Wake the f@#k up

[Bugle M In]

Its not racism its resentment caused by the GOV which is sold as racism.....

I don't know if "sold" is the right term...IMO.
But, what the Gov of now and the past (Feds like Ian Waddel etc who come to mind and someone I have met several times).
have "created" racism by the form of basically establishing "segregation" with some of these bs policies.

The "will never change" is true to some degree, but I don't think it is the "way to think".
It "will never change" unless it gets talked about, and the "push back" starts to happen.
Only when the majority start to see how "out of hand" it has become, and talks loudly about it, will it change..IMO

[finngun]

The "will never change" is true to some degree, but I don't think it is the "way to think".///////well i think i never see equal rights,,in my lifetime,,,sad..

[Bugle M In]

The "will never change" is true to some degree, but I don't think it is the "way to think".///////well i think i never see equal rights,,in my lifetime,,,sad..

One day, due to "special interests" things will fall apart.
Why, because the planet is only "so big" and that's it.
And yet people keep populating, bigger and bigger.
Eventually "mother nature" will kick back, and even the special interests will be left with "nothing".
Look at moose, and some groups blaming us hunters for that, rather then pointing their finger at themselves.
If one does not deal with the "real issue" at hand, one is left with the continuing problem with no hope in sight.
And once you remove a user group, you have now also "lost a voice" in the battle to actually "correct the problem"
In the end, it's a lose\-lose proposition.
Very stupid in fact, and saying it will never change, is removing the voice to "make it change".
Speak up!

[Weatherby Fan]

This won't change as it was ruled by the Supreme Court of Canada they have special rights and until this is challenged and stopped or changed its only going to get worse a lot worse, we can blame the egghead we have in power but this is not a Prime Minister or a Premier issue its way bigger than that, it has to come from the people to force the hands of the government to challenge it in court and we don't have anyone that will stand up and make changes for the better of all people not just 4% of the population of Canada

Again as others have said this is going to get ALOT WORSE......

[elknut]

Bugle M In.......I think it wont ever change because the Supreme Court has given them their rights...They will never reverse that decision..Our constitution divides Canada..The Natives never signed on.... the Quebecers have an opt out clause ....and we suck the hind tit...Trying to go against is like trying to break down a wall with your head...The Conservative govt of Stephen Harper didn't change much ..Just the gun laws ..We have literally given our rights of ownership to the Natives...The govts sign treaties giving them ownership first and foremost...We can't put a pipeline through because of Native land claims ...As someone said .....Once our generation is gone it will all but be over for our hunting and fishing Heritage..I for one really depise Canada for not challenging this outcome and agree we are one nation...But you see in reality we are not ..." ONE NATION "...We are 3 going on 4 ...The United Nations can talk about fairness all it wants but I don't see any other country that has given up its sovereignty as has Canada...Jees we are stupid...Dennis

[sthdslayer]

Here is an article about the lack of leadership that i think sums it up

The issue of pipelines is a key in Canada’s latest crossroads of national seriousness. The country didn’t arise from an anti-colonial revolution, like others in the Americas, or from a unique cultural homogeneity like Norwegians, Finns, Israelis and Czechs. It was a group of British-settled or occupied territories strung along the American border and hastily put together when the U.S. emerged united at last and with the greatest army and generals in the world after its Civil War, and unencumbered with any affection for the British Empire.
John A. Macdonald, the great and racially tolerant founder of the country, and George-Étienne Cartier and George Brown, conceived the only transcontinental, bicultural, parliamentary confederation in the history of the world, and secured its approval by squabbling colonial legislators in what are now four provinces (Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick), and by the British Parliament. Benjamin Disraeli was chancellor of the Exchequer, deputy prime minister and leader of the House of Commons in a government officially led by the Earl of Derby, who as colonial secretary had completely misjudged the issue of responsible government in Canada after the 1837 rebellion. Disraeli and William Ewart Gladstone, in the midst of their great rivalry of more than 35 years (during which they served as prime minister and chancellor a total of 13 times) had little knowledge of Canada, were skeptical about its survival, and Gladstone generally thought the Empire was nonsense anyway. They interrupted the intense debate over the Second Reform Bill, vastly expanding the British electorate, to put Macdonald’s British North America Act through. The colonial secretary, Lord Carnarvon, said they were creating what would eventually be one of the world’s great nations, and the governor general of Canada, Viscount Monck, spoke in the House of Lords in support of it with some eloquence.
but realized the new country needed a national purpose beyond not being American. He soon unveiled his “national policy,” which consisted of setting up more provinces, imposing a tariff that would facilitate the creation of a manufacturing industry, and most ambitiously, building a transcontinental railway that would connect the new country and be the spine of it. This was an immense undertaking: the Americans were pursuing the same objectives but they could lay track on farmland and gentle hills all the way to the Rocky Mountains and had a huge capital market to finance their railways. Canadian Pacific was largely built upon the rock of the Canadian Shield, and Canadian financial markets could finance only about a quarter of the costs. The financial centres of New York and London, where funds would have to be raised, were heavily influenced by forces connected to competing American railroads. Macdonald got his entire program through, and was followed by 15 years of Wilfrid Laurier extending rail service in the country and incentivizing immense waves of immigration. Macdonald and Laurier, prime ministers for 34 of Canada’s first 44 years as a Dominion (there were five prime ministers in the other 10 years), built a credible country, able to play an important and distinguished part in the First World War.Other prime ministers were more than placemen. Robert Borden took the country through the First World War (though he used the English majority to impose conscription on French Canada). Mackenzie King ran always as a figure of French-English conciliation, and got the country through the Second World War without a major split, running a very distinguished war effort, and even taking the lead in urging president Harry Truman and British prime minister Clement Attlee into the Cold War after the Igor Gouzenko affair broke in Canada in 1946. Louis St. Laurent presided over peace and prosperity in the Fifties, Lester Pearson was a wide-ranging reformer. The only reason Pierre Trudeau entered pubic life was to defeat the Quebec separatists, and he did it when no one else could. Brian Mulroney tried unsuccessfully to complete the constitutional process but did succeed in putting through free trade and in moving the basis of federal income from taxes on income to taxes on goods and services, both vital achievements. Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin eliminated the federal deficit and passed the Clarity Act, making provincial secession more complicated after almost losing the 1995 Quebec independence referendum. Stephen Harper tried to shrink the public sector durably by reducing HST. Other leaders governed too briefly to leave much of a mark.

Canada appears completely dysfunctional; a chump among the world’s nations we so tiresomely lecture on their moral duties

For two-and-a-half years, the Justin Trudeau government has been preoccupied with full-body immersion in politically correct pandering to native people, gender warriors, and eco-alarmists, in fiscal extravagance, collective apologies, and Peter Pan posturing in the world. In strategic terms, Canada is a mockery for importing 700,000 barrels of oil a day in eastern Canada while being unable to move oil from Alberta to eastern markets. The accomplished financier and philanthropist Seymour Schulich last week sent round a letter to a Vancouver newspaper from a man in Seattle thanking Canada for the gift of “$100 million a day” because of the low oil price forced on Alberta by British Columbia, by preventing Alberta from exporting oil to world markets. The failure to supply our eastern provinces and to access fully the trans-Pacific markets, squabbling and envious provinces, and the lack of any effective federal leadership are a disgrace that makes Canada appear completely dysfunctional; a chump among the world’s nations we so tiresomely lecture on their moral duties.

I like Justin Trudeau personally and urged readers to vote for him in 2015, because of the Harper autocracy and sclerosis (after a generally successful period as prime minister). While the financially and oratorically extravagant political correctness of the government is grating, there have not been disasters until recently. Failure to get some movement on pipelines will sink this government. The stalling of the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, which would almost triple the flow of Alberta crude oil to the West Coast, to 890,000 barrels daily, and the cancellation of the Energy East pipeline in October of last year, which would have brought more than a million barrels a day east from Alberta and Saskatchewan for refinement and sale or export, are both traceable to the absence of federal leadership.

Underlying the travails of both projects is the moral incapacity to face down the nativist and ecological scaremongers. The natives are ambiguously divided on the Trans Mountain pipeline and do not play an important role in the eastern project. And the climatic debate is nonsense: alleged (completely implausible) danger to 76 orca whales on the southern British Columbia coast, and esoteric discussion about the impact on ability to meet the insane carbon-emission targets we foolishly committed to in the Paris climate agreement. (It doesn’t matter much because the entire fairy tale evaporated with the withdrawal of the United States, while the chief offenders, China and India, charge ahead making no commitment to do anything.) We will find out soon enough if climate is changing, if the world is warming, and if the conduct of man has anything to do with any of it. We need not amuse the world by pre-emptively punishing ourselves as we are.
What is required is a federal enunciation of a right of eminent domain that enables the federal government to fulfill its mandate to provide peace, order and good government. This could require the patient appointment of high court judges who will not be as easily gulled as they have been recently by woeful tales of the ubiquity and fragility of native religion and the susceptibility of nature to the safest of all energy transmission methods. And above all, it will require leadership. It’s showtime for Justin Trudeau; to take a phrase from the Quebec of Pierre Trudeau’s politically formative years: “Un chef ou pas un chef?” (a leader or no leader?).

[codeitin]

This whole thread is wrong and has nothing to do with hunting. The constitution does not create racism, First Nations should be entitled to equal, but distinct, claims to their own culture, history and land the same way that non-First Nations are, and ironically is the definition of real entitlement that a majority group can feel comfortable calling aboriginal groups asking to be given a legitimate and distinct stake in the country we all share "entitlement". All I am reading here is guys who are reluctant to compromise their way of life but are more than happy to impose that way of life on others, like little kids who are angry that other kids are suddenly being allowed to play different games in their sandbox.

I dislike even dignifying this thread with a response but it pains me to see it floating at the top of the page unopposed - I was hoping it would just get closed .

[gutpile]

Obviously you haven't lived long enough !

[Piperdown]

This whole thread is wrong and has nothing to do with hunting. The constitution does not create racism, First Nations should be entitled to equal, but distinct, claims to their own culture, history and land the same way that non-First Nations are, and ironically is the definition of real entitlement that a majority group can feel comfortable calling aboriginal groups asking to be given a legitimate and distinct stake in the country we all share "entitlement". All I am reading here is guys who are reluctant to compromise their way of life but are more than happy to impose that way of life on others, like little kids who are angry that other kids are suddenly being allowed to play different games in their sandbox.

I dislike even dignifying this thread with a response but it pains me to see it floating at the top of the page unopposed - I was hoping it would just get closed .

Man i am really enjoying all your hunting stories and pictures can you please post some more up

[j270wsm]

This whole thread is wrong and has nothing to do with hunting. The constitution does not create racism, First Nations should be entitled to equal, but distinct, claims to their own culture, history and land the same way that non-First Nations are, and ironically is the definition of real entitlement that a majority group can feel comfortable calling aboriginal groups asking to be given a legitimate and distinct stake in the country we all share "entitlement". All I am reading here is guys who are reluctant to compromise their way of life but are more than happy to impose that way of life on others, like little kids who are angry that other kids are suddenly being allowed to play different games in their sandbox.

I dislike even dignifying this thread with a response but it pains me to see it floating at the top of the page unopposed - I was hoping it would just get closed .

I wish I was like you, and seen rainbows and lollipops through every window

No one is saying that natives can't/shouldn't keep their culture, or have rights!!! What they are saying is that they should be given special treatment! After all, they are Canadian just like the rest of us. They shouldn't be given a slap on the wrist for doing something that the rest of us would be in jail for or paying hefty fines. I personally feel that handing money to people for doing nothing creates entitlement.