Originally Posted by SmokinJoe (Post 2707842)

The only thing you have made a case for is....... Hang on I'm looking for it...... Yup Not a darn thing. You have said the same crap over and over again and there's nothing anywhere to back any of it up, other than a few made up stories. The same 5 people keep backing up your terrible thought process, and it's gotten old,

The mods asked for guys to move on and let others in to take over... Clearly that was a farce,

Next deal is mark my word within the next 10 years you will have to get your tags from an indian controlled outfit. Personally saw the framework for it. This morning... If that thought makes you mad, wait till it kicks in. Look at bc... Trust me it's coming.

Originally Posted by Diesel.1974 (Post 2707982)

Much of the argument is in relation to FN "right" to hunt vs non FN's "privilege" to hunt. So my question is, If an FN is convicted of an offences under the wild act can their sentence include a hunting suspension? Or will a provincial suspension be in contradiction of the federal treaty? But if a suspension is possible in these circumstances what makes an FN's "right" so different than a "privilege" if they can be both removed by a court order.

When my ancestors land in the maritimes in the late 1600's hunting and fishing was neither a "right" or privilege", it was a way life required for survival. All of our cultures come from a background of hunters and gathers and when my ancestor guaranteed the Native people that they could maintain their heritage and rituals, no where in those treaties did it say we would give up ours. There has to be a fair and equal solution somewhere but I don't think we are there yet. Let's hope we find it before it is too late.