It's not hard to figure out why.

When people get personally attacked by others, which is exactly what your doing when your downgrading a hunter's experience that they choose and enjoy the natural reaction is to personally attack as well.

Especially when you don't even keep you attack real, making it cartoonish by classifying everything in one category of helpless animals that can't escape waiting to be guaranteed to be shot.

this thread tis like a double edge sword ... set up as a poll. The Head line, set up ta get a HF Debate going... Debait is set when open the thread & it reads: Anti HF guys ... Still trying ta understand the debate over HF... Reason for my post in blue ...
Edit: ing with android... screen went before could finish... Me mind wonders so hit post... Just trying ta get better view of why people had ta put up HF ta start with ? Have read some posts from HFers see no advantage...

Having an opinion is not a personal attack. Some of you just take it as such. Like you just did.

Not liking the .223 as a deer cartridge is not a personal attack on someone who uses a .223 for deer.

It's not a hard concept.

Let me make it simple:

I am entitled to my opinions on HF, or JFF, or what restaurant is best, or anything else.

You are entitled to your opinions. And to disagree vehemently with mine.

But I am still entitled to them. Yours (or anyone else's) butthurtness over me having them does not make them personal attacks. And yours (or anyone else's) desire for me to share your opinion or at least STFU on the subject is not my concern or problem - it's yours.

And you have attacked me personally on my hunting - by making up methods you said I used that existed only in your own mind. So excuse me if the high horse talk doesn't impress me.

I've always meant to read this. I'm going to try and do it this year. 'Couple of you gentlemen should too.

The Christmas Day Armistice

And who's not, and why?

And who gets to decide that for anyone else? [/quote]

Nobody gets to decide it.

But folks are allowed to have opinions about HF just like anything else.
Everybody on the THF has opinions on everything from broadheads to bullets to politics to what restaurant is the best.
You are one of the most opinionated guys on here - on a variety of subjects from TPWD to game wardens to JFF.

But when the subject is HF anybody with a different opinion is the devil or has a screw loose just because you don't like their opinions. And the personal attacks begin. A lot on here are like that when it comes to HF.

It's crazy. [/quote]

He made a statement that a person was a "true" hunter. I asked him a couple of questions. His is that a personal attack. You are the one who has stated over and over that high fences reduce animals to livestock and what happens behind them is not hunting. And you go even further stating you want to have them outlawed.

I have no qualms and have never attacked anyone for their chosen method of hunting. I will always defend my and others methods. [/quote]

Let me make it simple:

I am entitled to my opinions on HF, or JFF, or what restaurant is best, or anything else.

You are entitled to your opinions. And to disagree vehemently with mine.

But I am still entitled to them. Yours (or anyone else's) butthurtness over me having them does not make them personal attacks. And yours (or anyone else's) desire for me to share your opinion or at least STFU on the subject is not my concern or problem - it's yours.

And you have attacked me personally on my hunting - by making up methods you said I used that existed only in your own mind. So excuse me if the high horse talk doesn't impress me. [/quote]

Oh Lawd! For the at least 100th time, your opinions don't bother me or anyone else at all. Your desire that HF's be outlawed is not an opinion. It is your need for your opinion to destroy others preferred methods and force others to play by your opinions/rules only that gets you on the naughty list.

And every time I harassed you about your sheep hunt, I pointed out that I supported your chosen method. The exact opposite of you.

So yes, you're entitled to your opinions. You're NOT entitled to force others to abide by them. And you are the ONLY one in these convos that advocates that.

I'm gonna say this once more as clear as I know how and leave it alone:

1) Having an opinion and supporting it is not a personal attack on anyone. It is MY opinion. I am entitled to it. The fact that someone doesn't like/agree with it does not make it a personal attack. It simply means they take it personally - that's on them. Not me.

2)My opinion that the law should change is not a personal attack or me forcing my opinions on anyone. It is advocating that those that make the laws change them. That's how democracy works. I have as much right as any citizen to advocate for a change in the law. I am not under any illusion that I can force anyone to do anything. I have never said I can. Your arguments otherwise are ridiculous. You just don't want the law changed so you take it personally.

You just make stuff up about what you say I do (try to personally force someone to stop HF hunting, hunt sheep at non-existent waterholes, etc., etc.) and make your responses about me (instead of the subject) using your made-up "straw men".

See it at the time in every context. It's just a way to dodge/deflect from the subject.

You can "harass" me personally about my hunt by making up crap about how it even went down and somehow in your brain that's cool and copacetic. But my opinions on HF makes me a bad man. Think about it.

Opinions are used as personal attacks quite often. What politicians do best.

Example: "anyone that shoots a buck behind a high fence is just shooting a captive deer in a pen".

I know several hunters that just hunted some very large State high fenced WMAs that posted some nice bucks and their stories that would take that opinion as a personal attack on their hunting experience.

Really not complicated.

Merriam's Dictionary:

"personal" - adj. - "of or relating to a particular person..."

BY DEFINITION, my opinions are not and cannot be personal attacks on someone I: 1)have not communicated with 2) regarding their particular experiences. Period.

That these folks I don't know and have never corresponded with about their experiences "would take that opinion as a personal attack" doesn't make it one. Or make me a personal attacker of them. It would just make them overly-sensitive because someone they don't know and have never corresponded with doesn't share their opinion of HF hunting. Granted, there are a lot of overly-sensitive folks when it comes to the subject of HF.

No, it's not complicated. At all.

This is good. I needed some humor on a rainy morning to kill some time.

These little dudes are way funnier than another HF go-round to me.

Oh lawd. You do have me confused with someone else. I stated plainly that your opinions don't bother me. I NEVER said anything about personal attacks. You aren't capable of attacking me.

I did harass you about your hunt to point out your hypocrisy and I stated plainly that I completely support you taking the easy way and letting a guide do (some) your work for you.

And there's the difference, I fully support you when you take a shortcut to an awesome animal, while you want to deprive others of their preferred methods. That is not an opinion of yours. That is a privilege you want to deny others from doing.

You always struggle this much? Or are the holidays stressful for you?

In times like these, I like to draw on my ancestors' philosophy regarding hunting:

Kill it. It's dead. Let's eat it.

P

Your passive/aggressive crap would probably work well at a slumber party of Jr. High girls.

Speaking of passive/aggressive, have I told you about my ex-wife?

as pappy say: tis all on de-bait ya choose ta set up over i gots cheap posts...

have you seen the prices opened up my billfold.. All i had twas a couple bucks... Be awhile before see any doe... Being a lowfer , true ta form, As pappy says: i got cheap posts..

You can choose to ignore what you know to be true:

The people you don't know personally will perceive your comments as a attack on their hunting experience.

And when you plead ignorance to this fact your stance loses credibility, and your ending any chance at new friendships with those that you offend.

And maybe you could care less about that. I find life more enjoyable sharing it with friends, especially those that hunt and enjoy the outdoors.

Well Said Amigo

Will never understand what Joy someone finds in degrading others Hunting Experiences and constantly Trolling and stirring the Pot, Jealously, Inadequacy, Ignorance......Well said again

"I find life more enjoyable sharing it with friends, especially those that hunt and enjoy the outdoors."

Thank you both for being so concerned about my friendships, joy, inadequacies, etc.

Y'all have the junior-high girl passive-aggressive thing down to a science. I'll give you that.

I've never heard such whining.Why do my opinions threaten you so much? Are you really that insecure?

Let me put it bluntly PP: I am entitled to my opinions on the subject of HF. If some insecure ninnies I have never met "perceive my comments as an attack on their hunting experience", I don't give a rat's a**. Period. Present company included.

If they are that worried about someone not thinking their HF hunting experiences are all that hot (newsflash: many don't - just read this thread), then they need to either: 1)grow a pair, 2)start hunting outside of pens, or 3) both.

All this stuff is very Freudian. Talk about fragile egos. Sheesh.

So these two friends are talking and the first guy says "Have you ever had a Freudian slip of the tongue?" The second guy says "What's that?" First guy: "It's like the other day on the elevator at my office building. The elevator doors open and this gorgeous woman with a low cut dress is already on there and instead of saying 'Six please', the floor I work on, I said 'Sex please'." "Oh yeah," says the second guy. "Just last week, at breakfast, I was going to say to my wife 'Pass the honey, Honey', but instead I said 'Pass the honey you miserable !itch, you ruined my life.'"

I'll agree with parts of that. I don't understand why anyone would give someone else the power to influence them, by granting their opinions "attack" status.

Hence my statement "you are incapable of attacking me".

But openly stating "I would like to see HF's outlawed" goes from opinion, to advocating the limitation of others to meet your own self imposed standards.

You can see the difference. You might not want to, but you can.

They don't offend me yet. I haven't hunted high fence yet. When I do, I will take offense to your broad swath opinion at that time.

And you have made it very plain that you don't give a rat's a$$.

"Is this thing on?"