SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Laws to permit the colour "blaze pink" for hunters have been proposed in five states in the US. How did this become a legislative trend?
As the legislative session drew to a close last week at the Minnesota state capitol, a curious piece of legislation became the focus of ire for lawmakers - a bill to make something called "blaze pink" legal for hunters to wear.
...
Last spring, Wisconsin Representative Nick Milroy had the idea that "blaze pink" might also be an acceptable safety colour as well as a way to get some new blood into the sport.He even got a textile scientist at a local university to investigate whether there were any safety concerns.
"The fastest growing segment in new recruits into hunting are females, and that's one of the big reasons that companies have been marketing things like pink camouflage, pink guns, pink knives," he says.
Participation in hunting in the US has been on the decline for decades, and the sport is overwhelmingly dominated by men.
Safety Orange to become Safety Pink?
(Score: 2) by fliptop on Sunday May 29 2016, @04:16PM
That's not quite true, there's been a few times I've followed a blood trail to its end and never found a fresh kill, or found it way down inside a deep ravine that's nearly impossible to even winch it out of. Lost a few expensive arrows that way too.
And have even more wounded deer wandering around, eventually dying in a remote ravine as food only for the buzzards and coyotes?
To be oneself, and unafraid whether right or wrong, is more admirable than the easy cowardice of surrender to conformity
(Score: 2) by JNCF on Sunday May 29 2016, @06:28PM
If you really want more blood, limit big game hunters to spears and buck knives.
And have even more wounded deer wandering around, eventually dying in a remote ravine as food only for the The Mighty Buzzard and coyotes?
FTFY. I get what you're saying, and definitely agree that the number of wounded animals per attacked animal wound go up. I would also expect the number of attacked animals to go down, though - hunting with a spear is a more strenuous activity that fewer people get into. I'd bet that this would result in a fewer total number of wounded-but-not-dead animals, but I wouldn't be too incredibly surprised if I lost.
(Score: 2) by fliptop on Sunday May 29 2016, @06:52PM
Actually, the way I look at it, an arrow is just a little spear.
The only time you have to wear blaze orange/pink when hunting large game is during rifle season. Otherwise, you camouflage yourself the best you can so they're more likely to walk in close.
I'm not a bird hunter but I think you have to wear it while hunting waterfowl. Not sure about upland game birds like quail or pheasant.
To be oneself, and unafraid whether right or wrong, is more admirable than the easy cowardice of surrender to conformity
(Score: 2) by JNCF on Sunday May 29 2016, @07:17PM
Arrows are made differently, with flight in mind and fletching on shaft. I think OP was trying to restrict us to classic melee weapons - I doubt that even an atlatl would be allowed, much less a bow and arrow.
I have yet to hunt a large animal with a spear. I've only actually been deer hunting a couple of times, period (I used to have radically different views on death, and was a vegan for years). Most of my gun hunting experience has been with birds, but I've also gigged some frogs, fish, and a couple small mammals. I enjoy wading through a pond gigging frogs way more than lying in a blind waiting for ducks. I did shoot a frog with an arrow once, but that's my only bow kill. I haven't put in enough time with a bow yet, but a confused frog is an easy target.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 29 2016, @07:46PM
Strangely, I don't dig on venison. I'll leave that to my non-capitalized cousins. The only warm-blooded wild game animals I enjoy are quail and doves and hunting them requires entirely too much walking through muddy corn fields for my lazy ass. Now catfish, they're in dire peril from me. I'm all about getting food from sitting around smoking cigarettes and swapping lies with other old guys.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Troll) by ilPapa on Monday May 30 2016, @10:22PM
It takes a real man to kill defenseless creatures. What are you compensating for?
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 2) by fliptop on Tuesday May 31 2016, @03:39AM
Nothing. I'm just hungry. And it's practically free.
To be oneself, and unafraid whether right or wrong, is more admirable than the easy cowardice of surrender to conformity
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Tuesday May 31 2016, @01:03PM
That's what all hunters say. Hunting "for food" is just a gateway drug. You start out shooting a squirrel for stew and you end up like these assholes:
http://www.oregonherald.com/bnews/i/95.jpg [oregonherald.com]
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31 2016, @04:53PM
I don't hunt for food. I kill and leave the poor, innocent, dead animals to rot just to piss off jerks like you.
Head shots are best when they blow animal brains out onto the trees...
Lick it up, chattel.