Hunters Ed

[SmTx]

I've had mine for over 20 years but with all the recent changes to things I don't see why it should still be required.

Constitutional carry is legal. No license needed to hunt pigs. Texas made it a constitutional right to hunt and fish. Majority of hunting in Texas is done on private lands. No problem with public hunts requiring it. Game Wardens still write tickets for no hunters ed.

Does anyone have a good argument for why it should still be required to hunt on private land. Safety isn't a valid argument to me. If we're looking to the government to tell us how to be safe we'd all be vaccinated by Monday, right?

This is only on my mind because I went hunting recently with some new hunters in their 40s and hunters ed came up.

[Ruttin&Struttin]

I personally like the fact it is required. Just because someone is over any certain age doesn't mean they understand gun safety. I've had a bullet cross a property line onto my property that was so close I could feel the wobble in the air before I heard the shot. The guy that shot that round at a deer ended up getting a ticket for a few things. One of which was no hunters ed. I like it being required and I think it should continue to be.

[flywise]

I don’t think it should be required unless you want to hunt public land. My son does not have it yet but we were thinking about taking a class in a couple weeks but I already let him sit by himself on our lease. He is 13 and been sitting with me and learning from me for many years.

[RedBear78]

My thought is that is doesn’t hurt to be to safe.A lot of us grew up hunting and fishing safety,respect and courtesy were implanted.I’ve introduced others to hunting and have hunted with grown men who were green to safety,rules and just a little out of touch with woodsmanship.I like the idea that you have to or supposed to have some kind of formal introductory class to carry a firearm in the woods.Kind of Like LTC I’m kinda glad there is kinda blanket protection for carrying a side arm,but I’d be glad to know that persons that did were in fact qualified to do so.I saw a young woman at academy trying to buy a 40 cal and she didn’t know one end of the gun from the other.I suggested to her that she needs some kind of firearms class before she makes a purchase like that.Kinda same with hunting,just my thoughts.

[Gumbo Man]

Well I know you said that safety isn’t a valid argument but it’s really the only argument that can be made concerning removing this as a requirement. I taught Hunter Safety for 8 years and still believe in the program as a very useful tool for teaching our next generation of hunters the responsibilities that come with loading a firearm and using it. We’ve all been around hunters that we considered less than responsible with handling a gun of any type. Keep in mind that those men and women pass on there bad habits to their children and the circle continues until someone gets seriously injured or killed. I will not allow anyone to point a gun at me loaded or unloaded. It’s a horrible lack of responsibility. Kids are very encourage able and it’s the best time in their lives to instill proper gun handling practices hoping that dad won’t undo what they learned in class. And regarding private land or public does it really matter where you are if you get shot? Plus there is so much more to learn in a class beyond safety that can stay with them for the rest of their lives. Ethics, survival skills,responsibility to name a few. I doubt that it will ever go away because it is a fee that provides revenue for the state and that’s a whole other argument.

[SmTx]

My thought is that is doesn’t hurt to be to safe.A lot of us grew up hunting and fishing safety,respect and courtesy were implanted.I’ve introduced others to hunting and have hunted with grown men who were green to safety,rules and just a little out of touch with woodsmanship.I like the idea that you have to or supposed to have some kind of formal introductory class to carry a firearm in the woods.Kind of Like LTC I’m kinda glad there is kinda blanket protection for carrying a side arm,but I’d be glad to know that persons that did were in fact qualified to do so.I saw a young woman at academy trying to buy a 40 cal and she didn’t know one end of the gun from the other.I suggested to her that she needs some kind of firearms class before she makes a purchase like that.Kinda same with hunting,just my thoughts.

LTC isn't needed anymore. Rights are being given back to the people.

Well I know you said that safety isn’t a valid argument but it’s really the only argument that can be made concerning removing this as a requirement. I taught Hunter Safety for 8 years and still believe in the program as a very useful tool for teaching our next generation of hunters the responsibilities that come with loading a firearm and using it. We’ve all been around hunters that we considered less than responsible with handling a gun of any type. Keep in mind that those men and women pass on there bad habits to their children and the circle continues until someone gets seriously injured or killed. I will not allow anyone to point a gun at me loaded or unloaded. It’s a horrible lack of responsibility. Kids are very encourage able and it’s the best time in their lives to instill proper gun handling practices hoping that dad won’t undo what they learned in class. And regarding private land or public does it really matter where you are if you get shot? Plus there is so much more to learn in a class beyond safety that can stay with them for the rest of their lives. Ethics, survival skills,responsibility to name a few. I doubt that it will ever go away because it is a fee that provides revenue for the state and that’s a whole other argument.

You touch on a point I knew I forgot. I'm OK with youth license holders having to have hunters ed. Adult license holders should not be subjected to the course and tickets associated with not having it.

I'm all for education. It's not the state's job to educate hunters. Constitutional carry pretty well solidifies that to me.

[RMW]

I think it’s worthless if you ask me, don’t remember anything we ever did in there. You can carry a pistol and hunt pigs without it then it shouldn’t be required.

[JackRyan]

You raise a good question and the question is not if hunter safety is good or beneficial but should it be a legal requirement to hunt, if I understand your original post.

I took hunter safety as a young adult and I learned a lot from that class. I did not grow up in a hunting family or around guns. I had already used my one year of deferment and if it had not been a requirement I definitely would not have taken that class. All three of my kids took hunter safety at a young age and it was good for them and they learned basic gun safety rules in the class.

Having said that though, I don't believe it's ever the government's job to protect us from ourselves. In this case though maybe the requirement helps protect us from others as previously mentioned. The percentage of hunters not familiar with general safety rules seems to be going up. Tragic hunting accidents happen every year that could have been prevented if basic gun safety rules had been followed.

I'm in favor of the requirement for hunter safety.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[Razorback01]

Spend a few weeks working in a Wal Mart sporting goods section and a year in an archery shop- you will appreciate an attempt to educate.

[BOBSTER]

Hunter Education is a very important tool when taken seriously. Problem being is that now an adult can sit in front of their computer and take the class and not get anything out of it if that is what they choose. Sitting in a classroom and hear the true confessions of some that have seen, or been part of an accident is something that will always remain with you. You have no idea how many times a year I get handed a loaded shotgun that is off safety. During teal season, I was given a youth shotgun that had already been put into the gun sleeve, and being transported in the utv, and when they gave it to me, it was off safety and loaded with one in the chamber. That could have been a terrible accident for everyone there. I brought that up to the attention of dad of course.

Just because you hunt on private property, does not keep accidents from happening.
So yes, Hunter Education is very important still.

[flywise]

How many people who have had the class
Drink beer between morning and evening hunts?
Drink beer in the stand while hunting?
Climb a fence with the gun in their hand?
Gut a deer while working a knife toward their body as opposed to away from your body?
I think the class is generally a good class and has good information in it but i'd guess most hunting accidents happen by and too people who took the class.

[Gumbo Man]

LTC isn't needed anymore. Rights are being given back to the people.




You touch on a point I knew I forgot. I'm OK with youth license holders having to have hunters ed. Adult license holders should not be subjected to the course and tickets associated with not having it.

I'm all for education. It's not the state's job to educate hunters. Constitutional carry pretty well solidifies that to me.

You bring a valid point proving once again the incompetence from state lawmakers and the rules and mandates that they hand down to us. Case in point, I can walk a field that has some water and a duck blind and shoot snipe and doves legally with lead shot. The minute I sit in the duck blind to shoot ducks, I need steel shot. Now keep in mind the whole steel mentality years ago was to eliminate the chance for lead poisoning and Avion Cholera I think. Makes no since at all when your shooting over the same field. Next up is Conservation season with geese. By the time they extend the limits and allow electronic calling devices the birds are so shot up and spread Leary the benefit is not much at all in most areas. Then they complain that we are not killing enough birds and Cholera outbreak is imminent. I could go on an on about regulations that make no sense and are a complete waist of paper but at the end of the day we are stuck with them.

[tdwinklr]

I don’t think it should be required unless you want to hunt public land. My son does not have it yet but we were thinking about taking a class in a couple weeks but I already let him sit by himself on our lease. He is 13 and been sitting with me and learning from me for many years.

What about new people on a large lease that have never hunted before? I believe I would want them to have some idea of the dos and don'ts.

[Mertzon Man]

You raise a good question and the question is not if hunter safety is good or beneficial but should it be a legal requirement to hunt, if I understand your original post.

I took hunter safety as a young adult and I learned a lot from that class. I did not grow up in a hunting family or around guns. I had already used my one year of deferment and if it had not been a requirement I definitely would not have taken that class. All three of my kids took hunter safety at a young age and it was good for them and they learned basic gun safety rules in the class.

Having said that though, I don't believe it's ever the government's job to protect us from ourselves. In this case though maybe the requirement helps protect us from others as previously mentioned. The percentage of hunters not familiar with general safety rules seems to be going up. Tragic hunting accidents happen every year that could have been prevented if basic gun safety rules had been followed.

I'm in favor of the requirement for hunter safety.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

I agree, my kids grew up hunting but was glad they took the course. Saftey is paramount when handling firearms. Never hurts to be reminded and reinforce what you have taught them.