Metis hunting rights?

[209x50]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

I think the average metis or status aboriginal would have a bit of a problem with you deciding that only the poor among them could exercise what they would feel is their right. Look at it this way... Imagine anti-gun and anti-hunting groups campaigned to only allow the poor to hunt for subsistence. "Middle class guys can get their meat at Safeway, they don't need guns". Would you be alright with that? I don't think any of us would be. Same issue. When it comes to what they see as treaty rights it doesn't matter to them what "most folks" think.
Not agreeing with all of them, just saying how I think it would be seen.

Sorry Oko but if that is a comparable in your world I'm staying in mine! LOL

[Boss442]

[QUOTE=ishootbambi;622026]
so....where has boss442 been today? i was sure looking forward to him admitting what i said yesterday was the truth.

Sorry I've been gone all weekend. No I did'nt and would'nt call Med Hat F&W to confirm your story. Its quite obvious to me what thier opinion on the subject was, by the lack of interest in the matter.

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by 209x50

Sorry Oko but if that is a comparable in your world I'm staying in mine! LOL

LOL, and we're all happy to have you stay there.

The common factor is you believe you have a right to do something, and someone else is telling you they think you should only be able to exercise it under conditions x, y, or z, (which they dictate) otherwise they don't think you should need to exercise the right. Do any of us really need to hunt or own guns? No. But someone else's definition of need has nothing to do with, nor should have any impact on, our rights. I wasn't arguing the native position, only that trying to restrict someone's rights to some subclass you have dreamed up (poor prople who need subsistence) doesn't really address the rights issue.

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Ya almost funny...NOT

So, how would you suggest there be a balance and an equall share? The way i see it continuing is the white man will keep paying for the management for a lesser and lesser hunt opportunity as time goes by

Revolution!

[leo]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

LOL, and we're all happy to have you stay there.

The common factor is you believe you have a right to do something, and someone else is telling you they think you should only be able to exercise it under conditions x, y, or z, (which they dictate) otherwise they don't think you should need to exercise the right. Do any of us really need to hunt or own guns? No. But someone else's definition of need has nothing to do with, nor should have any impact on, our rights. I wasn't arguing the native position, only that trying to restrict someone's rights to some subclass you have dreamed up (poor prople who need subsistence) doesn't really address the rights issue.

So what is "your" solution ? equality doesn't exist anywhere on this planet except for the morgue. The charter of rights won't change and there will always be people who take with out giving any thing back, and they are world wide, of all nationalities.

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by leo

So what is "your" solution ? equality doesn't exist anywhere on this planet except for the morgue. The charter of rights won't change and there will always be people who take with out giving any thing back, and they are world wide, of all nationalities.

My solution would be to let the courts sort it out using the current constitution, charter, and treaties of record, and looking at them from a fairly conservative, minimalist perspective (what do the documents actually say, versus what some social justice types would like them to say).

Originally Posted by Okotokian

My solution would be to let the courts sort it out using the current constitution, charter, and treaties of record, and looking at them from a fairly conservative, minimalist perspective (what do the documents actually say, versus what some social justice types would like them to say).

Quit talking such nonsense...that sounds way too reasonable

[CanuckShooter]

Originally Posted by maxpower2506

I must be missing something in all this, did we all not evolve from hunter gatherers? why is it only some races, and combinations of races, lost there TRADITIONAL rights

It just might have something to do with the Canadian Constitution?? Google it up, Section 35 would be a good place for you to start. If you have more questions you could probably get some good instruction in your local senior secondary school.

[CanuckShooter]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

LOL, and we're all happy to have you stay there.

The common factor is you believe you have a right to do something, and someone else is telling you they think you should only be able to exercise it under conditions x, y, or z, (which they dictate) otherwise they don't think you should need to exercise the right. Do any of us really need to hunt or own guns? No. But someone else's definition of need has nothing to do with, nor should have any impact on, our rights. I wasn't arguing the native position, only that trying to restrict someone's rights to some subclass you have dreamed up (poor prople who need subsistence) doesn't really address the rights issue.

Well stated OKO...they next thing you know they will be suggesting subsistence hunting is only ok if they use traditional weapons, like home made bows and arrows!!

[leo]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

My solution would be to let the courts sort it out using the current constitution, charter, and treaties of record, and looking at them from a fairly conservative, minimalist perspective (what do the documents actually say, versus what some social justice types would like them to say).

I certainly can find no fault with your reasoning, however I do not share your optimism in our judicial system or political arena to do what is right and best for all.

[Top Gun]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

For those that don't know him, meet Ron Jones, you know him as Rafter.

http://www.timescolonist.com/technol...360/story.html

Ron is rather quiet now that he realizes that many here were aware of his identity through the conversation, so while I hopes he finally responds to my simple questions asked previously to him, I doubt he will.


Ron, this thread and your writtings are now part of your public history. Your refusal to idetify your cultural identity speaks volumes. Louis Riel would not be proud of you. I doubt very many other Metis are either.


His words no longer deserve to be believed.

Quote from Rafter (Ron Jones) post 353



Here is an example of Ron as one of the Captains of the hunt.



Ron Jones claims the same people (including himself) participating in illegal hunting will be the ones to enforce rules against illegal metis hunting. Can he really expect anyone to trust him anymore?


Before this thread started, I had a good measure of respect for Ron and his convictions. Ron's actions here have shown me his true nature. I now know he is selfish and manipulative, not worthy of respect or trust. I feel sorry that the Metis people have this individual taking up much of their publicity.

W.B.

Hi, my name is Ron Jones.

I am Metis.

I shot the antelope.

You do not know me. I do not want or need your respect.

All you have written is based on a fool's assumptions. A waste of every ones time.

Ron Jones

[Top Gun]

Originally Posted by Sporty

As a Metis that has always been Metis, never had the opportunity to "hide" behind my skin color out of fear of racism of being a "half breed", I'm embarrassed by these articles. Funny that certain people are suddenly brave enough to say they are Metis when there are certain rights involved. Ron or Rafter, what constitutes subsistence to you and those involved in the "fighting for Metis" rights?? Out of personal integrity I have never exercised the Metis harvesting as I don't "need" free hunting to feed my family. If I did, it would be a moose to put on my own table and to share with my extended family, not an antelope.

In answer to your other questions, I have my Metis card, have had one for years and obtained a new one. In fact, my Metis ancestors were the first to claim Metis and had Metis numbers given to them as far back as the 1860's. I vote in the Metis elections, I help people in my community, Metis or not and I suspect I and my family have a stronger connection to the Metis spirit than you do.

Sporty,

You have me confused with some one else.

One comment though, our people including you, voted to put on the communal hunts in order to goad the Gov't into court. Our people appointed me as your Captain and the community came together and campaigned accross the Province. You were and are a part of it.

As far as your family having a stronger connection to the Metis Spirit than me, I suggest you re read your family tree as we are related.

Ron Jones

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by Top Gun

W.B.

Hi, my name is Ron Jones.

I am Metis.

I shot the antelope.

You do not know me. I do not want or need your respect.

All you have written is based on a fool's assumptions. A waste of every ones time.

Ron Jones

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showt...276#post106276
Post #123

Hello I am new to the forum and have been enjoying some of the comments. Has any one thought of contacting the Aboriginals to sit in on these meetings. The new census indicates 86,000 Metis in the Province. Obviously they would not be for Open Spaces. I think the same thing applies to the Indian. Both groups were never even consulted on these programs. Actually it is the Law that aboriginal groups have to be consulted on anything that impacts their way of life. I am guessing the Aboriginals could be powerful allies to the people who are against Open Spaces. Good question for Cormack Gates would be, "Have Aboriginal Groups been consulted with on this program". Point of Interest, I am not Aboriginal. Just a person against Governments that abuse their power for the gain of their friends and to satisfy their own hidden agendas/egos.

Intresting how you weren't aboriginal then, but now you are!

Pretty Decietful Impressions .

[Top Gun]

Originally Posted by mulecrazy

I wonder how many times he is going to be asked these questions. He continuously dodges them for a reason. Its a classic defense when you know your wrong. He will just keep questioning everyone else but not answer those directed at him. I find it odd that everyone against total metis hunting rights has no problem answering any question, but those for it or defending metis/native hunting rights keeps dodgeing them. They do nothing but point the finger at us and claim false info.

M.C.

You got the wrong man, my friend.

You are easily lead down the garden path.

I have no need to dodge anyone. You should be able to figure that one out easy enough by yourself.

Ron Jones

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by Top Gun

M.C.

You got the wrong man, my friend.

You are easily lead down the garden path.

I have no need to dodge anyone. You should be able to figure that one out easy enough by yourself.

Ron Jones

I think I have already proven you have been decietful about who you are in my previous post!

[mulecrazy]

Originally Posted by Top Gun

M.C.

You got the wrong man, my friend.

You are easily lead down the garden path.

I have no need to dodge anyone. You should be able to figure that one out easy enough by yourself.

Ron Jones

Been drinkin "Top Gun"? ROFLMAO. wow a little name change to confuse people hey. and still dodging every important question I see. And trying to undermine someone else to deflect critisism. Nicely done there big guy.

BTW, thanks for making me look good.

[Tuc]

Potty, he's beakin in post #125 as Rafter.

[ARGO GUY]

What the hell is with these people with more than one acount on here.Get a freakin life

[Tuc]

Could be using two different puters.

[ARGO GUY]

Tuc .

That makes it even wore. Funny how rafter has left the building

[walking buffalo]

Top Gun is Ron Jones' Non Aboriginal Metis bloodline,

Rafter is Ron's unknown bloodline,

Maybe he is just confused as to who he is?

Ron Jones' AO name shall be "Wa-quish and the Glove"

[KBF]

Heres a prime example of some abuse to this issue. I believe it was late December, early January cant remember date for sure. But here in 108 we had lots of snow and cold. Good day for calling coyotes so I thought. I had walked into my set and once I got there the wind started to blow pretty hard and it was in the wrong direction so I did not call and just walked back to the truck. So as I'm driving back north a guy in pretty pimped out easily $65,000 plus Duramax (and he was probably shooting a high end Sako or Weatherby with a Swarovski or Zeiss scope on it)asks me if it was possible to head east on road that was about a mile south of where we were sitting , I said no I tried and its drifted pretty tight. So he says "yea I just dropped my buddy off back there and he's headed for that herd off mule deer over there, we gotta get some meat for a Metis CONVENTION". Something tells me that a CONVENTION does not fit into the definition of SUBSISTENCE; or at least it shouldnt. had I only known this Id a said for sure you can get down that road with that truck. But I guess whats done is done just my rant.

[Sporty]

Originally Posted by S.A.S

WT?

Stage illegal hunts? Then bitch about rights? You people consistently bite the hand that feeds, One day you will wake up and someone like me will have control, Then you will wish you were alot more grateful in these days. Time and time again Indians/Metis get into problems then blame the White man! When those 2 girls froze in saskatchewan a lady from that reservation was on the TV bitching about how the governement does not give them enough to live off of and it causes the Indians there to drink.

Earn your own way from now on, It is easy to bitch and complain when you drive around in the vehicles that we brought, In the clothes that we brought, sitting in the houses we built, turning on the lights we brought, calling people on the phones we brought.

Keep causing trouble and see where it leads, More and more people see things the way I do everyday.

You should really learn more about the Metis before you get on your soap box patting yourself on the back for all the things you've "bought" us. Most Metis are hard working, tax paying people. I own my own house, car and small business and believe me, you didn't contribute one dime to what I've amassed on my own and I'd bet my last dollar I can speak for most Metis in that regards. Nice try though.

[CanuckShooter]

Originally Posted by Sporty

You should really learn more about the Metis before you get on your soap box patting yourself on the back for all the things you've "bought" us. Most Metis are hard working, tax paying people. I own my own house, car and small business and believe me, you didn't contribute one dime to what I've amassed on my own and I'd bet my last dollar I can speak for most Metis in that regards. Nice try though.

Hear, hear...you tell him Sporty, he is blowing wind.

[ishootbambi]

[QUOTE=Boss442;623599]

Originally Posted by ishootbambi

so....where has boss442 been today? i was sure looking forward to him admitting what i said yesterday was the truth.

Sorry I've been gone all weekend. No I did'nt and would'nt call Med Hat F&W to confirm your story. Its quite obvious to me what thier opinion on the subject was, by the lack of interest in the matter.

you said i made up a story so i provided you with the proof that what i said was real. as long as we agree that what i said happened did thats all that matters. i still think it sucks that it happened and the fish cops are unable to do anything about it.

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

LOL, and we're all happy to have you stay there.

The common factor is you believe you have a right to do something, and someone else is telling you they think you should only be able to exercise it under conditions x, y, or z, (which they dictate) otherwise they don't think you should need to exercise the right. Do any of us really need to hunt or own guns? No. But someone else's definition of need has nothing to do with, nor should have any impact on, our rights. I wasn't arguing the native position, only that trying to restrict someone's rights to some subclass you have dreamed up (poor prople who need subsistence) doesn't really address the rights issue.

we are limited in what we can hunt oko. sometimes by funding in the case of out of province sheep hunts for example, or by laws for the protection and management of the animals. we all are limited, and natives and metis should be subject to the same laws. its simply about striving for equality.

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by Top Gun

M.C.

You got the wrong man, my friend.

You are easily lead down the garden path.

I have no need to dodge anyone. You should be able to figure that one out easy enough by yourself.

Ron Jones

this seems simple enough. rob, do a little search on the two profiles and see what there is to see.

dale

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by KBF

Heres a prime example of some abuse to this issue. I believe it was late December, early January cant remember date for sure. But here in 108 we had lots of snow and cold. Good day for calling coyotes so I thought. I had walked into my set and once I got there the wind started to blow pretty hard and it was in the wrong direction so I did not call and just walked back to the truck. So as I'm driving back north a guy in pretty pimped out easily $65,000 plus Duramax (and he was probably shooting a high end Sako or Weatherby with a Swarovski or Zeiss scope on it)asks me if it was possible to head east on road that was about a mile south of where we were sitting , I said no I tried and its drifted pretty tight. So he says "yea I just dropped my buddy off back there and he's headed for that herd off mule deer over there, we gotta get some meat for a Metis CONVENTION". Something tells me that a CONVENTION does not fit into the definition of SUBSISTENCE; or at least it shouldnt. had I only known this Id a said for sure you can get down that road with that truck. But I guess whats done is done just my rant.

If your experience is from last winter, this wouldn't be subsistence hunting, it would be poaching. If all is correct, then it would be a case of poaching involving the stated "Metis Convention".

Am I correct "Wa-quish and the Glove" ?

[CanuckShooter]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

If your experience is from last winter, this wouldn't be subsistence hunting, it would be poaching. If all is correct, then it would be a case of poaching involving the stated "Metis Convention".

Am I correct "Wa-quish and the Glove" ?

They would have had poor elders and single mothers to feed at the assembly...which would be feeding for subsistence. If you had any inkling at all about what your mouthing off about you'd know Metis don't have 'conventions'....gawd some guys are so stoopid.

[maxpower2506]

Originally Posted by CanuckShooter

It just might have something to do with the Canadian Constitution?? Google it up, Section 35 would be a good place for you to start. If you have more questions you could probably get some good instruction in your local senior secondary school.

Didn't catch it did ya!!!! Typical, I simply stated we ALL evolved from gatherers, It doesn't matter what part of the planet you live on, everyone was at one time in history a gatherer, but NOW only some races and combinations of races has the RIGHT to carry on their RIGHT to GATHER.