Is it just me or does anybody eles think that ppl. who hit deer in these towns can sue that town? The deer have to be managed & those towns that do not allow deer to be harvest should be held accountable for not manageing their deer. Would it not be great if the insurance co. started to sue these towns for claim resulting from deer collisions. I bet alot of woods would open up quick.
For towns that have no hunting regs.
rdfhunter
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Joined
·
17,848 Posts
Is it just me or does anybody eles think that ppl. who hit deer in these towns can sue that town? The deer have to be managed & those towns that do not allow deer to be harvest should be held accountable for not manageing their deer. Would it not be great if the insurance co. started to sue these towns for claim resulting from deer collisions. I bet alot of woods would open up quick.
Joined
·
8,433 Posts
[up][up]
I'm sure there would be some problems but it sure would help the honest man! How many people would aim for deer now?
Of course it would only be smart to let organizations in like UBNJ to help do it for free but hell why would anyone do the smart thing. [sleep]
Come on guys - be honest. You all know that hiring an outfit that nets the deer, then kills it by slamming a steel bolt into its brain and tossing the animal into a heap to decompose is much more compassionate than having it hunted and used as food. After all - man has been netting and using steel-bolts on deer for 2.6 million years. It's now part of the human genome.
Besides, don't you dumb hunters ever read? The antis recently did a poll of NJ deers and found that 4 out of 5 deers prefer to die by a bolt to the brain than a sabot through the heart. (The 5th deer was being netted and steel-bolted at the time they interviewed it that's why it preferred the sabot through the heart.)
Obviously the antis and the media have done a great job of informing NJ citizens that it is much more ethical to pay tax dollars to have deer harvested than have hunters do it for them for free (while hunters help to pay DFW salaries by purchasing licenses, tags, etc.)
You hunters have all lived up to the carefully crafted stereotype that you are ignorant cro-magnons. (I'm sorry, I know I just offended the cro-magnons.)
Ant
Besides, don't you dumb hunters ever read? The antis recently did a poll of NJ deers and found that 4 out of 5 deers prefer to die by a bolt to the brain than a sabot through the heart. (The 5th deer was being netted and steel-bolted at the time they interviewed it that's why it preferred the sabot through the heart.)
Obviously the antis and the media have done a great job of informing NJ citizens that it is much more ethical to pay tax dollars to have deer harvested than have hunters do it for them for free (while hunters help to pay DFW salaries by purchasing licenses, tags, etc.)
You hunters have all lived up to the carefully crafted stereotype that you are ignorant cro-magnons. (I'm sorry, I know I just offended the cro-magnons.)
Ant
Joined
·
6,574 Posts
To these asshole anti's ,It's not so much as saving the animal as it is for them [anti pieces of shit]to stop us from doing somthing we get enjoyment out of, hunting. In thier warped minds, it's accecpible to pay out the ass with your towns tax dollars to hire contractors to do the job because to them it's just work and they get no enjoyment or enlightenment out of it. but God forbid we volunteer to go to a safety class and volunteer to do it for free, now that's taboo and howdare you even bring it up![down]
There have been several attempts to sue the state and certain townships over deer vehicle collisions. I know Princeton township had lawsuits filed against them but I never heard the outcome. A couple years ago a few PETA members were traveling up the GSP and hit a deer totaling their car. They then sued the state saying hunters in the woods caused deer to run out onto the highway. If I remember right this happened at like 2-3AM, and I think it was outside of hunting season as well. That case got thrown out. I would think if a township did not allow hunting and they did not manage deer via sharpshooter, net & bolt, etc. then they would be creating an unsafe situation for motorists and should be held responsible. The same goes for property damage in areas where deer are not controlled due to township laws.
Maybe this is the same incident and I have my facts confused, but I believe a car full of NJ's own animal rights people (I forget which ones) hit and killed a deer on the turnpike down around the Cranbury exit, and tried to sue the state, claiming that it was the DFW's deer management program's fault.beaverman said:
Kinda a funny thought ... a car full of animal rights nutcases hitting and killing a deer with thier Yugo covered in animal rights bumber stickers. I wish I could have been there. [hihi]
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
