Rights to hunt, trap and fish
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 8:08 pm
It is interesting to note that four states, Arkansas, Arizona, South Carolina and Tennessee, have proposed constitutional amendments that determine a citizens right to hunt, trap, fish and harvest wildlife. These issues to be decided in November elections.
Ten states have amended their constitutions to guarantee the right to hunt and fish: Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota. Oklahoma, Vermont, Virginia and Wisconsin. In the same vain, California and Rhode Island guarantees the right to fish but not hunt.
Perhaps I do not see the "big picture". These rights were passed along with land grants by King George IV prior tho the American Revolution, It appears that these rights were also given to the states (grandfathered in) as they were admitted to the Union. It is interesting that Vermont, as early as 1777, recognized the need to insure these rights by Constitution. Is this really necessary? All of a sudden, what we, as citizens, view as a fundamental right for some 330 plus years needs to be made legal?. It is legal!!! We are required purchase licenses to participate in these activities.
Is it possible that too many political groups have too much time on their hands and too strong a desire to control others?. What comes next?. A proposed constitutional amendment to determine our right to consume beef, chicken, pork. lamb and what about eating those baby Lima beans?
Surely there are more important issues to be addressed by Legislators.
Ten states have amended their constitutions to guarantee the right to hunt and fish: Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota. Oklahoma, Vermont, Virginia and Wisconsin. In the same vain, California and Rhode Island guarantees the right to fish but not hunt.
Perhaps I do not see the "big picture". These rights were passed along with land grants by King George IV prior tho the American Revolution, It appears that these rights were also given to the states (grandfathered in) as they were admitted to the Union. It is interesting that Vermont, as early as 1777, recognized the need to insure these rights by Constitution. Is this really necessary? All of a sudden, what we, as citizens, view as a fundamental right for some 330 plus years needs to be made legal?. It is legal!!! We are required purchase licenses to participate in these activities.
Is it possible that too many political groups have too much time on their hands and too strong a desire to control others?. What comes next?. A proposed constitutional amendment to determine our right to consume beef, chicken, pork. lamb and what about eating those baby Lima beans?
Surely there are more important issues to be addressed by Legislators.