Scott I agree on the PC issue. Killed is killed, irregardless of the terminology. So why use taken in the first place? It appears to be a way of making an unpleasant circumstance sound better...If we recognize that it's unpleasant, then why do we do it? Like when the govt. appropriates private property for public use... no matter what wording they use, they still took the land against someone's will. No getting around that.
Would a replica deer/horns mount invoke the same memories?
In the end I've gone about as far as I can with this subject, and I do appreciate everyone's input. I will never understand how removing the best genetics from a population of anything can be deemed beneficial, or admirable, but that's just one confused Hoosier's take on it. I agree with what RAH stated earlier. Hunt as you will, and be glad we are afforded the privilege. My apologies for sidetracking this thread.
Peace.
"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"
If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1) And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1) Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT? PB answer: It depends.
