So why don't we wear it

Leaving the matter of some of the "spin" associated with the American revolution aside, I assure you many of us - those that secretly don't long to be Europeans - DO NOT forget the "legal issues" the United States fought its revolution over.

Back on topic, at least in part, 10,000 or 86,000, the "number" difference between Great Britain and the US is significant to say the least. I doubt that my comment regarding finding a state other than Hawaii that has so few "card carrying hunters" could be found needs changing. Muir's Montana is the state with the lowest population density of all of the 50 states (Alaska recently, and sadly in my eyes, lost that distinction), has more than twice the 86,000 figure.

Provided that the order of magnitude doesn't change, I wouldn't think of arguing over the validity of 'this number or that', but I do want to 'explain' my number a bit. I mentioned "card carrying stalkers" because I was referring to those that would be affected by a "public relations" matter. By using that term, I wanted to exclude target and competitive shooters, and for the most part, those that only use airguns and rimfires. While excluding airgun and rimfire shooters from consideration may inappropriately shrink the number, again, I think the order of magnitude is the most significant matter. Call it 100,000 in the UK. That is still less than one-fiftieth - AT BEST - of the number of hunters in the US. Hell, in the two states with the lowest populations in the country - Alaska and Montana - there are, using 'your' numbers, AT LEAST 3 times as many hunters as there are in the 70 million people in GB.

And THAT was my point.

I was acknowledging that "public relations" IS noteworthy for "you". If you knew how vigorously I fought against that very concept as it is so stupidly applied "over here", you might accept my mea culpa a bit more graciously.

Regards,
Paul

PS - Don't wan to be too "Socially Correct", but I think "we" both may have actually learned something in this thread. (I certainly did.) Not the least of which being that discourse over contentious issues can in fact be conducted in a civil manner when the parties respect one another.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the history lesson flytie. Sorry, but it interests me!

Perhaps Muir has an alternative comment or two to make. I would be disappointed if he didn't ;)

Flytie, I don't recall mentioning the tax issue in my message, but had in mind the fairly typical attitude of the leaders of any intruder nation who perceive opportunities for asset stripping and domination. I can't help feeling a bit of pride in what was once our British Empire - achieved from such a small island after all - but am not blind to the probable behaviour which might inevitably be included in the making of it. You didn't, I blatently lead your comments onto my own deranged pathway. But I could have gone much further, as the "American" leaders wanted expansionism, whereas the UK Government did not. There were many reasons for the split.

Iwrch - 'nice picture of the tiger. In all of the films I've seen of them, I've always marvelled at how they can blend in to their surrounds.
Back on topic and to orange again, and countershading, it's amazing what does work in nature!

Simon
 
AS usual - I think the hastily written word can be misconstrued. I meant what I said flytie - really - thanks. My education was limited into what could be packed into the three 'r's before I left at fifteen. Most of our history lessons were actually very biased towards how brave a country Scotland was - and every outstanding name was a hero without blame whilst all the English were absolute baddies.
I thought that was a bit of nonsense because according to my varied bloodlines - I'm a hardy mongerel so I couldnt swallow that hogwash.
One of these days I'll sit down and do some serious reading.

The reason Paul Revere was mentioned on that day was in a sort of 'Robin Hood' style and because it was basically presented in anti-English style, (Talk about mind conditioning ! That woman was eventualy banned from teaching, not least for her blatant cruelty ), and frankly, I was too busy wandering the wild corners and getting callouses on my hands from tree felling and firewood duties to bother with much else at the time. Then the kindly administrations of a platoon sergeant and his NCO's took over.

AS often happens - the original thread got somewhat hi-jacked but I hope the subject was covered OK. I apologise for my part in the distraction but the side issues were interesting.

Day-glo rules OK ! I too have little doubt that the health and safety bureau will eventually get hold of it. I have ben using wide ribbons of day-glo for years - in order to mark shot stags and hinds for easy spotting by the gillies for collection - also through the shackle-holes in my knives so that they do not get lost or forgotten.
 
Last edited:
As far as deer and orange go
deer see men in high vis orange gear :eek: :eek:
deer think look at them numnuts :lol: :lol:
if the prat's dress like that cant be of any danger to us :confused: :confused:
BANG Bol!!cks " got it wrong again dad " :doh:
 
Back on topic and to orange again, and countershading, it's amazing what does work in nature!

Simon

What about Zebras then?:confused:
Even in a world of different shades of grey, just black and white must stand out a bit?!
So how does that work for them?
Mind you, a good few of them do get eaten!:lol:
Could it just be natures way of ensuring that lions don't go hungry?:rolleyes:
MS:D
 
MS - I recall seeing a documentary many years ago on the Beeb on that very subject. As I recall they established that most lion hunts occur at dusk and that by that time the zebras take cover in bruch and under trees. The argument made sense but I have no idea whether it stood up to subsequent debate. The other possibility might be that zebra markings are a natural form of dazzle.
 
Well - you must all have noticed that as the day moves to dusk, reds and greens merge to become very much the same. I suppose that it is probably true that animals - some of them at least - use different bands of the light process for vision; but why and for what practical reason ? You'd think that one sight method would suit every creature. I suppose that bees have evolved a method of sight to suit their pollen-collecting and lifestyle, but predating animals such as the cat and dog family dine from a wide variety of animals with in some cases - very different colourings.
 
MS - I recall seeing a documentary many years ago on the Beeb on that very subject. As I recall they established that most lion hunts occur at dusk and that by that time the zebras take cover in bruch and under trees. The argument made sense but I have no idea whether it stood up to subsequent debate. The other possibility might be that zebra markings are a natural form of dazzle.
taking this a little further , most cats kill by strangulation, when herds of zebra are all stood about the group is in effect a huge dazzle pattern, & head & neck target areas are mixed. The application of safety in numbers.
 
I think we should explore this theory further by releasing a pride of lions at the next Newcastle football match and see which group of supporters they choose to eat!:cool:
MS:D
 
Back
Top