# I Hope You Hate This As Much As I Do



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

In a moment, I'm going to ask you to watch some video.

My guess, and hope, is that you'll hate it.

The images are graphic; disgusting, and something _damn_ well needs to be done to the people who were involved. You see....Pigs were tethered in a field, given some goodies to munch on and then, sadistically, were casually used as targets for "testing" some newly designed bullet.

The results are stomach churning.

(You can see the video at this link:* http://tinyurl.com/awaay*
Another warning though: the images are *VERY VERY graphic and disturbing*.)

I never thought I would say this before, but I agree with PETA on this one. As a hunting community we need to stand up and DEMAND that this kind of activity STOP!

To avoid a hearing on charges of being cruel to animals, LeMas Ltd. - the bullet maker - paid *a paltry $2,700 fine *to the USDA.

Not appeased, an animal rights group went ahead and filed a complaint with the Spokane County Prosecutor (after tentatively identifying someone wearing a Spokane Police Department patch on their shoulder) hoping more serious charges can be brought.

I can't imagine not charging these idiots with something.

Everyone and anyone connected with this atrocity should face maximum prison time.

I hope you'll write, or e-mail, Spokane prosecutors, urging them to haul those sadists into court.

Here's all the addresses you'll need:

E-mail -- www.spokanecounty.org

Or Write:

The Honorable Steven J. Tucker, esq.
Spokane County Prosecuting Attorney
Public Safety Building, 1st Fl.
1100 W. Mallon
Spokane, WA 99260

Regards,

Ryan

.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Sorry, I could't watch the third one. I am sitting here puzzled. How can they be stupid enough to think that will promote their bullets. I like to see things fall down like a switch was turned off. I don't know what else to say, I am just sitting here with my fingers not wanting to type. Later.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

That kind of stuff ****** me off to no end, I wish I could have been there. :evil:

I didn't make it thru the second one :evil:


----------



## Burly1 (Sep 20, 2003)

The tests themselves were bad enough, but to document such cruelty on video and then be stupid enough to distribute it is beyond comprehension. This is strong ammunition for PETA. The fools should be put out of business. E-Mail sent. Burl


----------



## 6162rk (Dec 5, 2004)

I COULDN'T GET IT TO RUN. BUT, SEEING THAT PETA WAS INVOLVED I DON'T TRUST THE INFORMATION ANYWAY.


----------



## Young'in (Feb 1, 2006)

That has to be the worst thing i have ever seen. I feel sick to my stomach, if thats real i can agree with PETA on one thing... uke:


----------



## wirehairman (Oct 31, 2005)

What the . . . :******:


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

Not the first time. Back in the 70's live mallard ducks were used to test the effectiveness of the up and coming steel shot requirements for duck hunting. 4,500 mallard ducks met their fate in that test.


----------



## gooseboy (Sep 13, 2005)

THAT IS WRONG! I hope everyone associated with that "experiment" faces a 200,000 dollar fine and 15 years in prison. I couldnt make it past the 2nd pig dying. That is extremely wrong and i am ******. :******:


----------



## 94silverado (Oct 16, 2005)

Thats just wrong in sooo many ways. uke:


----------



## Eagle Eye (Mar 1, 2006)

The video looks crule however, I would never side with PETA on anything knowing what their end game is. :sniper:


----------



## honkbuster3 (Jan 11, 2006)

That is pretty disgusting uke: I don't see the point in doing that at all. That has to be the first PETA video ever posted on this site


----------



## Remington 7400 (Dec 14, 2005)

I may be wrong and I am not trying to start a fight, but I'll say this.

I would alot rather kill a few pigs to make sure things work that issue it to the marines and loose half a platoon because of faulty ammo.

I'm not saying what was depicted on this video was right, but there is definately two perspectives to see this issue from.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

I'm going to have to disagree with you there Remmy. Take that one to the extreme, couldn't the same justification be used if a company shot up homeless folks? "well they're bums anyway, and we probably saved a marine's life". It is a pig, but as you can see it sell feels pain same as us. We have ballistics gel these days, and if need be, they could have shot the pig in the head and then proceeded with their experiments. Nailing a live pig with a shot that wont kill it is cruel. I never thought that PETA was wrong because of their views (at least in the short game), I am just against how they go about it. There should be a group for hunters/shooters against violence such as this without the end goal of having a vegetarian world.


----------



## Scoonafish (Oct 9, 2005)

Rem, I see your point, but I thought they made ballistic gel to test this kind of stuff. If they wanted to test for tissue damage, buy a side of beef or something. There was a lot of ways they can test without doing that.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

MT wrote:


> I never thought that PETA was wrong because of their views (at least in the short game), I am just against how they go about it.


What?????????????????????


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

Plainsman said:


> MT wrote:
> 
> 
> > I never thought that PETA was wrong because of their views (at least in the short game), I am just against how they go about it.
> ...


Some people are stating that they couldn't go against these blokes because they hate PETA. I'm stating that the short term goals of PETA, that is stopping people such as this and the cruel fur traders in the far east are reasonable. Their long term goal of creating a vegetarian society where humans and animals live as near equals, I am not for.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

I'm kind of in agreement with Remington 7400. Couple of points..........

1) This is a PETA film. What kind of editing, splicing and so on did they
do? I wouldn't trust anything PETA puts out to be truthful.
2) ballistic gel or a side of beef will never be able to give you real world 
tissue damage results.
3) Tests such as these go on all the time in laboratory animals in the
search for medicine and cures and they are a lot worse than what you
saw in these clips. 
4) How in the hell did PETA get hold of these films? Again, I don't trust
anything PETA says.

Ben, where did you get the story from? I'm curious as to why there be a fine from USDA on this matter. I don't even understand why USDA would be involved. Were these pigs from a slaughter house and were later returned to the slaughter house for processing? Something seems missing.


----------



## farmerj (Jun 19, 2004)

Clicked on the link and am now kicking myself. Should have noticed in the lower left it was to www.petatv

Can just imagine what they are saying about their hit count.

I would trust it about as far as I can throw an M1 tank. Unless someone can show that there were real charges brought and fines paid (public record here), I don't trust PETA.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

> 1) This is a PETA film. What kind of editing, splicing and so on did they
> do? I wouldn't trust anything PETA puts out to be truthful.


You saw it with your own eyes, do you think they just scared the pigs and edited in the blood?



> 2) ballistic gel or a side of beef will never be able to give you real world
> tissue damage results.


Then how in the hell will shooting a side of pork give you real world tissue damage results?



> 3) Tests such as these go on all the time in laboratory animals in the
> search for medicine and cures and they are a lot worse than what you
> saw in these clips.


Justifying action by saying that worse things happen is a weak way to approach anything. Certainly it goes on, doesn't make it any better.



> 4) How in the hell did PETA get hold of these films? Again, I don't trust
> anything PETA says.


Who knows? Maybe some bloke who was considering buying the bullets is a member of PETA and shipped it off.


----------



## panman (Mar 3, 2006)

Peta and other organasions do this all the time,in the name of hunters.They also blast away at road signs leave gates unlocked fences torn down beer cans on property all the while whereing camo.Most people go for it ,and hunters are to blame.Looks like they got a bunch on this site.pan.


----------



## eaglehead6 (Nov 6, 2005)

hmmmm , tough one here . I bet this was never supposed to be seen by the general public. Who ever this company is specializes in MILITARY and POlICE ammunitions. Is this right , the way to do this NO but does it simulate real life situations and effects from the type of ammunition they are selling to the MILLITARY AND POLICE YES. Does this type of information need to be shown to the general public whether you are a hunter , anti-hunter , PETA or other wise NO . Does it need to be done Yes, Why you may ask? so the effect of the round can be seen, So the police and millitary can see something similiar to what they might see if they have to pull the trigger on someone that might be attacking YOU or YOUR family. They have to have the confidence that this round will not penetrate through and through the punk that might have you down on your back and the only shot he has to save your life is to shoot him. He carries this the rest of his life and you have him to thank for the rest of yours . Sorry guys i am a hunter and believe in fair chase and everything nobel of hunting however i have a brother that is a city cop as well as i am in the military it makes a difference to test these things for real or at least as reall as possible in order to believe that you can pull that trigger when you have to . NOT Trying to start a argument in any way shape or form but this is a different thing altogether then hunting and it may save lives in the future. SAying that they did a very poor job of doing this as humanley as they should have . It looks like a buture job to me and really no thought was put into the way to finish these pigs off in a humaine manner.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Gohon said:


> I'm kind of in agreement with Remington 7400. Couple of points..........
> 
> 1) This is a PETA film. What kind of editing, splicing and so on did they
> do? I wouldn't trust anything PETA puts out to be truthful.
> ...


Hey Gohon

Been gone for the weekend...just got back now. This was posted on the local ABC News out here in Seattle. I found a link from a news site in Spokane. Looks like everyone is trying to push the blame on the other company and duck for cover. It seems USDA had jurisdiction because the offense occurred at a hog farm.

Here is the link and followup story in regards to the allegations:

http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/06/03/ ... igs001.cfm

-------------------------------------------------------------
*Prosecutors investigate pig cruelty claims*

Associated Press

SPOKANE - A prosecutor is reviewing claims by a national animal rights group that a munitions distributor violated the state's animal cruelty law by using live pigs to test bullets.

Spokane County senior deputy prosecutor Brian O'Brien said he is reviewing a video and other materials supplied by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, but the information has yet to be forwarded to law enforcement for criminal investigation.

"We'll give it a fair look before deciding what kind of investigation, if any, should be done," O'Brien said.

PETA claims that the 10 tethered pigs shown in the video being shot with bullets distributed by Le Mas Ltd. were killed in Spokane County.

A Le Mas official said the test was done more than three years ago at an Arkansas farm.

Stan Bulmer, Le Mas' president of marketing, who lives in Spokane, said the U.S. Department of Agriculture fined his company $2,750 last year for "physical abuse of hogs while conducting research." Bulmer said the settlement agreement covered the violation at the Arkansas farm.

"That was the one and only time we conducted non-anesthetized tissue testing," Bulmer said.

Le Mas, which stands for Law Enforcement Military Ammunition Sales, is based in Little Rock, Ark. The company distributes a "blended metal technology" bullet that will penetrate body armor but not pass through human tissue, Bulmer said.

The "frangible" ammo will bore through steel and other hard targets but will not pass through a human torso. Instead, it shatters, creating "untreatable wounds," a military publication's Web site said.

Using live hogs instead of anesthetized animals or ballistics gelatin was essential to study the immobilizing effects of the new bullets and for follow-up necropsies on the animals, Bulmer said.

"This wasn't just a bunch of guys getting together to shoot hogs," Bulmer said. "This was scientific testing."

A portion of the video shows an unidentified Spokane police officer examining a bulletproof vest that had been shot with a Le Mas bullet, but there's nothing to suggest the officer was present for the hog killings.

PETA spokeswoman Holly Mattern said her organization believes the bullet testing and the killing of the pigs occurred in Spokane County.

PETA attorney Lori Kettler of Norfolk, Va., formally asked Spokane County prosecutor Steve Tucker in August to file felony animal cruelty charges against Le Mas; two company officers, Bulmer and President and CEO John Hamilton of Little Rock; and Gibby Media Group of Spokane, which edited the promotional video.

Lon Gibby, president of the video company, said his firm didn't tape the killings but did edit video brought in by a client and produced a master DVD. Gibby said he didn't know where the filming occurred.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ryan

.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

panman said:


> Peta and other organasions do this all the time,in the name of hunters.They also blast away at road signs leave gates unlocked fences torn down beer cans on property all the while whereing camo.Most people go for it ,and hunters are to blame.Looks like they got a bunch on this site.pan.


Pan are you implying because I posted this news story that I am somehow involved with PETA? uke:

Please do tell.... how long have you been posting here again? Who are you?

Ryan

.


----------



## dlip (May 16, 2004)

It's something that goes on in the labs, for medical purposes, and in this case ballistics. We know animals are used in testing, we just never see it this raw. This is jacked up.


----------



## Bert (Sep 11, 2003)

I am trying to figure out what all the fuss is about. Poor poor pigs. I have shot many deer that kicked for a while after the shot. They dont all drop dead in their tracks.
I have worked on farms and have seen pigs dispatched with crowbars, .22 rifles...you name it. 
Everyday, thousands of pigs get their nuts cut off without anesthesia. Tails get clipped, eye teeth are cut with a side cutter...
They are pigs.
In the wild, critters are often killed by other critters most often for food but somtimes just for the kill. It is seldom "humane".
This whole PETA thing worries me. The fact that many of you are making a big deal out of it worries me too.
To torture an animal just for the fun of it is sick but killing for a reason is ok with me and the sad fact is that it is seldom pretty.
Shooting a pig in the heart as they did means that it probably took a less than a minute for the thing to die. Running it over and over in slow motion is where you get the Bambi effect.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

Bert my beef (get it) is that some of those pigs didn't need to be alive for this. Whether they were alive or shot in the head right before that, the flesh would act the same. This is unreasonable cruelty.


----------



## Bert (Sep 11, 2003)

MT
They gotta get "dead" somehow.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

Bert said:


> MT
> They gotta get "dead" somehow.


Like I said, shoot them in the head from close range, no reason to make them suffer.


----------



## Chris Schulz (Sep 7, 2004)

Militant_Tiger said:


> Bert said:
> 
> 
> > MT
> ...


I cant believe everyone is getting so upset about this...Have you ever been to a slaughter house before?? My family has raised a few hogs for the past ten years now. One year we had them butchered by a guy who walked into our trailer with a .22, shot them, and while some of them were still alive he proceeded to skin and gut them. Right in the trailer! It was a little disturbing but what you guys are getting so upset about is nothing compares to what goes on in a slaughter house. Go down to texas and video a hunt with there dogs...its the same thing in my opinion...OH AND ANOTHER THING....IT'S A FOCKING PIG FOR GODS SAKES. GET OVER IT


----------



## Jiffy (Apr 22, 2005)

I would have to agree that this whole deal (the pig shooting) seems completely unnecessary. However, it is far from "stomach turning" and it really is not all that hard to watch. I guess some here must have lived very sheltered lives. Again, I am not condoning this act. I just am finding it hard to believe that some of you are finding it so shocking. Just my observation.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Jiffy said:


> I would have to agree that this whole deal (the pig shooting) seems completely unnecessary. However, it is far from "stomach turning" and it really is not all that hard to watch. I guess some here must have lived very sheltered lives. Again, I am not condoning this act. I just am finding it hard to believe that some of you are finding it so shocking. Just my observation.


Hey Lee

Thanks for the thoughts. I have been reading other's take on this issue, and I have to tell you that I have had feelings both ways on this one. Yes this video and controversy was stirred up by PETA. That is always a warning flag. But then I had to ask myself WHY was this methodology necessary to test a bullet? Why couldn't they use ballistic gel like every other major ammo manufacturer? Do other ammo maufacturers do this only we haven't seen video of it?

I pondered some others thoughts as I typed this up. I have to agree with MT on his point. Why couldn't they have shot the pig in the head humanely/quickly first? Did they enjoy hearing the pig squeal? You would still get the effect on live flesh as the pig would have died moments earlier and blood would still be transversing its circulatory system.

I then read eaglehead's post and I can see his logic. Maybe it does serve some purpose that I'm not aware of or fail to see some bigger issue. If that is true someone REALLY messed up allowing it to be distributed without the tightest controls.

But tell me this.... How can we as a Sportmen's group condone such behavior? Watching those animals tied up and summarily shot P!SSED me off to the bone. They almost made it SEEM like hunting, by doing this outside with some hokey amature video. They did not do this in a "Scientific" manner I would expect of a well thought out expiriment. They did this "half a$$ed" with some home video camera.

If we don't take a strong stand against such behavior, it is a slippery slope to turn the tide against hunting if the general public believes that hunters aren't outraged by this. They'll associate that we think this is no big deal cause we do similar things all the time.

I know Lee that you and others have said this is no big deal really, as you and I and many others have all seen many "graphic" scenes similar to this on the farm and even in the hunting field. However we all know that the cattle, sheep, and swine in a farm are put down quickly using humane methods. Although visually it may be similar this video is not that.

I HATE I MEAN REEEEAAAAAALLLYYYY HATE to see ANY animal suffering. I could care less if it is a cow, deer, pig, duck, etc.

To me these guys went way too far over the line. I think they know it too...

Thanks for listening to my followup....

Ryan

.


----------



## ClassicGun (Mar 6, 2006)

I totally agree with you Benelli. Remington 7400 like stated above they could of used Balistic Gel or a slab of beef. I really dont like to see animals suffer which is why if a duck or goose is suffering i will somehow kill it whether by ringing its neck or suffocating it.

I also agree with PETA as i am a Person for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (NO IM NOT A MEMBER OF PETA). I only agree with them on somethings. But they are extremists that want to ban hunting and fishing and that is wrong

THINK of how many jobs would be lost or affected if hunting or fishing were banned in the US!
(spelling is wrong)

Gun manufacturers
Gun accesory manufactorers
ATV compainies
Sporting Goods Stores
Ammunition companies
Optics Companies
Boat companies
Reloading systems companies
There wouldnt be a need for as much wood or metal affecting those jobs
Chronographs
Game Call companies
Clothing companies

THEY ARE ENDLESS!


----------



## eaglehead6 (Nov 6, 2005)

I guess the best way to look at this is that it is not hunting and has absolutely nothing to do with hunting. Shooting a pig that is tied up would never be or i would hope never be anyone's idea of a fairchase hunt. This is an experiment , a way to test the bullets on a living animal , to see penetration or lack of , to see the real time reaction to the fact that it was just shot by the bullet that they are trying to sell. The arms and ammo companies are always trying to perfect the perfect bulllet for the job, in this case POLICE and MILLITARY work, not hunting , in no way is this a hunting video or even close to one. It really does not even belong or should be seen on a hunting forum , a police or millitary forum possibly but hunting , never. Besides hunters , millitary as well as cops are never instructed to take head shots unless absolutely neccessary, they always shoot for center of visible mass. We as hunters should know that .


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

eaglehead6 said:


> I guess the best way to look at this is that it is not hunting and has absolutely nothing to do with hunting. Shooting a pig that is tied up would never be or i would hope never be anyone's idea of a fairchase hunt. This is an experiment , a way to test the bullets on a living animal , to see penetration or lack of , to see the real time reaction to the fact that it was just shot by the bullet that they are trying to sell. The arms and ammo companies are always trying to perfect the perfect bulllet for the job, in this case POLICE and MILLITARY work, not hunting , in no way is this a hunting video or even close to one. It really does not even belong or should be seen on a hunting forum , a police or millitary forum possibly but hunting , never. Besides hunters , millitary as well as cops are never instructed to take head shots unless absolutely neccessary, they always shoot for center of visible mass. We as hunters should know that .


You have to understand the larger overall US effect of this type of video. You understand it is not hunting. The VAST majority of Americans have no concept of hunting.

This video was shown on the 6 PM news on Friday on our ABC affliate to the greater western Washington state population. That equates to more than 1 million people who saw that video. 95+% do not hunt out here! Therefore you do the math. People who have no knowledge about what hunting is or isn't just watched a video whereby they form an impression. They see a pig being shot by someone with a home video. They equate hunting with shooting, therefore this might be a type of hunting. This is all going through their heads as they sit and listen to the pig squeal.

You can seperate the difference. They can't or are too ignorant to understand any difference. Don't you think it would be wise to fight this kind of perception?


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

Ben,

below is a story on the ammo that was being tested that day. This was not hunting ammo and in fact probable wouldn't even make very good hunting ammo. PETA would use anything they can to hurt hunting so I'm not going to loose any sleep over this, especially since that 95% you spoke of would fail to listen to you anyway. But read this story and you may just see that PETA may have succeeded in giving hunters a black eye but even worse they may in fact have done much more damage to our military by letting another cat out of the bag. This story was published a few months prior to the testing done on the pigs. I can't verify this story is accurate or truthful but it is a very strange coincidence.

December 2003
Editorial

A better bullet Blended-metal ammo rates realistic testing

During a mid-September firefight north of Baghdad, Ben Thomas recorded the first known kill of an adversary with a relatively new type of ammunition. The former Navy SEAL, now a security consultant with a private corporation contracted by the U.S. government, was traveling with three colleagues when they were ambushed by an estimated eight to 12 "bad guys.

What Thomas says about that single bullet's performance should have Pentagon officials scrambling to test the ammo. But they're not. In fact, when word of the engagement reached an influential member of the military's weapons-testing community, he mistakenly surmised that Thomas was an active-duty serviceman and, via an e-mail exchange, threatened Thomas with court-martial for using unapproved ammunition, the former SEAL told AFJ.

During a telephone interview last month, Thomas said the bullet he fired struck one of the attackers in the upper left quadrant of the buttocks, killing him immediately. Under most circumstances, a 5.56mm bullet striking a person's buttocks wouldn't be expected to create a fatal wound. The shot was made at a distance of about 110 meters, Thomas said, using a standard M4 carbine with a 14.5-inch barrel.

I'll spare the details, but when Thomas and his colleagues later examined the body they couldn't believe the destructive effects caused by that 5.56mm round. Thomas said he has shot people with various types of 5.56 ammo used by special operators - regular Green Tip, Black Hills Mk 262 and tracer - but has never seen any wound from a 5.56mm round that evidenced the destructive energy released by that bullet.

The ammo that Thomas used was a so-called "blended-metal-technology" round, manufactured by RBCD of San Antonio and distributed by LeMas Ltd. of Little Rock, Ark. For the past four years, RBCD has been featured during AFJ's annual "Shoot-out at Blackwater" training center (August AFJ), where the ammo's unique performance has impressed most of the special operators observing its effects. Designed to release maximum energy in soft tissue, the "armor-piercing limited penetration" ammo will bore through hard targets, such as steel and glass, but will not pass through a person or even several layers of drywall.

Considering the ammo's effects, you'd think the special-operations community would be beating a path to RBCD's door. Congress attempted to make that happen by including just over $1 million in last year's defense budget to test "blended-metal" ammo; however, 14 months after lawmakers appropriated those funds, not a dime has been spent.

Officially, at least, military officials say RBCD ammo is no more effective than other types now in use and, under some conditions, doesn't even perform as well. That line flows from tests conducted a few years ago in which RBCD ammo's effects were observed in ballistic ordnance gelatin, the standard means for ammo testing. Stan Bulmer, president of sales and marketing for LeMas, responded that standard tests in ballistic gelatin fail to demonstrate the performance of the new technology in RBCD ammo - an RBCD bullet's destructive capabilities are most apparent in living tissue. Tests using live animals would clearly show its unique effects, Bulmer said. But despite his appeals and the funds for testing provided by Congress, the military refuses to retest the ammo in live tissue.

Some observers are convinced that Special Operations Command officials' refusals to test RBCD ammo stem from work that's well underway at that command. For some time, the special-operations community has been conducting work on a new 6.8mm round to replace the 5.56mm. If a 5.56mm round proved to be as effective as larger 6.8mm ammo, the rationale for new ammo and a new weapon would disappear.

Thomas isn't interested in any of the reasons that might be keeping RBCD ammo from reaching U.S. special-operations forces, but he is convinced that its use would save soldiers' lives. An adversary hit by a blended-metal bullet - even if struck in an arm or leg - would be in no condition to continue the fight, he said.

The former SEAL's experience with RBCD ammo should be reason enough for Pentagon officials to insist that Special Operations Command immediately begin realistic testing of the blended-metal ammunition. Further foot-dragging by the command should trigger a congressional inquiry.


----------



## eaglehead6 (Nov 6, 2005)

OK , Ben you show outrage, you show passion, you show everything that a true hunter who does kill animals and does not want to see them suffer would act like. I feel the same way as does probably every hunter on this sight does , however i am not blind to the fact that every deer i have shot has not felt any pain. I am sure some of the deer i have shot have died very quickely however i have also shot deer that have not and it makes me sick to my stomach but it is a unfortunate truth to hunting. We are all human and humans make mistakes, if you shoot at something with the intent to kill it the truth is that it might not happen as quickly as you or any other hunter would want it to. Do we quite hunting NO we learn from our mistakes and move on. This video that you have put on a hunting forum is not a hunting video . It is a promaotional video to sell ammo to the millitary as well as LAW ENFORCEMENT agencies. It is my personall belief that this video does not belong here and you attacked the wrong people(the people who are trying to improve ammo and ballistics for the very people that might help you someday in the future IE policeman). If I were you i would attack the very people who took this video and twisted it to make the people out there who do not hunt believe that this was a hunting situation. Beilieve it or not you have contributed to this very thinking by denouncing the people in this video and urging hunters to contact the politicians. I say contact the media who ran the story and tell them what you think of the peta people who do not understand that this is or may be a necessary thing to do but in no way, shape or form is a hunting video . And 99.9% of all hunters would agree that this is not a fair chase situation or hunt. This particaulr post has caused a problem for me lately and I hope that possibly I can let this go and move on. I say kudos to the people who strive to make better ammo so that the people that protect our way of life can do there job better and more efficiently. They (ammo makers) contribute to society and even if no one buys they're bullets or thinks that they are not as effective as the company believes them to be they are still one step closer to building the perfect bullet for the men and women who put they're lives on the line everyday.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Gohon and Eagle thanks for taking the time to provide some additional perspective on this thread. I agree that this story is very inflammatory and that there are many sides to any issue.

Eagle you are correct. I should be placing my outrage at the proper people who have distorted the story to appear as something other than it was. You would think that if a major ammo company was being indicted and persecuted that they would provide a news release stating why they video was shot, and the greater good that could come of the testing. I looked all over the internet and could find no such document. I will be making amends now by rebutting the story to the proper news outlets.

Gohon could you provide me with the link to that article. I believe you have provided some great ammunition (pun fully intended) that I can use in an article I'll be writing to "correct" a wrong.

You see.... That is why I think this forum is great. People take the time to provide further information and background to give a story it's full review. Passion is a great thing when it is properly presented by a fully informed individual.

Thank you for not flaming me and showing me another perspective.

Regards,

Ryan

.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

you guys are pretty good advertiser's for that video, to bad it's getting this much web time.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

Here is the article I quoted. I stumbled upon it by accident while looking for something else. http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/bullets/

Below is a quote from a PETA sponsored page that caught my eye.....BTW, I ran into this at the same time as the article above.



> For some unknown reason, the USDA blacked out three entire pages of affidavits. In fact, there are numerous redactions in all the USDA documents that PETA has received. Our attorneys are appealing the decision to withhold this information from PETA.


You can read the entire article here http://www.stopanimaltests.com/f-lemasPigs.asp if you wish but like I said it is a PETA site or at least appears to be. What caught my eye here was the three pages that the USDA blacked out before turning the information over to them. My suspicion is 1) this was a government backed test or at least was given the green light by the government. 2) that was not a promotional video at, all but something probable obtained from a disgruntle employee almost two years after said testing.

If we are going to get to the truth and combat people such as PETA then there is no such thing as to much web time on these matters. To think otherwise is short sighted and ridiculous.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

ever heard of good press and bad press? why promote bad press?? Unless it is beneficial to you to make hunters look bad???


----------



## HUNTNFISHND (Mar 16, 2004)

I don't think this makes hunters look bad, because these are not hunters. uke:

Hunters don't tie up animals and shoot at them. :eyeroll:


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

you are right sorry, it makes guns look bad.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

There is always no press which seems to be what you are looking for and would certainly please the anti's. If there is bad press then the most effective way to combat it is to get to the truth first and then move from there. If this thread and discussion bothers you that much then maybe you should just ignore it. Since it apparently has been printed in several newspapers and posted on several web sites I doubt that Nodak Outdoors is much of a threat at putting out bad press. Personally I'd like to know what the truth really is. :eyeroll:


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Gohon said:


> Personally I'd like to know what the truth really is. :eyeroll:


Agreed!


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Well gohon.... blah blah blah


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

buckseye said:


> Well gohon.... blah blah blah


buckseye it is apparent you have decided to follow me from thread to thread like a little puppy dog in a juvenile attempt to start a pissing contest. Though it is irritating I normally just consider the source but you might want to stop and think that it is not just me you are interrupting but others as well. Do you have anything of substance to contribute to this thread?............. couple of us were attempting to get to the truth of this matter.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

> buckseye it is apparent you have decided to follow me from thread to thread like a little puppy dog in a juvenile attempt to start a pissing contest.


Just the opposite gohon, I usually don't read any thing you write but sometimes the subject is so absurd I try to kill the thread. You are quite conceited.

If you have complaints about me take them to the mods and Chris they will tell me what I need to know about the rules around here.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

buckseye said:


> > but sometimes the subject is so absurd I try to kill the thread.


Oh I see......... you have decided to be the one that determines what can and what cannot be discussed on this forum. I guess the moderators and Chris might just as well turn everything over to you huh.......... And you call me conceited. :lol: Well, at least you admitted to what you are and your childish intentions are.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Whats the matter isn't the playground big enough for you? Were you a playground bully? Well guess what I have handled that situation many times? I'll ask Chris to make another NoDak so we each have one.


----------



## administrator (Feb 13, 2002)

Sigh....

I'd like to keep this going but lately I need to be proactive to clean up all the BS.

If you guys have a beef with each other, TAKE IT UP VIA PM'S.

Thanks.


----------

