Kimber VP will vote against Bush

Status
Not open for further replies.

rick_reno

member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
3,027
http://espn.go.com/outdoors/conservation/news/2004/0312/1757798.html

Sportsmen protest Bush's outdoor policies

By Joan Lowy
Scripps Howard News Service — March 12, 2004

From the slopes of the Rocky Mountains to the primeval forests of Alaska to the prairie potholes of the Dakotas, hunting and fishing enthusiasts are rebelling against President Bush's public lands policies.

The nation's 47 million hunters and anglers tend to be conservative Republicans who voted for Bush in the last election, but many sportsmen say they have been imbued with a new sense of militancy by the administration's sacrifice of some of the best wild lands in America to economic development.

"It seems like no matter which area you look in or what shrub you look under, this administration has waged all-out war on conservation," said Tony Dean, who hosts a popular television and radio show for hunters and anglers in the Midwest.

Dean, who lives in Pierre, S.D., said he is most angered by a policy the administration proposed last fall that would have made it easier for farmers and developers to fill in wetlands. The wetlands of the Dakotas, called prairie potholes, provide some of the most important habitat in North America for migratory ducks and some of the best duck hunting in the world. If there are no wetlands, there are no ducks. If there are no ducks, there is no duck hunting. For hunters like Dean, the conservation issue trumps even gun rights as a top concern.

"I think I own 60 shotguns and rifles. I certainly am a Second Amendment believer," Dean said. "But if there is nothing to hunt, then guns don't mean that much to me."

The administration's efforts to open more public lands on the Eastern front of the Rocky Mountains to oil and gas drilling has driven some sportsmen to do something they never thought they'd do — make common cause with environmentalists. "People who couldn't even bring themselves to say the word Democrat a few years ago are now willing to join arm-in-arm with the Sierra Club to save the Eastern front," said Ryan Busse, 34, vice president of Kimber Mfg. Inc., a high-end gun manufacturer in Kalispell, Mont.

This year's presidential election will probably be "the first time in my life that I will have voted for somebody other than a Republican in a national election," said Busse, who spends over 70 days a year fly fishing or hunting.

Alan Lackey, 43, a former cowboy who is now a car dealer in Raton, N.M., came to Washington recently with a group of Western sportsmen to protest oil and gas drilling provisions in a major energy bill before Congress that is one of Bush's top legislative priorities. "I consider some of these places (where drilling has been proposed) to be heaven on earth," Lackey said.

In Southeast Alaska, the administration's decision to open the Tongass National Forest — one of the last old growth forests on the continent — to logging prompted Greg Petrich, an avid hunter and angler in Juneau, to ask contact gun clubs across the country to sign a protest petition. Nearly 500 gun clubs, from the Slippery Rock Sportsmen's Club of Pennsylvania to the Pinetucky Gun Club of Georgia, signed the petition, including 40 clubs from Bush's home state of Texas. The petition drive proved "that your conservative, rightwing gun owners are really attached to hunting and wild areas and keeping those areas intact for the next generation," said Petrich, a registered Republican with a degree in gunsmithing.

The White House is keenly aware of the problem and has taken steps to address the sportsmen's concerns.

"We've had a long and very constructive partnership with outdoors and recreation groups," said James Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Policy. "The fact that they are coming to us (with their concerns) is something we welcome."

With regard to energy development and logging, the administration is merely administering public lands according to "multiple use" principles set out by Congress that require industry be allowed access to public lands in addition to recreational users, Connaughton said.

The administration is trying to preserve wetlands by providing landowners with financial incentives not to develop their land, Connaughton said.

In November, Interior Secretary Gale Norton met with the leaders of 20 groups who represent hunters and anglers, including Ducks Unlimited, Safari Club International, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership and the Boone and Crockett Club.

The groups told Norton that protecting wetlands and the Eastern front of the Rockies from development are their top priorities.

Three weeks later, some of the leaders who met with Norton were invited to a session with Bush at the White House.

The meeting was ostensibly to thank the groups for supporting Bush's bill to increase logging in national forests to reduce the risk of wildfires, but much of the discussion with the president — which lasted nearly an hour — was about protecting wetlands. Four days later, Bush killed the proposed wetlands rule. Sporting groups said the move was a step forward, but did not resolve the wetlands issue since federal agencies are still operating under guidance issued more than a year ago that allows landowners to fill in isolated wetlands that do not connect to other bodies of water.

Unrest among hunters and anglers could prove critical in some swing states where the presidential race is expected to close, such as Arizona, Florida, New Mexico, Oregon and Pennsylvania, said Jim DiPeso of Republicans for Environmental Protection.

"In a lot of these communities hunting is a way of life, a culture," DiPeso said. "Woe be it to an administration that takes away their hunting places."
 
The nation's 47 million hunters and anglers tend to be conservative Republicans who voted for Bush in the last election, but many sportsmen say they have been imbued with a new sense of militancy by the administration's sacrifice of some of the best wild lands in America to economic development.

I'll take "Contradictory Statements" for $500, Alex. :scrutiny:
 
I think I own 60 shotguns and rifles. I certainly am a Second Amendment believer," Dean said. "But if there is nothing to hunt, then guns don't mean that much to me."

I suspect most of the "80 million gun owners" are like this, unfortunately. :scrutiny:
 
Some of you Kimber owners should write and tell this guy which side his bread is buttered on. How many of you hunt with 1911 pistols? They are a large part of Kimber's business now so this guy ought to be fired for being stupid.
 
Not a very business savvy stance if you ask me. Helping the Democrats will never be in the best interests of anyone that does business with firearms or related accessories.
 
The "welfare class" of gunowners believe that the GOVERNMENT is responsible for providing hunting grounds, and game, management of those resources at someone else's expense. These "welfare class" gun owners need to step up to the plate and buy these lands to prevent development (if it is occurring at all), or shut up.

It is amazing to me how many classical groups of people are being converted to "entitlement" grabbers. The forefathers of these hunters were hardy men traversing wild lands and taking game, not entitlement class people.


Tamara said:
I'll take "Contradictory Statements" for $500, Alex.

:D
 
Typical flabby flannels. Waaaah, someone else pull the wagon, I want to eat Cheetoes and ride in it. Waaaah, pay my way. Waaaah, give me something for nothing.

Couch-sitting scum, the world does not revolve around you. You must pay your own way. I'm sick and f*&^@%g tired of doing your work for you, hunters. I pay thousands upon thousands for you every year and you whine about wanting more. Disgusting.

Mr. Dean, you are a fool and a dangerous moron. The Second Amendment is not about hunting.
 
So, the guy doesn't understand the main thrust of the 2nd Amendment and he doesn't much care for for the 5th Amendment (private property rights).

I'd say we use the First Amendment (the right to write) to tell him how we feel as well as the 1A freedom to dissociate our $$ from his bank account.

Toward that end:

[email protected]

Rick
 
AZ, thanks for that. That felt great.:)

Gimme, gimme, gimme, I want, I want, I. . . . aaaaah!

Bad day to hear for the parasites in the hunting community. Just back from the accountant. What a reaming I will take from the likes of them.

You guys are heavy! Get out of the wagon! The government does not exists to give you things, no one owes you jacks**t!
 
I am getting a little sick and tired of people bashing hunters. I grew up hunting and supporting gun rights. Everyone I know involved in the shooting sports is a hunter and they are all supporters of the 2nd amendment. Just because some 'suit' who hunts won't support Bush you disparage the whole group. Ever heard the word bigot?

I guess I'll try and find a more hunter friendly spot to hang around.
 
Uh, Neal, please go back and look at the quote that MicroBalrog posted. That quote is from Tony Dean, who has a TV and a radio show for Hunters and Anglers. This guy makes his living from people who own guns(Hunters). If he doesn't care about the 2nd beyond hunting, then he's really not the kind of ally we need to stop gun banners. I don't hunt but if people started trying to ban "high powered scoped sniper rifles" (and they will get there eventually after the "assault weapons") I would still be fighting the fight to stop the banning of those guns. Hunting rifles are only part of the 2nd Amendment issue, the Hunters need to open their eyes a little and help the rest of us with this fight. Their pet shotguns and bolt actions will be on the block soon enough. Look at Teddy "The Swimmer" Kennedy trying to ban .30-.30 ammo. John Kerry voted for the AWB renewal! :banghead:



Edited to add quotes qround assault weapons, because there is no such thing.
 
Chill out, Neal...

You're as welcome here as anybody else.

I'm a (handgun) hunter too, and a staunch supporter of your rights. I'm also a cop, so I learned a long time ago that I was probably gonna pi$$ somebody off at least once a day, whether I wanted to or not. I've carried guns all my life and to tell the truth, I'd like nothing better than to just have hunting guns around these days.

But I don't kid myself that hunting alone, is what it's all about.

Frankly I always felt that the best 1911 hugged the original design as close as possible, and the Kimber never appealed to me anyhow. But even if they made a gun I wanted to buy, they could suck eggs for dinner because they wouldn't get any of my money after reading this.

Sounds like somebody needs to call S&W, and ask them just what the "cold shoulder" of the American shooting public feels like...
 
I am getting a little sick and tired of people bashing hunters...

Its not all hunters that are being bashed here. I'd be willing to bet you that 90%+ of those "bashing hunters" here are hunters themselves.

There is clearly a subset of hunters out there who believe the 2nd amendment is only about hunting and won't stand with other non-hunting gun owners when it comes to defending our liberties against the antis. I believe Mr. Busse sounds like one of them.

Thing is he's aligning himself with people who after they take my AR15 are going to come for his bolt action, wood stocked .308 (or at least create a situation where there are plenty of game for him to hunt but hunting is illegal).

I also don't believe that Mr. Bush has done anything to harm the environment.
 
I have No Problem with hunters.

I grew up among them, and ate game at their tables, and I've gone out of my way to back them up.

Quite a few of them understand what the second amendment is really about, and I naturally don't aim my derision at THEM. They know who they are, and they know who is being derided.

A great heaping number of them don't have a clue what the 2nd amendment is for.

If we got from them the same level of support they get from us, you'd never hear of a peep from me on this topic.

But as long as I keep hearing "No one needs a military pattern rifle", as long as I keep hearing "2nd Amendment = trivial right to amuse myself with sport shooting", as long as I keep hearing "The AWB does not interfere with my right to own a shotgun or rifle for hunting", and as long as I keep hearing "no honest man needs a gun smaller than a canned ham",

I'm gonna call em the way I see em.

Whether they admit it or not, every one of them knows their duck gun is safe as long as I've got my evil mil patterns locked up in my closet.

Every one of them knows, whether they admit it or not, that they have to go through guys like ME, before they can get to THEM.

And nary a word of thanks is to be heard.
 
I am a hunter for a few days out of the year. I am a Second Amendment supporter every day of the year.

I have been known to trash other hunters when they give they act like 2A is a right to sporting games, because it just ain't true. In fact, Congress could, from what I see, make hunting illegal tomorrow, and there isn't anything I'm aware of which would stop that law from going into effect. There have been days when I hoped they would try it just to hear the many fools finally understand that hunting has never been a right.

Maybe then it would dawn on their dim bulb that we need to be together for all in order to safeguard the rights of the few.

Some of these goobers might have the right to keep and bear arms, but they sure don't practice safe weapons handling, and with a few of them, I'd like to wrap their Perazzi around their necks tightly:cuss:

If you are going to exersize the right, exersize the responsibility too, please!
 
I'm a hunter, but if you were on the Mendocino National Forest on the first day of deer season, you'd have a hard time not bashing at least some hunters yourselves.

The forefathers of these hunters were hardy men traversing wild lands and taking game, not entitlement class people.
There aren't any more of those "hardy men" because there aren't any more open wild lands. Settlement, population growth and modern life happened. I daresay there wouldn't be any wild lands worthy of the name if the public lands hadn't been set aside.

I more or less agree with Busse's comments, but not just because of hunting. Life and viability of the natural world trumps any other issue in my book.
 
Same old debate between hunters and shooters.

Hunters cry no need for an AR to hunt or if I can't hunt, no need for guns.

Shooters cry no entitlements for public land, management and conservation, a gun is for protection from the evil forces of the world.

Kimber has become a target here also. Most people have bashed Kimber because they can't afford a Kimber. Period.

Nowhere did the article say this guy was a Kimber spokesman speaking for company policy. He was one worker.

You guys out there with supervisory positions, you gonna fire your workers because they have a different opinion than you?

There seems to be enough crying on both sides.

We will destroy ourselves from within, if not already.
 
An e.mail re: my new Kimber

Dear Sirs,
I just bought a Kimber Pro Eclipse from your company and now I might be sorry I did. After reading an article entitled, "Sportsmen protest Bush's outdoor policies", from Scripps Howard News Service, dated March 12, 2004. I find your VP Ryan Busse stance on hunting and the Second Amendment a bit disconcerting. You do a brisk business in 1911 style pistols.. can't say they are of much use for hunting. Of what use then, are they? Is this is your corporate stance, and is this your sentiment?
"The administration's efforts to open more public lands on the Eastern front of the Rocky Mountains to oil and gas drilling has driven some sportsmen to do something they never thought they'd do — make common cause with environmentalists. "People who couldn't even bring themselves to say the word Democrat a few years ago are now willing to join arm-in-arm with the Sierra Club to save the Eastern front," said Ryan Busse, 34, vice president of Kimber Mfg. Inc., a high-end gun manufacturer in Kalispell, Mont."
If I'd have known this before purchasing my Eclipse, I would not have. I would have bought from a company that understands it's customer base. By actively working against its your own vested business interests this VP will most certainly cost you business.
I'd say this is a customer relations nightmare for you when word gets around. I would appreciate hearing your stance on this issue, as I may - no - will certainly purchase more 1911 style pistols in the future and I'd like to buy from a company that understands the issue that is so clearly stated in the Second Amendment.
Now maybe I'm just a little quick on the trigger here and maybe this is just some news piece to stir up trouble, so lets hear it, set me straight on this.
Sincerely,
XXXXXXX
____________
I will let you all know of their reply.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top