WA Rep. Robert Sutherland's comments about fish and wildlife officers

[ucwarden]

One of the criticisms this forum receives is that it is a lot of complaining and not enough thoughtful action or discussion.

If you want to promote breaking the law, or forcing confrontation you had better think it through carefully.

How many of you think the Bundy or Hammonds events were well planned out? Do you think they could have been much better if they had? I do.

 When the Anti Gun/hunting crowd rally, the have buses, coordinated shirts, unified concise messaging. While we disagree with what they are saying they execute much better than we do.

Sportsmen had better start figuring out how to play the game. There are plenty of lessons to learn from the Anti crowd. We dont have to do it the same way they do,  but we had better start paying attention.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

I fully agree, and add to that we need to quit arguing among ourselves.  I believe the easiest way for the anti's to get a foothold, is to get us fighting among each other.  We see that when archery hunters complain about rifle hunters, and the other way around.  It's called divide and conquer.   

We all have our own personal pet peeves, and for me it is general criticism of game wardens.  What I mean by general criticism is when I hear "they are all...." or "that's why nobody respects game wardens anymore" or any such things.  I know one hell of a lot of game wardens from all across North America, and while there are a few I absolutely can't stand, I have never met a single one who I don't believe would lay their lives down to save each and every one of us.

[Pegasus]

jrebel and Pegasus:

I no not want to continue this bantering back and forth, but I would like you to explain how you believe I have twisted or manipulated anyone's words on here.  I simply asked for support for the WDFW officers, in standing up to some horrible comments made by an elected official.  If anyone thinks I was in any way attacking the honest sportsmen on this forum, I don't understand how you arrived at that conclusion, and would welcome your explanation.  I would ask both of you to respond to me by private message or by phone call, as I doubt the other forum members are finding this conversation to be all that valuable.

As far as my comments on anonymously posting; In no way did I say "you not being so tuff if I knew who you are", but rather I was simply stating my opinion on anonymous statements in general.  I feel people become much more aggressive and rude (and often less truthful) when nobody knows their true identity.  I have always been one who believes in looking an opponent square in the eyes and saying things to one's face.

There is absolutely no way I can convince either of you to agree with my line of thought, so I will not continue to respond to either of you on here.  I do want to say one more thing, that while you two are judging me for being gone from the forum for so long, once again you are talking about something you know nothing about.  Did it ever occur to you that I had a reason for being gone for so long?

Take care gentlemen, and I do hope to hear from you in a less public, and more courteous manner.     
   

Actually I did not find your initial post as being reasonable asking others to  harass an individual. Evidently, for whatever reasons you found it not necessary to post here for a whil,e you were able to post anonymously when you wanted to stir up the pot toward your chosen victim. Once opposed you decided to twist every argument against your idiotic idea of getting anonymous posters to do your bidding. Now you continue with the tuff talk and belittling:

"As far as my comments on anonymously posting; In no way did I say "you not being so tuff if I knew who you are", but rather I was simply stating my opinion on anonymous statements in general.  I feel people become much more aggressive and rude (and often less truthful) when nobody knows their true identity.  I have always been one who believes in looking an opponent square in the eyes and saying things to one's face."

You have been treated more than fair here by people that disagreed with your attempt to harass an individual. You are the one that twists our words. You are the one that complained about anonymous posters on an anonymous board. You do not like people that oppose your opinion and you are unable to deal with it. You tried to make a mountain out of a molehill and you have failed miserably. You certainly have not helped the reputation of the WDFW here with your behavior.

[jrebel]

Back to the topic of Sutherland.  What if he was referencing the local sheriff (outside of Snohomish county) as armed goons? Or pd? Or other LEO? You guys are deflecting the issue and attacking the WDFW,  take them out of the equation. Sutherlands comments were flat out wrong and all of those who openly discount them as benign underestimate the power of a few irrational thinkers and their empowerment to change things in a hurry.  I  have NEVER seen Sutherland advocate for sportsman or outdoors, actually quite the opposite.  He got caught up in a look at me ego stroking moment and should be held accountable. Eslick (also 39th) on ther other hand has on multiple times showed leadershipand that she cares.

Tbar

I respect what your saying and appreciate your analogy but to be clear, I am not OK with  what was said (the actual words used), as stated multiple times.  If that had been directed to anyone else, I would not be OK with it.  Now....If the comment was directed toward any form of government, LEO, ect....and that group was deserving of a harsh verbal tongue lashing due to corruption, dishonesty, lack of meeting their obligations, etc.....I would have the same reaction and response.  I think were we all differ on this topic in how we interpret what was said or how literal we took his words.  I will not denounce a person for having passion about what they are talking about.  Could he had used more appropriate words...yes.....and I can concede to the fact he should not have said what he did..in the way he did.  But I will not call for his resignation or denounce what was said if it is going to be hypocritical to my stance. 

Using your example....if the sheriff deserved harsh criticism, my response would be the same.  I do not see WDFW being a deflection when the words were directed at the agency, director, etc.

[Igor]

jrebel and Pegasus:

I no not want to continue this bantering back and forth, but I would like you to explain how you believe I have twisted or manipulated anyone's words on here.  I simply asked for support for the WDFW officers, in standing up to some horrible comments made by an elected official.  If anyone thinks I was in any way attacking the honest sportsmen on this forum, I don't understand how you arrived at that conclusion, and would welcome your explanation.  I would ask both of you to respond to me by private message or by phone call, as I doubt the other forum members are finding this conversation to be all that valuable.

As far as my comments on anonymously posting; In no way did I say "you not being so tuff if I knew who you are", but rather I was simply stating my opinion on anonymous statements in general.  I feel people become much more aggressive and rude (and often less truthful) when nobody knows their true identity.  I have always been one who believes in looking an opponent square in the eyes and saying things to one's face.

There is absolutely no way I can convince either of you to agree with my line of thought, so I will not continue to respond to either of you on here.  I do want to say one more thing, that while you two are judging me for being gone from the forum for so long, once again you are talking about something you know nothing about.  Did it ever occur to you that I had a reason for being gone for so long?

Take care gentlemen, and I do hope to hear from you in a less public, and more courteous manner.     
   

Actually I did not find your initial post as being reasonable asking others to  harass an individual. Evidently, for whatever reasons you found it not necessary to post here for a whil,e you were able to post anonymously when you wanted to stir up the pot toward your chosen victim. Once opposed you decided to twist every argument against your idiotic idea of getting anonymous posters to do your bidding. Now you continue with the tuff talk and belittling:

"As far as my comments on anonymously posting; In no way did I say "you not being so tuff if I knew who you are", but rather I was simply stating my opinion on anonymous statements in general.  I feel people become much more aggressive and rude (and often less truthful) when nobody knows their true identity.  I have always been one who believes in looking an opponent square in the eyes and saying things to one's face."

You have been treated more than fair here by people that disagreed with your attempt to harass an individual. You are the one that twists our words. You are the one that complained about anonymous posters on an anonymous board. You do not like people that oppose your opinion and you are unable to deal with it. You tried to make a mountain out of a molehill and you have failed miserably. You certainly have not helped the reputation of the WDFW here with your behavior.

[Tbar]

Back to the topic of Sutherland.  What if he was referencing the local sheriff (outside of Snohomish county) as armed goons? Or pd? Or other LEO? You guys are deflecting the issue and attacking the WDFW,  take them out of the equation. Sutherlands comments were flat out wrong and all of those who openly discount them as benign underestimate the power of a few irrational thinkers and their empowerment to change things in a hurry.  I  have NEVER seen Sutherland advocate for sportsman or outdoors, actually quite the opposite.  He got caught up in a look at me ego stroking moment and should be held accountable. Eslick (also 39th) on ther other hand has on multiple times showed leadershipand that she cares.

Tbar

I respect what your saying and appreciate your analogy but to be clear, I am not OK with  what was said (the actual words used), as stated multiple times.  If that had been directed to anyone else, I would not be OK with it.  Now....If the comment was directed toward any form of government, LEO, ect....and that group was deserving of a harsh verbal tongue lashing due to corruption, dishonesty, lack of meeting their obligations, etc.....I would have the same reaction and response.  I think were we all differ on this topic in how we interpret what was said or how literal we took his words.  I will not denounce a person for having passion about what they are talking about.  Could he had used more appropriate words...yes.....and I can concede to the fact he should not have said what he did..in the way he did.  But I will not call for his resignation or denounce what was said if it is going to be hypocritical to my stance. 

Using your example....if the sheriff deserved harsh criticism, my response would be the same.  I do not see WDFW being a deflection when the words were directed at the agency, director, etc.

Fair enough.  Can you show me how Sutherland has been passionate about outdoorsman? Sportsman? Ever? He has had many opportunities in far less public settings to show "passion" and frankly has not even showed interest much less passion. 
Also for those who claim someone hides behind anonymity? My feelings and comments will be articulated directly to Sutherland as well as other appropriate officials with his staffer cc'd on all with my name and contact information. I actually enjoy a level of anonymity on the forum but when the setting warrants a position I act in accordance.

[ucwarden]

Back to the topic of Sutherland.  What if he was referencing the local sheriff (outside of Snohomish county) as armed goons? Or pd? Or other LEO? You guys are deflecting the issue and attacking the WDFW,  take them out of the equation. Sutherlands comments were flat out wrong and all of those who openly discount them as benign underestimate the power of a few irrational thinkers and their empowerment to change things in a hurry.  I  have NEVER seen Sutherland advocate for sportsman or outdoors, actually quite the opposite.  He got caught up in a look at me ego stroking moment and should be held accountable. Eslick (also 39th) on ther other hand has on multiple times showed leadershipand that she cares.

Tbar

I respect what your saying and appreciate your analogy but to be clear, I am not OK with  what was said (the actual words used), as stated multiple times.  If that had been directed to anyone else, I would not be OK with it.  Now....If the comment was directed toward any form of government, LEO, ect....and that group was deserving of a harsh verbal tongue lashing due to corruption, dishonesty, lack of meeting their obligations, etc.....I would have the same reaction and response.  I think were we all differ on this topic in how we interpret what was said or how literal we took his words.  I will not denounce a person for having passion about what they are talking about.  Could he had used more appropriate words...yes.....and I can concede to the fact he should not have said what he did..in the way he did.  But I will not call for his resignation or denounce what was said if it is going to be hypocritical to my stance. 

Using your example....if the sheriff deserved harsh criticism, my response would be the same.  I do not see WDFW being a deflection when the words were directed at the agency, director, etc.

Fair enough.  Can you show me how Sutherland has been passionate about outdoorsman? Sportsman? Ever? He has had many opportunities in far less public settings to show "passion" and frankly has not even showed interest much less passion. 
Also for those who claim someone hides behind anonymity? My feelings and comments will be articulated directly to Sutherland as well as other appropriate officials with his staffer cc'd on all with my name and contact information. I actually enjoy a level of anonymity on the forum but when the setting warrants a position I act in accordance.

Very well stated Tbar.  Thanks for your input.

[Pegasus]

Got a PM from the OP. Wants me to stop posting here. Does not like opposition to his agenda in the open forum. Not going to happen. Not going to silence his critics. Not going to intimidate them into silence.

[jackelope]

“ He posted public information about a publicly elected official. That's WAY different than posting home address and cell phone number is a random WDFW employee”

It’s not. WDFW employees are also public officials. You won’t post their home address because that’s not public information. Their name, position, work email/phone/address are. You can look up anyone who was paid off of public funds. As an example.

http://Http://fiscal.wa.gov/salaries.aspx

I generally support LEOs and have a lot of friends who went that route after the service. My biggest complaint would be how the good LEOs don’t police the bad LEOs. Good guys know who bad guys or people on power trips are. This seems to be a far bigger problem than the actual number of bad LEOs. Too many people being “loyal” for bad LEOs just because they’re a brother in blue. No one wants to end up like Serpico (the actual guy not the movie). You’d be amazed what people are willing to overlook because they may personally like someone or they’re just biding their time to collect a check, and that’s true across all industries. Let alone one where you might not get backup when you need it for “crossing the thin blue line”.

All of that said, I haven’t had any bad interactions with anyone from WDFW enforcement, or any other LEO, and wouldn’t seriously advocate violence against them, or any one else, for any reason. A lot of the treatment you’d get from LEOs will stem directly from how at ease you can make them during any interaction.

I already posted that but it was twisted by one of the WDFW reps here. What if we had posted Bigtex's .gov address? Oh my. But we did not and we won't post an individual's email, or phone. They have tried to twist everything that I have posted to support their agenda. They are also twisting another's words here. They need to get off their bully pulpit and stop trying to rally this public forum to do their bidding to harass an individual they want as their victim.

Only one post here so far has agreed with Sutherland. The rest, including me, have disavowed his words which he already had retracted. They are doing nothing to to enhance the reputation of the WDFW which is in dire need of repair. Instead they continue that outsiders are not part of the "Club" that can really know what is going on at the WDFW. We have to only believe them. One complains that we are posting anonymous here. What an amazing revelation. Funny after not posting here for ages he scurries to this anonymous board to get anonymous posters to do his bidding and harass an individual when he should be harassing Jay and the top of the WDFW to open hunting and fishing. The attitude that you would not be so tuff if I knew who you are is the attitude that gives law enforcement a bad name. It's an anonymous  board, go complain elsewhere.

There are no WDFW rep’s here.

I’m curious, Pegasus. Are you good with the other thread promoting emailing all of our reps and senators asking for opening of hunting and fishing? You posted in that thread. You know it’s there. Nothing bad said about it though. And their .gov emails are posted there.
Asking for a friend.

[jrebel]

Back to the topic of Sutherland.  What if he was referencing the local sheriff (outside of Snohomish county) as armed goons? Or pd? Or other LEO? You guys are deflecting the issue and attacking the WDFW,  take them out of the equation. Sutherlands comments were flat out wrong and all of those who openly discount them as benign underestimate the power of a few irrational thinkers and their empowerment to change things in a hurry.  I  have NEVER seen Sutherland advocate for sportsman or outdoors, actually quite the opposite.  He got caught up in a look at me ego stroking moment and should be held accountable. Eslick (also 39th) on ther other hand has on multiple times showed leadershipand that she cares.

In all honesty...no I don't know if or how he has advocated for our sport in the past.  With that said....I don't know how many of you guys have advocated for the sport.  I assume if he has enough passion to open up and speak out now....there is a bit of passion.  Maybe this is what gets him into advocating for our sport.  Sometimes it takes moments and times like these to kick people in the butt and make them stand up for what they believe in.  He could have been more constructive in statement....but heck...sometimes you have to start somewhere!!  LOL 

Tbar

I respect what your saying and appreciate your analogy but to be clear, I am not OK with  what was said (the actual words used), as stated multiple times.  If that had been directed to anyone else, I would not be OK with it.  Now....If the comment was directed toward any form of government, LEO, ect....and that group was deserving of a harsh verbal tongue lashing due to corruption, dishonesty, lack of meeting their obligations, etc.....I would have the same reaction and response.  I think were we all differ on this topic in how we interpret what was said or how literal we took his words.  I will not denounce a person for having passion about what they are talking about.  Could he had used more appropriate words...yes.....and I can concede to the fact he should not have said what he did..in the way he did.  But I will not call for his resignation or denounce what was said if it is going to be hypocritical to my stance. 

Using your example....if the sheriff deserved harsh criticism, my response would be the same.  I do not see WDFW being a deflection when the words were directed at the agency, director, etc.

Fair enough.  Can you show me how Sutherland has been passionate about outdoorsman? Sportsman? Ever? He has had many opportunities in far less public settings to show "passion" and frankly has not even showed interest much less passion. 
Also for those who claim someone hides behind anonymity? My feelings and comments will be articulated directly to Sutherland as well as other appropriate officials with his staffer cc'd on all with my name and contact information. I actually enjoy a level of anonymity on the forum but when the setting warrants a position I act in accordance.

[ucwarden]

Got a PM from the OP. Wants me to stop posting here. Does not like opposition to his agenda in the open forum. Not going to happen. Not going to silence his critics. Not going to intimidate them into silence.

And here is the oppressive PM I sent to jrebel and Pegasus:

 Gentlemen:
I see you once again are at it on the forum, coming at me, so I will repeat what I said on there before.  Perhaps it's time to take this conversation off of the forum, and into a less public setting, as this has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand.

Please feel free to tell me whatever is on your minds, so we can have a rational civilized conversation, where nobody is posing for the group.

Todd Vandivert

[Pegasus]

“ He posted public information about a publicly elected official. That's WAY different than posting home address and cell phone number is a random WDFW employee”

It’s not. WDFW employees are also public officials. You won’t post their home address because that’s not public information. Their name, position, work email/phone/address are. You can look up anyone who was paid off of public funds. As an example.

http://Http://fiscal.wa.gov/salaries.aspx

I generally support LEOs and have a lot of friends who went that route after the service. My biggest complaint would be how the good LEOs don’t police the bad LEOs. Good guys know who bad guys or people on power trips are. This seems to be a far bigger problem than the actual number of bad LEOs. Too many people being “loyal” for bad LEOs just because they’re a brother in blue. No one wants to end up like Serpico (the actual guy not the movie). You’d be amazed what people are willing to overlook because they may personally like someone or they’re just biding their time to collect a check, and that’s true across all industries. Let alone one where you might not get backup when you need it for “crossing the thin blue line”.

All of that said, I haven’t had any bad interactions with anyone from WDFW enforcement, or any other LEO, and wouldn’t seriously advocate violence against them, or any one else, for any reason. A lot of the treatment you’d get from LEOs will stem directly from how at ease you can make them during any interaction.

I already posted that but it was twisted by one of the WDFW reps here. What if we had posted Bigtex's .gov address? Oh my. But we did not and we won't post an individual's email, or phone. They have tried to twist everything that I have posted to support their agenda. They are also twisting another's words here. They need to get off their bully pulpit and stop trying to rally this public forum to do their bidding to harass an individual they want as their victim.

Only one post here so far has agreed with Sutherland. The rest, including me, have disavowed his words which he already had retracted. They are doing nothing to to enhance the reputation of the WDFW which is in dire need of repair. Instead they continue that outsiders are not part of the "Club" that can really know what is going on at the WDFW. We have to only believe them. One complains that we are posting anonymous here. What an amazing revelation. Funny after not posting here for ages he scurries to this anonymous board to get anonymous posters to do his bidding and harass an individual when he should be harassing Jay and the top of the WDFW to open hunting and fishing. The attitude that you would not be so tuff if I knew who you are is the attitude that gives law enforcement a bad name. It's an anonymous  board, go complain elsewhere.

There are no WDFW rep’s here.

I’m curious, Pegasus. Are you good with the other thread promoting emailing all of our reps and senators asking for opening of hunting and fishing? You posted in that thread. You know it’s there. Nothing bad said about it though. And their .gov emails are posted there.
Asking for a friend.

I have no problem with the other thread. I do have a problem with what the OP here was doing. He was trying to torch an individual by securing emails from others here. I am pretty sure you can see the difference. It is a personal attack on Sutherland. It is not a request to please help us open fishing and hunting. Unfortunately the OP does not handle criticism very well. He must have been great to run into in the field. It's his way or the highway here or he will twist your posts and try to belittle the opposition. He just can't handle being called out on it. He does not need to try to get his opposition stopped from posting here.

[bigtex]

“ He posted public information about a publicly elected official. That's WAY different than posting home address and cell phone number is a random WDFW employee”

It’s not. WDFW employees are also public officials. You won’t post their home address because that’s not public information. Their name, position, work email/phone/address are. You can look up anyone who was paid off of public funds. As an example.

http://Http://fiscal.wa.gov/salaries.aspx

I generally support LEOs and have a lot of friends who went that route after the service. My biggest complaint would be how the good LEOs don’t police the bad LEOs. Good guys know who bad guys or people on power trips are. This seems to be a far bigger problem than the actual number of bad LEOs. Too many people being “loyal” for bad LEOs just because they’re a brother in blue. No one wants to end up like Serpico (the actual guy not the movie). You’d be amazed what people are willing to overlook because they may personally like someone or they’re just biding their time to collect a check, and that’s true across all industries. Let alone one where you might not get backup when you need it for “crossing the thin blue line”.

All of that said, I haven’t had any bad interactions with anyone from WDFW enforcement, or any other LEO, and wouldn’t seriously advocate violence against them, or any one else, for any reason. A lot of the treatment you’d get from LEOs will stem directly from how at ease you can make them during any interaction.

I already posted that but it was twisted by one of the WDFW reps here. What if we had posted Bigtex's .gov address? Oh my. But we did not and we won't post an individual's email, or phone. They have tried to twist everything that I have posted to support their agenda. They are also twisting another's words here. They need to get off their bully pulpit and stop trying to rally this public forum to do their bidding to harass an individual they want as their victim.

Only one post here so far has agreed with Sutherland. The rest, including me, have disavowed his words which he already had retracted. They are doing nothing to to enhance the reputation of the WDFW which is in dire need of repair. Instead they continue that outsiders are not part of the "Club" that can really know what is going on at the WDFW. We have to only believe them. One complains that we are posting anonymous here. What an amazing revelation. Funny after not posting here for ages he scurries to this anonymous board to get anonymous posters to do his bidding and harass an individual when he should be harassing Jay and the top of the WDFW to open hunting and fishing. The attitude that you would not be so tuff if I knew who you are is the attitude that gives law enforcement a bad name. It's an anonymous  board, go complain elsewhere.

There are no WDFW rep’s here.

I’m curious, Pegasus. Are you good with the other thread promoting emailing all of our reps and senators asking for opening of hunting and fishing? You posted in that thread. You know it’s there. Nothing bad said about it though. And their .gov emails are posted there.
Asking for a friend.

I have no problem with the other thread. I do have a problem with what the OP here was doing. He was trying to torch an individual by securing emails from others here. I am pretty sure you can see the difference. It is a personal attack on Sutherland. It is not a request to please help us open fishing and hunting. Unfortunately the OP does not handle criticism very well. He must have been great to run into in the field. It's his way or the highway here or he will twist your posts and try to belittle the opposition. He just can't handle being called out on it. He does not need to try to get his opposition stopped from posting here.

You do realize there is more going on in the world than opening hunting and fishing right? Or is that the only thing we should email people about?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Pegasus]

“ He posted public information about a publicly elected official. That's WAY different than posting home address and cell phone number is a random WDFW employee”

It’s not. WDFW employees are also public officials. You won’t post their home address because that’s not public information. Their name, position, work email/phone/address are. You can look up anyone who was paid off of public funds. As an example.

http://Http://fiscal.wa.gov/salaries.aspx

I generally support LEOs and have a lot of friends who went that route after the service. My biggest complaint would be how the good LEOs don’t police the bad LEOs. Good guys know who bad guys or people on power trips are. This seems to be a far bigger problem than the actual number of bad LEOs. Too many people being “loyal” for bad LEOs just because they’re a brother in blue. No one wants to end up like Serpico (the actual guy not the movie). You’d be amazed what people are willing to overlook because they may personally like someone or they’re just biding their time to collect a check, and that’s true across all industries. Let alone one where you might not get backup when you need it for “crossing the thin blue line”.

All of that said, I haven’t had any bad interactions with anyone from WDFW enforcement, or any other LEO, and wouldn’t seriously advocate violence against them, or any one else, for any reason. A lot of the treatment you’d get from LEOs will stem directly from how at ease you can make them during any interaction.

I already posted that but it was twisted by one of the WDFW reps here. What if we had posted Bigtex's .gov address? Oh my. But we did not and we won't post an individual's email, or phone. They have tried to twist everything that I have posted to support their agenda. They are also twisting another's words here. They need to get off their bully pulpit and stop trying to rally this public forum to do their bidding to harass an individual they want as their victim.

Only one post here so far has agreed with Sutherland. The rest, including me, have disavowed his words which he already had retracted. They are doing nothing to to enhance the reputation of the WDFW which is in dire need of repair. Instead they continue that outsiders are not part of the "Club" that can really know what is going on at the WDFW. We have to only believe them. One complains that we are posting anonymous here. What an amazing revelation. Funny after not posting here for ages he scurries to this anonymous board to get anonymous posters to do his bidding and harass an individual when he should be harassing Jay and the top of the WDFW to open hunting and fishing. The attitude that you would not be so tuff if I knew who you are is the attitude that gives law enforcement a bad name. It's an anonymous  board, go complain elsewhere.

There are no WDFW rep’s here.

I’m curious, Pegasus. Are you good with the other thread promoting emailing all of our reps and senators asking for opening of hunting and fishing? You posted in that thread. You know it’s there. Nothing bad said about it though. And their .gov emails are posted there.
Asking for a friend.

I have no problem with the other thread. I do have a problem with what the OP here was doing. He was trying to torch an individual by securing emails from others here. I am pretty sure you can see the difference. It is a personal attack on Sutherland. It is not a request to please help us open fishing and hunting. Unfortunately the OP does not handle criticism very well. He must have been great to run into in the field. It's his way or the highway here or he will twist your posts and try to belittle the opposition. He just can't handle being called out on it. He does not need to try to get his opposition stopped from posting here.

You do realize there is more going on in the world than opening hunting and fishing right? Or is that the only thing we should email people about?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Ah geez Bigtex you do realize that the thread that Jackelope asked about is....wait for it........a thread about hunting and fishing? Here is what the OP of that thread in his first post said:

"but it is important for everyone to see and hopefully email their representatives.  Please leave this in a place for all to see.  If you send an email feel free to respond with "e-mail sent" but don't start a bashing thread that gets this moved to a locked status or forum where not everyone can see it.  Feel free to post responses from your reps if you feel it appropriate. It will be interesting to see who back our hunting and fishing heritage and who doesn't.  Cheers"

Get it BigTex? But thanks for trying to diminish my answer to Jackalope's question.

[hunter399]

“ He posted public information about a publicly elected official. That's WAY different than posting home address and cell phone number is a random WDFW employee”

It’s not. WDFW employees are also public officials. You won’t post their home address because that’s not public information. Their name, position, work email/phone/address are. You can look up anyone who was paid off of public funds. As an example.

http://Http://fiscal.wa.gov/salaries.aspx

I generally support LEOs and have a lot of friends who went that route after the service. My biggest complaint would be how the good LEOs don’t police the bad LEOs. Good guys know who bad guys or people on power trips are. This seems to be a far bigger problem than the actual number of bad LEOs. Too many people being “loyal” for bad LEOs just because they’re a brother in blue. No one wants to end up like Serpico (the actual guy not the movie). You’d be amazed what people are willing to overlook because they may personally like someone or they’re just biding their time to collect a check, and that’s true across all industries. Let alone one where you might not get backup when you need it for “crossing the thin blue line”.

All of that said, I haven’t had any bad interactions with anyone from WDFW enforcement, or any other LEO, and wouldn’t seriously advocate violence against them, or any one else, for any reason. A lot of the treatment you’d get from LEOs will stem directly from how at ease you can make them during any interaction.

I already posted that but it was twisted by one of the WDFW reps here. What if we had posted Bigtex's .gov address? Oh my. But we did not and we won't post an individual's email, or phone. They have tried to twist everything that I have posted to support their agenda. They are also twisting another's words here. They need to get off their bully pulpit and stop trying to rally this public forum to do their bidding to harass an individual they want as their victim.

Only one post here so far has agreed with Sutherland. The rest, including me, have disavowed his words which he already had retracted. They are doing nothing to to enhance the reputation of the WDFW which is in dire need of repair. Instead they continue that outsiders are not part of the "Club" that can really know what is going on at the WDFW. We have to only believe them. One complains that we are posting anonymous here. What an amazing revelation. Funny after not posting here for ages he scurries to this anonymous board to get anonymous posters to do his bidding and harass an individual when he should be harassing Jay and the top of the WDFW to open hunting and fishing. The attitude that you would not be so tuff if I knew who you are is the attitude that gives law enforcement a bad name. It's an anonymous  board, go complain elsewhere.

There are no WDFW rep’s here.

I’m curious, Pegasus. Are you good with the other thread promoting emailing all of our reps and senators asking for opening of hunting and fishing? You posted in that thread. You know it’s there. Nothing bad said about it though. And their .gov emails are posted there.
Asking for a friend.

I have no problem with the other thread. I do have a problem with what the OP here was doing. He was trying to torch an individual by securing emails from others here. I am pretty sure you can see the difference. It is a personal attack on Sutherland. It is not a request to please help us open fishing and hunting. Unfortunately the OP does not handle criticism very well. He must have been great to run into in the field. It's his way or the highway here or he will twist your posts and try to belittle the opposition. He just can't handle being called out on it. He does not need to try to get his opposition stopped from posting here.

You do realize there is more going on in the world than opening hunting and fishing right? Or is that the only thing we should email people about?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

You do realize people pay for hunting and fishing on dates that are posted in a regulation booklet.

Amazon doesn't send the package you ordered.
Are you not gonna call or email?

Are you gonna pay for a product you don't receive?

[bigtex]

“ He posted public information about a publicly elected official. That's WAY different than posting home address and cell phone number is a random WDFW employee”

It’s not. WDFW employees are also public officials. You won’t post their home address because that’s not public information. Their name, position, work email/phone/address are. You can look up anyone who was paid off of public funds. As an example.

http://Http://fiscal.wa.gov/salaries.aspx

I generally support LEOs and have a lot of friends who went that route after the service. My biggest complaint would be how the good LEOs don’t police the bad LEOs. Good guys know who bad guys or people on power trips are. This seems to be a far bigger problem than the actual number of bad LEOs. Too many people being “loyal” for bad LEOs just because they’re a brother in blue. No one wants to end up like Serpico (the actual guy not the movie). You’d be amazed what people are willing to overlook because they may personally like someone or they’re just biding their time to collect a check, and that’s true across all industries. Let alone one where you might not get backup when you need it for “crossing the thin blue line”.

All of that said, I haven’t had any bad interactions with anyone from WDFW enforcement, or any other LEO, and wouldn’t seriously advocate violence against them, or any one else, for any reason. A lot of the treatment you’d get from LEOs will stem directly from how at ease you can make them during any interaction.

I already posted that but it was twisted by one of the WDFW reps here. What if we had posted Bigtex's .gov address? Oh my. But we did not and we won't post an individual's email, or phone. They have tried to twist everything that I have posted to support their agenda. They are also twisting another's words here. They need to get off their bully pulpit and stop trying to rally this public forum to do their bidding to harass an individual they want as their victim.

Only one post here so far has agreed with Sutherland. The rest, including me, have disavowed his words which he already had retracted. They are doing nothing to to enhance the reputation of the WDFW which is in dire need of repair. Instead they continue that outsiders are not part of the "Club" that can really know what is going on at the WDFW. We have to only believe them. One complains that we are posting anonymous here. What an amazing revelation. Funny after not posting here for ages he scurries to this anonymous board to get anonymous posters to do his bidding and harass an individual when he should be harassing Jay and the top of the WDFW to open hunting and fishing. The attitude that you would not be so tuff if I knew who you are is the attitude that gives law enforcement a bad name. It's an anonymous  board, go complain elsewhere.

There are no WDFW rep’s here.

I’m curious, Pegasus. Are you good with the other thread promoting emailing all of our reps and senators asking for opening of hunting and fishing? You posted in that thread. You know it’s there. Nothing bad said about it though. And their .gov emails are posted there.
Asking for a friend.

I have no problem with the other thread. I do have a problem with what the OP here was doing. He was trying to torch an individual by securing emails from others here. I am pretty sure you can see the difference. It is a personal attack on Sutherland. It is not a request to please help us open fishing and hunting. Unfortunately the OP does not handle criticism very well. He must have been great to run into in the field. It's his way or the highway here or he will twist your posts and try to belittle the opposition. He just can't handle being called out on it. He does not need to try to get his opposition stopped from posting here.

You do realize there is more going on in the world than opening hunting and fishing right? Or is that the only thing we should email people about?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Ah geez Bigtex you do realize that the thread that Jackelope asked about is....wait for it........a thread about hunting and fishing? Here is what the OP of that thread in his first post said:

"but it is important for everyone to see and hopefully email their representatives.  Please leave this in a place for all to see.  If you send an email feel free to respond with "e-mail sent" but don't start a bashing thread that gets this moved to a locked status or forum where not everyone can see it.  Feel free to post responses from your reps if you feel it appropriate. It will be interesting to see who back our hunting and fishing heritage and who doesn't.  Cheers"

Get it BigTex? But thanks for trying to diminish my answer to Jackalope's question.

“ He posted public information about a publicly elected official. That's WAY different than posting home address and cell phone number is a random WDFW employee”

It’s not. WDFW employees are also public officials. You won’t post their home address because that’s not public information. Their name, position, work email/phone/address are. You can look up anyone who was paid off of public funds. As an example.

http://Http://fiscal.wa.gov/salaries.aspx

I generally support LEOs and have a lot of friends who went that route after the service. My biggest complaint would be how the good LEOs don’t police the bad LEOs. Good guys know who bad guys or people on power trips are. This seems to be a far bigger problem than the actual number of bad LEOs. Too many people being “loyal” for bad LEOs just because they’re a brother in blue. No one wants to end up like Serpico (the actual guy not the movie). You’d be amazed what people are willing to overlook because they may personally like someone or they’re just biding their time to collect a check, and that’s true across all industries. Let alone one where you might not get backup when you need it for “crossing the thin blue line”.

All of that said, I haven’t had any bad interactions with anyone from WDFW enforcement, or any other LEO, and wouldn’t seriously advocate violence against them, or any one else, for any reason. A lot of the treatment you’d get from LEOs will stem directly from how at ease you can make them during any interaction.

I already posted that but it was twisted by one of the WDFW reps here. What if we had posted Bigtex's .gov address? Oh my. But we did not and we won't post an individual's email, or phone. They have tried to twist everything that I have posted to support their agenda. They are also twisting another's words here. They need to get off their bully pulpit and stop trying to rally this public forum to do their bidding to harass an individual they want as their victim.

Only one post here so far has agreed with Sutherland. The rest, including me, have disavowed his words which he already had retracted. They are doing nothing to to enhance the reputation of the WDFW which is in dire need of repair. Instead they continue that outsiders are not part of the "Club" that can really know what is going on at the WDFW. We have to only believe them. One complains that we are posting anonymous here. What an amazing revelation. Funny after not posting here for ages he scurries to this anonymous board to get anonymous posters to do his bidding and harass an individual when he should be harassing Jay and the top of the WDFW to open hunting and fishing. The attitude that you would not be so tuff if I knew who you are is the attitude that gives law enforcement a bad name. It's an anonymous  board, go complain elsewhere.

There are no WDFW rep’s here.

I’m curious, Pegasus. Are you good with the other thread promoting emailing all of our reps and senators asking for opening of hunting and fishing? You posted in that thread. You know it’s there. Nothing bad said about it though. And their .gov emails are posted there.
Asking for a friend.

I have no problem with the other thread. I do have a problem with what the OP here was doing. He was trying to torch an individual by securing emails from others here. I am pretty sure you can see the difference. It is a personal attack on Sutherland. It is not a request to please help us open fishing and hunting. Unfortunately the OP does not handle criticism very well. He must have been great to run into in the field. It's his way or the highway here or he will twist your posts and try to belittle the opposition. He just can't handle being called out on it. He does not need to try to get his opposition stopped from posting here.

Ah geez Pegasus. You also stated "it is a personal attack on Sutherland. It is not a request to please help us open hunting and fishing."

You're right, UC's request has nothing to do with opening hunting and fishing, and guess what, that's okay because we live in a world where we can do more than tackle one topic at a time and not just be stuck on opening hunting/fishing 24/7.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk