Hunting – Page 5 – Shall Not Be Questioned

The Gun Culture Has Changed, Professor Messner

I love me a good tale about gun owners and their psychology, especially those tales which are woven by lofty academics who pretty clearly haven’t been outside of the Ivory Tower for a while. Over at the HuffPo, there’s no clearer example of some of the nonsense of this type. I invite you, dear readers, to go look atÂ part oneÂ andÂ part two, of the HuffPo interview with Professor Michael Messner, author of King of the Wild Suburb: A Memoir of Fathers, Sons and Guns. Let me share with you some excerpts from the interview, and discuss why I think his thinking is antiquated, and most decidedly out of touch with the gun culture of today:

You write movingly that “those hunting trips with Dad and Gramps were actually about fathers and sons finding a way to love each other. These outings were not so much about hunting for deer: they were about hunting for each other.” You have two sons who are now young adults. Because you gave up hunting before they were born, you never had that as a catalyst to connect with them. Is that a continuing source of sadness? Did you find other less violent ways to bond with them that will stick with them throughout their lives, as your experiences hunting with your father and grandfather have stayed with you?

What exactly is flawed about men bonding through activity? Men and women are somewhat different, I think, in how they form friendships. Men tend to bond with each other more through activity, and I think this is not really different for father and sons. He speaks of this type of bonding as if it were a bad thing, but that strikes me as rather narrow minded.

Part of the tension–and this is really only possible to see in retrospect–is that this 1950s identification with Davy Crockett was very much a pre-civil rights era celebration of white masculinity, and the violent subjugation of the continent from Native peoples, and eventually of the Southwest from Mexico. Still today, in a good deal of popular culture as well as in political debates about gun violence, we tend to think of white guys with guns as protectors and heroes, while reacting with fear to images of black or brown men with guns.

The Professor is making connections that I think only exist in his mind. You can embrace masculinity without racism or sexism. Because some of the people who embraced masculinity in the past, also happened to be racist and sexist, does not mean the two need to be forever connected. This strikes me as incredibly weak thinking for an academic. It also just amazes me we can’t have a discussion about gun ownership with people on the left without bringing up the whole “scared of brown people” motivation for gun ownership.

Well, I guess I’d be surprised to hear that sort of politicized passion about something like hunting coming from a young guy today. However I am happy to see so many young men today — including my sons Sasha and Miles — for whom ideas like equality with women, gay and lesbian people are taken for granted.

Professor Messner is a man living in the past. He’s had his thinking tainted by the left-wing baby boomer culture that focuses heavily on gender, and rejects a flawed conception of masculinity that is entirely of their own making. Would it surprise Messner that “equality with women, gay and lesbian people are taken for granted,” even among many gun owners and hunters today? Would it be such a shock to discover we’ve changed along with the rest of society?

Women are now the fastest growing demographic of gun owners. Most of us have not only been tolerant of this trend, but outright embraced the ideas of women being involved in our sports. Younger men want to share their hobbies with their wives. And why not hunting and shooting as a hobby for a couple to share? Many of us have also either been completely tolerant of gay gun rights groups, or have outright embraced their coming to our cause. I also think I’ve been a vocal advocate for legalizing gay marriage. Does it mean anything that I can announce this on a blog about gun rights without worrying about losing readers?

Get out of the past Professor Messner. We’ve come a long long way since the gun culture of your father and grandfather. The hunting and shooting culture has changed into something more tolerant and inclusive. I would invite Professor Messner to step out of the Ivory Tower of academia for a bit, an attend something like an Steel Challenge or USPSA national competition, and then talk to some of the women shooters about how they view their relationship with firearms, hunting, and shooting through the lens of their gender. Sure, you’ll give them a little chuckle about such a blast-from-the-past question, but some of their answers might just surprise you.

Want to Make Something More Popular?

Ban it. Apparently across the pond fox hunting is more popular than ever:

Yet a bigger factor appears to be that exquisitely delinquent streak in the British character that reacts against the hectoring and bossiness of officialdom. As a result, thousands of people who previously had little obvious interest in hunting have taken it up.

â€œOur membership has doubled to around 1,000 since the law was passed,â€ says Sam Butler, the Warwickshireâ€™s ebullient Master. â€œThe support we are getting from the communities is incredible.

That certainly pleases me to hear there is at least some willingness to resist intrusions into country life over there. We had a similar experience over on this side of the Atlantic with the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. The “banned” weapons had a great increase in popularity both during the ban, and after it expired. The AR-15 was not as widely owned when they were banned in 1994. Shooters generally preferred the M1A, M1 Garand, or M1 carbines. Despite the fact that all of these firearms are military arms, or of a military pattern, they were popular, and so most states excepted them from their bans. They were also exempted from the federal ban. The AR-15 was not, and was, in fact, targeted by state and federal bans by name. Seventeen years later, and seven years after the expiration of the ban, the AR-15 is far more popular than any of the exempted firearms.

The ban had the unintended effect of piquing interesting in the banned rifles among shooters, and many competitors found the AR-15 more accurate and better suited for shooting matches. Collectors also developed interest. Americans, I believe, also possess the same “character that reacts against the hectoring and bossiness of officialdom,” as their British cousins.

My first rifle was an AK-47 patterned Romanian SAR1, which was not covered by the ban. I bought it specifically to make a statement. I didn’t really get into shooting in any serious way until later. In fact, it was the Assault Weapons Ban movement that made me start paying attention to the right to keep and bear arms, and developed my concern that the Second Amendment was in serious danger. I think there’s a whole generation of shooters who became concerned about their rights specifically through the 1994 ban.

I could make a good argument, in hindsight, that lobbying for, and eventually passing that ban, was the biggest strategic mistake the other side made. It was a bridge too far.Â It’s refreshing to see the fox hunting ban in the UK may be having the same kind of effect, especially since much of it is being driven by the political dominance of urban dwellers in the UK, who know nothing of the English and Welsh countryside, but who want to regulate life there heavily nonetheless, their traditions and pastimes be damned. That can have unintended consequences, and as our opponents on the “assault weapons” issue here would probably be willing to admit in their weaker moments, that doesn’t always work out in their favor over the long run.

The Sunday Hunting Controversy

The Reading Eagle has pretty good coverage of the debate. NRA notes that aÂ hearing is being held this Thursday, and is asking folks to contact their legislators. The main groupÂ lining up in opposition are the Farm Bureau. Despite the claim that farmers are opposed to this,Â there’s evidence that’s not as universally true as the Farm Bureau would have you believe. The reason for this bill is that hunting has been in decline in Pennsylvania for some time,Â with young people citing lack of free time, and older people citing lack of game.

I think it’s important to pass this because the number of hunters in the state can be viewed as a proxy for how much support the entire shooting community can command if politicians start thinking about displeasing us, so a decline in hunting can hurt people who are just shooters, and interested in the right to bear arms. There isn’t quite so easy a proxy for shooters, except for LTCs, which as of yet do not approach the number of hunting licenses issued in the state.

PETA Strikes Again

Apparently they consider it a travesty that Prince William is a bird hunter, and are begging Kate Middleton to put a stop to it. If I were Kate, that would mean I have a very public dinner of pheasant.

As one might expect, the PETA nut cases are once again mischaracterizing the nature of bird hunting, and operating under the delusion that humans were never meant to be predators.

Sunday Hunting Hearing

There are hearings being held around on the state on what appears to be NRA’s next legislative priorityÂ in Pennsylvania. There is little doubt that animal rights extremist groups, like HSUS, are going to oppose this move. But the biggest opposition that will be faced, from what I’ve seen, is from farmers and other hunters.

I don’t think hunting can be saved. I don’t think this because it’s impossible, but because hunters don’t seem to have the “no one gets thrown off the lifeboat” attitude that’s become prevalent among gun rights activists. Divide and conquer is an easy strategy with that community, and it’s certainly one that will be relentlessly exploited by the opponents of hunting until it is no more.

Unfortunately for those of us in the shooting community, hunters are still people of the gun, and once they are gone, we will have to hope not to be eaten last.

We’re Winning

Colleges in Pennsylvania are offering shooting lessons as part of the curriculum. Right now it’s only curriculum for wildlife biology students, but it’s a start:

“With this class, if one of these students becomes a pheasant biologist, for example, they know what the hunting end is all about. If someone asks them, ‘Have you even fired a shotgun before?’ they can actually say yes.”

I just like seeing colleges presenting the topic in a manner that doesn’t involve fanning the flames of hysteria.

A Quick Survey on Blue Laws

Specifically, the poll tackles Sunday hunting. Richard, this is your chance to voice your opinion.

NRA just posted a survey of their followers on Facebook asking about the repeal of Sunday hunting bans in Pennsylvania and Virginia. In 4 minutes, the results are pretty overwhelming. So, if you are an NRA member and have an opinion, go share it with them.

So now you can’t say that NRA isn’t listening to you, Sunday ban advocates. It’s your chance to cast your vote alongside your fellow NRA members.

Our Voices & Votes Don’t Count

At least, that’s what the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau seems to be arguing.

Okay, I get that not everyone is on board with Sunday hunting, particularly religious farmers. I don’t agree with them, and I’m going to do what I can to open up hunting. But I’m not going to say that they are any less a part of the discussion or shouldn’t be considered in the debate. However, that’s what their spokesman is saying about those of us who support it. See, we’re just a bunch of “interests outside Pennsylvania.” To back it up, he cites NRA which has about 400,000 members who live here – many of whom do support allowing us the option to hunt on Sunday. Another evil outside group? NSSF with more than 500 Pennsylvania business owners here who serve hundreds of thousands of hunters & gun owners.

Honestly, shame on the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau for reducing themselves to this level of “us vs. them” attacks. We are Pennsylvania citizens. We have a voice and a vote, too. We pay the taxes that fund the subsidies many of your members benefit from – hello Farm Bill. Just because we don’t agree doesn’t mean that we’re somehow “less Pennsylvanian” than farmers.

Sunday Hunting in PA

Apparently farmers are the main people opposing this:

Apart from the religious justification for the ban, Farm Bureau members also claim they want one day free of hunters traipsing across their property.

Hikers and bird-watchers join the farmers, saying they want one day a week of bullet-free passage through Pennâ€™s Woods. And some sportsmen also support the ban, saying the wild critters they stalk need a day of rest as well.

Do the wild critters get a day of rest from bears, bobcats, or cougars? Sunday hunting, I think, is an important move to help reverse a declining sport, or at least to slow the decline. It’s amazing to me what a tough debate this has been. I can’t think of any state that’s passed Sunday hunting where it wasn’t a fight, and not with HSUS, but other hunters and people from rural areas where hunting is generally well supported.

Getting Rid of the Sunday Hunting Ban

Alerts from NRA and NSSF this week announced a public meeting of the Pennsylvania House Game and Fisheries Committee tomorrow to tackle the topic of ending the the blue law that bans Sunday hunting dating back to the 1870s.

The Sunday Hunting Coalition points out that Pennsylvania would see a significant economic boost from expanding the number of days hunters are allowed to take to the fields and woods.

The estimated impacts from a lift on the ban on Sunday hunting are based on responses to surveys of hunters in Pennsylvania and North Carolina. In these two states, government agencies conducted extensive surveys of hunters in which they were asked to report the number of additional days they would participate in hunting if the Sunday hunting ban were to be lifted. Based on these responses, it is estimated that hunters will participate in, on average, about 22 percent of the additional days made available to them from the lifting of the ban. In other words, if the lifting of restrictions increased the number of hunting days by 10, the average hunter would increase their hunting days by about two.

Specifically, Pennsylvania would likely see a direct economic impact that could create more than 4,400 jobs with wages topping $99 million. Of all the states with Sunday hunting bans or heavy restrictions, Pennsylvania stands to gain the most jobs and economic impact of a repeal of the prohibition.

So, you know, lawmakers who are so desperate for more money and want to be seen as “creating” jobs, this is your chance. Seriously, $99 million more in wages to tax and 4,400 new jobs. That’s just the direct impact, the indirect impact gives us even more jobs and higher wages.

(Similar post with a little more data & background over at PAGunRights.com.)