Leaderboard

Yowie as above stated several have been shot and a lot have been "drawn down" on and the people decided not to shoot. A hunter here in my state was in that position. He was a State trooper out hunting and never even pointed the gun at the Sasquatch and stated that it was to human looking. You have already figured out the gun ownership is a touchy subject. If you get your info from mainstream media in the US then there probably is nothing to talk about because you have fallen for the propaganda. They keep trying to ban what they call "assault" weapons. The semiautomatic "assault weapon" (fully auto is illegal without the right permit and very few are given) is classed as a rifle in the FBI tracking of shootings. Rifles are second up from the bottom (above shotguns) for number of people killed. On average there are almost 2 times the people killed with knives, 2 times the number of people killed with blunt objects (hammer, ballbat), almost 3 times the number of people killed each year using no weapon other than hands, feet, pushing. now the most people in at almost 30 times the number killed with rifles are killed with handguns! Why is the government trying to get rid of the "assault" weapon because if you had one of them it would not be near as easy to take you in a tactical assault type of situation. They should be going after what kills almost 16 times as many Americans every year than all murders combined and that is medical malpractice at 225,000 per year. I would feel less afraid of running into gun owner than I am going to the doctor.

Interesting. You guys in Australia waited too long remaining subjects - we fought the Brits and became citizens - so we don't have to have a reason for a firearm. Now we too, use our firearms for vermin. We have lots of two-legged vermin, but thanks to our firearms, not as many today as a week ago, or a month ago. Actually, we don't have too few gun laws - some argue we have too many. I note that Europeans can't fathom our gun laws, nor our preference for personal firearms. With the attacks of immigrants rampant, they may be wishful for American type gun laws and commonality. It's not that every other American has a gun, but we do have 40,000,000 more firearms than American citizens in this country. And that's not nearly enough, so our factories are punching them out very efficiently. Our problem is ammunition availability. We keep selling ammo to the world who are using it, and it certainly drives up costs over here, and creates uneven distribution problems. Of the roughly 370 million firearms in the US, on any given day, the bulk are NOT to be found in remote areas of the US. Many are kept at home, many are what some of us would consider sub-calibers, unsuited to shoot and drop a Bigfoot, and many are handguns designed for anti-personnel use. Those who have experience killing, understand that firearms are just tools, and not one tool can perform all tasks, and what is great for prarie dogs or small game will not drop a brown bear. So there's that, too. Suitability. One would need to be in the right place, at the right time, with the right weapon for conditions, with the right amount of grunt, and then be lucky enough to get a drop. And then, get it out. Which I postulate, might be a bit more difficult than many may be inclined to believe.

No, the Brits fought the Brits. Over 90% of the people in those thirteen colonies were British. It was a British Civil War, just fought in a foreign land.. Yah.......no. The loyalists saw themselves as British subjects, and they were the minority.The people in blue shooting at the redcoats saw it vastly different and saw themselves as American colonialists. The Canadians seem themselves as British because they constantly remind us that "they" burnt down the capitol in 1812.

Yowie1: One of those "rambo" type hunters I know personally bragged to me and others that if he ever saw one, he was going to "lay it down". He hunted feral hogs and deer mostly, and he hunted the river bottoms. He made that brag for about 10 years. When he was about 27 years old he was walking out of the bottoms from his deer stand just before black dark one day about four years ago. A large male Bigfoot walked out of a cane thicket and onto the trail less than 20 yards in front of him. Both froze and stared at each other for a few seconds before the animals screamed and ran off at high speed. He made the mistake of telling me and others about his encounter. Of course he was asked by us why he didn't "lay it down". He would always laugh and say, "Well **** it, I would have, but my dang .308 somehow turned into a BB gun on the spot."

In response to Yowiie's initial comment, it fascinates me how people in Australia could allow themselves to be at the mercy of a tyrant or invading army. You willingly surrender your right of self protection. You and every neighbor on your street would be slaughtered like sheep. In the States, a tyrant or invading force would be up against a firearm from every direction. They'd be up against wolves, not sheep, every single step along the way. Many good reason outlined above. Those who don't believe or aren't looking for one are probably too stunned to even try to get a shot off. Many who are hunting for a squatch probably find what they're looking for and see a human face looking back at them. Not too easy to pull that trigger. It's one thing when you know you're hunting an animal. It has horns or hooves or long tails. It's altogether different when it has eyes, a nose, mouth, teeth and hands like us, and is looking right at you. I would never kill one unless I was attacked and there was no other option.

Agreed .. I think with every single thing you said. I was thinking of stymied in the sense of engaging academic research with large budgets into the search, not individuals' personal efforts in the field. I don't believe our TV personalities from the bigfoot community have any more "pull" in that sense than I do. So far as personal efforts ... I prefer the flexible and nimble approach that comes from answering only to myself, I don't have a board of peers or trustees I have to ask permission from that's grounded in preservation of a status quo. MIB

Plenty of reports where a hunter had one in his sights, but declined to take the shot since it was too human looking. Plenty of reports of shooting one, and either it just walks away unfazed or they follow a blood trail but never find a body. True or not? How do I know, I was not there. But if taken at face value, the opportunity has been there.

Plussed, although I'm guessing that you aren't really stymied. I'm not a researcher, but I don't feel stymied about anything. I just keep on doing what I like, which is learning more about behavior patterns. I've had my personal proof, which is the only sensible way to approach that concept, IMO. I'm repeating myself, but science is ongoing. I'd point to the tons of information gathered in the last few decades and emphatically state that it's teaching interested people much of value. It's a dynamic process that will probably last many more decades surrounding this subject, so be patient. If someone wants more right away, I don't know what to say. Read, listen, learn, go outside, it's fun. Period.

I don't have any trouble finding a trusted researcher. There aren't many I truly respect because their values don't align with mine but that's not the same as trust: none that I know of would "send my evidence off to the Smithsonian to make it disappear" or anything like that, they're as curious as I am and maybe even more aggressive than I'd be about getting stuff tested. Question: why you think a "researcher" is necessary? It's not like there's some BF researcher certification process that, upon certification, gives you access to resources that you or I don't already have equal access to. The most having a known researcher available to you might do is give you access to even more known researchers that are just all as stymied as the rest of us. That's a fact. MIB

The vast majority of these shootings occur in so-called "gun-free zones" or occur in high-crime areas.

^^^Obvious you have never heard a BF coming through the forest at you.

When are our gun laws going to be tightened? The 2nd amendment is over 200 years old, so not soon. My opinion is that most people are not pro kill. Just because they own guns or shoot deer does not mean they are shooting Bigfoot.

I am pro kill for at least one specimen in the name of science. Possible reasons they are not shot here in my humble opinion. 1- They do not exist 2- There are so few 3-Elusive and intelligent enough to only dwell in the thick dark forests and swamps where humans do not tread. 4- They are shot and not documented for fear of repercussions. 5- Government intervention and or cover up. I personally think number one is the most plausible answer.