The "right" to hunt is put on the ballot in NC

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • TexDefender

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 28, 2017
    1,572
    So Democrats always say the 2nd amendment rights to use guns is about HUNTING (which we know different).... so when someone seeks to ENSURE the right to HUNT, the DEMOCRATS seek to BLOCK THAT TOO ??? WOW, just WOW
     

    DutchV

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 8, 2012
    4,703
    Democrats are opposed to people having rights. They want us all to be subjects.
     

    Inigoes

    Head'n for the hills
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 21, 2008
    49,365
    SoMD / West PA
    If states start to acknowledge the right to hunt, that means the right to bear arms outside the home is not to far off...
     

    Derwood

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 2, 2011
    1,075
    DC area
    It sounds like a good idea but it makes me wonder if it is this even necessary. Would this make it harder for DNR to manage populations/ecology? What are traditional methods? If everyone has the right to take as many as they wish of a particular species, we could end up in a situation like in the early 20th century where game species are depleted, so the state government/DNR will still set limits and rules as they do now, right? These types of initiatives can have unintended consequences. The text says the state assembly can still impose any rules it sees fit...so what is the actual outcome? Do people really get something they didn't already have? That Fox story has a lot of hearsay and not much detail. Like I said, this sounds really great, but I am always suspicious of political activity that sounds great but could in fact be a solution searching for a problem. Also, judging by the comments here and others I read online, it looks like this is being successfully used as a wedge issue in an election year. I really don't like the politicization of outdoor sports because the pendulum always ends up swinging back the other way. So I very much prefer keeping hunting/fishing/shooting sports out of the public debate as much as possible. Then again, maybe a constitutional amendment takes hunting/fishing it off the political table.

    Here is the actual text:

    Sec. 38. Right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife.

    The right of the people to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife is a valued part of the State's heritage and shall be forever preserved for the public good. The people have a right, including the right to use traditional methods, to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife, subject only to laws enacted by the General Assembly and rules adopted pursuant to authority granted by the General Assembly to (i) promote wildlife conservation and management and (ii) preserve the future of hunting and fishing. Public hunting and fishing shall be a preferred means of managing and controlling wildlife. Nothing herein shall be construed to modify any provision of law relating to trespass, property rights, or eminent domain.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,930
    Messages
    7,259,485
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom