A Constitution Amendment Preserve the Right to Hunt and Fish?
Submitted by Stan G on Sun, 2008/05/04 - 8:54am.
Can anyone explain the need for a constitutional amendment?
According to the Legal Notice appearing on page A12 in Sunday, May 4, issue of the Knoxville News-Sentinel we will be voting on the following:
"The citizens of this state shall have the personal right to hunt and fish .... Traditional manners and means may be used to take non-threatened species."
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 2008/05/04 - 11:13am.
The amendment is in response to attempts in other states to restrict hunting. But the amendment itself is next to useless in protecting the "right" to hunt. The "right" is subject to reasonable legislation, so virtually any regulation would be upheld by the courts.
The amendment is in response to attempts in other states to restrict hunting. But the amendment itself is next to useless in protecting the "right" to hunt. The "right" is subject to reasonable legislation, so virtually any regulation would be upheld by the courts.
Good Idea. I think they should have the right to hunt polar bear with a butter knife.
Save the Seals, club a hunter. ;)
I have the right to carry concealed tackle in order to protect myself from crazed walleyed pike.
When fishing becomes a crime, only criminals will fish!
So long as I can continue to hunt with my car, I'm happy.
Post new comment