# Kudos to Lancaster Archery for boycotting the Harrisburg Sportsman Show



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

The list is long - I wonder if they will pull the plug on the whole show. 

Matt


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

Finally, there is a backbone in this country standing up against this madness! We The People are not the villains but are under constant assault from the lunatic Left! Nuff Said!


----------



## woodpecker1 (Sep 6, 2012)

i own many muzzleloaders rifles and pistols and i hope that black powder dont become an issue.o who knows maybe next ill be carbon arrows are to sleek and deadly with folding blade arrow heads. ted nugent for president!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

I think boycotting this show is silly. Just because you can't have assault rifles and large capacity magazines does not mean you are infringed on your rights to have weapons. You can still have weapons, you can still hunt, you can still do everything you could do before, except you have to re-load more often. What's wrong with that?

yes I know I'm going to get lots of flack from the Americans on this, but that's just how I feel.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Lazagna said:


> I think boycotting this show is silly. Just because you can't have assault rifles and large capacity magazines does not mean you are infringed on your rights to have weapons. You can still have weapons, you can still hunt, you can still do everything you could do before, except you have to re-load more often. What's wrong with that?
> 
> yes I know I'm going to get lots of flack from the Americans on this, but that's just how I feel.


Obviously, many of us disagree with you. What's wrong with reloading more often? Why don't you tell me what's right with it?

The second amendment wasn't put there so we could hunt. It was put there because it was never intended that the government hold so much power over us by maintaining a super powerful standing military. It was intended that WE be the nations primary defense...because you can NOT trust the King.

When the King has so much power, you are NOT a self governing citizen. You are a peasant subject.

BTW, an AR15 is not an assault rifle...except that the legislature changes the definitions in whatever way pleases them.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

woodpecker1 said:


> i own many muzzleloaders rifles and pistols and i hope that black powder dont become an issue.o who knows maybe next ill be carbon arrows are to sleek and deadly with folding blade arrow heads. ted nugent for president!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I could vote for Nugent...well he'd be better than anybody we've had since the turn of the 20th century anyway.

Hey look at some other countries where they have strict regulation on things like knives...oh and no bow hunting.


----------



## ArcherFletch (Jul 8, 2012)

doesn't this belong in the Political / Religious / Whatever forum, Trad archery I thought was the one mature board on this ArcheryTalk website where we can actually talk about, you know, archery.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

ArcherFletch said:


> doesn't this belong in the Political / Religious / Whatever forum, Trad archery I thought was the one mature board on this ArcheryTalk website where we can actually talk about, you know, archery.


Probably.


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

MGF said:


> Obviously, many of us disagree with you. What's wrong with reloading more often? Why don't you tell me what's right with it?
> 
> The second amendment wasn't put there so we could hunt. It was put there because it was never intended that the government hold so much power over us by maintaining a super powerful standing military. It was intended that WE be the nations primary defense...because you can NOT trust the King.
> 
> ...


Notwithstanding the definitions of what is or isn't an assult rifle, I know times have changed, and citizens don't need large capacity clips to defend their rights, so deal with the times, they have changed. At the time the rights were written, times had changed where it was then needed to have this right. Times have chagned again and it's not needed anymore.


----------



## mcharles (Nov 11, 2009)

Lazagna said:


> I think boycotting this show is silly. Just because you can't have assault rifles and large capacity magazines does not mean you are infringed on your rights to have weapons. You can still have weapons, you can still hunt, you can still do everything you could do before, except you have to re-load more often. What's wrong with that?
> 
> yes _*I know I'm going to get lots of flack from the Americans on this*_, but that's just how I feel.


Thanks for your input on this, but you should identify yourself as a Canadian & also fill out your profile.


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

the list continues to grow:

Archery-relateorganizations/people withdrawing:

Lancaster Archery
Kinsey's Archery
Gene and Barry Wensel and Mike Mitten(Brothers of the Bow)
Fred and Michelle Eichler
Michael Waddell
Lee and Tiffany Lakosky
Ralph and Vicki Ciancerullo(sp)
J&M Traditions(Jim and Marcia Rebuck)
IBO
Bear Archery
Hoyt Archery
Bowhunting.com
Jay Gregory
Bowhunter Planet
Easton Bowhunting
Major League BAseball Bowhunting



Other companies:

Cabelas(a main sponsor of the show)
Keystone Country Store
Trop Sporting Goods
The Sportsman Shop
Jim Shockey
Primos Calls
Outdoor Network
Camo Addiction
Deer and Deer Hunting
Hunter Specialties
Stan Potts
Larry Weishuhn


Perhaps some are correct as to where this should be...but I have seen more varied topics that stretched to reach the traditional archery theme...I have attended this show for over 20 years..but will not attend...many people are heading to Cabelas and other local companies that backed out, many of which are within an hour of the show.

It is to be noted that most, if not all of these businesses/speakers, will lose most if not all of their booth space money....for those of you who do not know, or ahve never been there..it goes by squared ft..and I believe last I heard the smallest space...10x10, is $3,000 for the ten days.....when I worked for LAS, we took up and paid for a whole aisle in the archery area....about 10-15 booth sizes...so these organizations are making a sacrifice, not to mention lost sales to a show that would average over 500,000 visitors......

Gene and Barry were also giving seminars, and are working around getting a breach of contract the show organizers may level at them.


I live 45 minutes away, but I will take the 45 minute drive to Cabelas instead....many of us are meeting there.....


Lee Vivian


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

mcharles said:


> Thanks for your input on this, but you should identify yourself as a Canadian & also fill out your profile.


Very true, I am a Canadian and I will update my profile.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Definitely a PRM topic.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

mcharles said:


> Thanks for your input on this, but you should identify yourself as a Canadian & also fill out your profile.


No, I don't think he needs to do that. His opinions are just as valid as any Americans. This isn't an election, it is a forum of ideas and discussion, so citizenship doesn't matter, IMO. Again, this thread needs to be moved to the PRM.


----------



## WillAdams (Jun 6, 2009)

<delete political commentary>

Thanks! I'm going to make a point of driving to at least one of the businesses in question and making as large a purchase as I can manage that weekend.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

ArcherFletch said:


> doesn't this belong in the Political / Religious / Whatever forum, Trad archery I thought was the one mature board on this ArcheryTalk website where we can actually talk about, you know, archery.


OK that made me blow coffee - How bad are the other forums???

Matt


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

there is no PRM forum...perhaps on the legislation/rights forum, but this is a post originally complementing an archery company which is an active company in the Traditional Archery arena, who has made a stand for something, and was being congradulated for it., no different in my mind than the threads thanking and lauding companies for excellent service, making a great product, etc...and others have stated there were others.....and I provided the list.....I have seen topics more off the traditional archery mark in this forum than that....

If the MODERATOR makes that decision...so be it.....


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Matt_Potter said:


> OK that made me blow coffee - How bad are the other forums???
> 
> Matt


I dunno, I try to stay out of Gen Pop on AT. :embara:


----------



## Wayko (Dec 22, 2011)

Lazagna said:


> Notwithstanding the definitions of what is or isn't an assult rifle, I know times have changed, and citizens don't need large capacity clips to defend their rights, so deal with the times, they have changed. At the time the rights were written, times had changed where it was then needed to have this right. Times have chagned again and it's not needed anymore.



Just wondering what has changed. Man has been killing man although history, just like today, gun's are just one of many tools used, (remove one tool, it will still go on) history shows it's human nature, the world is no safer today then it was years ago, AR's function the same as any semi-auto, they look different, when we start banning guns on how they look, where does it stop, & who get's to decide?


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

fotoguy said:


> there is no PRM forum.


Yes, there is a PRM forum.

It's the short hand for the Political, Military and Religious threads forum:

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=68

It is where threads like this belong to keep contentious topics (other than instinctive aiming threads) from trashing the place with heated arguments and bad feelings. This is certainly a potentially contentious topic.


----------



## mrjeffro (Jul 25, 2007)

I had a great talk with John Wert at last years show. I got to drool over the new Titan riser that wasn't released yet. Looks like this year it won't be worth the 3 hour drive.


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Matt_Potter said:


> OK that made me blow coffee - How bad are the other forums???
> 
> Matt


Wow, Matt...my coffee cup was luckily empty when I read that! I'm just waiting to see how long it takes this thread to turn into an "instinctive vs gap" argument.....this thread is probably one of the most mature themed threads started in quite a while....and there are a bunch of traditional companies and people involved in this matter....


Lee


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Warbow said:


> Yes, there is a PRM forum.
> 
> It's the short hand for the Political, Military and Religious threads forum:
> 
> ...


I must be naive, but just about every thread I read on this forum turns into a contentious thread....and the excuse is usually that discussion with different opinions is healthy and good for the sport.....

Like stated, if the MODERATOR decides..so be it.....if folks in the Trad. forum would rather discuss/argue the instinctive vs gap, the glove vs tab, the what's the fastest topics ad nauseum, rather than issues of today in the real world that exists away from the keyboard, then go for it..........


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Lazagna said:


> Notwithstanding the definitions of what is or isn't an assult rifle, I know times have changed, and citizens don't need large capacity clips to defend their rights, so deal with the times, they have changed. At the time the rights were written, times had changed where it was then needed to have this right. Times have chagned again and it's not needed anymore.


No. It's needed now more than ever. Old King George had nothing on the bunch that are running things now.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

fotoguy said:


> I must be naive, but just about every thread I read on this forum turns into a contentious thread....and the excuse is usually that discussion with different opinions is healthy and good for the sport.....
> 
> Like stated, if the MODERATOR decides..so be it.....if folks in the Trad. forum would rather discuss/argue the instinctive vs gap, the glove vs tab, the what's the fastest topics ad nauseum, rather than issues of today in the real world that exists away from the keyboard, then go for it..........


You what, it doesn't take a "MODERATOR" for people to do the right thing...just like it doesn't take a cop for people to put trash in trash bins. This thread isn't a trad archery issue, it is about guns and politics, and there is a forum here for that.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

fotoguy said:


> the list continues to grow:
> 
> Archery-relateorganizations/people withdrawing:
> 
> ...


Just a fun side note, I bought my first bow from Ralph many years ago when he had an archery shop in Chicago.


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Warbow said:


> You what, it doesn't take a "MODERATOR" for people to do the right thing...just like it doesn't take a cop for people to put trash in trash bins. This thread isn't a trad archery issue, it is about guns and politics, and there is a forum here for that.


yes, but on this site, it DOES take a moderator to make the decision and MOVE the thread.......and I don't believe you or I are moderators....if you don't like the topic, as I have been told many times...don't open and read the thread....until it is deleted or moved by MODERATORS....you do have the right NOT to read it...as I have the right not to read inane threads that are started here.....


----------



## bigtone1411 (Nov 3, 2011)

I believe the thread belongs here. All sportsman need to be united. Our numbers are only large enough to matter if we are all united. The same group that wants to take AR's and magazines hate all guns. They also hate bowhunters. They think it is cruel to stick Bambi with a sharp stick. Those same people also think it is wrong for humans to drive into the wilderness. Believe me, I know. They have closed many 4 x 4 trails here and unpaved roads. They hate fishing too. They think it is cruel. I personally don't care for black guns. I will probably never own one. But i know from years of watching the government, that they will not stop there. New York just passed a seven round magazine law. Here in CA it has been ten. I have heard some politicians elude to 3 rounds as the proposed limit. What are the gun manufacturers to do? Make a different mag for each jurisdiction. There are already tons of great handguns that you can't get in California, because the manufactures won't pay the extortion to get on the safe gun list.

I just don't see archery being to far behind on this madness. Will they limit draw weight? You don't need a 50 pound bow to kill deer. Didn't you know, mechanical broad heads are evil. Bows shouldn't be black or camo, they need to be wood.

Congratulations to those big companies that took a stand. It's about time American companies grow a pair. Thats how you truly vote in this country. With your dollar. Look at all the pressure Wal-Mart is under. There are many locations they don't sell firearms or ammo because of local pressure. If things keep the way they are going, it will be very hard to buy ammo locally. Without ammo, all firearms are useless. When that is accomplished, I guarantee, hunting, bows, black powder,ect. will be next. Thats why this topic belongs here. Thanks for listening to my rant.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

I'm not sure I think the protest is valid and I do think that by the time the dust settles on this gun control argument that both sides will have to compromise a bit, but I admire the people and companies for having balls enough to stand behind their principles.


----------



## zdogk9 (Dec 6, 2011)

Lazagna said:


> Notwithstanding the definitions of what is or isn't an assult rifle, I know times have changed, and citizens don't need large capacity clips to defend their rights, so deal with the times, they have changed. At the time the rights were written, times had changed where it was then needed to have this right. Times have chagned again and it's not needed anymore.


The Second Amendment was added to insure that the citizens would have arms equal to the best infantry of the day. Not only to serve in case of attack by a foreign power, but to serve as a check against an over reaching government.


----------



## Double S (Mar 30, 2008)

I agree too. A big thank you to LAS and all the other Bow / Gun manufacturers and retailers that are standing together as one. The list of folks backing out is getting really long. Alot of these companies will be taking a big hit...From what I read on Facebook is that most already paid ahead of time and they might not be able to get refunds. This Thread stays. 



JParanee said:


> Big props to Lancaster Archery for pulling out of the Harrisburg/Eastern Sportsman Show after it was announced that there would be no assult rifles or high capacity magazines welcome. Along with almost 50 others including Cabelas they have made a stand
> 
> I urge anyone that was planning on attending to rethink there trip till the organizers rethink there poor judgement
> 
> Thx for looking


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

bigtone1411 said:


> I believe the thread belongs here. All sportsman need to be united.


All sportsmen? There is no "all sportsmen" in this. It is a politics and gun issue, not an "all sportsmen" issue. What has this to do with fly fishing or back packing or golf or football or track or horseracing? Nothing. This definitely belongs in PRM--which is still a part of AT, so it is still about what your fellow *archer* think about it. It just isn't a thread specific to traditional archery.


----------



## MrSinister (Jan 23, 2003)

MGF said:


> Obviously, many of us disagree with you. What's wrong with reloading more often? Why don't you tell me what's right with it?
> 
> The second amendment wasn't put there so we could hunt. It was put there because it was never intended that the government hold so much power over us by maintaining a super powerful standing military. It was intended that WE be the nations primary defense...because you can NOT trust the King.
> 
> ...


With what you say which is the exact intent of the 2'nd amendment how can any one claim to stand up for it? How is it at all relevant? If the government today decided to crush any level of uprising of the people that is what would happen plain and simple. By your own definition the amendment isn't of much value in our world today. To me it is most definitely not worth the lives it costs our country.


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

MrSinister said:


> With what you say which is the exact intent of the 2'nd amendment how can any one claim to stand up for it? How is it at all relevant? If the government today decided to crush any level of uprising of the people that is what would happen plain and simple. By your own definition the amendment isn't of much value in our world today. To me it is most definitely not worth the lives it costs our country.


This is what I am trying to say. But it does not have to be removed, just modified. You can still hunt with only three bullets, you don't need 50. I'm not saying get rid of guns, just put some limits on it.


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Warbow said:


> All sportsmen? There is no "all sportsmen" in this. It is a politics and gun issue, not an "all sportsmen" issue. What has this to do with fly fishing or back packing or golf or football or track or horseracing? Nothing. This definitely belongs in PRM--which is still a part of AT, so it is still about what your fellow *archer* think about it. It just isn't a thread specific to traditional archery.


I think you have been living in liberal California too long, or are drinking the Kool-Aid that it won't happen to archery....while many times I do not subscribe to the big tent theory...this is one time I think all forms of hunting/shooting sports unite. The slippery slope has started:

Assault rifles with high capacity clips are for mass killings...get rid of them!

Next....

Most murders in big cities/suburbs are with handguns...better get rid of them next

High powered hunting rifles with scopes are weapons used by snipers and people to assassinate political figures....out they go.....

Look at that poor cat/duck/etc with an arrow in its head(which just happened, by the way)...archery and bowhunting is cruel and dangerous.......now what????

THAT is why it belongs here.....we all hang together or we will all hang separately...wish I had thought of that quote as my own....

Heck, I don't own an assault rifle, probably never will....I don't even use my shotgun to hunt anymore...but I am not naive or ignorant enough to think it will never get to bowhunting......


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Double S said:


> I agree too. A big thank you to LAS and all the other Bow / Gun manufacturers and retailers that are standing together as one. The list of folks backing out is getting really long. Alot of these companies will be taking a big hit...From what I read on Facebook is that most already paid ahead of time and they might not be able to get refunds. This Thread stays.


Thank you for your decision!


----------



## MrSinister (Jan 23, 2003)

I am not sure why the debate is even brought up. Our nation is split evenly enough on the issue that there is no way that anything significant would ever be done. Any changes would be token political policy changes that won't change a single outcome in themselves. Add that to the fear driven sales that the discussions have fueled and in the end there are more weapons out there than ever and increasing with each day.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

We should all support those boycotting this


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

sharpbroadhead said:


> We should all support those boycotting this


I won't support them because of thier actions. If they have something I need, I might get it from them, but by no means am I supporting them just because they stood up to what THEY believe. I think it's wrong for them to be boycotting the show.


----------



## bigtone1411 (Nov 3, 2011)

Warbow said:


> All sportsmen? There is no "all sportsmen" in this. It is a politics and gun issue, not an "all sportsmen" issue. What has this to do with fly fishing or back packing or golf or football or track or horseracing? Nothing. This definitely belongs in PRM--which is still a part of AT, so it is still about what your fellow *archer* think about it. It just isn't a thread specific to traditional archery.


I think most of us understand the definintion of "sportsmen" the way that I used it. Lets just say, those that are taxed on their outdoor equipment to provide for conservation of the natural resources of this great land. For example, Campers, fisherman, archers, hunters, atv enthusiasts, firearms enthusiasts, people into air rifles, slingshots, backpackers. I am sure there are multitudes of others, but I hope you get my point. Oh, yeah, like everybody thats interested in all the stuff they sell at Cabelas. None of these things are completely safe from the existing government. I'm not saying regulation is not needed in any of these activities, but when will it stop.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

I would hope the show organizing committee is doing a group....:doh:...over that decision.

:thumb:...for those choosing to boycott.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

fotoguy said:


> I think you have been living in liberal California too long, or are drinking the Kool-Aid that it won't happen to archery....while many times I do not subscribe to the big tent theory...this is one time I think all forms of hunting/shooting sports unite. The slippery slope has started:


If you *really think* that federal gun laws will lead to federal bans on traditional archery equipment then this thread belongs in the traditional archery forum, otherwise it belongs in Archery Talk's special forum for political, military and religious threads where archers talk about issues that are important to them but which are not specifically about archery--which is exactly the nature of this thread. I'm not saying this issue isn't important to sportsman but rather it isn't specific to this AT sub-forum and should be moved to the sub forum where it would be on topic.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

MrSinister said:


> With what you say which is the exact intent of the 2'nd amendment how can any one claim to stand up for it? How is it at all relevant? If the government today decided to crush any level of uprising of the people that is what would happen plain and simple. By your own definition the amendment isn't of much value in our world today. To me it is most definitely not worth the lives it costs our country.


How is it costing lives? On 911 airplanes killed 3000 people. Do you want to outlaw airplanes? A half dozen people a day are shot in Chicago alone (some days more) where handguns have been illegal for many years until recently. How many people die in auto accidents. Do you want to outlaw cars? Heck, they won't even institute meaningful driver training or testing.

This isn't about saving lives. It's about tyrannical control of the peasant subjects.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Lazagna said:


> This is what I am trying to say. But it does not have to be removed, just modified. You can still hunt with only three bullets, you don't need 50. I'm not saying get rid of guns, just put some limits on it.


Why?


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

I support all those who boycott the show because of what they belive. and if we dont unite as sportsman we are doomed. There are already cities in Ca. that have tried to ban archery. For those of you who don't think they won't attack archery you are WRONG !!! this thd is not just about guns.

Gary Mccain
California Bowman Hunters and State Archery Assoc.
Vice President


----------



## bigtone1411 (Nov 3, 2011)

Amen Gary


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I am Canadian, always have been. I completely support the boycott, because I've seen what happens when a population lets their government take their firearms. 

-Grant


----------



## DougKMN (Nov 7, 2006)

Lazagna said:


> Notwithstanding the definitions of what is or isn't an assult rifle, I know times have changed, and citizens don't need large capacity clips to defend their rights, so deal with the times, they have changed. At the time the rights were written, times had changed where it was then needed to have this right. Times have chagned again and it's not needed anymore.


Do police need them?

Citizens face the same criminals police do. And they are generally there first.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

This is a hot issue, to which I would say this, and ask that anybody who takes issue with what I'm saying, take the time to understand, and maybe even ask for clarification, about what I'm trying to say.


'Assault Riffles' are only different in that people have different psychological associations, because they look like military counterparts. People buy them in large part, because they like the idea of owning something like the military uses, and in the case of the AR-15, it's kind of like ILF, you can pick and choose and assuming it's made to spec, the stuff will work.
High capacity, by whatever definition it goes by, is only of serious advantage to the mass murderer. Most murders happen one or two at a time. It is not a serious handicap to murder somebody with a crow bar insted of a gun. Sure, gun is easier, but if you hit somebody from behind, it doesn't matter.
Mass murders, despite the disproportionate publicity, and while acknolwedging the personal tragedy to those involved, are not a serious issue on a national level. I looked up the numbers, and over a 28 year period, our nation of 300,000,000 averaged 167 people killed a year. Aside from the fact that politicians are singling out the weapons instead of taking a comprehensive look at everything, including the individuals, their relationship to society and access to mental health, and a general lack of training regarding self defense, there is a fundamental problem with even having the argument. On a national level, if you go by the numbers instead of the personalization via the sensational media, this is totally a non-issue.

If you'll forgive my pasting from a f-book post...

We (as the general public) are being bamboozled into believing that politicians are making an honest effort to protect us. Baloney. Compare the numbers to real, significant problems for our country, for our fellow citizens, things that likely will affect us, or somebody we love. 

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 32,885 people died in traffic crashes in 2010 in the United States (latest figures available), including an estimated 10,228 people who died in drunk driving crashes, accounting for 31% of all traffic deaths last year.

I had a friend who was killed by a drunk driver in a pickup truck. He was a really good guy. Should we ban pickup trucks and alcohol?

According to the National Cancer Institute, Cigarette smoking causes an estimated 443,000 deaths each year, including approximately 49,000 deaths due to exposure to secondhand smoke.

My grandfather died of lung cancer. Only knew him for a few years. I still remember him driving me around on the mowing tractor. Really would have liked to have known him better. All I remember about being able to say goodbye was that my Dad wasn't there one morning, because he had to take the earliest flight he could to get back to Wisconsin in time to do it for us. Should we ban cigarettes? I think they're stupid, and people who smoke them are stupid for doing it, but... hey, this is America, right?

Isn't it?


I don't own any 'black' guns. I probably won't. But, I find the idea of telling lawful citizens that they can't have something, even if millions of owners have proven that they can do so lawfully and responsibly, because of what they _might_ do with it, particularly when there _is no significant national problem_totally unacceptable. This principle can be applied to marriage equality, racial equality, whatever, you name it. It doesn't end where we have our personal agendas. Some time or another, it'll come to our doorstep. Think archery is immune? Gary, who works with California Bow Hunters, mentioned that several cities in California are putting bans on Archery on the Table.

When it comes to these specific rights, I think that we, as shooting or hunting enthusiasts tend to fall short in one way in particular. We talk amongst ourselves, preaching to our choir, when we really need to reach out and educate, politely and with sympathy, those who do not yet understand. Those nutty liberals get that way because they only talk about it among other nutty liberals, who were made nutty because they got fed the nuts by those who have an agenda. If they meet somebody from the 'other' side, and learn to see them as a reasonable, responsible, knowledgeable, and _caring_ person, who gives a darn about _their_ best interest too, they may actually start questioning the nutritional value of the same nuts they've been chewing.

So, I guess my real question is, who's up for it? Want to complain, or do you want to start to fix an underlying problem? How about we all try to get somebody hunting or shooting this year, and encourages others to do the same. You've just got to get them hooked, after that, they'll take to it on their own!


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Lazagna said:


> Notwithstanding the definitions of what is or isn't an assult rifle, I know times have changed, and citizens don't need large capacity clips to defend their rights, so deal with the times, they have changed. At the time the rights were written, times had changed where it was then needed to have this right. Times have chagned again and it's not needed anymore.


I can see your point, but I don't agree with it. Once you give something up it is very difficult to get it back, and who know what the future holds? Modern society is in a constant state of flux, who knows what this country will be like 100, 200, 1000 years into the future?


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

MGF said:


> How is it costing lives? On 911 airplanes killed 3000 people. Do you want to outlaw airplanes?


Even more to the point, our Government's reaction to this, largely for personal political gain, and the financial gain of cronies, led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, including many of our own soldiers who wanted to do nothing more than serve their country.

I'd join a political party if there was one I felt I could trust.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

since we are talking about the right to bear arms - listen carefully to this interview:






Look who is bragging up the NRA. The NRA has a habit of correctly informing us of attacks on the 2nd Amendment - and then quietly supporting those very same attacks. The NRA has betrayed me one to many times.

At this time - the only organzation that backs the 2nd Amendment 100% is Gun Owners of America


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

MGF said:


> How is it costing lives? On 911 airplanes killed 3000 people.


Not really a good example. The ownership and use of jumbo jets in the US is rather tightly regulated.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

This video is excellent as well - Larry Pratt exposes the anti-gun crowed for the childish, unthinking people that they are - look at how low Piers Morgan goes:


----------



## nw.primitive (Jan 11, 2012)

While this thread is political in nature, I do appreciate seeing it here, as Lancaster is one of the two primary US suppliers for traditional gear. I feel it is relevant to this forum and thank you for posting it. I like to know that the companies I do business with are willing to put their foot down.

Personally I'm not a fan of the NRA, I'm not into AR's or AK's at all, I'm socialist liberal in politics (which in the US is still very far to the right if you compare it to most of Europe), an assault weapon ban would not affect my hunting or hobbies at all, _and_ I've never been into the conspiracy theory side of politics.. BUT this gun paranoia and control is absolutely getting out of hand, and quickly! I don't think an AWB will pass right now but I am confident that once it does, the push will continue until there are less and less guns available to citizens. There are many people who believe citizens have no reason to own firearms at all. While it is not possible to remove firearms from circulation in this country today, the wheels are in motion. It might take another generation to pass before it becomes possible.

How bad could it get? Take a look at laws on the other side of the Atlantic. This is where things are headed in my opinion. That Benchmade folder in your pocket is illegal in England for example. 
https://www.gov.uk/find-out-if-i-can-buy-or-carry-a-knife


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

DougKMN said:


> Do police need them?
> 
> Citizens face the same criminals police do. And they are generally there first.


No, they don't need them.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Great Post - thanks for taking the time

Matt



BarneySlayer said:


> This is a hot issue, to which I would say this, and ask that anybody who takes issue with what I'm saying, take the time to understand, and maybe even ask for clarification, about what I'm trying to say.
> 
> 
> 'Assault Riffles' are only different in that people have different psychological associations, because they look like military counterparts. People buy them in large part, because they like the idea of owning something like the military uses, and in the case of the AR-15, it's kind of like ILF, you can pick and choose and assuming it's made to spec, the stuff will work.
> ...


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

Easykeeper said:


> I can see your point, but I don't agree with it. Once you give something up it is very difficult to get it back, and who know what the future holds? Modern society is in a constant state of flux, who knows what this country will be like 100, 200, 1000 years into the future?


Then they change the laws again.


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

grantmac said:


> I am Canadian, always have been. I completely support the boycott, because I've seen what happens when a population lets their government take their firearms.
> 
> -Grant


What's an example of firearms taken away by the government?


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

MGF said:


> Why?


Because people don't NEED them.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

nw.primitive said:


> How bad could it get? Take a look at laws on the other side of the Atlantic. This is where things are headed in my opinion. That Benchmade folder in your pocket is illegal in England for example.
> https://www.gov.uk/find-out-if-i-can-buy-or-carry-a-knife


Too late. That Benchmade folder is already illegal in many local jurisdictions if concealed or if carried with intent. Heck, forget knives, that tire iron in your trunk is a weapon if they want it to be. I know of one case where a father coming home from coaching little league was pulled over. He was driving a pickup so he put his gear behind the seat. He was busted for carrying concealed, which is a wobbler in CA which can be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony, so he had to plead out to avoid the felony charge. You all are way too late to this game.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Lazagna said:


> What's an example of firearms taken away by the government?


----------



## TheLongbowShoot (Mar 23, 2012)

That just makes me love Lancaster Archery all the more. I am a life time customer.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Lazagna said:


> What's an example of firearms taken away by the government?


UK and Japan would be on that list.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Lazagna said:


> Because people don't NEED them.


You don't need a lot of things. I'll be by with a truck to pick it all up, ok?


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

MGF said:


> You don't need a lot of things. I'll be by with a truck to pick it all up, ok?


Does not really work that way. I don't NEED 50 arrows, so I have 4. I don't NEED a gun, so I don't have one. I don't NEED 50lbs of meat in the feezer, so I only have 10. I don't have any EXCESS of what I don't need. A hunting weapon only NEEDS a couple to three rounds, why do you NEED any more?


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

why do you NEED to hunt - you can buy your meat at the grocery store?- heck - why do you NEED to eat meat - PETA says you don't? These people are like little Stalin's, maybe they are like this to compensate for other things lacking in themselves - so they want to dictate what everyone else should be allowed to have or do!


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Can you imagine if we all started calling for Lazagna to be silenced - we would hear FREE SPEECH - 1st Amendment, blah, blah, blah - but when it comes to the 2nd Amendment - oh - well that is different - unless of course you are a wealthy person and hire armed guards - because we all know that the lives of the Patricians are worth MUCH more than the lives of the Plebs!


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Lazagna said:


> Does not really work that way. I don't NEED 50 arrows, so I have 4. I don't NEED a gun, so I don't have one. I don't NEED 50lbs of meat in the feezer, so I only have 10. I don't have any EXCESS of what I don't need. A hunting weapon only NEEDS a couple to three rounds, why do you NEED any more?


You don't need to hunt at all. You sure do NOT need a bow.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Can you imagine if we all started calling for Lazagna to be silenced - we would hear FREE SPEECH - 1st Amendment, blah, blah, blah - but when it comes to the 2nd Amendment - oh - well that is different - unless of course you are a wealthy person and hire armed guards - because we all know that the lives of the Patricians are worth MUCH more than the lives of the Plebs!


The very wealthy and powerful in this country (the politicians) don't need to hire armed guards. We hire them.


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

MGF said:


> You don't need to hunt at all. You sure do NOT need a bow.


I am not saying you have to take your weapons away, I am saying you don't need the excessive amount of amunition held in a single clip.
you are right, I don't need to hunt, and therefore I don't.

What I am saying is that reducing the WANT for excessive clips sizes is OK, it's not taking anything from you other than the ability to shoot multiple tagets quickly (whatever your taget might be).

I don't fall under the 1st Amendment, so I won't be quoting that.


----------



## Wayko (Dec 22, 2011)

Was reading all the need threads, was just wondering who get to decide what someone needs or don't need, sounds more like the shephard telling the sheep what they need


----------



## tpcowfish (Aug 11, 2008)

I don't think they should ban any weapon from a sane responsible citizen, But sane, responsible citizens need to be just that, responsible for there weapons, alcohol, actions.


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

Wayko said:


> Was reading all the need threads, was just wondering who get to decide what someone needs or don't need, sounds more like the shephard telling the sheep what they need


Which makes it sound like everyone is just saying "because I have it now, you don't have the right to take it away"...... does not make any sense to me.

Sure you have it now, but in order to make some people happy, we will just reduce the amount you have. Nothing wrong with that. You can't have a car that has 1200Hp on the road, because it's too excessive, but there are no boycotts happening because of that. Only if it was something they already had would they be upset about it.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Lazagna said:


> I am not saying you have to take your weapons away, I am saying you don't need the excessive amount of amunition held in a single clip.
> you are right, I don't need to hunt, and therefore I don't.
> 
> What I am saying is that reducing the WANT for excessive clips sizes is OK, it's not taking anything from you other than the ability to shoot multiple tagets quickly (whatever your taget might be).
> ...



How are you defining "excessive"? Just because it's excessive for you (somebody who doesn't even own a gun) doesn't mean it's "escessive" for somebody else.

I take it you haven't done any competition handgun shooting? You know...rapid fire, timed fire for x number of rounds and so on? Why do you want to take these folks sport away from them? They aren't hurting anybody.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

tpcowfish said:


> I don't think they should ban any weapon from a sane responsible citizen, But sane, responsible citizens need to be just that, responsible for there weapons, alcohol, actions.


Indeed, and that guy who said he'd start killing people if any more gun laws were passed had his CC permit pulled--though his FFL 1 and 7 seem to still remain intact...


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Lazagna said:


> Sure you have it now, but in order to make some people happy, we will just reduce the amount you have.


That'll be after the fight.


----------



## nw.primitive (Jan 11, 2012)

Lazagna said:


> Which makes it sound like everyone is just saying "because I have it now, you don't have the right to take it away"...... does not make any sense to me.
> 
> Sure you have it now, but in order to make some people happy, we will just reduce the amount you have. Nothing wrong with that. You can't have a car that has 1200Hp on the road, because it's too excessive, but there are no boycotts happening because of that. Only if it was something they already had would they be upset about it.


I think context is important here, this is a constitutional amendment in our country, arguably the second most important one we have, which is why it was the second one written down. It is deeply rooted in our history. It defines who we are and where we came from. If you don't understand why that is so important to us, I'm not sure how else I can explain it.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

you don't fall under the second amendment either. you don't understand because your country didn't have to fight for the right to be free


Lazagna said:


> I am not saying you have to take your weapons away, I am saying you don't need the excessive amount of amunition held in a single clip.
> you are right, I don't need to hunt, and therefore I don't.
> 
> What I am saying is that reducing the WANT for excessive clips sizes is OK, it's not taking anything from you other than the ability to shoot multiple tagets quickly (whatever your taget might be).
> ...


----------



## Wayko (Dec 22, 2011)

Lazagna said:


> Which makes it sound like everyone is just saying "because I have it now, you don't have the right to take it away"...... does not make any sense to me.
> 
> Sure you have it now, but in order to make some people happy, we will just reduce the amount you have. Nothing wrong with that. You can't have a car that has 1200Hp on the road, because it's too excessive, but there are no boycotts happening because of that. Only if it was something they already had would they be upset about it.



Why would you want to take away a 50 shot clip from someone, personally I don't own anything like it, tried a 50 shot clip on a buddies AK-47 but did not like the extra weight. No I don't own any AK's or AR's or 50 shot clips, the largest clip I own is 13 rounds for my Glock 23 & my 22 hold 14 in the tube, just because I don't own one of the clips or guns currently being talked about, does not mean I don't respect the right of someone who does. I don't understand the problem with AK's, AR's & large clips, there not or ever will be the problem.


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

2413gary said:


> you don't fall under the second amendment either. you don't understand because your country didn't have to fight for the right to be free


Um, yeah we did, the War of 1812, burned your whitehouse down just to prove our freedom.


----------



## nw.primitive (Jan 11, 2012)

The war of 1812 was the British. Canada wasn't Canada until 1867.


----------



## nw.primitive (Jan 11, 2012)

If you need a refresher...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Canada


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

...


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

nw.primitive said:


> The war of 1812 was the British. Canada wasn't Canada until 1867.


Still the same land we defended, and the same people. Are are still related to the British, the Queen is still our Queen.


----------



## Lazagna (Nov 2, 2012)

I've gotten what I wanted out of this and that point is you don't want to give up something you have, but you don't have a concrete reason. I'll leave it there and not post about this again so I don't become the targe of a person hated on this board for expressing something opposite to the masses. 

Thanks everyone for your view's, I don't hold anything against anyone and will leave this topic alone now.

thanks and have a great day! Seriously, have a good one.


----------



## Wayko (Dec 22, 2011)

Lazagna said:


> I'm not going to debate anymore, just leaving one last commen then I'm done, unless you want to PM me regarding this. Nobody has give a reason as to WHY they have to have these large sized clips. That's my point. Everyone wants to keep the clips because they have the right to. You also used to have the right to have slavevs. That has changed because the times have changed, so, change with them on this.



And I would say you were unable to give a reason as to why not.


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

Lazagna said:


> What's an example of firearms taken away by the government?


Are you kidding? Don't they teach History in Candada? You must be joking. Let me spell it out for you H-I-T-L-E-R.


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

I think we should boycott TIME magazine next, check it out:


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

If you haven't boycotted Time already - there isn't much hope for ya -


----------



## vabowdog (Dec 13, 2007)

Hats off to LAS and all the rest of the guys and gals who is boycotting this show!!!!!


Dewayne


----------



## vabowdog (Dec 13, 2007)

Sharp, I would totally agree...I quit reading time back in the early 80s


Dewayne


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

Yea TIME is garbage, somebody ordered that crap from kids raising money for school or something. But it makes great fire starter in my wood burner. Sort of ironic I use it to pollute the environment with carbon...... But when you read it you absolutely can't believe how the Looney Lefties think. It gives great perspective into their demented ideology.


----------



## Jim Casto Jr (Aug 20, 2002)

Lazagna said:


> I think boycotting this show is silly. Just because you can't have assault rifles and large capacity magazines does not mean you are infringed on your rights to have weapons. You can still have weapons, you can still hunt, you can still do everything you could do before, except you have to re-load more often. What's wrong with that?
> 
> yes I know I'm going to get lots of flack from the Americans on this, but that's just how I feel.


If you had an equivalent to our “2nd Amendment to the Constitution”, you’d probably have a different outlook. It has nothing to do with what we might need, but rather what we might WANT. We’re Americans! 

Unfortunately, we’re becoming more and more like Europe and even, yes, Canada. There are (or were) guarantees here that the rights of the individual were paramount. Now… the notions of the many are beginning to outweigh the rights of the individual.

I fear too many here have been assimilated into the collective (Borg/Marxist), and resistance is futile, but I still tip my cap to those that are trying.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

btw - not to come off as a NAZI - but the stuff about Hitler being against guns - is mostly bunk - he actually made it easier for Germans to own guns, the Communists on the other hand completely banned guns everywhere they gained power.


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

I think he took them from the Jews sharp. Which made them eaiser to round up. Thats not bunk.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

He took them away from anyone who had communist affiliations - it just so happend that many Jews, though certainly not all were communists - some Jews were actually Nazi's some even were SS commanders - history is much more complex than we can imagine. 

But that is another story - the only point I was making is that the idea that Hitler banned guns in Germany is not true - he actually lowered the age to own a gun from like 21 to 18, he removed all requirements for permits on owning long guns and extended the permit for owning a handgun by several years.

Certainly nothing like our 2nd Amendment - but not a ban either.

I learned this when I used the "Hitler banned guns argument" and someone schooled me on the facts - and I looked into it and found out that they were right - so I don't use that argument anymore and just stick with those who did ban guns - the Communists.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

oh - I forgot - he also removed the requirment to obtain permits to own ammunition.


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

Well we both agree on the second amendment issue. And it seems to me Time has gotten a lot smaller over the years. And good going for all those vendors that stood up even though it might have cost them some business at the show I think they will make up for it in the long run.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Wow 4 pages but I expected it.

I just returned from the SHOT show I was there promoting a new product EPN which is a supplement company that is working with Sportsman and Outdoorsman that are looking for an edge thru advanced nutrition 

A little plug  



















The show was a buzz about what is going on and believe me this optic is on the minds of everyone in the industry because it effects us all and thank god a ARCHERY Co like Lancaster understands this 

As for those that are supporting the Ban thank you very much. I am so impressed with the way people are coming out against the shows promoters and the way it is going it looks like its gonna be a big flea market instead of a top event.

I live an hour or so from the show and will not be attending for the first time in many years. If we meaning all of us gun and bow users do not stand for each other all of our rights will slowly disappear.

As for those that are for it and still want to attend the show have a nice drive from Canada or Ca  

Mods thank you for letting this stand because it does effect all of us some just don't grasp that


----------



## zdogk9 (Dec 6, 2011)

Lazagna said:


> No, they don't need them.


But they do have them, and as long as they do, I NEED them.


----------



## thed (Jan 31, 2012)

Remember to call or email the vendors that supported the bill of rights and thank them.

I was going to type out my list of laws I want changed in other countries... then I remembered that I don't have one.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Lee and Tiffany Lakoski and Ralph and Vicki Cianciarulo cancelled their appearences too


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Lazagna said:


> What's an example of firearms taken away by the government?


All restricted weapons in Canada (Ie: ARs) used to be non-restricted before bill C-68 came into effect in the early 90s. So now you can only take them from your home to the range, no way to use them for anything but hitting steel and paper.

They also restricted all semi-auto rifles to 5 rounds and pistols to 10.
All .25-.32 caliber pistols were prohibited.
All pistols with barrels under 4.2" were prohibited.
The Norinco Type 97 was reclassified (non-restricted to prohibited) and seized without compensation.
The Spas-12 shotgun was prohibited because it looked scary.
The FN FAL got the same treatment.
As did the AK-47.

None of those had anything to do with specifications or capability, they did it based on looks or name alone.

You don't NEED computers, books, free speech, the right to vote, you car, your phone, food you like or anything but a 6x6' cell without a window any more than I NEED my guns.

I'll tell you this much. I've been a Canadian my whole life, but if the Lieberals or Nutcase Democratic Party get into power again I'll be nothing but a set of burning footprints headed for the border.

-Grant


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Lee and Tiffany Lakoski and Ralph and Vicki Cianciarulo cancelled their appearences too


I've never been a fan but maybe I'll change my mind


----------



## retro-grouch (Mar 19, 2005)

The show's promoters are the reed Expo Co. They are a BRITISH company. In this discussion it seems we have three foreign entities arguing against the US citizens Constitutionally guaranteed (spell?) rights. Those being Great Britain, Canada and California. Whoda thunk?


----------



## JimmyP (Feb 11, 2006)

Wat to go we don't need a dictator gov.telling us what to to and what we can have


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I really wonder if people know how close we are to gun confiscations - it has already happened in New Orleans after Katrina - door to door - and it was done at the point of an Assault Rifle - by the same troops everyone has bumper stickers saying they support, by the same troops who swore an oath to defend the Consitution! I have a brother-in-law who was/is a Major in the United States Air Force - and one time I made a negative comment about the then President - and my brother-in-law looked at me and said that I should watch what I say because he swore an oath to defend the President! I looked at him and said - "Last I heard you swore an oath to defend the Constitution against ALL enemies, both foreign AND DOMESTIC" - guess they changed that oath - or a Major who flew Tankers and is now a commercial pilot does not know the difference.






we are on the verge of losing our country - if it is not already lost and we just don't know it yet!


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

remember people the gov`ts of today no matter what country use the divide and conquer method... we need to stand together in numbers .. soon it will be hand guns then long guns.. we have just gone through this crap.. in canada...we have to get to the heart of the issue and my take is parents need to be more in control of their kids ..make them turn off the friggin computer screens with the make believe games ... and give the schools back some power to discipline the kids ..school uniforms ... no bra straps ...no pants down around their asses etc etc etc .parents need to sit down to dinner with their kids and review the day and assign chores etc ...kids today are way out of tune.. and I`m sorry if I`m ranting.. but I can tell ya if there was ever a major war or invasion again whatever country the guys that know gun control is actually being able to hit your target will be the first to defend ..also when a punk comes into a corner store to rob or hurt some one using a gun he should automatically get 25 yrs no question again these people usually are not the tax paying working generation...and the guns stolen ....and in ending again power in numbers.. stay sportsman united ...


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

retro-grouch said:


> The show's promoters are the reed Expo Co. They are a BRITISH company. In this discussion it seems we have three foreign entities arguing against the US citizens Constitutionally guaranteed (spell?) rights. Those being Great Britain, Canada and California. Whoda thunk?


LOL! California may as well be another country. They're broke, their taxes are outrageous and English will soon be a second language.


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

The NRA just officially withdrew from the Sports Show and any other show sponsored by Reed Exibition, only after asking Reed to reconsider their decision. Reed refused to change their decision. Many outfitters have also withdrawn, so this now looks like a fishing and camping show only. There is also a rumor that Cabelas is considering either buying out Reed and taking over ownership of this show or organizing a new show and outbidding Reed for use of the Pa Farm Show buildings for their own show the same week next year and years to come.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

fotoguy said:


> The NRA just officially withdrew from the Sports Show and any other show sponsored by Reed Exibition, only after asking Reed to reconsider their decision. Reed refused to change their decision. Many outfitters have also withdrawn, so this now looks like a fishing and camping show only. There is also a rumor that Cabelas is considering either buying out Reed and taking over ownership of this show or organizing a new show and outbidding Reed for use of the Pa Farm Show buildings for their own show the same week next year and years to come.



Very good  

I think that is very commendable


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Looks like both sides are sticking to their guns, so to speak. As much as I am a supporter of our 2nd Amendment, all the others are important as well. A show promoter should have the right to dictate the flavor of their production and vendors should have the right to chose their participation. It's sad a compromise could not be reached, but sometimes, that's just the way real freedom works. It's costing both sides to keep their stance, but at least it's only money.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> LOL! California may as well be another country. They're broke, their taxes are outrageous and English will soon be a second language.


I truly have nothing against the Mexicans, and I think that on the whole they tend to pull their weight more than the natives in this state, but this is so true. I practice my Spanish when I go to the Taqueria, where they serve the best food in town, using the best ingredients for the cheapest prices, no comparison. They work their butts off. But, to the above point, every product I see on the shelves is in both English and Spanish. Our governor is... well... don't know if Google is going to rat me out


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Sanford,

I agree that Reed has the right to decide the flavor of the show, but the decision was made as a knee jerk reaction to the Connecticut incident and the establishment cry about guns. Those vendors were an acceptable part of their show in previous years, and at their sponsored Shot Show weeks earlier in Vegas. It's a lot easier decision when you already have the vendors pay for their non refundable space and then change the rules. The only reason this British company made that decision was not to draw criticism from anti-gun organization, when, in fact, they actually bit the hand that feeds them.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

spot on fotoguy


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Lee, I think the best vote in the land is your pocketbook. The better vote is a unified pocketbook or the ability to affect pocketbooks. The decision mid-stream, after contracts were signed, presents a sticky issue on both sides - did it harm the other vendors, if so what's their damage. Did it harm just one vendor, the one selling AK's - what's his damage, or does pulling out post-contract signing breach a contract to perform on the part of the vendors who are pulling out. That's gonna be a court battle for sure, that is, if there were obligations broken.

But, contract issues aside, the British company can make any statement or business decision they want without stepping on any individual's right under the 2nd Amendment. That's a freedom of private enterprise. One can still see, buy and bear their specific arms from anywhere else.

Agree, a decision like that should have been reserved for the future, but good or bad on their part - it's their decision to bear the consequences. But also, the ones pulling out are making their last minute statements as well - good or bad, it's their decision to bear the consequences. For me, it's not really a 2nd Amendment issue as much as it is a freedom of expression issue. Contracts and obligations will just add to the cost of each side's right to make that expression.


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Sanford, 

I am in agreement. I do think this will affect Reed's bottom line. With the number of people posting on the show's Facebook page stating they are not attending, they will be losing the admission fees, parking fees, etc. vendors too will lose revenue, not to mention local hotels, restaurants, etc. Reed pays upwards of $1 million to rent the complex for the week. This is a no win financially for Reed, the vendors, and the local businesses, not to mention the financially bankrupt city of Harrisburg. Sometimes, though, principles trump money, something I believe Reed did not think would happen. It just irks me that those very vendors who exhibit and sell those weapons were welcomed by Reed in years past, and helped Reed make money those years, and they were acceptable at the Shot Show they sponsor. It just disappoints me that they buckled in an effort to be politically correct. What will affect them more is if those vendors choose not to come back in subsequent years for fear of the same thing occurring. What was once the largest Sports Show in the East, and maybe the nation may be an afterthought. I guess since the IBO runs the 3D tournament there has backed out, the tournament will be cancelled. The Archery Hall will be rather empty this year.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Lee, we can assume they misjudged the reaction. Would not be the first time for a large corporation to make such a mistake. They only have to answer to shareholders in profits, so normally, principles never enter their decisions unless there's a financial benefit also. Iow, they probably don't care one way or the other about gun rights except that they can appease more people to come out, otherwise, they would not have any guns at any show, ever. This time, it might not work out so good, as the move teed off more folks than it appeased.


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

True. By the very nature of the show. the people they appeased were those who normally would not attend. The people that they upset were those who attended who were interested in outdoors, whether it be gun, bow , etc. You would think a large company like that, with years of running that show would have an understanding of its demographics. If they exist to make money for the shareholders, they may have some explaining to do!


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Since its a British Co that runs the show I think they could smooth thinks over if they just offer to take Pierce Morgan back with them when they leave


----------



## Cwilder (Jun 4, 2006)

JParanee said:


> Since its a British Co that runs the show I think they could smooth thinks over if they just offer to take Pierce Morgan back with them when they leave


Sounds like a great idea


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

JParanee said:


> Since its a British Co that runs the show I think they could smooth thinks over if they just offer to take Pierce Morgan back with them when they leave


LOL! Deport Pierce Morgan!


----------



## Lil Okie (Mar 25, 2008)

vabowdog said:


> hats off to las and all the rest of the guys and gals who is boycotting this show!!!!!
> 
> 
> Dewayne


x-2


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I don't believe that they "misjudged" the reaction - I don't think they care. I was once having a discussion with the same neo-con brother-in-law who is a Major in the Air Force that I mentioned in a previous post. We were discussing the horribly immoral movies and TV shows that are being produced in such abundance. His response was the typical neo-con response: "Well you can't blame them, they only make what people want to see - it is all about the money". This was right around the time that the film Brokeback Mountain came out. I replied to him, then please explain to me why the film, The Passion of the Christ made more money and had more people view it in its opening week than Brokeback Mountain had duirng its entire run, inculding DVD releases? Do you see more films or TV shows like The Passion of the Christ or like Brokeback Mountain? If it is about money and what people want to see - we should be seeing shows like the Passion of the Christ, but that is not the case, you cannot turn on the TV without the theme of Broke Back Mountain being shoved at you, you rarely if ever see anything truly Christian on TV and when you do, it is usually in jest or mockery.

Anyhow - when the powerful want to influence public opinion - they don't care if they lose money - they con't care if they could make more money doing something differently - all that matters is changing public opinion to what they believe and they will resort to almost anything to accomplish it. 

And the unfortunately reality is that it works in most cases - the unthinking masses usually, like good lemmings, through gradualism go right along with it.


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Jamie Gray, 2012 Olympic Gold Medalist in Womens 3x20 rifle has officially pulled out of her appearance at the Show....


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Well, some of us felt the Show would turn into a fishing-boat-Rv show this year..since many hunting organizations as well as outfitters from Alaska to Pennsylvania have withdrawn. Guess we are wrong....Towne Marine has pulled out, along with their 30 boats, leaving their 6500 sq ft space open.....gonna be plenty of room to walk around, unlike elbow to elbow in previous years....don't think they will get their 500,000+ attendance this year!


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

awesome!


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Given the current list of pull-outs to total number of advertised exhibitors, it's about 17% right now. Still a lot a snowball building slope left till show, so I bet a decision gets made to reverse this flow real soon.


----------



## Wayko (Dec 22, 2011)

fotoguy said:


> Well, some of us felt the Show would turn into a fishing-boat-Rv show this year..since many hunting organizations as well as outfitters from Alaska to Pennsylvania have withdrawn. Guess we are wrong....Towne Marine has pulled out, along with their 30 boats, leaving their 6500 sq ft space open.....gonna be plenty of room to walk around, unlike elbow to elbow in previous years....don't think they will get their 500,000+ attendance this year!



GOOD POST......I was wondering about than, seems most of the people I know & myself who have guns & bows, etc. have fishing rods & tackle & alot of camping gear also.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

just heard NWTF pulled out


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Sanford, you would think so but recently, before pulling out, Cabelas, one of the major sponsors of the show, met with Reed to ask them to reconsider, to which they refused, the NRA did the same this week...Reed refused, and they have released a statement that they will be holding the show...Mathews Archery just withdrew, along with Rocky Mountain Elk, and numerous others, Mossberg, Ruger, etc...there are now no gun manufacturers or reps attending. Interesting fact, in their advertisements for advanced ticket sales..Reed had finalized plans for a Tactical Arms section/room for the first time this year, and actually made it part of their promotions, and booked those firearm companies purposely for that area! They are still advertising on TV, claiming over 2100 vendors and new products and exhibits, particularly the Tactical Assault section and vendors....they had every intention of exploiting this type of firearm since preparation of the show months ago....even designating a room for it...so what changed their mind AFTER soliciting those companies and taking their money, along with selling advanced tickets to the public advertising these additions......they buckled from the anti-gun movement.....plain and simple!


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

I would bet that Central PA where this event is held is largely a rural conservative community. So why would the organizers be inclined to buckle from the anti - gun crowd? This is ridiculous. I don't buy into any of the nonsense polls that depict this country as having majority Leftist ideologies. You can doctor up the numbers any way you like, but this is still a conservative nation being undermined by a minority left leaning Washington DC. Power to the People! Enough is enough!


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Lee, agree. They were pro-gun show one minute, even tactical guns, and then not the next. That's pandering, plain and simple. - meaning, they have no agenda and no principles - just a bottom line. We have a lot of politicians who operate similarly. I have read where the Governor was previously being pressed on the use of the public complex for any gun shows at all, that is, in light of the recent tragedy.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

So at what point do they pull the plug and cut their losses 

Matt


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Urban,

While the surrounding area, is mostly rural, the State Farm Show Complex where it is held is in the city of Harrisburg, which as you know is the state Capitol. While the city of Harrisburg benefits greatly from this show, and in its current financial condition of bankruptcy, it has just made the top ten list of the highest crime rate in the US. Despite the income from this show, the mayor, along with the mayor of Lancaster, the city I live in, about 30 miles from there, both have joined and attended Mayor Bloomburgs Mayors against guns coalition. So while the surrounding area is rural agriculture, the cities are not. 

The Governor is a conservative Republican, but given the state of politics, and his résumé as a former State Attorney General,I would not trust him to stand firm! Hotel reservations are being canceled, so the while the city gets $1 million for renting the complex, local businesses will suffer. Bass Pro, who withdrew, is four miles away from the show, and many are vowing to shop there instead. In previous years Bass Pro allowed their parking lot to be used as a parking and shuttle bus pickup place for the show. They are not allowing it this year


----------



## ArcherFletch (Jul 8, 2012)

Sanford said:


> Lee, agree. They were pro-gun show one minute, even tactical guns, and then not the next. That's pandering, plain and simple. - meaning, they have no agenda and no principles - just a bottom line.


do you think it's a possibility that the tragedy changed their minds? Can you be sure they have no principles? It seems like they had to know it would be incredibly un-popular decision and they made it anyways. 

Pandering would have been saying "we're gonna have high-cap mags anyways because our customers love them", it's the easy way out. They put themselves on the line and are getting burned for it, but they made the decision to make the hard choice and take a stand for what they believe in. Their political stand is costing them probably tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars :mg:


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Matt

I guess they will go ahead with it. They have paid for the complex, received vendor money and sold advanced tickets. It appears they have backed themselves into a corner. Being the large, arrogant corporation they are, I assume they will hold it. Reed is a huge company, and according to reports, this expenditure is basically a pimple on their business butt!

I am more interested to see how many vendors commit to their shows next year, especially the Shot Show in Vegas which they also sponsor!


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Archer fletch

I am sure they are using the Connecticut shootings as a reason, but not as a moral reason but as a crutch to bow to the anti gun movement. It didn't affect their decision to continue the Shot Show, a dhow consisting only of firearm related items. I believe when they told the vendors of those items at this show that they would not be allowed, that they had no idea other vendors and attendees would react with such vigor and support. They failed to recognize the vendors ideals, as well as the customers. They knew the customers enough to promote a special area. Your estimate of thousands of dollars lost is low. They average around 500,000+ attending with ticket prices around at least $20/per. 

They made a knee jerk decision and counted on vendors not giving up their booth fees and sales for a matter of principal. Plain and simple, they messed up, no social conscience or morality was involved! If they were concerned with morals, alcohol and related auto deaths account for more deaths, and has for some time, but they have never prohibited the Jack Daniels trailer or their concession stands which serves beer from selling their product there. While tobacco causes multitudes of cancer related deaths, US Tobacco, another sponsor, is allowed to display and give away FREE samples of their smokeless tobacco. They plain and simply got exposed for what they are!


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

fotoguy said:


> They plain and simply got exposed for what they are!


Yep, typical Corporate Wh***s.... one that will lean right or left with the wind. Next time, don't be surprised to find the wind shifted their leaning back again


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

My taxidermist Wildlife Studios which is the largest taxidermist that displays there has pulled out which made me very
pleased 

The list is growing and I hope that people band together and do not attend the show 

I feel bad for the vendors that are sticking it out but I do not agree with them not pulling out


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

fotoguy said:


> Matt
> 
> I guess they will go ahead with it. They have paid for the complex, received vendor money and sold advanced tickets. It appears they have backed themselves into a corner. Being the large, arrogant corporation they are, I assume they will hold it. Reed is a huge company, and according to reports, this expenditure is basically a pimple on their business butt!
> 
> I am more interested to see how many vendors commit to their shows next year, especially the Shot Show in Vegas which they also sponsor!


Funny they didn't pull this nonsense at the SHOT show I just left there and it was about 70 percent black rifles


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

http://1389blog.com/2012/12/23/larry-correia-refutes-the-gun-controllers-once-and-for-all/


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

I'm happy to support all of those who've taken a stand against this irrational, fear-driven, and uninformed reaction. Says a lot about a business who'll not compromise principle for profit. Every day I send an email to the representatives in my state capitol and in Washington to let them know that if they oppose the gun ban with every tool at their disposal they'll have my support and a promise to run them out of office if they don't. I'd urge everyone to stand together, this has to be a unified response. Understand that they're not gonna be satified with this hamburger they're proposing. If it passes in any form they're coming after the whole cow. Don't be complacent here and think it can't happen to you. Just check out YouTube if you don't believe it....

Here are a couple of really informative article/videos to educate those who'll trample our Second Ammendment Rights but hide behind security guards armed with the same weapons they want to ban. By the way, anybody read about the White Plains Journal in NY recently? You know, the paper who published the names and addresses of legal gun owners in their area? THEY are now hiding behind armed guards, both at work and at home. Ironic, isn't it?


http://1389blog.com/2012/12/23/larry-correia-refutes-the-gun-controllers-once-and-for-all/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmKenGxxlB0


----------



## woodpecker1 (Sep 6, 2012)

[/SIZE 2nd amendmant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! U.S.A !!!! compare the nuts in office today to the gentleman of yesteryear who wrote the constitution. i bet they would never send tanks and plains and weapons to the middleeast and hope they wouldnt use them against us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I for one want to be the strongest country on earth. the apex predator of mankind. if you want to be less than that ask yourself why? stick your guns fellow sportsman and stay at the top of the foodchain.and dont attend the sportman show.well take a bite out of there wallets .yep. bite first and bite hard


----------



## WillAdams (Jun 6, 2009)

woodpecker1 said:


> i bet they would never send tanks and plains and weapons to the middleeast


I bet you didn't pay much attention in history class.

Please go look up the words to the Marine Corps Hymn, the first and second Barbary Wars, and the parts played in that partof history by Thomas Jefferson.


----------



## woodpecker1 (Sep 6, 2012)

i read the story . i googled it. no more piracy.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

woodpecker1 said:


> [/SIZE I *for one want to be the strongest country on earth. the apex predator of mankind*. if you want to be less than that ask yourself why? stick your guns fellow sportsman and stay at the top of the foodchain.and dont attend the sportman show.well take a bite out of there wallets .yep. bite first and bite hard




There are many who would see that as an acccurate assessment of American foreign policy ... :mg:

Oh allright ... no more pot stirring then ....... :shade:


----------



## woodpecker1 (Sep 6, 2012)

:yield:


----------



## bldtrailer (Feb 2, 2010)

How long will we have ANY of our freedoms if WE don't uphold and support the "2nd" The right to Bare Arms( bows are arms to). This is the only admendment that insures that all the others will be there for us all. If the 2nd falls how long will it be until the first admendment goes and then the rest. The first step in a dictatorship is always disarming the people. WE ARE THE PEOPLE & need to take a stand as Lancaster archery did! (how long will it be before the EPA bans the import of the woods our bows are made of ,just ask Gibson Guitars) I carried an M60 machine gun and an M16 (6yrs 95 bravo MP Army)and swore to uphold the Constitution of the USA and defend it from ALL enemies foreign and domestic( My father KIA Nam. 1968 fighting for & defending the above USA Air force Raven ) I'll be dammed if I do less!
FREEDOM IS NEVER FREE IT WAS PAID FOR WITH THE BLOOD OF HEROS! NEVER GIVE UP YOUR RIGHTS! TOO MANY BRAVE MEN & WOMEN HAVE DIED TO EARN THEM, PROTECT AND DEFEND THEM!!!


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Eastern Sports and Outdoor Show postponed
Intelligencer Journal
Lancaster New Era
Updated Jan 24, 2013 11:06
Harrisburg


More Sharing Services 

Related Topics
Eastern Sports an... (16)
By P.J. Reilly	
Staff Writer
The Eastern Sports & Outdoor Show is being postponed, according to a source.
A longtime show exhibitor, who did not want to be identified, told Lancaster Newspapers that he was informed by an official from show organizer Reed Exhibitions Thursday morning that this year's event would be postponed.
The show was scheduled to run from Feb. 2-10 at the State Farm Show Complex in Harrisburg.
More than 200 exhibitors and celebrities slated to appear at the event announced they would not attend the show, after Reed officials last week said so-called assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines could not be sold or even displayed there.
Reed said those items could draw negative attention given the current political climate. Those that pulled out of the show said Reed's move was a shot to the Second Amendment.
The source, who joined the boycott, said he was not told to when the show would be postponed.


Read more: http://lancasteronline.com/article/...and-Outdoor-Show-postponed.html#ixzz2IuUdCMV1


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

This is what happens when we stick together as sportsmen, archers and gun owners. Too bad we don't use this power regularly.


----------



## Double S (Mar 30, 2008)

A big thumbs up!.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Very cool

Matt


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

Senator Dianne Feinstein, Dem, California just introduced an Assault Rifle Ban Bill in Congress. I don't know the details but apparently it is over the top. How can California keep voting this nut job back into office?


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Just fantastic 

I applaud all who stood together 

We need to do more of this and again thank you all for your comments 

Bravo


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Power to the people.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

San Fransisco and LA vote her in not the central valley. but we keep trying


UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> Senator Dianne Feinstein, Dem, California just introduced an Assault Rifle Ban Bill in Congress. I don't know the details but apparently it is over the top. How can California keep voting this nut job back into office?


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

2413gary said:


> San Fransisco and LA vote her in not the central valley. but we keep trying


We deal with same BS in PA. Pittsburgh and Philadelphia keep voting in idiots.


----------



## woodpecker1 (Sep 6, 2012)

woo. i look at the list of people who stood there ground and have to wonder how much money just in booth space was lost!!!!!!!


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

I don't know the details on the contracts, but I wondered if those who pulled out could sue for losses based on them changing the nature of the show after the fact. They promoted it as one thing, then they made it something else. I don't know legal, but it would seem a case, at least from one viewpoint, of changing the agreement after the fact. Whether that would qualify as breach of contract, I guess depends on the particular contract. Would be interesting, if they didn't either restore the event as promised, or refund/release exhibitors, if a class action lawsuit evolved...


----------



## TexasRaised (May 23, 2011)

While a I am not advocating the behavior of the show as I am a staunch stuard of the constitution, the fact is a business has a major risk every time it purchases stock to resell. Imagine making the astronomical purchase of buying enough ar-15's to stock a show as big as the one in question. Then you come to find that not only is it illegal to sell those products during your show, you are also responsible for disposing of them. I don't have access to the shows budget but I do know that most retailers don't have enough capital to absrb that big of a cost, which could very well cause them to fold up shop. 
That being said, I also believe that as Americans we have a duty to prevent the molestation of our constitution, the only document that protects us from the power hungry. If I was the operator of a vendor I would rom eve my business from the show as well. Trading freedom for security is never the right decision. The show should have rejected the threat and continued to sell the guns that we as Americans have the constitutional right to purchase.


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Woodpecker, a 10'x10' space is $3,000 for the ten days.,and then figure plus revenue lost from sales for ten days with over 500,000+ visitors....it was quite a sacrifice by many or the companies.

Barney, I am sure being the big corporation they are, Reed had clauses and provisions for vendor backing out, but there will sure to be legal issues for some time. Actually, by backing out of their seminars, the Wensels and other speakers are dealing with breach of contract issues from the organizers, so it may go both ways...and may never be settled for some time. Please, before anyone goes to a Sports Show, please check to see if it sponsored by Reed Expo, the company that did this. There is also rumor that the NSSF(natl Sports shooting federation) who runs the Shot Show may break ties with Reed Expo as their promoter and organizer for future Shot Shows.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

itbeso said:


> This is what happens when we stick together as sportsmen, archers and gun owners. Too bad we don't use this power regularly.


No kidding. I would even expand on that. Would be great if we did it more often as citizens who valued the liberty of ourselves, and others as well, even those with whom we disagreed.

Inspired, I sent e-mail to my congress representative Anna Eshoo, as well as my Senators, Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, trying to keep it polite, professional, and fact based. I doubt they'll actually read any of them, but it's a try.


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

fotoguy said:


> Woodpecker, a 10'x10' space is $3,000 for the ten days.,and then figure plus revenue lost from sales for ten days with over 500,000+ visitors....it was quite a sacrifice by many or the companies.
> 
> Barney, I am sure being the big corporation they are, Reed had clauses and provisions for vendor backing out, but there will sure to be legal issues for some time. Actually, by backing out of their seminars, the Wensels and other speakers are dealing with breach of contract issues from the organizers, so it may go both ways...and may never be settled for some time. Please, before anyone goes to a Sports Show, please check to see if it sponsored by Reed Expo, the company that did this. There is also rumor that the NSSF(natl Sports shooting federation) who runs the Shot Show may break ties with Reed Expo as their promoter and organizer for future Shot Shows.


Fotoguy,

You sort of bring up a good point. Why should we continue to allow the moron vote to control the destination of our country. The morons keep voting in politicians who have no respect for the constitution. WE, the remainder of this nation, NEED to vote with our DOLLARS! Regardless of what the media would have us believe, I BELIEVE that this is still a largely conservative nation. We need to support businesses that have OUR values, we need to support candidates that have OUR values. WE need to stick together, because the LEFT is much better organized and they are RELENTLESS. Money talks, start spending it in places that SUPPORT your values. And those that don't can go broke and fade away.


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

There are some gun dealers saying that ole Obamalamadingdong is the best weapons salesman in history....


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> WE need to stick together, because the LEFT is much better organized and they are RELENTLESS.


It's funny, because that's what is often said (or used to be said) about the Republican party. Ah, the days of Tom DeLay...

I was sitting in my dentist's office, waiting for my daughter, and I saw that issue of Time. I didn't like the slant of the article, the unilateral glorifying of anti-gun politicians via fashion shoots, or the characterization of guns as the source of gun violence. However, there was something in there that was interesting. Supposedly, most Americans support the NRA's positions on gun issues, and 49% of all households have a gun. I was actually surprised on that. It would seem that we're not so isolated. We just need to speak up, and act. Shopping is always fun , but making our feelings known to others who might have a misinformed opinion is good too!


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Long Rifle said:


> There are some gun dealers saying that ole Obamalamadingdong is the best weapons salesman in history....


Now for a second time! I remember when he first got elected, everybody was complaining about how hard he made it to get ammo. Wasn't legislation, just a buying panic. I'm glad I don't need to buy ammo right now. Man, that'd suck.


----------



## thed (Jan 31, 2012)

Reed Exhibitions may be out of it altogether.

"NSSF is in no way affiliated with, nor does it participate in or exhibit at this show in any way. Reed Exhibitions does, however, manage the NSSF-owned SHOT Show (though Reed manages the SHOT Show, all SHOT Show decisions, policies and actions are made at NSSF’s direction).

Because of Reed’s recent actions, NSSF is considering all options regarding the management of future SHOT Shows."



http://www.nssfblog.com/nssf-statement-on-the-eastern-sports-and-outdoor-show/


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Honestly 

How dare a British based Co. try and dictate what will be allowed at our shows


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> Senator Dianne Feinstein, Dem, California just introduced an Assault Rifle Ban Bill in Congress. I don't know the details but apparently it is over the top. How can California keep voting this nut job back into office?


Because there are 30 million people in the state. 15 million work, the other 15 million are on entitlement programs and they get to vote. Who do you think they are going to continue to vote for? Exactly, anyone who will continue the entitlements. They don't call us the land of fruits and nuts for no reason. The only way to get the libtards out of office here is to take the vote out of the hands of anyone in prison, on welfare, or any other entitlement where they don't work. Politicians like Feinstein and pelosi thrive here, sad to say.


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

BarneySlayer said:


> Supposedly, most Americans support the NRA's positions on gun issues, and 49% of all households have a gun. I was actually surprised on that. It would seem that we're not so isolated. We just need to speak up, and act.


Exactly. Yet the media would have you believe otherwise. Hence, the morons who can't think for themselves crying out for a gun ban. We can no longer let the media dictate the discussion, because its mostly lies. We are the many being ruled by the few, and our complacency has lead us down this perilous pathway.


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

itbeso said:


> Because there are 30 million people in the state. 15 million work, the other 15 million are on entitlement programs and they get to vote. Who do you think they are going to continue to vote for? Exactly, anyone who will continue the entitlements. They don't call us the land of fruits and nuts for no reason. The only way to get the libtards out of office here is to take the vote out of the hands of anyone in prison, on welfare, or any other entitlement where they don't work. Politicians like Feinstein and pelosi thrive here, sad to say.


Aint that the truth. And the 15 million with a job are too busy working to go vote, LOL! CA and NY has some of the whackiest politicians in the country, pure lunatics, and they get re-elected over and over again. Some of them are so stupid I bet they never even read the constitution, nor do they care. Our country is being ruled by a FEW legislators that get voted into office by campaigning in highly populated urban areas. All a liberal candidate has to do to win an election is hit all the highly populated urban areas and pander to the Taker Class. The entitlement class has become so large I don't know if we will ever be able to reverse the trend.


----------



## yougoteem (Feb 3, 2004)

This thread started out as a relevant archery related thread by "thanking" an archery based company for standing up against attacks on our 2nd amendment. It belongs here, and the posts made by many different members prove this. If it was moved to PRM it would not get the appropriate attention. Thanks to the mod's for leaving it here.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

yougoteem said:


> This thread started out as a relevant archery related thread by "thanking" an archery based company for standing up against attacks on our 2nd amendment. It belongs here, and the posts made by many different members prove this. If it was moved to PRM it would not get the appropriate attention. Thanks to the mod's for leaving it here.


It sure did!...and it sure does!..and yep...kudos too the mods who left it here....for nearly TWO (2) YEARS NOW! :laugh:


----------



## Bustoff (Sep 3, 2014)

I don't like to get political but I will patronize Lancaster for this reason.


----------



## Joe Hohmann (Oct 24, 2013)

I saw this show advertised last winter. Did they have a show without the ban? Since I live only 2 hours away, I considered going. I did not, since it seemed totally hunter oriented...and I no longer hunt. In any event, I'm glad they said "no" to the Political Correctness Police.


----------



## p508 (Mar 20, 2012)

Matt_Potter said:


> OK that made me blow coffee - How bad are the other forums???
> 
> Matt


Depends on your definition of maturity-


----------



## WillAdams (Jun 6, 2009)

The show was cancelled last year --- there was a different show w/ different sponsors this year.


----------

