Aboriginal Right To Shoot The Cute?
- Thread starter dumpthemonarchy
- Start date
I believe that in the context of 'ceremonial' activity, spears would have been the available implement. If the argument that is being forwarded relates to cultural/ceremonial import, one would assume that the participants would desire to remain as close to the original practice.
No one is suggesting that this group 'have to stay in the stone age', however, if this activity is being sold as tradition and celebrating roots, using a rifle would taint the entire activity.
No one is suggesting this.
I'd like to clear something up.
If Whitie wants to go hunting otters and seals Whitie can go hunting seals and oterrs.
Absolutely NOTHING seperates anyone from the same rights as another person in the country. There is no such thing as "native rights" and "everyone else rights".
No wonder society keeps getting hosed. It's too freakin' easy.
CCR&F CLEARLY says:
15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
If Whitie wants to go hunting otters and seals Whitie can go hunting seals and oterrs.
Absolutely NOTHING seperates anyone from the same rights as another person in the country. There is no such thing as "native rights" and "everyone else rights".
No wonder society keeps getting hosed. It's too freakin' easy.
CCR&F CLEARLY says:
15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
take a look at the salmon fishing quotas and licensing reqs on teh west coast and the lobster fisheries on the east coast.
Main Entry: sub·mit
Pronunciation: \səb-ˈmit\ Function: verb Inflected Form(s): sub·mit·ted; sub·mit·ting Etymology: Middle English submitten, from Latin submittere to lower, submit, from sub- + mittere to send Date: 14th century transitive verb1 a: to yield to governance or authority b: to subject to a condition, treatment, or operation <the metal was submitted to analysis>2: to present or propose to another for review, consideration, or decision ; also : to deliver formally <submitted my resignation>3: to put forward as an opinion or contention <we submit that the charge is not proved>intransitive verb1 a: to yield oneself to the authority or will of another : surrender b: to permit oneself to be subjected to something <had to submit to surgery>2: to defer to or consent to abide by the opinion or authority of another
Since when do you have to "beg" for your rights?
Main Entry: ap·pli·ca·tion
Pronunciation: \ˌa-plə-ˈkā-shən\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English applicacioun, from Latin application-, applicatio inclination, from applicare Date: 15th century 1: an act of applying: a (1): an act of putting to use <application of new techniques> (2): a use to which something is put <new applications for old remedies> (3): a program (as a word processor or a spreadsheet) that performs one of the major tasks for which a computer is used b: an act of administering or superposing <application of paint to a house> c: assiduous attention <succeeds by application to her studies> 2 a: request, petition <an application for financial aid> b: a form used in making a request3: the practical inference to be derived from a discourse (as a moral tale)4: a medicated or protective layer or material <an oily application for dry skin>5: capacity for practical use <words of varied application>
Since when do you have to "beg" for your rights?
Pronunciation: \səb-ˈmit\ Function: verb Inflected Form(s): sub·mit·ted; sub·mit·ting Etymology: Middle English submitten, from Latin submittere to lower, submit, from sub- + mittere to send Date: 14th century transitive verb1 a: to yield to governance or authority b: to subject to a condition, treatment, or operation <the metal was submitted to analysis>2: to present or propose to another for review, consideration, or decision ; also : to deliver formally <submitted my resignation>3: to put forward as an opinion or contention <we submit that the charge is not proved>intransitive verb1 a: to yield oneself to the authority or will of another : surrender b: to permit oneself to be subjected to something <had to submit to surgery>2: to defer to or consent to abide by the opinion or authority of anotherSince when do you have to "beg" for your rights?
Main Entry: ap·pli·ca·tion
Pronunciation: \ˌa-plə-ˈkā-shən\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English applicacioun, from Latin application-, applicatio inclination, from applicare Date: 15th century 1: an act of applying: a (1): an act of putting to use <application of new techniques> (2): a use to which something is put <new applications for old remedies> (3): a program (as a word processor or a spreadsheet) that performs one of the major tasks for which a computer is used b: an act of administering or superposing <application of paint to a house> c: assiduous attention <succeeds by application to her studies> 2 a: request, petition <an application for financial aid> b: a form used in making a request3: the practical inference to be derived from a discourse (as a moral tale)4: a medicated or protective layer or material <an oily application for dry skin>5: capacity for practical use <words of varied application>Since when do you have to "beg" for your rights?
Last edited:
Well I never heard of red necks being called natives. The only Americans called Natives are Native Americans. You have clarified yourself but don't you think it needed clarification?
Not sure how this fits in the topic at hand or how it fit in what I was saying.
In a perfect world, I would agree.
Out here we have many issues between Natives and Whites. Hatred doesn't show it's ugly face often, but it does come up on occasion.
Maybe on the law books we are all equal, but in real life and in real court it is far different.
At the moment we have the Nuu-chah-nulth that want to hunt otters. The DFO says there are about 3500 right now. With their track record on counting I would guess there are twice that.
The Natives would like to "harvest" 20 a year. (the first year anyways)
20 will not harm the numbers and it will let them find out if they can- #1- skin the animals. #2- tan the hide (not easy to preserve). #3- fashion a head dress for the Chiefs and #4- sell the pelts.
There is simply no point in arguing or fighting this. They will do it, it's a fact.
The gov't will allow it because for them to fight it, they would lose in the Supreme Court.
Seen this battle a few times, don't want my tax $$$' s going for it anymore when we have hungry and needy people in the area,and many other good uses for the money.
As for the Foot Guards hats. The Queen (or her spokespeople) say "we will search for a synthetic" to get the PETA type people to shut up. There is no substitute for the real thing, and I guarantee that the meat is not being eaten.
Damn shame too, bear meat is very palatible.
This is true, but Canadians aren't so good at Canadian history...;-)
Captain, I agree 100%. If this was about sustenance providing, I would feel differently though.
Again, I agree.
We are, but some Chiefs and their friends and family are more equal.
That gavel swings two ways Strickland.
That may be true, the Gov't is not oft on the ball. But so long as Otter are of a concern, I would say hold off on the ceremonial cull, but at 20 a year, I'm not sure which way I go on this yet. Given differring numbers and a low cull count.
I don't see an issue here. I've tanned Deer pelts, never sold them though. Just used them to make art and clothing given away as gifts. But I can understand the urge to get in touch with their roots though.
That's not always a given, but your concern is not without merit.
I would agree, I have been in my fair share of battle with corrupt leaders in my community. Living far to high off the hog, while their people suffer.
You may be right.
Though I won't eat it for spiritual reasons, I can not agree, I find it greasy and gamey, lol. But that's just my opinion. ;-)
Where does it say they aren't? They CHOOSE to submit to regulation. It's not forced submission. Wake up and smell the bannock buddy. You listened to some else's thought and misinterprtations and now that skewed thought is your reality.
Did these quota people choose to "submit" an "application" to be "bound" to the quotas and "regulations" or did they choose to not submit?
What's the real seal deal?
Just politics eagle smack ..who knows why politicians,representatives and others do the things they do.. like eat seal hearts right from the seal..Publicity?/image?/Really Hungry/to be polite/then tie it to any relatable issue?.
A North /South thing, I guess..But we already solved that one years ago..lol.
Some like guns/some like raw meat..Some like green/clean technology ..Who knows? ..Depends where you live and what you stand for ..
1 thing I do know..
It's the thrill of the hunt..
but in the end .we all want our Peace.!..
lol..
Over and out there from here
Just politics eagle smack ..who knows why politicians,representatives and others do the things they do.. like eat seal hearts right from the seal..Publicity?/image?/Really Hungry/to be polite/then tie it to any relatable issue?.
A North /South thing, I guess..But we already solved that one years ago..lol.
Some like guns/some like raw meat..Some like green/clean technology ..Who knows? ..Depends where you live and what you stand for ..
1 thing I do know..
It's the thrill of the hunt..
but in the end .we all want our Peace.!..
lol..
Over and out there from here
What you have insinuated above is no doubt the biggest tragedy relative to the average first nations person. There has been ;lots of money and programs made available, but if the cash doesn't filter down to the entire community, the cash/program is useless.
I am not a part of the FN community, however, some friends of mine are and the do not describe the senior leadership in the most complimentary terms. Sadly, it's the average FN person that gets the sh*t-end-of-the-stick as he/she is the pawn in the game.
Insinuated? I've been sued, unsuccessfully, I might add. And I agree. In an argument with another member here over my being or not being Native, because of my political views. I had a thought that mad me go "Hmmm". Not only is it detrimental to the community en mass to be led by criminals, but it is IMHO, even more detrimental to be led by people whom poses preconcieved notions of how they are precieved and seen. In which I mean, if you are led by someone that continuously tells you that out side the Rez gates, lies a world filled with people who hate you because of your colour, the police will beat you up, just because your Native and that the Gov't is out to kill every last one of us. What is you incentive to spread your wings and view the world from on high?
And for good reason. Could you please send them to Scott Free's house, he seems to think I'm not Native because I don't tow the community line.
This is the very reason my Grand Father moved us off the Rez. But I still feel drawn back to it, go figure. So people, no matter the race, are gluttens for punishment. ;-)
I've said it before, many times, we are at times, our own worst enemies.
I'm not that fond of it. It makes good dog food, though.
Um, I would beg to differ that the meat isn't eaten. Unless it's cremated, something will eat it. lol
More hysterics. 1%, not a few. And if you read my post, I CLEARLY said there may be reasons to stop it, but, to call 1% cull a 'decimation' of the population is hilariously dramatic.
lol Yup. If 20 out of 25,000+ is decimating the population, then the some 2800- 3000 people in Canada that die from vehicle crashes has sent the 6 billion people on the planet into the extinction spiral.
Re-read the article Karrie and apply some real-life elements as well.... Do you really think that they would announce a formal 'cull' if the number of otters expected to be sacrificed was only 20?.. Would this even be a news item?... Only to the gullible.
Further, you have mentioned on a couple of occasions that 1% is A-OK.. Seeing how it is that insignificant, why not 2% or 3 or 4? More importantly, the targets are to be male otters (presumably the mature ones and not the pups). Based on the observation that the male sea otter hits their sexual maturity at 4-6 years (ADW: Enhydra lutris: Information) and this cull seeks to kill 1% of the male otters every year, it may have a wee impact.
... So considering that they will be impacting the # of reproducing males upon which the entire population will be affected, I'd say, yeah - decimation is an appropriate description. Unfortunately it won't be realized until 4-5 years into the 'ceremonial cull'.
One last thought. You and L Gilbert appear to be of the opinion that this species is durable and somewhat hardy based on the callousness of the "it's only 1%". Based on the article (again), the species was re-introduced into BC in the late '60's and early '70's and according to the statistics from the aforementioned, there is the massive population of 3500 otters...
.... Real good idea to kill the otters seeing that they are soooo prolific, eh?.. But then again, you're a zoologist, right? You just know these things.
A year or so ago some judge decided that natives have the right to use traditional high-powered rifles with scopes and lights attached for night hunting for sustenance and ceremonial purposes. They also have the right to fish with their traditional seine boats for food fish as they have been for thousands of years. See being discriminated against does have its advantages.