Quote:
Originally Posted by albertaatlatl
The ABA members present at the GM moved a motion and voted 21 to 5 to take our information on the use, effectiveness, history and such to the AGMAG table in May. At the GM there were 36 people present, not all ABA members. The discussion was short and heated. We are ABA members, and were hoping for a lot more members to attend. However, the majority of members present did not think this a small issue, and decided that the board who proposed the ban should be the one to carry the 'full info' package to the table. We are currently finishing our documentation to be forwarded to ABA, HFT, AFGA and the like. We are happy at this turn of events, and FULLY expect the ABA to do the job entrusted to it's executives by the members!!
|
I am not sure I am clear, so please correct me if I am wrong.
The only resolution regarding the "other equipment" proposal previously made by the ABA exec/board was for those same individuals to take additional information forward to AGMAG?
Was there no resolution for ABA to withdraw its earlier proposal?
What exactly was included in the "full info package"? Does it only address Atlatls? What about spears or other bladed hunting tools?
AA, are you agreeing with the ABA that these tools NEED to be regulated?
I hope you and other 'primitive' hunters are not participating in this continued craziness because you believe that regulation is inevitable.
This is eerily familiar. Same situation in the late '90s just before C68 was passed; so many were willing to throw others under the bus hoping that THEIR firearms wouldn't be banned.