FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178  
179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   >>   >|  
expert shot can make with a double-barreled gun. It is natural for the hunter who does not care a rap about the extermination of species to love the gun that will enable him to kill up to the bag limit, every time he takes the field. It is natural for men who don't think, or who think in circles, to say "so long as I observe the lawful bag limit, what difference does it make what kind of a gun I use?" It is natural for the Remington, and Winchester, and Marlin gun-makers to say, as they do, "Enforce the laws! Shorten the open seasons! Reduce the bag limit, and then it won't matter what guns are used! But,--DON'T touch autoloading guns! Don't hamper Inventive Genius!" Is it not high time for American sportsmen to cease taking their moral principles and their codes of ethics from the gun-makers? Here is a question that I would like to put before every hunter of game in America: In view of the alarming scarcity of game, in view of the impending extermination of species by legal hunting, can any high-minded _sportsman_, can any _good citizen_ either sell a machine shot-gun or use one in hunting? A gentleman is incapable of taking an unfair advantage of any wild creature; therefore a gentleman cannot use punt guns for ducks, dynamite for game fish, or automatic or pump guns in bird-shooting. The machine guns and "silencers" are grossly unfair, and like gang-hooks, nets and dynamite for trout and bass, their use in hunting must everywhere be prohibited by law. Times have changed, and the lines for protection must be more tightly drawn. [Illustration: THE CHAMPION GAME SLAUGHTER CASE One Hour's Slaughter (218 Geese) With Two Automatic Shot-Guns] The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (Judge Orlady) has decided that the Pennsylvania law against the use of automatic guns in hunting is entirely constitutional, because every state has a right to say how its game may and may not be killed. It is up to the American People to say _now_ whether their wild life shall be slaughtered by machinery, or not. If they are willing that it should be, then let us be consistent and say--away with all "conservation!" The game conservators can endure a gameless and birdless continent quite as well as the average citizen can. HOW THEY WORK.--There are a few apologists for the automatic and pump guns who cheerfully say, "So long as the bag limit is observed what difference does it make how the birds are killed?" It is strange th
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178  
179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

hunting

 

automatic

 

natural

 

makers

 

American

 

unfair

 
gentleman
 
hunter
 

killed

 

citizen


Pennsylvania

 

machine

 

taking

 

difference

 

extermination

 

species

 

dynamite

 

Slaughter

 

Automatic

 
Supreme

changed

 

protection

 

prohibited

 

expert

 

tightly

 

SLAUGHTER

 

Illustration

 

CHAMPION

 
continent
 

average


birdless

 

gameless

 

conservation

 

conservators

 

endure

 
observed
 

strange

 

cheerfully

 

apologists

 

consistent


People

 
constitutional
 

Orlady

 

decided

 

machinery

 

slaughtered

 
seasons
 

Reduce

 

matter

 
Shorten