full of shit mikey,-http://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2014-08-21/goat-abattoir/5686162

2.More bullshit from mikey the numbers don't agree with your idiocy see number 3.

3. If you're going to shoot them with a dart that costs $30 how does that compare to less than $1 for a .308 round, if you shoot them with a .308 they don't breed or cause any more damage. It's a myth that hunters don't shoot the smaller pigs we shoot every pig we see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I'm actually on the side of ending the war on drugs and letting addicts have as much as they want.  Who am I to tell them what they can inject into their bodies?  I would rather spend the money on treatment.  Far more ROI.  And for those that don't accept treatment, the ability to shoot up all they want will be self-critiquing.  

A good article on ending the war on drugs to cut gun crime.

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/end-drug-war-cut-gun-violence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Yes.  And tax the market to pay for the treatment.  The FDA can regulate it.  Problem SOLved.

Treatment of what? Do people who smoke cannabis need "treatment"? You're assuming that everyone who consumes this hypothetically legal heroin, meth, cocaine, etc., will see their consumption as an illness in need of "treatment." But I suspect very few will see it that way.

Sugar kills far more people than any illicit drug and how many sugar addicts seek this "treatment" you suggest? 5%?

The reality of a legalized drug market is that drugs without FDA clearance or compliance WILL be consumed in quantity with an explicit and implicit approval by the same agencies and officers on whom we rely to protect us from things that we don't necessarily understand, like Thalidomide with reversed chirality, radium water, Darvocet, Dantron, snake oil, etc..

Specifically how can the FDA "regulate" a drug that has no FDA testing, compliance, or compliant safety? 

Understand, I'm not necessarily against the idea of drug legalization, but all drugs are not cannabis ... that happens to be an odd duck that is actually a food product with proven safety. Assuming that what works for cannabis will also work for other drugs may be hopelessly naive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

 It's a myth that hunters don't shoot the smaller pigs we shoot every pig we see.

Can you shoot faster than 45 million pigs will breed? You da man.

Woofers: Assuming that what works for cannabis will also work for other drugs may be hopelessly naive.

Hopelessly naive works just fine for most cliches. Good to go for Simple Jeff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

1.You are full of shit mikey,-http://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2014-08-21/goat-abattoir/5686162

2.More bullshit from mikey the numbers don't agree with your idiocy see number 3.

3. If you're going to shoot them with a dart that costs $30 how does that compare to less than $1 for a .308 round, if you shoot them with a .308 they don't breed or cause any more damage. It's a myth that hunters don't shoot the smaller pigs we shoot every pig we see.

1. Dipshit, did you bother to read your own article? Those are "free range goats" not feral goats. There is a huge difference. Meat that is imported for consumption has to be raised in compliance with USDA practices. Feral goats and pigs are definitely not allowed,  https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/207/~/regulations-for-importing-meat-%2F-wild-game-products

As for the rest, again the numbers don't agree with you. You'll need to shoot 80% of all feral pigs at any given time to keep the population from growing. Do you understand that? It's because when you kill a feral pig, you then open up that range and food sources for new pigs. And with even a six month old pig able to start to breed and have two litters per year of up to a dozen piglets per litter, their population just shoots back if you fail to exceed that 80% mark.

So you have actually convinced yourself that you and your countrymen can shoot your way to that 80%? That's over 18 million pigs per year. U. Queensland estimates there are about 300,000 hunters in Oz, so if 10% of them can do it seriously enough to address your invasive species problem, then each hunter will need to kill 600 pigs. That's an insane number. I knew very devoted pig hunters in Alabama who managed maybe ten pigs a year. You seem to think that because one pro hunter can kill 60 at a time that he can keep killing those kind of mobs indefinitely all the way to 18 million. But pigs are smart, they're not going to just stay easy targets once they know how easily they can be killed like that. I just walked past twenty deer from my office to the parking deck, they barely moved, because they know they nobody is going to hunt them on a laboratory campus. But even one hunter and they're back to scattering. And pigs are much smarter than deer, they'll catch on in a heartbeat.

Or maybe hire a thousand professional pig hunters with helicopters, they would have to kill 18,000 pigs each, an average of 60 pigs for every working day. With benefits and overhead at Australian minimum wage, that's about AU$100 million per year in salary alone, add in the costs of the copters, maintenance, ground staff, ammo, that's about AU$1 billion or so, every single year, to hit that 80% and keep the feral pig population from growing.

And it's also nearly twice the price of the $30/year to chemically sterilize them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/7/2017 at 3:54 AM, random said:

You don't give a fuck about the Constitution tom-boy, you only care about yourself. 

JFC...That's what Rights of the Individual are.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2017 at 8:35 AM, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

 

The USA is our biggest customer with goat meat our markets are expanding, I told you to stick to physics you're showing your idiocy here mike.

Is junk science the new buzzword from hoplophobes, when you examine these buzzwords from lefties it shows you really have nothing.

It's illegal to transport live feral pigs here, the animal rights nutjobs will insist the job to sterilise these large sows must be done by a qualified Vet, how much will a Vet charge for a field trip to sterilise a sow and multiply that by however many sows you wish to sterilise. Once you have sterilised the sows they will still be able to devastate crops and spread diseases so you have really achieved nothing.

Compare the cost of your idiocy for field trips for Vets to sterilise a sow after trapping it to one of these which will sterilise the sows and stop them damaging crops and spreading diseases.

 

Australian-Outback-BTI-.308-.223-1.jpg

Sterile sows will out eat several little ones.    Maybe not a big issue in warm climes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/7/2017 at 6:02 AM, Uncooperative Tom said:

Right. It was semi-autos that you discovered were dangerous, wasn't it?

And did that happen before or after your government told you to discover it?

Funny how people who have no experience know what's best for others.  22 Mag is illegal for hunting in my state.  Would be irresponsible to use one for that purpose here these days.  300-06,  30-30, 300 - all very popular.   Nowhere I hunted that 200M shot was possible.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2017 at 0:15 PM, chinabald said:

Depends on what you are hunting. Small game like rabbits .22s are fine. Deer, bear,...nope. 

22 Mag work on deer.    They are hazardous to humans.

22 might work on rabbits sitting around eating flowers in your yard.  Can't image using anything but a shotgun and some beagles during season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2017 at 3:24 PM, mikewof said:

And yet you probably have never shot heroin and likely believe that you have the credibility to denounce drug use. Why is that?

Not a good analogy, Mike.   Better analogy would be the type of needle to use to shoot up...or limit the size of needles for legitimate medical use because junkies kill themselves using certain types.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2017 at 3:32 PM, random said:

Gut shooting deer is a concept that does not require practical experience to condemn. 

The only joke here is you

I've never heard anyone say gut shooting a deer is a good thing.  

Gut shooting a feral pig is not good but I'm not loosing sleep over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2017 at 10:07 PM, mikewof said:

Specifically how can the FDA "regulate" a drug that has no FDA testing, compliance, or compliant safety? 

That's a very good question and the answer explains why cigarettes are not a food nor a drug. They're just a product.

If they were a drug, which they clearly are not, then they'd have to be proven safe and effective to treat some condition.

Similarly, alcohol isn't a drug, though we treat it a bit more like "real" drugs.

I think we might just need to recognize that people use drugs for reasons other than the safe and effective treatment of medical conditions. And that this is actually OK.

Getting drug warriors to recognize the first one is darn near impossible. No chance at the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rockdog said:

Not a good analogy, Mike.   Better analogy would be the type of needle to use to shoot up...or limit the size of needles for legitimate medical use because junkies kill themselves using certain types.

As far as I can tell, the quality and leadership of a person in not increased as he learns the technical details of firearms. Nor is his behavior improved. Nor is his credibility improved. Nor is his or her positive contribution to society improved. These qualities seem to go downhill when firearms enter the mix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jocal505 said:

As far as I can tell, the quality and leadership of a person in not increased as he learns the technical details of firearms. Nor is his behavior improved. Nor is his credibility improved. Nor is his or her positive contribution to society improved. These qualities seem to go downhill when firearms enter the mix.

Good point. And it gets even worse when politicians enter the mix. We should probably disarm all governments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎09‎/‎2017 at 0:57 PM, mikewof said:

1. Dipshit, did you bother to read your own article? Those are "free range goats" not feral goats. There is a huge difference. Meat that is imported for consumption has to be raised in compliance with USDA practices. Feral goats and pigs are definitely not allowed,  https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/207/~/regulations-for-importing-meat-%2F-wild-game-products

As for the rest, again the numbers don't agree with you. You'll need to shoot 80% of all feral pigs at any given time to keep the population from growing. Do you understand that? 

Or maybe hire a thousand professional pig hunters with helicopters, they would have to kill 18,000 pigs each, an average of 60 pigs for every working day. With benefits and overhead at Australian minimum wage, that's about AU$100 million per year in salary alone, add in the costs of the copters, maintenance, ground staff, ammo, that's about AU$1 billion or so, every single year, to hit that 80% and keep the feral pig population from growing.

And it's also nearly twice the price of the $30/year to chemically sterilize them. 

I know all about our Goat industry Mikey, the landowners don't want us to shoot them because they can be trapped in the yards easily then you back a truck up then off to the abattoir. Aussie meat is in high demand because we don't have many diseases like you seppos no rabies or foot and mouth disease just to name 2.Free range is just a fancy name for ferals the goats are a feral pest here have been since the British introduced them.You link was about Canada it had nothing about Australia did you even bother to read it?

I know how many pigs have to be shot to keep numbers from growing, nice to see you realise it's a massive problem.

I do a bit of Aerial culling when the Government pays for it, we average around 200 pigs an hour, probably be a bit cheaper if they changed the regulations and allowed us to use R44 instead of Turbine powered choppers and got rid of the spotter who counts how many you shoot and how many shots are fired.We go through pallet loads of ammo.

 

As for your idiocy on sterilising sows it costs more than $30 to do that and they still destroy crops and spread diseases, sounds like the idiocy of this inner city homo(NTTIAWWT) who is also ignorant of the fact it's illegal to release feral pests into the wild

Quote

Bill to manage stray cats introduced

 

11 September 2014

Independent Member for Sydney Alex Greenwich today introduced a bill to ensure that sponsored trap-neuter-return and management (TNR) programs are lawful.

TNR programs involve desexing animals in a specific group or colony of unowned stray animals and returning them to where they were found where they stop breeding, allowing the population to stabilise.

“In New South Wales there are a number of successful volunteer run programs but they may not be lawful because returning a non-native animal to where it came from could constitute the ‘abandoning’ or liberating’ offences.

The stray animals released under a TNR program would have been in the community anyway, only under a TNR program they will be desexed and not produce further offspring. An undesexed female cat and her offspring can produce 420,000 cats in seven years; TNR programs can help break this cycle.

http://www.alexgreenwich.com/bill_to_manage_stray_cats_introduced

 

I like this comment on the idiocy of trap neuter release programs, do you realise it's illegal to release a feral pig after you have sterilised it here in Australia Mikey got any more illegal suggestions?

Quote

l- Peter Rutherford commented 2 years ago · 

Hello Alex,

I have read your proposal to make it lawful for people to release feral cats after desexing them. I would have hoped you would have understood that the issue with feral cats is not that they have sex with native fauna, the issue is, they kill them in the millions every day.

Rather than making this anti-biodiversity activity legal, if you cared one itoa for the average of 6 small native birds, mammals and reptiles that every feral cat kills everyday, you would want these people prosecuted, rather than protected. I cannot understand how anyone with even the slightest interest in trying to reduce the decimation, as about 75 million small birds, mammals and reptiles are killed each day, would want to protect feral cats.

I strongly suggest that you withdraw your dumb bill immediately

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

 it gets even worse when politicians enter the mix

That depends on us, the people.

Quote

We should probably disarm all governments.

Larry Pratt has fed you adolescent civics. The lower road.

A basic within civilization is the social compact.  Even at the tribal level, the "state" (the community at large)  has a monopoly on violence. Very basic, Tom. There is no need to modify such a basic at this point in the journey that is civilization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rockdog said:

Sterile sows will out eat several little ones.    Maybe not a big issue in warm climes.

Mikey doesn't realise what he proposes is illegal here, you can be prosecuted for releasing feral pigs into the wild even if they are sterilised.

I told mike to stick to physics he didn't listen so we have to put up with his idiocy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Rockdog said:

22 Mag work on deer.    They are hazardous to humans.

22 might work on rabbits sitting around eating flowers in your yard.  Can't image using anything but a shotgun and some beagles during season.

30/06 are dangerous to humans, but you can legally hunt with them in Michigan's rifle zone. A 22 mag is more powerful then maybe some realize, but its not a big game cartridge. 

A lot of hunters stalk rabbits, follow tracks and keep an eye 50 yards ahead, spot a rabbit and slowly get into a safe shooting position...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

Mikey doesn't realise what he proposes is illegal here, you can be prosecuted for releasing feral pigs into the wild even if they are sterilised.

I told mike to stick to physics he didn't listen so we have to put up with his idiocy.

Do you actually have that rule in Australia? What is the name of that law? I think you're bullshitting that it's illegal to sterilize wild pigs in Oz.

Over here, in pigland, it's a common method that landowners use to convert stinky boar meat to barrow meat. Guys who are good at it can do it in less than a minute after they corral the boar.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Rockdog said:

Sterile sows will out eat several little ones.    Maybe not a big issue in warm climes.

Unsterile sows will out eat several little ones too. That's the whole point, you want to use the invasive species itself to control and crowd away the breeders.

80%, remember?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

That's a very good question and the answer explains why cigarettes are not a food nor a drug. They're just a product.

If they were a drug, which they clearly are not, then they'd have to be proven safe and effective to treat some condition.

Similarly, alcohol isn't a drug, though we treat it a bit more like "real" drugs.

I think we might just need to recognize that people use drugs for reasons other than the safe and effective treatment of medical conditions. And that this is actually OK.

Getting drug warriors to recognize the first one is darn near impossible. No chance at the latter.

Okay Normy, so let's follow this path to your intended legalization ...

The U.S. currently allows cigarettes and alcohol and thus the USDA and FDA, along with various safety acts, controls the safety and purity of tobacco and the feedstocks for alcohol, along with the testing of imported and domestic alcohol and tobacco. As taxpayers, we expect the safety of these items, since they are legal products. We expect that the imported tobacco isn't laced with a deadly insecticide and that the stylish vodka won't contain enough methanol to make us go blind.

Now extend a similar legality to cocaine and heroin ... it's a little more difficult, but it should be manageable, the pharma industry regulates cocaine as some kind of surgical packing material, it seems the mechanisms may be in place to dramatically expand that industry segment with legality. And heroin is apparently related to things like morphine, and oxy, right? So regulate the relative "safety" of those drugs, and like alcohol, if someone overdoes it, they'll die with those too, but c'est la vie, consumer beware, it's the nature of a legalized drug economy.

But now extend this legalization to other drugs that don't really have a well-defined pathway to safety, drugs that do what they do in large part because they are violently toxic, like bath salts, meth, krokodile, etc.. How are you supposed to regulate drugs like that? Or do you just propose regulating a subset of drugs, but keeping other illegal and unregulated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

I know all about our Goat industry Mikey, the landowners don't want us to shoot them because they can be trapped in the yards easily then you back a truck up then off to the abattoir. Aussie meat is in high demand because we don't have many diseases like you seppos no rabies or foot and mouth disease just to name 2.Free range is just a fancy name for ferals the goats are a feral pest here have been since the British introduced them.You link was about Canada it had nothing about Australia did you even bother to read it?

I know how many pigs have to be shot to keep numbers from growing, nice to see you realise it's a massive problem.

I do a bit of Aerial culling when the Government pays for it, we average around 200 pigs an hour, probably be a bit cheaper if they changed the regulations and allowed us to use R44 instead of Turbine powered choppers and got rid of the spotter who counts how many you shoot and how many shots are fired.We go through pallet loads of ammo.

 

As for your idiocy on sterilising sows it costs more than $30 to do that and they still destroy crops and spread diseases, sounds like the idiocy of this inner city homo(NTTIAWWT) who is also ignorant of the fact it's illegal to release feral pests into the wild

 

I like this comment on the idiocy of trap neuter release programs, do you realise it's illegal to release a feral pig after you have sterilised it here in Australia Mikey got any more illegal suggestions?

 

1. Are you suggesting that Australian goat meat exports contain feral goats? If you've personally witnessed this, the please let me know, I would like to alert my FDA friend and let him look into this. It's illegal and dangerous. As far as I know, you are completely full of shit with your claim, and sneaking feral animals into slaughter and then export would trigger every alarm bell in the Livestock Identification System. The U.S. has one, as far as I know, you folks have one too if you're exporting meat to the USA. "Free range" is not a fancy name for feral animals. Free range animals are livestock, feral animals are not livestock. Hey Austin, you have a small pig operation, what kind of risk do you run sliding some captured feral pigs into the stock that you sell for slaughter? Godfrey here claims that it happens all the time over there with goats.

2. The article I cited only mentioned Canada as the one exemption for U.S. hunters to bring some wild caught meat (like pheasant) back into the USA. It was very clear that all other examples from all other countries are not allow. You didn't actually read it. Maybe you should read your own cites and others before wasting time here?

3. The whole point of this thread that you started is that the pigs in your country are spreading the "Panama TR4" virus, and then you come back a few days later and claim that diseases aren't actually a problem?

4. I've been trying to get you to wrap your head around the 80% factor for the last few days, it's the same problem here. Now you've absorbed it, congratulations, and good luck shooting your way to 80%, let alone higher.

5. You write that you kill 200 pigs an hour by copter. If you're able to kill 200 per hour, and there are say, 1000 more pros like you, then by your claim, you would be able to kill close to 100% of Australia's feral pig population in less than a month. And yet, for some curious little reason, you can't and you don't. Now, why would that be?

6. The point about sterilizing invasive species, the reason why it's the favored emerging method is because it's better. Yes, the sterilized animals still cause damage, but as they get older, and as the remaining new pigs are born, and then sterilized, the invasive species starts to die off. Yes, I get that you can't wrap your head around the math of why it works, I assume it's because you aren't interested in learning new things. But you are able to kill 200 pigs in an hour and you still can't make a dent in your invasive pigs problem, it's in fact some 5x worse than our feral pig problem is in the USA. So go ahead, keep shooting pigs, have fun burning through palettes of ammo, and then when y'all have 40 million feral pigs instead of your current 25 million feral pigs, the Australian government will finally listen to you, give you the slightly more powerful guns and ammo that you want, and then in a couple of months, your feral pig problem will just magically disappear ... and then you'll wake up from your dream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike, maybe not to the US but we have been exporting feral pig for years.  It is almost impossible to differentiate between feral and stock on Australian properties.  Feral goats are considered stock in a way, in that the owner knows they are there and breeding, eating his fodder.  They round them up and ship them out.  Managing numbers so they can breed up again.  Sounds like stock to me.

Many outback towns have a "Pig Box", or at least they did when I did it.  It's a refrigerated container where field shot pigs are chilled following inspection by the local manager.  Many hunters paid for fuel and ammo this way.  Depending on price they sometimes made a good profit.  At times they got better money for feral pig meat as the Germans have plenty of the pink ones already.

Wild boar exports suffer as accredited hunter numbers drop

Australia's game meat industry is struggling to keep up with overseas demand for wild boar products, as drought and dwindling hunter numbers slow supply.

While recreational hunter numbers are thought to be increasing nationally, fewer shooters are choosing to become accredited to harvest wild pigs for human consumption.

The only company exporting feral pig meat from Queensland this year, Game Meat Processors, is currently slaughtering 1,000 head per week at its Brisbane factory, for markets in France and Germany.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, random said:

Mike, maybe not to the US but we have been exporting feral pig for years.  It is almost impossible to differentiate between feral and stock on Australian properties.  Feral goats are considered stock in a way, in that the owner knows they are there and breeding, eating his fodder.  They round them up and ship them out.  Managing numbers so they can breed up again.  Sounds like stock to me.

Many outback towns have a "Pig Box", or at least they did when I did it.  It's a refrigerated container where field shot pigs are chilled following inspection by the local manager.  Many hunters paid for fuel and ammo this way.  Depending on price they sometimes made a good profit.  At times they got better money for feral pig meat as the Germans have plenty of the pink ones already.

Wild boar exports suffer as accredited hunter numbers drop

Australia's game meat industry is struggling to keep up with overseas demand for wild boar products, as drought and dwindling hunter numbers slow supply.

While recreational hunter numbers are thought to be increasing nationally, fewer shooters are choosing to become accredited to harvest wild pigs for human consumption.

The only company exporting feral pig meat from Queensland this year, Game Meat Processors, is currently slaughtering 1,000 head per week at its Brisbane factory, for markets in France and Germany.

Some countries allow wild meat to be sold. The U.S. doesn't unless it's aquatic. They're so strict about the rules here that any land animal, even something as small as a cricket (which is sometimes sold for human consumption, but usually pets) has to be farm raised to USDA standards. If you kill wild game here, you can eat it or give it away, but you can't sell it. A county near me as a "road kill festival" actually all hunted meat, that they give away for free in chili, burgers, etc. and the participants donate a few bucks at the door, for charity. It's a way around the restriction, in a sense.

And I mentioned that earlier, that I know some countries allow it. The USA definitely does not. But Godfrey knows better, he writes that feral goat meat is exported to the USA. I've no idea how they forge the livestock identification at their processor for USDA clearance, but again, Godfrey claims that they do this.

The reason why conventional control methods don't work with fast-to-reproduce animals like rats and pigs is because the math kills you in the end, and it's the available food and competition that ends up controlling the population. So if you just kill them, you'll never get ahead of the population. Look at what a single breeding pair of pigs can produce in three years, when you consider their offspring, if food and competition doesn't limit the growth, up to 3.5 million pigs from a single breeding pair in 36 months:

  6 12 18 24 30 36 sum
               
1 12 12 12 12 12 12 72
2   144 144 144 144 144 720
3     1,728 1,728 1,728 1,728 6,912
4       20,736 20,736 20,736 62,208
5         248,832 248,832 497,664
6           2,985,984 2,985,984
               
              3,553,560

If you try to get in front of this kind of growth pattern with ammo, it will escape you every time, You need to limit the growth through competition and available food sources. The ideal competition for most any invasive species IS that species, because the domain overlaps nearly 100%. But yeah, Godfrey cries like a whipped pup "but the sterile hogs will keep ripping up fields!" Yeah, they will, and if you let that generation obsolete the ones behinds it, at least you have a chance.

           
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mikewof said:

Do you actually have that rule in Australia? What is the name of that law? I think you're bullshitting that it's illegal to sterilize wild pigs in Oz.

Over here, in pigland, it's a common method that landowners use to convert stinky boar meat to barrow meat. Guys who are good at it can do it in less than a minute after they corral the boar.

 

Thanks for the vid Mikey!!  It led me to one of Rhinos mating.  I had no idea that Rhino Peepees  are so long they dragged on the ground!!  

And why praytell, is the feral pig meat tastier when they have been castrated??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, billy backstay said:

Thanks for the vid Mikey!!  It led me to one of Rhinos mating.  I had no idea that Rhino Peepees  are so long they dragged on the ground!!  

And why praytell, is the feral pig meat tastier when they have been castrated??

I think that their nuts help produce the pheromone that sends the sows into the throes of porcine delight. I assume that it also makes their meat smell like a stevedore's jockstrap with the consistency of boot leather.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, mikewof said:

Unsterile sows will out eat several little ones too. That's the whole point, you want to use the invasive species itself to control and crowd away the breeders.

80%, remember?

Unsterile does make little babies.  Sterile ones are good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, mikewof said:

1. Are you suggesting that Australian goat meat exports contain feral goats? If you've personally witnessed this, the please let me know, I would like to alert my FDA friend and let him look into this. It's illegal and dangerous. As far as I know, you are completely full of shit with your claim, and sneaking feral animals into slaughter and then export would trigger every alarm bell in the Livestock Identification System. The U.S. has one, as far as I know, you folks have one too if you're exporting meat to the USA. "Free range" is not a fancy name for feral animals. Free range animals are livestock, feral animals are not livestock. Hey Austin, you have a small pig operation, what kind of risk do you run sliding some captured feral pigs into the stock that you sell for slaughter? Godfrey here claims that it happens all the time over there with goats.

2. The article I cited only mentioned Canada as the one exemption for U.S. hunters to bring some wild caught meat (like pheasant) back into the USA. It was very clear that all other examples from all other countries are not allow. You didn't actually read it. Maybe you should read your own cites and others before wasting time here?

3. The whole point of this thread that you started is that the pigs in your country are spreading the "Panama TR4" virus, and then you come back a few days later and claim that diseases aren't actually a problem?

4. I've been trying to get you to wrap your head around the 80% factor for the last few days, it's the same problem here. Now you've absorbed it, congratulations, and good luck shooting your way to 80%, let alone higher.

5. You write that you kill 200 pigs an hour by copter. If you're able to kill 200 per hour, and there are say, 1000 more pros like you, then by your claim, you would be able to kill close to 100% of Australia's feral pig population in less than a month. And yet, for some curious little reason, you can't and you don't. Now, why would that be?

6. The point about sterilizing invasive species, the reason why it's the favored emerging method is because it's better. Yes, the sterilized animals still cause damage, but as they get older, and as the remaining new pigs are born, and then sterilized, the invasive species starts to die off. Yes, I get that you can't wrap your head around the math of why it works, I assume it's because you aren't interested in learning new things. But you are able to kill 200 pigs in an hour and you still can't make a dent in your invasive pigs problem, it's in fact some 5x worse than our feral pig problem is in the USA. So go ahead, keep shooting pigs, have fun burning through palettes of ammo, and then when y'all have 40 million feral pigs instead of your current 25 million feral pigs, the Australian government will finally listen to you, give you the slightly more powerful guns and ammo that you want, and then in a couple of months, your feral pig problem will just magically disappear ... and then you'll wake up from your dream.

Sterilization is good.  Shooting them is good.  Win-win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, jocal505 said:

As far as I can tell, the quality and leadership of a person in not increased as he learns the technical details of firearms. Nor is his behavior improved. Nor is his credibility improved. Nor is his or her positive contribution to society improved. These qualities seem to go downhill when firearms enter the mix.

But you have proven yourself not very bright so your entire portion of your post after "As far as I can tell" is moot.

As far as credibility goes, a persons comments regarding types of guns become not credible when they've proven they are not knowledgeable in differences between the types.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

Mikey doesn't realise what he proposes is illegal here, you can be prosecuted for releasing feral pigs into the wild even if they are sterilised.

I told mike to stick to physics he didn't listen so we have to put up with his idiocy.

you don't think his point would be to change the government policy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, mikewof said:

Okay Normy, so let's follow this path to your intended legalization ...

The U.S. currently allows cigarettes and alcohol and thus the USDA and FDA, along with various safety acts, controls the safety and purity of tobacco and the feedstocks for alcohol, along with the testing of imported and domestic alcohol and tobacco. As taxpayers, we expect the safety of these items, since they are legal products. We expect that the imported tobacco isn't laced with a deadly insecticide and that the stylish vodka won't contain enough methanol to make us go blind.

Now extend a similar legality to cocaine and heroin ... it's a little more difficult, but it should be manageable, the pharma industry regulates cocaine as some kind of surgical packing material, it seems the mechanisms may be in place to dramatically expand that industry segment with legality. And heroin is apparently related to things like morphine, and oxy, right? So regulate the relative "safety" of those drugs, and like alcohol, if someone overdoes it, they'll die with those too, but c'est la vie, consumer beware, it's the nature of a legalized drug economy.

But now extend this legalization to other drugs that don't really have a well-defined pathway to safety, drugs that do what they do in large part because they are violently toxic, like bath salts, meth, krokodile, etc.. How are you supposed to regulate drugs like that? Or do you just propose regulating a subset of drugs, but keeping other illegal and unregulated?

I think Normy is a bit busy right now.

A short answer is to follow Portugal's example.  Maybe "decriminalization" is a better term than "legalization".  And along with decriminalizing drug use, the shift to treat addiction as a health issue and not a criminal issue had a huge impact on the drug problem there.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/portugal-drug-experiment-heroin-decriminalizing-drugs-382598

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I think Normy is a bit busy right now.

A short answer is to follow Portugal's example.  Maybe "decriminalization" is a better term than "legalization".  And along with decriminalizing drug use, the shift to treat addiction as a health issue and not a criminal issue had a huge impact on the drug problem there.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/portugal-drug-experiment-heroin-decriminalizing-drugs-382598

I agree with you if 'treatment' means shipping them to North Korea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rockdog said:
2 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I think Normy is a bit busy right now.

A short answer is to follow Portugal's example.  Maybe "decriminalization" is a better term than "legalization".  And along with decriminalizing drug use, the shift to treat addiction as a health issue and not a criminal issue had a huge impact on the drug problem there.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/portugal-drug-experiment-heroin-decriminalizing-drugs-382598

I agree with you if 'treatment' means shipping them to North Korea.

Well, "treating" them in prison is working out SO well for us, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rockdog said:

But you have proven yourself not very bright so your entire portion of your post after "As far as I can tell" is moot.

As far as credibility goes, a persons comments regarding types of guns become not credible when they've proven they are not knowledgeable in differences between the types.

Open minded much? This is an evolving situation. I could know zip about guns and still have a clue about gun policies. Gun management has to be sorted out, and your input is welcome (but suspect). I suggest that my knowledge base is as incomplete as yours is jaded. The details can be managed just fine; i suggest that LCM's don't have a bright future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I think Normy is a bit busy right now.

A short answer is to follow Portugal's example.  Maybe "decriminalization" is a better term than "legalization".  And along with decriminalizing drug use, the shift to treat addiction as a health issue and not a criminal issue had a huge impact on the drug problem there.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/portugal-drug-experiment-heroin-decriminalizing-drugs-382598

Agree, decriminalization is better, keep the government away from the responsibility and liability of these drugs.

But them how would the rest work?

If someone is caught using, say they are stopped for a traffic infraction and the cop notices a bag of meth on the seat ... are they cited, and then given the option of treatment over punishment? Or is it completely decriminalized, and the cop is then no more interested in a giant Ziploc bag filled with Krokodile as he would in a giant Ziploc bag filled with Froot Loops?

And does the decriminalization extend just to the users? Or does it extend to the dealer of the Krokodile, and the person with the filthy basement lab who manufactures the desomorphine?

Your link to what Portugal does is helpful, but it seems that they still criminalize dealers and manufacturers. Would that be our method too? If so, how would we handle effective dealers who just don't "hold" and leave that to minors?

btw, I typed "desomorphine" and the Google engine kicked in and just gave me an ad for Suboxone at the bottom of the SA page. Yikes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Rockdog said:

Sterilization is good.  Shooting them is good.  Win-win.

You would think so, horse logic says so, but did you look at the three year population chart I posted? A single breeding pair can make up to 3.5 million new pigs in three years. The population of fast breeders like pigs, rats, rabbits and mice are not strongly limited by available population, but rather by available food and territory.

NYC had a major rat population problem, and they were unable to poison their way out it for that reason, so they're switching to sterilization hormones from poison.

So even if they killed 75% of the pigs in Australia, about 15 million animals, the population would still increase. It's hard to get our heads around that kind of math. A sterile, angry, territorial animal is a better population control than an empty chunk of land with only a few breeding pigs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Rockdog said:

you don't think his point would be to change the government policy?

He's confused. As far as I know it is not illegal to chemically sterilize animals in Oz. It's legal in the U.S. as long as the hormone is life-limited and approved for use.

Godfrey has convinced himself that sterilization means capturing the pigs, transporting them to the vet, doing surgery and rereleasing. That would be insane, they would literally need something like 10,000 full time vets to do the work. It's a hormonal bait additive, it triggers the pigs immune system to attack fertilized eggs or to dislodge the eggs. Ironically, the one they use in the USA for black tailed deer, and bears is derived from pig immune systems, https://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/nwrc/publications/06pubs/perry061.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were doing a trial with that, on Fire Island, the years I was working out there  -  feeding the deer birth-control hormones.

It made a very noticeable impact.  2005, place was overrun with sickly, starved-looking deer.  Keeping them out of the garden required constant diligence.  By 2010, there were still quite a few deer, but noticeably less; and they were much healthier-looking.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Well, "treating" them in prison is working out SO well for us, right?

Exactly.  Next step is get rid of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, frenchie said:

They were doing a trial with that, on Fire Island, the years I was working out there  -  feeding the deer birth-control hormones.

It made a very noticeable impact.  2005, place was overrun with sickly, starved-looking deer.  Keeping them out of the garden required constant diligence.  By 2010, there were still quite a few deer, but noticeably less; and they were much healthier-looking.

 

I thought Fire island was overrun with Poofs? Do they call each other 'dear'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

I thought Fire island was overrun with Poofs? Do they call each other 'dear'?

Those guys don't breed much.

I'm talking about these guys:

l47lfg1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2017 at 3:39 PM, mikewof said:

But now extend this legalization to other drugs that don't really have a well-defined pathway to safety, drugs that do what they do in large part because they are violently toxic, like bath salts, meth, krokodile, etc.. How are you supposed to regulate drugs like that? Or do you just propose regulating a subset of drugs, but keeping other illegal and unregulated?

This is more a question for the Prohibition thread but the short answer is that the US has exactly ONE drug law that has worked well to reduce abuse and addiction: the Pure Food and Drug Act. People learned what was in drugs and reacted to the information. We can try other things, like prohibition, but that's never worked. Information to consumers and purity standards are the best we can do. I have no problem with those kinds of regulation. The government should not harbor and protect business that are selling impure products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

This is more a question for the Prohibition thread but the short answer is that the US has exactly ONE drug law that has worked well to reduce abuse and addiction: the Pure Food and Drug Act. People learned what was in drugs and reacted to the information. We can try other things, like prohibition, but that's never worked. Information to consumers and purity standards are the best we can do. I have no problem with those kinds of regulation. The government should not harbor and protect business that are selling impure products.

I agree Tom.  The bastards over here are not allowing pill testing, my pingers could be impure.  They are forcing me to consume pills made in biker's kitchens!  It's simply not good enough.  What the fuck is my elected local representative doing for me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, mikewof said:

He's confused. As far as I know it is not illegal to chemically sterilize animals in Oz. It's legal in the U.S. as long as the hormone is life-limited and approved for use.

Godfrey has convinced himself that sterilization means capturing the pigs, transporting them to the vet, doing surgery and rereleasing. That would be insane, they would literally need something like 10,000 full time vets to do the work. It's a hormonal bait additive, it triggers the pigs immune system to attack fertilized eggs or to dislodge the eggs. 

Its illegal to release non native animals into the wild, it's illegal to transport live feral pigs.

Baiting is more expensive than shooting we have done studies on this, we already use shitloads of 1080 baits which kill everything that eats it. 1080 sterilises pigs it kills them within a few days of them eating it. If using baits is the answer as you absurdly claim then why has the millions spent on using 1080 failed in controlling our feral pest problems?

Try educating yourself on the extensive use of poison baits in Australia- https://www.google.com.au/search?q=1080+baiting+australia   https://www.google.com.au/search?q=1080+pigs+australia&oq=1080+pigs+australia

 

I think 1080 should be banned it's killing many native species as well as imported feral pests -

Quote

Wedge-tailed eagles tracked by researcher not afraid to spend time in the treetops

Collisions with aircraft, being hit by cars while feeding on roadkill and eating poisoned carcasses are the leading causes of death.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-11/tracking-the-wedge-tailed-eagles-from-the-treetops/8886346

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

This is more a question for the Prohibition thread but the short answer is that the US has exactly ONE drug law that has worked well to reduce abuse and addiction: the Pure Food and Drug Act. People learned what was in drugs and reacted to the information. We can try other things, like prohibition, but that's never worked. Information to consumers and purity standards are the best we can do. I have no problem with those kinds of regulation. The government should not harbor and protect business that are selling impure products.

Then it sounds like many drugs are still going to be illegal under legalization, because there is no rational way to standardize, regulate or inspect them. The people who consume those drugs might do so legally, but the people who manufacture and distribute them will still be criminals.

Since consumption will be legal, but sales and production will be illegal, it seems there may even be an increase of people of nonviolent offense fed into the prison industry.

Unless I missed something there, Normy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

Its illegal to release non native animals into the wild, it's illegal to transport live feral pigs.

Baiting is more expensive than shooting we have done studies on this, we already use shitloads of 1080 baits which kill everything that eats it. 1080 sterilises pigs it kills them within a few days of them eating it. If using baits is the answer as you absurdly claim then why has the millions spent on using 1080 failed in controlling our feral pest problems?

Try educating yourself on the extensive use of poison baits in Australia- https://www.google.com.au/search?q=1080+baiting+australia   https://www.google.com.au/search?q=1080+pigs+australia&oq=1080+pigs+australia

 

I think 1080 should be banned it's killing many native species as well as imported feral pests -

 

Yes, poisoning them is a problem, it doesn't work either and it gets into the food chain.

And regardless your kill method; shooting, poisoning, shaming them into porcine suicide, it's all subject to that 80% lever.

You guys have about five times more feral pigs than we have with a population of less than 10% of us. Yet you're still arguing that you need more firepower to get in front of that population.

So go ahead, shoot the hell out of the pigs, change your gun laws, shoot the pigs with nuclear-tipped shells for all I care, lotsa luck there. And when you actually want to control the problem, when that magic little mathematical light pops on in your collective heads, you'll sterilize them. (And no, you're not going to "transport" them, you'll either dart, corral, or bait them.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mikewof said:

Yes, poisoning them is a problem, it doesn't work either and it gets into the food chain.

And regardless your kill method; shooting, poisoning, shaming them into porcine suicide, it's all subject to that 80% lever.

You guys have about five times more feral pigs than we have with a population of less than 10% of us. Yet you're still arguing that you need more firepower to get in front of that population.

So go ahead, shoot the hell out of the pigs, change your gun laws, shoot the pigs with nuclear-tipped shells for all I care, lotsa luck there. And when you actually want to control the problem, when that magic little mathematical light pops on in your collective heads, you'll sterilize them. (And no, you're not going to "transport" them, you'll either dart, corral, or bait them.)

If baiting them with 1080 which kills them hasn't worked very well what makes you think baiting with anything else will work, at least 1080 kills them so they cannot do any more damage.

Shooting them with a dart is bullshit you might as well shoot to kill then they don't do any more damage, bullets are cheaper than darts have longer range as well.

If you go back to the first post you might discover it was a politician telling farmers to get semi auto rifles to do their bit to control pigs in their area.

Yes I have been aware for quite some time how many pigs need to be killed to stop numbers increasing, getting paid to shoot them means I can claim firearms,ammo accessories,vehicles etc on tax and gives pretty good job security.Just doing my bit for the environment.

 

 

 

 

 

16299150_489102594546688_1471228676762782598_n.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

The government should not harbor and protect business that are selling impure products.

What about guns, Tom? Why do they rate a different standard?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

Just doing my bit for the environment.

Just promoting guns, every which way. Do you butcher all this meat, MO?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

Just promoting guns, every which way. Do you butcher this meat, MO?

I eat the smaller pigs.

 

The chef Gordon Ramsay will show you how to butcher and cook free range pork, he uses a semi auto rifle is that a deadly assault rifle or more like a hunting rifle?

Quote

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

I eat the smaller pigs.

You leave the larger carcasses, or what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

If baiting them with 1080 which kills them hasn't worked very well what makes you think baiting with anything else will work, at least 1080 kills them so they cannot do any more damage.

Shooting them with a dart is bullshit you might as well shoot to kill then they don't do any more damage, bullets are cheaper than darts have longer range as well.

If you go back to the first post you might discover it was a politician telling farmers to get semi auto rifles to do their bit to control pigs in their area.

Yes I have been aware for quite some time how many pigs need to be killed to stop numbers increasing, getting paid to shoot them means I can claim firearms,ammo accessories,vehicles etc on tax and gives pretty good job security.Just doing my bit for the environment.

 

1. For the nth time ... baiting them with poison doesn't work for the same reason that shooting them doesn't work, because you need to kill 80% of the given population to prevent a population increase.

2. Injecting the hormone with a dart isn't done from a distance, it's done though a corral. The common method is with a feed trap though, designed so that only specific animals of specific size can get their heads into it.

3. Your bit in bold is the nut of truth though, it seems that you don't really want to actually manage your invasive species problem, that's for "tree huggers" like me, right? You want to shoot pigs, and if the pig population continues to grow with your dunderheaded attempts to blast away a solution, then all the better ... more "job security" for you, more fun of blasting the shit out of pigs, maybe even more high powered rifles if your countrymen can see their way clear to it.

I suspect that you like having 25 million feral pigs there, and if you get 35 million of them that you would be even happier with even more job security.

But I lived in Australia long enough to recognize the immense, jaw-dropping beauty of the place. It would make me sad if Australia's natural beauty is eaten away by an unstoppable wall of pigs, cane toads, goats and rabbits. Hopefully, someone a bit more progressive and scientific than the knuckle-draggers plans a functional strategy to manage your invasive species.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Modurn-ate said:

So the glory days of legal cocaine & heroin in the USA, history and protocols, evades you? ( Medicinal & recreational. )

They're still legal here, (at least in heroin preparations) you just need a reason, those are both Schedule 2 drugs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/09/2017 at 2:53 PM, mikewof said:

You would think so, horse logic says so, but did you look at the three year population chart I posted? A single breeding pair can make up to 3.5 million new pigs in three years. The population of fast breeders like pigs, rats, rabbits and mice are not strongly limited by available population, but rather by available food and territory.

NYC had a major rat population problem, and they were unable to poison their way out it for that reason, so they're switching to sterilization hormones from poison.

So even if they killed 75% of the pigs in Australia, about 15 million animals, the population would still increase. It's hard to get our heads around that kind of math. A sterile, angry, territorial animal is a better population control than an empty chunk of land with only a few breeding pigs.

I can see the logic in the argument, but without knowing where the younger and more fertile pigs go and what is done with them it's difficult to see the logical end to the reasoning. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

I eat the smaller pigs.

 

The chef Gordon Ramsay will show you how to butcher and cook free range pork, he uses a semi auto rifle is that a deadly assault rifle or more like a hunting rifle?

 

Which is the scariest, black or camouflage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be curious how much of the drugs and hormones used to control hogs makes it's way into other species and the environment. Human birth control drugs are already polluting and affecting the environment, seems that expanding the use to control wild species would have an even more dramatic affect. I fully understand that it is exceedingly hard to eradicate populations of coyotes and hogs, but it can be done without polluting the environment and that seems like a better idea to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites