Ducks Unlimited vs angry gunowners
- Thread starter scott_r
- Start date
Based on the numerous threads on the forum, a lot of people thought DU was more pro gun then it is.
The people who support them are disappointed they can't count on DU to support a democratic process.
The NFA have had their own widely publicized issues and many have chosen to not support them
I personally think they do some good things.
The DUs issues are hardly related. Thats a complete strawman. What we do know is hunters will throw their support behind conservation groups more then pro firearms groups based on the numbers you provided.
Thats not a bad thing to some extent but for hunters the two things are inextricably linked and to pretend it isnt that way assumes you are fine with hunting with a bow and arrow or slingshot because firearms are irrelevant.
All that matters is land access and I will hunt with whatever the government decides is appropriate.
nowarningshot
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Switch your comment 180 degrees. This is a reaction to a organization, funded by shooters and hunters turning on them.
Perhaps that flew in 1995, with no internet, when protest was a crowd on parliament hill....covered by military snipers.
Different time, different methods. Those methods taught to us by the enemy's of personal freedom. Ducks is working with those enemies, they have a reckoning due.
How is it, you can't see that?
DU usa has no problem to be why not DUC ...?
Sheldon and the leadership themselves... hard to say...
Every single one of the members... HELL YES!
Further to this point
If DUC decided to get off the pot and the NFA leadership said we dont need them or their help...
I would suggest the NFA would face a very similar backlash from it's membership that DU was facing last week...
If DUC decided to get off the pot and the NFA leadership said we dont need them or their help...
I would suggest the NFA would face a very similar backlash from it's membership that DU was facing last week...
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I think that’s more than a bit of a reach. Reality is most gun owners aren’t on CGN, or members of the NFA, or even know about this row over Duck’s neutrality or have even heard of this petition. Most won’t care about further restrictions, and most don’t own the guns affected- yet. To paraphrase Gatehouse, they have to take the scary guns before they can take the hunting rifle. I see that logic and carry a Glock for work ATC, so I like having the line as far from what I do as possible even if black guns don’t personally interest me anymore. But I’m a gun owning individual, not a wetland conservation organization. I don’t expect Ducks to see it the same way I do, or expand their mandate beyond conservation.
See DUC has a model that works. Money comes from multiple directions and groups. And they show results.
Then some of these supporting CGN retailers and some gun owners, make a big deal of DUC because they are neutral of a gun e-petition.
How many of these retailers and gun owners are members of the NFA? This would require a paid membership. I'm not sure...
But when I look at the NFA's listed Business Supporters I don't see them there. Maybe because they don't believe in gun advocacy. Or putting money where your mouth is.
Easier to e-crap on a duck I guess.
Then some of these supporting CGN retailers and some gun owners, make a big deal of DUC because they are neutral of a gun e-petition.
How many of these retailers and gun owners are members of the NFA? This would require a paid membership. I'm not sure...
But when I look at the NFA's listed Business Supporters I don't see them there. Maybe because they don't believe in gun advocacy. Or putting money where your mouth is.
Easier to e-crap on a duck I guess.
In what way?
I would guess that there is more NFA people signing the petition then pure hunters. Several of the things you point here are exactly what im saying...
The NFA people tend to be the more gun rights oriented people and the hunters don't care... as you have stated.
The point is the division is pointless as because as you stated it is incrementalism in the hopes of division... Thats why we need the hunters to see that... sadly a lot don't or wont get involved until its too late.
NZ is an example...
They don't have to... how much that hurts their support is questionable... clearly a LOT of people hoped they would side with gun rights and are disappointed...
I agree it would be a shame if they just pick up more support from gun hating libs and the hunters eventually lose access to land...
And wouldnt it be a shame if that was simply because they couldnt share a petition on democratic process?
Last edited:
I understand that is how you feel about it...
You can certainly accuse each individual business of whatever you want but that certainly doesnt absolve DU...
Im surprised you think it does... Look at what i posted on BCWFs position...
You are defending an organization that is clearly moving more left in its support... certainly your choice but others are perfectly entitled to move support to organizations that understand the link between firearms and hunting...
Seems a no brainer really... if they decide that hunters are doing too much damage will you support that too?
This is how the incrementalism happens... if you do nothing now what do you think DU will be in 10 years...
More pro firearm?
I’m sure duc model will keep working just fine but it will be without a lot of gun owners support that they use to have before they betrayed us
Not sure why you keep bringing up the nfa. I used to be a member before they wasted a ton of time and money fighting internally and I will not be a part of them until Sheldon resigns
I’m not just craping on duc. I’ll crap on anyone who betrays me and my contributions.
It’s very clear you are a duc supporter and don’t care that they won’t even post a notification of a petition about gun bans on their website. And that is your choice. But they won’t get another dime from me until they chose to do what I believe is the right thing.
you may be right but look what DU says about guns:
h t t p s ://www.ducks.org/about-ducks-unlimited/du-statement-on-firearms
DU Statement on Firearms
We know that many of you have been following the recent debate on potential gun-control legislation.
The potential for new firearms regulations or legislation is a complicated and divisive issue, and while there are no simple answers to the problem of reducing violence in our country, DU will continue to remain steadfast and focused on our mission of wetlands and waterfowl conservation, and in our support for hunters and a continued strong waterfowling tradition.
Ducks Unlimited was founded by hunter-conservationists 80 years ago, and conservation remains our mission. DU is first and foremost an organization dedicated to conserving wetlands for waterfowl, and the majority of our members are hunters.
DU strongly supports the right to bear arms and believes that with that right comes a responsibility to use firearms lawfully and safely. The ownership and use of firearms is intertwined with wildlife management and conservation in North America, and we strongly support hunting. Without hunters and recreational shooters and their financial contributions through hunting licenses and excise taxes on sporting arms, national conservation funding would be decimated.
We will continue to hold ourselves to the highest standards of gun safety, hunting ethics, and responsible firearms ownership and use.
if only the canadian have said the same ...
Thats pretty interesting...
American Du : highest standards of gun safety, hunting ethics, and responsible firearms ownership and use
Canadian Du : we are only involved in conservation despite our president being listed on the CFAC as a member and listing his title
Its disappointing so many Canadian gun owners are ok with this dichotomy
Circle back to the registry being demolished and Canadian gun owners should be proud of some of what has been accomplished and should continue to wage that battle with the same level of energy...
If your problem is with gun advocacy, stop complaining to neutral conservation groups who get significant revenue from non-gun owners. This in itself is an amazing accomplishment.
https://www.ducks.ca/assets/2019/08/AR-2019_LISTS_web.pdf
https://www.ducks.ca/about/our-partners/
https://www.ducks.ca/assets/2019/08/AR-2019_LISTS_web.pdf
https://www.ducks.ca/about/our-partners/
You shouldn't kid yourself...
If DU came out as Pro gun all that support would be gone...
That's exactly why they have taken the track they have... can you not see that?
They completely get you won't pull your support... that's why they can play both sides...
The left will pull support at a moment's notice for social media points...
And you are supporting those people's position by not holding DU accountable... Guns aren't important....
Last edited:
Again... you are hoping the left sees eye to eye with you and allows you to hunt indefinately... right now you are convenient to them...
Everyone pro DU admitted that a huge amount of their support comes from non gun owners and the libs...
Its honestly stunning that you don't think in the race for virtue that you won't be the first one thrown under the bus....
If you would rather that they were on your team then pro firearms people that may not hunt as much as you then you are in serious trouble....
You just don't know it yet...
Everyone's in trouble for something.
It's how you react and plan against it.
Wetlands were being drained and habitat lost. DUC got organized and fast forward 75 years is now winning.
Now, gun bans are imminent. What do us gun owners do? E-petition and get angry at DUC. Will it work? Maybe.
It's how you react and plan against it.
Wetlands were being drained and habitat lost. DUC got organized and fast forward 75 years is now winning.
Now, gun bans are imminent. What do us gun owners do? E-petition and get angry at DUC. Will it work? Maybe.
