Hunting Blogs

'Right To Hunt' Amendments On Four State Ballots

By: J.R. Absher

Nov 06

Somewhat lost in the noise surrounding the presidential and critical U.S. Senate and Congressional races being decided at the polls today are issues vitally important to sportsmen in the states of Kentucky, Idaho, Nebraska and Wyoming.

Constitutional amendments to protect the right of citizens to hunt, fish and trap in accordance with state laws and regulations will appear on the ballots in those four states in today’s general election.

In April the Nebraska Legislature passed Legislative Resolution 40CA, the Right to Hunt and Fish Constitutional Amendment, by a 41 to 3 vote, qualifying the measure to head to voters there. In Idaho, House Joint Resolution 2a, the Right to Hunt and Fish Constitutional Amendment, passed with overwhelming support in the state Senate by a 31 to 3 vote and in the state House by a 63 to 4 vote.

In Wyoming, an amendment sponsored by state Sen. Larry Hicks, R-Baggs, will “preserve the heritage of Wyoming citizens’ opportunity to fish, hunt and trap wildlife.” And finally, the Kentucky Legislature passed House Bill 1, the Right to Hunt and Fish Constitutional Amendment in 2011, qualifying the measure for a 2012 general election ballot spot.

In the last general election, occurring in 2010, voters in Arizona, Arkansas, South Carolina and Tennessee overwhelmingly approved so-called right to hunt amendments—bringing the total number of states that have approved similar protection to hunting, fishing and trapping since 1996 to 12.

Each state’s provision contains varying language to achieve the same addressed goal: to protect against threats to hunting, fishing and wildlife-related opportunities that might be posed by anti-hunting and animal-rights contingencies.

Constitutional amendments have been approved by legislators and subsequently by voters in Alabama (1996), Minnesota (1998), Virginia and North Dakota (2000), Wisconsin (2003), Louisiana and Montana (2004), Georgia (2006) and Oklahoma (2008). Protection has been in place in Vermont’s Constitution since 1777.
 

5 comments

# RAbear51
Wednesday, November 07, 2012 6:13 AM
Hold on to your seats Sportsman !! We had better pursue these type of proposals in EVERY state in America and we'd better do it sooner rather than later.I'm concerned that the attacks on our heritage are about to begin in earnest after the election debacle yesterday. I am very very concerned for the future of our hunting rights and our great country. We need to unite stronger and louder than we EVER have now and there is no time to wait.
# RAbear51
Wednesday, November 07, 2012 6:14 AM
sorry,,,,Sportspersons !! LOL LOL
# dcarter11
Wednesday, November 07, 2012 10:24 PM
If you think after last night that we will have a right to hunt any where or even to have the right to bare arms you have more faith than I do. The president is against the citizen having the right to carry or possess a weapon. He even said that the citizen has no business having an assault rifle which is the first chip at the stone or our second amendment right to keep and bare arms. No I am not making this up even though I did para phrase just to shorten it up a bit. You know this administration does not care for our Constitution at all and wants to control every thing you do. The first lady can't even keep out of our kids lunch boxes.
If you voted for The president to have a second term I don't even know what to say but shame on you. By the way for those who will be offended by what I have written here, The First amendment state that we have the right of free speech but does not state the you or I have the right not be be offended. This is not hate speech. I say here what I say out of love for my Country and for all that call it home. Wake up America.
What business has anyone to say what kind of weapon I as a citizen and a veteran of the United State Marine Corps get to use for hunting or recreational target shooting or defense of my home or property or family or person. So long as I am not using it to harm a person or their property out of my own malicious intent or otherwise unlawful manor it's no ones business but mine weather it be a Barrett .50 cal or a nurf foam dart gun or water pistol.

For a person to infringe on my right to bare arms is illegal and is a direct violation of the Constitution of the Unites States of America which happens to be the supreme law of the land meaning it is above all other laws or acts or other form of legislature.

Think about it, the last for words of the second amendment are"shall not be infringed". That means that not even all the supreme court justices combine in a unanimous decision can take the right of the people to bare arms away legally.
Keep in mind that there is a coma between the the right of the state to keep and maintain a militia and the right of the people to keep and bare arms. The Coma is a conjunction which gives equal value to two separate statements meaning that both the States right to keep and maintain a militia and the peoples right to keep and bare arms are separate and different statements of equal value which shall not be infringed. All that I have said here is fact and is not subject to opinion or bias.
# dcarter11
Wednesday, November 07, 2012 10:30 PM
I have erred a couple of times. Last Four words, Justices Combined, and a few others however my point is made and stands firm regardless of the grammatical typos here and there.
# JustETice
Thursday, November 08, 2012 6:29 PM
I think that every state should push this issue also. So come on sportsmen and women in West Virginia tell our representatives to get this for us.

Post Comment

Only registered users may post comments.