Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

eppur_se_muova

(36,271 posts)
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 12:49 PM Nov 2014

'Right to Hunt' Amendments Pit Gun Rights vs. Animal Welfare (Governing.com)

With backing by the NRA, making hunting a constitutionally protected right has become increasingly popular in the past decade. The latest battlegrounds are Alabama and Mississippi.
by Chris Kardish | September 19, 2014

If enough Mississippi voters think it’s a good idea support hunting and fishing, they’ll join 17 other states in ensuring constitutional protections for the practices.

So-called “Right to Hunt and Fish” amendments have become increasingly popular in the past decade, as groups like the National Rifle Association have led yearly pushes in states they consider friendly terrain. Their objective: to head off future regulation against hunting and also establish it as the “preferred” means of wildlife population control, as opposed to special forms of contraception and other methods of thinning out herds.

In Alabama, which already has a hunting rights amendment, advocates want to make it even stronger through the ballot box in November. The amendment before voters would make hunting and fishing the “preferred means of managing and controlling wildlife.” Mississippi’s amendment would do that as well.

Both amendments would be subject to “reasonable regulations” that promote wildlife conservation, but animal welfare groups, such as the Humane Society of the United States, generally oppose constitutional protections for hunting for a number of reasons. They often deride the measures as policies that don't respond to any particular threat but merely will make it difficult to regulate more controversial practices down the road.

“It could prevent really progressive reform that would be necessary if there were really egregious abuse, certain forms of trapping like the kind we’re trying to fight against in Maine,” said Tracy Coppola, the director of the Humane Society’s Wildlife Abuse Campaign.
***
more: http://www.governing.com/topics/elections/gov-hunting-ballot-measures-alabama-mississippi.html




MODS: This straddles topics, including both animal rights and gun rights. Hope it can be posted outside the Gungeon.
29 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
'Right to Hunt' Amendments Pit Gun Rights vs. Animal Welfare (Governing.com) (Original Post) eppur_se_muova Nov 2014 OP
Hunting to control wildlife, how childish, disgusting and barbaric. randys1 Nov 2014 #1
I think in a lot of cases it makes sense. Travis_0004 Nov 2014 #2
So if an inexperienced, drunk hunter only wounds the animal the animal can wobble off randys1 Nov 2014 #3
hopefully he is not drunk while hunting Travis_0004 Nov 2014 #6
I think the 2nd amendment demands all guns be regulated within a militia randys1 Nov 2014 #8
The Democratic party and the president would disagree with you. nt hack89 Nov 2014 #11
Pres. Obama might disagree NickB79 Nov 2014 #17
This message was self-deleted by its author scarystuffyo Nov 2014 #20
Not to mention conventional. lumberjack_jeff Nov 2014 #5
With famine, disease, and starvation. cherokeeprogressive Nov 2014 #9
Cause eating farm-raised meat is SOOO much better for you, right? NickB79 Nov 2014 #23
No it isn't. alarimer Nov 2014 #29
Psychopaths like to kill animals. Hunters like to kill animals. To me, they meld together. Shrike47 Nov 2014 #4
I think the vast majory of animals hunted are eaten. Travis_0004 Nov 2014 #7
The vast majority of animals hunted are for trophies. RebelOne Nov 2014 #15
Most people that hunt for food Go Vols Nov 2014 #16
I once took a photo of a deer I shot, Jenoch Nov 2014 #22
You are horribly mistaken. Jenoch Nov 2014 #18
You can eat trophy animals, you know NickB79 Nov 2014 #19
Believe me, GGJohn Nov 2014 #25
Huh. linuxman Nov 2014 #13
you were saying scarystuffyo Nov 2014 #21
I support it scarystuffyo Nov 2014 #10
According to Ballotpedia.org, the Mississippi amendment would add petronius Nov 2014 #12
Alabama's Constitution would be amended like this: petronius Nov 2014 #14
Minnesota voters passed a constitutional Jenoch Nov 2014 #24
These types of Amendments are not really needed but Republicans know it gets their base of the sofa dilby Nov 2014 #26
In Minnesota, Jenoch Nov 2014 #27
2A rights and hunting have zero in common. ileus Nov 2014 #28
 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
2. I think in a lot of cases it makes sense.
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 12:59 PM
Nov 2014

Wild boar are an invasive species that is hurting a lot of native species. Hunting them is at least attempting to keep them in check.

randys1

(16,286 posts)
3. So if an inexperienced, drunk hunter only wounds the animal the animal can wobble off
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 01:00 PM
Nov 2014

and die in pure agony and hell, right?

 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
6. hopefully he is not drunk while hunting
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 01:15 PM
Nov 2014

Do you think buying a pig from a factory farm is an improvement?

Response to NickB79 (Reply #17)

NickB79

(19,257 posts)
23. Cause eating farm-raised meat is SOOO much better for you, right?
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 03:34 PM
Nov 2014




Even raised on smaller family farms, livestock is still subjected to pain and confinement that borders on cruelty. As a teen in the 90's, we pulled baby piglet's teeth out with pliers to let them nurse and fatten longer, castrated them with razorblades and no painkillers, caged sows for months when they gave birth, etc. And this is a standard practice by farmers to this day (though the confinement crates are being phased out, thankfully).

I'll take my free-range, antibiotic-free, wild-harvested meat, downed with a single shot, any day, thank you.

alarimer

(16,245 posts)
29. No it isn't.
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 06:09 PM
Nov 2014

The alternative is, in many cases, unacceptable as well.

Each ecosystem has a carrying capacity for a given species. Without humans, nature would take care of any overpopulation with disease and predation. In the absence of predators (we have sadly eliminated most of those), deer, for example, because stunted because there isn't enough food to go around. Plus diseases become a problem as well.

Hunting is one of the methods to manage these populations. It is done scientifically, not always perfectly, with limits set according to whatever formulas the managers have to be sustainable.

Did you know that an excise tax on hunting and fishing equipment and motor boat fuels goes to conservation programs? Most hunters and fishers that I know are more than willing to help out.

Sadly, they have attempted to institute a similar tax on other types of activities (binoculars, camping equipment) but those have always failed in Congress.

Please read a little about fish and wildlife management before you spout ignorant nonsense.

Shrike47

(6,913 posts)
4. Psychopaths like to kill animals. Hunters like to kill animals. To me, they meld together.
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 01:01 PM
Nov 2014

I understand killing animals to eat. That's not what we are talking about. This is killing for
Entertainment.

RebelOne

(30,947 posts)
15. The vast majority of animals hunted are for trophies.
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 03:08 PM
Nov 2014

Believe me, I know because I was a copy-editor 13 years for hunting and fishing magazines across the U.S. I also hated hunting and after reading and editing first-hand stories from hunters, I grew to really despise that so-called sport.

Go Vols

(5,902 posts)
16. Most people that hunt for food
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 03:18 PM
Nov 2014

Could give a shit about having their pic taken with what they killed,let alone wanting it in a magazine.

I hunted for 30+ years and can never remember a pic being taken.

 

Jenoch

(7,720 posts)
22. I once took a photo of a deer I shot,
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 03:33 PM
Nov 2014

but what I was actually ohotographing was the long-tailed weasal that was eating the tallow from the hanging carcass.

 

Jenoch

(7,720 posts)
18. You are horribly mistaken.
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 03:25 PM
Nov 2014

Trophy game make up only a tiny percentage of wildlife that is harvested. What, do you think everybody is actually shooting 12-point bucks with a B&C score of over 190? The reason your perceptions are scewed is that your average doe or fork buck don't make it into the pages of outdoor magazines.

Interestingly enough, there is a 10 point buck roaming our suburban Twin Cities neighboorhood. We rarely see a buck loke that on our hunting land. They never come out of the deep woods and swamps during the daytime.

NickB79

(19,257 posts)
19. You can eat trophy animals, you know
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 03:26 PM
Nov 2014

Do you really expect anyone to believe the vast majority of deer shot in this country every fall are left to rot in the woods, with only their heads sawed off for a wall mount?

What you suggest is actually illegal in virtually every state (leaving a game animal to rot in the field), with hefty fines and revocation of your hunting license if caught by game wardens.

And having grown up in a rural area where many people hunt with hand-me-down guns to get cheap meat for the freezer, I can say that I've NEVER seen anyone who didn't eat what they killed. Even a big buck can be processed into venison sausage, steak, hamburger, etc.

GGJohn

(9,951 posts)
25. Believe me,
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 04:21 PM
Nov 2014

you don't know.
The vast majority of animals harvested are NOT trophy animals, they're taken for food.

 

linuxman

(2,337 posts)
13. Huh.
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 02:55 PM
Nov 2014

Can't imagine why they are trying to head off future opposition to hunting. I mean, nobody would ever vilify and denigrate hunting and attempt to legislate against it...

Psychopaths like to eat food. I like to eat food. The case is mounting against me, it seems.

petronius

(26,602 posts)
12. According to Ballotpedia.org, the Mississippi amendment would add
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 02:54 PM
Nov 2014

the following to Article III of their Constitution:

Section 12A. The people have the right to hunt, fish and harvest wildlife, including by the use of traditional methods, subject only to laws and regulations that promote wildlife conservation and management and that preserve the future of hunting and fishing, as the Legislature may prescribe by general law. Public hunting and fishing shall be a preferred means of managing and controlling wildlife. This section may not be construed to modify any provision of law relating to trespass, property rights, the regulation of commercial activities or the maintenance of levees pursuant to Article 11.

It would follow right after:

Text of Section 12:

Right to Bear Arms

The right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person, or property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall not be called in question, but the legislature may regulate or forbid carrying concealed weapons.

http://ballotpedia.org/Article_III,_Mississippi_Constitution

At first glance I would support it, although I wonder what the background is for that statement about "traditional methods," as well as whether that "subject only to" limitation might be too strict (for instance, might there be laws about safety and access to public lands that might be unduly restricted by that clause)...

petronius

(26,602 posts)
14. Alabama's Constitution would be amended like this:
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 03:00 PM
Nov 2014

&quot a) All persons shall have the right to hunt and fish in this state in accordance with law and regulations. The people have a right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife, including by the use of traditional methods, subject to reasonable regulations, to promote wildlife conservation and management, and to preserve the future of hunting and fishing. Public hunting and fishing Hunting by the public and fishing by the public shall be the preferred means of managing and controlling wildlife. This amendment shall not be construed to modify any provision of law relating to eminent domain, trespass, or property rights.

&quot b) This amendment shall be known as the "Sportsperson's Bill of Rights."

http://ballotpedia.org/Alabama_Right_to_Hunt_and_Fish,_Amendment_5_%282014%29
 

Jenoch

(7,720 posts)
24. Minnesota voters passed a constitutional
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 03:36 PM
Nov 2014

amendment guaranteeing the right hunt and fish in 1998. It passed with a yes vote of more than 77%. Initially, while still in committe, the amendment also would have guaranteed the right to trap fur bearing animals.

dilby

(2,273 posts)
26. These types of Amendments are not really needed but Republicans know it gets their base of the sofa
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 05:26 PM
Nov 2014

and into the voting booths. Does anyone really believe that people in Alabama or Mississippi are in any danger of losing their right to hunt or fish? Never going to happen but it does get the Republican voting block to show up on election day.

 

Jenoch

(7,720 posts)
27. In Minnesota,
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 05:31 PM
Nov 2014

this issue was bi-partisan. It was more of a metro, non-metro division. There were some liberalTwin Cities Democrats against the amendment, but most Democratic legislators outside of the Twin Cities voted to out the amendment on the statewide ballot.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»'Right to Hunt' Amendment...