Pods

[kyler1945]

I do not disagree but hunters have not attempted to introduce or re-introduce such a polarizing issue in that time span either. The closest thing would be re-opening the grizz hunt in WY and the anti's went full bore on social and through the courts to try and did stop it. What I am saying is there is not, imo, sufficient reason to push for re-introduction of pods relative to the potential public perception damage that could be done with non-hunters and the additional infighting that would occur within our own ranks.

I’d settle for zero public fanfare for something that, to my eye, requires very little regulatory overwatch.

It doesn’t change the effort or cost of managing the resource. Unless possibly to the good.

With a few simple engineering controls, it doesn’t impact public safety to any material degree.

I mean, I don’t think you can get high with anectine. So there’s no recreational use/abuse vector to pursue.

Basically, it’s a nothing burger for anyone besides the user and the critter they shoot with it.

I’d sure like to hear more first hand accounts from the folks to regulated it out of use, on why they did so. So far I’ve just seen conjecture.

 

[CooterBrown]

"requires very little regulatory overwatch" in my opinion this would never happen. Big brother would get involved and possibly they should.

 

[BTaylor]

I’d settle for zero public fanfare for something that, to my eye, requires very little regulatory overwatch.

It doesn’t change the effort or cost of managing the resource. Unless possibly to the good.

With a few simple engineering controls, it doesn’t impact public safety to any material degree.

I mean, I don’t think you can get high with anectine. So there’s no recreational use/abuse vector to pursue.

Basically, it’s a nothing burger for anyone besides the user and the critter they shoot with it.

I’d sure like to hear more first hand accounts from the folks to regulated it out of use, on why they did so. So far I’ve just seen conjecture.

100% agree. But we dont live in a zero fanfare society, actually just the opposite. Too many people looking diligently for any reason they can find to be butt hurt about what someone else is doing that has zero bearing on the offendeds life.

 

[kyler1945]

@skydoc

You mentioned using Anectine regularly on animals. I can’t remember if the context was training, or…

One thing I forgot about was the fear of eating animals who’ve been shot with pods.

Were any of the animals you injected later used for human consumption? If so, has there been any guideline or studies involving that being an issue?


I know what I think, but it would be interesting to hear first hand on the topic.

 

[Plebe]

I’d settle for zero public fanfare for something that, to my eye, requires very little regulatory overwatch.

It doesn’t change the effort or cost of managing the resource. Unless possibly to the good.

With a few simple engineering controls, it doesn’t impact public safety to any material degree.

I mean, I don’t think you can get high with anectine. So there’s no recreational use/abuse vector to pursue.

Basically, it’s a nothing burger for anyone besides the user and the critter they shoot with it.

I’d sure like to hear more first hand accounts from the folks to regulated it out of use, on why they did so. So far I’ve just seen conjecture.

Police Investigate ’03 Death After Charge Against Nurse (Published 2006)

A critical care nurse is said to have engaged in chatter with a co-worker about the best way to kill a spouse a day before she died, an indictment says.

www.nytimes.com

Wife and death: Doc gives murder and adultery a shot

Although he was just 34, Dr. Carl Coppolino already had led a life with more twists than a Chubby Checker show.

www.nydailynews.com

Nurse Convicted of Valentine Murder

EASTON, Md. (AP) _ A nurse was convicted Friday of killing her husband after prosecutors told jurors she poisoned him during a Valentine's weekend murder-mystery retreat than set their hotel room on fire to cover up the crime. Jurors deliberated only a few hours before finding Kimberly...

apnews.com

Doctor Gets Life in Wife's Murder

abcnews.go.com

 

[kyler1945]

Police Investigate ’03 Death After Charge Against Nurse (Published 2006)

A critical care nurse is said to have engaged in chatter with a co-worker about the best way to kill a spouse a day before she died, an indictment says.

www.nytimes.com

Is this an example of recreational use?

I’d prefer to use an icicle. The evidence just melts away!

 

[Nutterbuster]

SCC doesnt kill people, people kill people!

Or does that line only work on gun-grabbers?

 

[BTaylor]

SCC doesnt kill people, people kill people!

Correct

 

[Plebe]

SCC doesnt kill people, people kill people!

Or does that line only work on gun-grabbers?

I'll have to check the Constitution on the right to bear NMBAs

 

[DroptineKrazy]

Im super late to the game on this thread but when I tell non hunters I bow hunt the overwhelming majority of them have a reaction that indicates to me that they see it as more ethical not less ethical than gun hunting. Sure it's just the romantic aspect that makes them think that, but I don't see a reason to disillusion them.

Sent from my SM-A516V using Tapatalk

I think they know the animal has a better chance to get away unscathed and that is why it doesn't bother non hunters as much.

 

[BenG]

I really just see this as one more thing to take the hunt out of "hunting". How is it more ethical to give the deer just about zero chance to get away? The perception we have of what is ethical or not can be a funny thing.

I could see archers that typically limit themselves to shooting 30 yards, now flinging arrows at 60, 80, or even 100 plus yards if all you have to do is basically hit the deer. It's easy to sit here and say we wouldn't but in reality I think there'd be more of that than not if these pods are as affective as they are being argued. I mean let's face it, why do you think Fred Bear wanted them?

It's just not for me and I don't think it should be for anyone. There's the people that say you do you and I'll do me. Well that's all well and good, and I agree with it to a point. It's almost as if to say if someone has a tag than they can use it anyway they seem fit. So should they be able to drive around at night with a spotlight and shoot deer out the window? Hey they have a tag, so let them do them right? The problem is the choices we make largely impact the future of the sport. Both in terms of public perception and amongst hunters themselves.

I'm also selfishly against it as someone who hunts for mature bucks. That resource will absolutely be diminished on public lands and permission based properties which is just going to lead more and more down the path of lands being locked up and managed for mature deer. More and more pay to play, which may end up being the most damaging thing to our sport of all.

Mark Kenyon made a really good post on instagram about live feed cell cams (which I personally don't see that much difference in a cell cam that keeps sending you photos in real time but whatever). Point was we as hunters do need to discuss these items and determine for us and our sport what is fair chase, and what we want hunting to be in the future.

Sorry for the long post, I tried not to go too off tangent but there's a million rabbit holes you could go down with this thread. I was reluctant to even post as I felt myself straying. I appreciate how civil the discussion has been here but pods are a hard no for me... or yes... I oppose it.

 

[skydoc]

@skydoc

You mentioned using Anectine regularly on animals. I can’t remember if the context was training, or…

One thing I forgot about was the fear of eating animals who’ve been shot with pods.

Were any of the animals you injected later used for human consumption? If so, has there been any guideline or studies involving that being an issue?


I know what I think, but it would be interesting to hear first hand on the topic.

I said that I use anectine regularly. I have seen used on animals. A licensed veterinary doctor administered the medication. I simply performed airway procedures on the animals. I do not use anectine on animals other than humans. I have heard of animals consuming anectine orally with no effect… but one of my draws to hunting is taking meat without any chemicals added.

 

[7mmremmag]

I voted nay, purely because I would rather minimize purposeful chemicals added to an animal I kill for food. This is also a 24 page thread, that may of been talked about already and I missed it when I skimmed.

I understand the suffering argument, I also believe that being hunted and shot is more humane than the methods that nature tends to use to kill tasty woodland creatures. Like anything else in life, its all a risk based decision and there is a bell curve in what an individual humans appetite for risk is. Interesting discussion otherwise.

 

[Nutterbuster]

voted nay, purely because I would rather minimize purposeful chemicals added to an animal I kill for food.

You voted "nay" to "I oppose legalization of pods?"

I worded the question the way I did because I understand many people don't want to use them, but I'm curious to see if people have problems with others using them.

I guess the wording is tricky for folks, but I asked because I know plenty of people who don't gun hunt, or crossbow hunt, or bait, or pay a guide for a variety of reasons. But they don't necessarily oppose others doing so.

 

[Jammintree]

You voted "nay" to "I oppose legalization of pods?"

I worded the question the way I did because I understand many people don't want to use them, but I'm curious to see if people have problems with others using them.

I guess the wording is tricky for folks, but I asked because I know plenty of people who don't gun hunt, or crossbow hunt, or bait, or pay a guide for a variety of reasons. But they don't necessarily oppose others doing so.

I voted uncertain. While I’m personally opposed to using them I’ve not yet learned enough about the implications of their use to decide if the law should determine if / how others use them.

 

[kyler1945]

I said that I use anectine regularly. I have seen used on animals. A licensed veterinary doctor administered the medication. I simply performed airway procedures on the animals. I do not use anectine on animals other than humans. I have heard of animals consuming anectine orally with no effect… but one of my draws to hunting is taking meat without any chemicals added.

Got it. Apologies. I was under impression you were administering to animals for training, in addition to humans.

Do you know if those animals you witnessed were destined for consumption?

 

[7mmremmag]

You voted "nay" to "I oppose legalization of pods?"

I worded the question the way I did because I understand many people don't want to use them, but I'm curious to see if people have problems with others using them.

I guess the wording is tricky for folks, but I asked because I know plenty of people who don't gun hunt, or crossbow hunt, or bait, or pay a guide for a variety of reasons. But they don't necessarily oppose others doing so.

Thanks for clarifying for my speedreading brain.

From that perspective, I'm not necessarily against it for anyone wanting to make that choice for themselves (I tend to view controversial issues from the standpoint of, you do you and I'll do me as long as nobody else is hurt), but my choice would be not to use it myself. I guess that keeps my vote the same anyways.

 

[Plebe]

Is this an example of recreational use?

I’d prefer to use an icicle. The evidence just melts away!

haha.

but ice isn't nearly as good. forensically.

added a few more of these murder stories.

 

[skydoc]

Got it. Apologies. I was under impression you were administering to animals for training, in addition to humans.

Do you know if those animals you witnessed were destined for consumption?

I do know that none were processed that day and in the freezer by the end of week. If they were eaten, it would be comparing apples to oranges. These animals had time to metabolize the anectine prior to being processed if they did end up as supper.

 

[kyler1945]

I do know that none were processed that day and in the freezer by the end of week. If they were eaten, it would be comparing apples to oranges. These animals had time to metabolize the anectine prior to being processed if they did end up as supper.

Right on.

I’m sure we can find an answer to this, but is this a minutes/hours process, or weeks/months/years process? I’m assuming it’s metabolized in minutes/hours, as that’s what allows the animal to recover right? Assuming they’ve remained alive of course.