The tacticool, 1956 Crosman .22 pellet rifle with high tech optics is wreaking a terrible wrath on their heads. Notice the stock extension designed to absorb the punishing recoil.
Al'Sqawkbar


Moderator: carlson1
You're about 2998 under the daily bag limitdoc540 wrote:Insurgent birds have re-infiltrated my neighborhood, killing local songbirds and generally trying to reassert their authority in my province.
The tacticool, 1956 Crosman .22 pellet rifle with high tech optics is wreaking a terrible wrath on their heads. Notice the stock extension designed to absorb the punishing recoil.
Al'Sqawkbar![]()
I didn't actually shoot those.Carry-a-Kimber wrote:Does declairing that one harvested a protected animal in a legal manner protect one from legal action? Just curious, never understood how the grackle thing worked. If I shot some for sport, was pulled over by a GW, and I told him they were eating my apple crop, would I be good to go? I know the burden of proof lies on the accuser.... this is a wierd law.
Wait? Those cretins are _protected_?!Carry-a-Kimber wrote:Does declairing that one harvested a protected animal in a legal manner protect one from legal action? Just curious, never understood how the grackle thing worked. If I shot some for sport, was pulled over by a GW, and I told him they were eating my apple crop, would I be good to go? I know the burden of proof lies on the accuser.... this is a wierd law.
You bet!lkd wrote:Wait? Those cretins are _protected_?!Carry-a-Kimber wrote:Does declairing that one harvested a protected animal in a legal manner protect one from legal action? Just curious, never understood how the grackle thing worked. If I shot some for sport, was pulled over by a GW, and I told him they were eating my apple crop, would I be good to go? I know the burden of proof lies on the accuser.... this is a wierd law.
Round 'em up and deliver them to the home of whoever came up with that INSANE idea.pbwalker wrote:You bet!lkd wrote:Wait? Those cretins are _protected_?!Carry-a-Kimber wrote:Does declairing that one harvested a protected animal in a legal manner protect one from legal action? Just curious, never understood how the grackle thing worked. If I shot some for sport, was pulled over by a GW, and I told him they were eating my apple crop, would I be good to go? I know the burden of proof lies on the accuser.... this is a wierd law.
Insane but true...
Oh, well, that pretty much means "Anytime you see a Grackle" thenSidro wrote:...or when concentrated in numbers and in a manner that constitutes a health hazard or other nuisance.
This.lkd wrote:Oh, well, that pretty much means "Anytime you see a Grackle" thenSidro wrote:...or when concentrated in numbers and in a manner that constitutes a health hazard or other nuisance.