who owns the deer? the person who shot it first
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9404E3D91E38E533A25751C0A9649D94699FD7CF On Nov 20, 12:17 pm, "M. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote: > 'Poaching' is not wrongNovember 18, 10:46 PM > Albuquerque Libertarian ExaminerKent McManigal > Added to the state's list of prohibited victimless acts is the imaginary > offense of "poaching". > "Poaching" is the act of not recognizing government's claim over something > itdoes notown: the wildlife that lives within the country's imaginary > borders. I suppose it is not surprising that the government employees think > they own thedeer, since they also think they own thehumans, but it is a > concept I will continue to correct when I run across it. > Purchasing a license from the government in order to hunt is admitting that > you agree that government owns the animals. You should ask the property > owner before hunting on his land, but if a deer is on your property, and it > has no ownership indicators, it is yours to take. "Poaching" would only be > wrong if someone owns the animals while they are running free, or if you > trespassed to get to the animals. No one owns the animals in most cases, > since "the state" can own nothing it did not first steal, and thieves have no > authority to dictate what can be done with the property they stole. > Hunting is an activity that teaches people to provide for themselves. It > short-circuits the welfare cycle that government depends upon for dependence > and loyalty. Pretending to own the wildlife and then selling permission to > hunt it simply gives the state more unwarranted power over the people. It is > another way to take money from productive people and give it to the parasites > of government. Plus, in order to hunt, people need to own effective weapons > and have the skills to use them. That is more reason for government to demand > a license: to keep track of armed people. Hunting often involved stalking > and tracking and an awareness of your surroundings. Those are skills that > your enemies would not like for you to hone, since they may serve you in the > future. > I am certainly not advocating mindless slaughter of wildlife. I hate waste. I > would not shoot it unless I was prepared to eat it, or otherwise use it. I > also know that some of the money from licenses goes toward habitat and such, > but the amount is atinypercentage (that which is left over after the > excessive bureaucracy is paid for) and could be done much better by the > market through privately owned property. Mostly your license fees go to > support those who want to exercise control over you and your guns. Don't > undercut freedom by supporting the state with your obedience or with your > money. You owe the state nothing.http://bit.ly/5VzmvC -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
