search
top

Bob Barker Lending His Support to HSUS in PA

Bob Barker is donating a million dollars to an animal rights group to fight for a pigeon shooting ban in Pennsylvania, and suggesting he’s going to join protestors outside of Philadelphia Gun Club. I have not been very supportive of Philadelphia Gun Club on this issue, and I consider to believe they are a liability on this issue, but nor am I a fan of the proposed ban HSUS is floating in Pennsylvania, largely because it will also ban many of the methods used in the training of hunting dogs, as well as other completely legitimate sporting activities in the Commonwealth.

The politics of this issue is difficult, because as the ban currently is must be opposed. But I have other, ancillary concerns with it as well. If a ban comes before the legislature, we have a number of local politicians who will likely part from NRA on this issue, even though on other issues they would be otherwise good. I don’t want them to get in the habit of having to go against NRA, especially when I know doing that isn’t likely to hurt them much considering the suburban makeup of the local gun community (most of whom don’t do pigeon shooting, or even hunting dog training for that matter). The only hope is to keep this bottled up in committee so they don’t have to vote on it. Philadelphia Gun Club is making it more likely there’s going to be a vote.

For the record, Pennsylvania is not the only state that still has pigeon shoots. The animal rights folks are lying in order to embarrass us on that count. But Philadelphia Gun Club is the only club in a suburban area doing them. While I understand the club has been around for a long time, and has been doing live pigeon shoots nearly as long, I think they are doing the shooting sports and hunters a grave disservice by continuing to hold live pigeon shoots in an area where it’s not possible to be discrete about it, and where the surrounding culture is not going to be supportive of the practice.

9 Responses to “Bob Barker Lending His Support to HSUS in PA”

  1. harp1034 says:

    I am going to have to agree on this one. Live pigeon shoots are not going to go over with suburbanites. The NRA should stay out of this. This is a lose-lose deal.

  2. mikeb302000 says:

    I believe shooting animals in any case is sick. The fact that shooting cute little pigeons would be unpopular with suburbanites, to me, is beside the point. For you, that seems to be the whole point, the public perception. You had a similar argument, which caused no end to controversy among your own, about open carry. Your whole thing is about the perception.

    I say this, shooting animals with guns is wrong, period. Carrying guns, often where there is no danger and practically zero possibility that the gun will be used, is wrong.

    Maybe the negative public perception should tell you something. Instead of disparaging those who object to these practices, an open-minded person would consider that they may have a point.

  3. “I believe shooting animals in any case is sick.”

    Written like someone who knows nothing about proper population control. The choice in many areas is shoot them (in which case the hunter gets meat and the state gets money) or hit them with motorvehicles. The latter is far less humane and far more expensive for everyone.

  4. Matthew Carberry says:

    Jeff,

    Mike is arguing from emotion. Pointing out the facts about responsible, professional wildlife management (or of carry for that matter) won’t make a difference.

    People who allow their emotions to triumph over reason, particulary when policy questions are at issue, can only have education offered to them, they can’t be forced to accept it.. Until they decide to think instead of feel all you can do is acknowledge their feelings and move on.

  5. Thirdpower says:

    “Maybe the negative public perception should tell you something. Instead of disparaging those who object to these practices, an open-minded person would consider that they may have a point.”

    So since the majority of the US population opposes MikeB’s ‘common sense gun control’, he openly admits he is closed-minded.

  6. Sebastian says:

    I don’t consider shooting animals to be unethical as long as it’s done in a sustainable way, and the animal isn’t wasted. Given that, I’m not entirely pro-pigeon shooting, but I don’t think the practice should be a crime.

  7. slick says:

    I know plenty of Philadelphians, and they uniformly hate the pigeons. Filthy flying rats, crap on everything. If the debate is framed in terms of raising even more pigeons, people will be against it. But if you can kill off the pigeons we already have, you’ll get a thumbs up.

  8. I say this, shooting animals with guns is wrong, period.

    Do yourself a favor, stay out of PA in fall, you’d be in tears in short order given the number of hunters in this state.

    That said, I think we’re gonna end up losing this one, and the Nanny Staters are gonna get this one. Not enough people realize this is a liberty issue, and there are too many hunters going, it ain’t huntin’, don’t care.

  9. Peter says:

    “Your whole thing is about the perception.”

    ZOMG! I actually agree with the execrable MikeB. I should probably run over to church to make sure Jesus hasn’t jumped off the Cross.

    You need to decide exactly what you are. If you’re a fellow who has a firearms hobby, then fine. If, on the other hand, you’re what you claim to be, a Second Amendment advocate, then you need to be that.

    You are 100% entitled to any opinion you want to espouse, so please don’t think I’m trying to force you to agree with anything I might hold an opinion on. My problem is that you, at least according to the annual rankings, occupy a fairly prominent place in the gun blogging community, and when you keep posting stuff that you think is bad/wrong, it’s far too similar to Justice Scalia’s Heller decision wherein he laid out what sort of gun control laws SCOTUS would find to be within the framework of the Constitution.

    Have you really done everything you’ve done on behalf of the RKBA only to get cited by some gun controller in support of their argument? Especially over some oddball issue such as this?

top