Any lawyers here?

[jtg1]

I am new to this site and want to say it is absolutley a great one. Thank you graybeard.  I don't know about the rest of you, but I am really getting tired of alway's being on the defencive when it comes to hunting, trapping and gun rights. I talked to a lady at the NRA about 6 months ago and asked her about going on the offencive for once. She practicly choked on the phone, telling me it's better to keep a low profile. You cannot tell me in this day and age where a fat guy can sue McDonalds for being fat or firestone can be sued because people drove too fast on underinflated tires that there is no way one can sue these anti gun,hunting or trapping idiots for blatently lying and the misinformation that they sue over all the time. Cant that be considerd pergury. As sportsman, we have more ammo to fight these groups with and yet it is keeped quite for the most part. I have never seen a billboard stating that Hunters for the hungry have donated hundreds of thousands of pounds of meat to food pantrys and soup kitchens. Antis donation =0. How many tens of thousand of acres of land has sportsmans groups bought and then given to the government for wildlife at 0 cost to the taxpayer. Amount of land donated by the animal rights people for wildlife, 0. The list goes on and on and on.  How far down the list of deaths is firearms. How many lives are potentially saved because of armed citizens. And yet with all that and more we are always on the defencive. I just dont get it. Can the antis not be held responsible for the misinformation. the anti crowd stopped trapping in Washington wich is now costing taxpayers millions in the damages to property, simply because they they blatently lied to the people. I just think it's time we as sportsman went on the offencive. there has to be a way. Any lawyers out here want to chime in and give me your thoughts.

[JeffG]

I'll vote yes here with one condition...it is done in the courts, and with changes or additions to state and federal law.  Any other method in my viewpoint will lead to personal, one-on-one violence because of tempers flaring up.  If we start putting legislators on the spot to either support us or get removed, I think they will see it our way.  I'm sick of being painted by the antis, as a whacko or blood thirsty weirdo because I hunt.  You want weird, ask an anti how they really feel about some things...sheesh!

[jtg1]

JeffG; You bet, it has to be done in the courts, not on the street. No group should be able to lie to the people to get there way. they did it in Washington state when they had that ballot inishitive 713 on the table. They paraded a 3 legged dog around saying "see. this is what foot hold traps do to your pets". they won and got trapping outlawed. Well as it turns out the dog actually lost his leg to a lawn mower. Now residents are wanting the state to pay for damages done by an exploding furbearer population. I think peta and hsus should be held responsible for the damage not the state. If they dont like it then maybe they should tell the truth and let people decide on facts. Thats why I am asking if there are any lawyers here that can put in there 2 cents on whether they can be sued when they blatenly lie. It should not cost the tax payers to fix a problem that would not exist if flat out lies where not told.

[rwng]

This will be very difficult to do because the Liberal/antis run the media. How can a good message get out to the people when it has to go thru them? The only time I see pro hunters etc. on tv they portray the typical stereotypical painting that the anti's want. It's maddening but I hope something can be done.